love

Author Topic: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons  (Read 75815 times)

DarkeningHumour

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10453
  • When not sure if sarcasm look at username.
    • Pretentiously Yours
Re: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons
« Reply #530 on: December 09, 2017, 10:56:08 AM »
Presumably Leslie Knope's favorite film of all time.

 ;D

I chuckled. I thought about Parks & Rec when I watched the movie too.
« Society is dumb. Art is everything. » - Junior

https://pretensiouslyyours.wordpress.com/

Teproc

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3529
Re: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons
« Reply #531 on: December 10, 2017, 09:28:24 AM »
Presumably Leslie Knope's favorite film of all time.

 ;D

I chuckled. I thought about Parks & Rec when I watched the movie too.

Even it would count as a relatively obscure reference, I'm surprised it never came up in the show, because it seems relatively likely at least one of the writers saw it. Maybe it did and I just don't remember it, and I guess it'd be more of a Community thing to allude to it anyway. But the whole story of the second half is basically the first season of Parks & Rec, which amuses me. It's not a great season either, maybe people should just watch Ikiru instead and jump to the second season.  ;D
Legend: All-Time Favorite | Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Poor  |  Bad

Letterbox'd

MartinTeller

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 17864
  • martinteller.wordpress.com
    • my movie blog
Re: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons
« Reply #532 on: December 10, 2017, 09:42:47 AM »
Even if a writer knew about it, they wouldn't expect the audience to. The Simpsons did a Rashomon gag once, but in general a Kurosawa reference in a primetime sitcom is likely going to fall flat with the general public.

Teproc

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3529
Re: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons
« Reply #533 on: December 10, 2017, 09:53:26 AM »
Even if a writer knew about it, they wouldn't expect the audience to. The Simpsons did a Rashomon gag once, but in general a Kurosawa reference in a primetime sitcom is likely going to fall flat with the general public.

Sure, I wouldn't expect a whole gag about it for that reason. Community would do it, but Community is weird like that. But maybe Leslie could have a poster of Ikiru in her office at some point or something. Maybe she does, for all I know.
Legend: All-Time Favorite | Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Poor  |  Bad

Letterbox'd

Teproc

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3529
Re: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons
« Reply #534 on: December 10, 2017, 10:48:47 AM »
Kumonosu-jô / Throne of Blood (Akira Kurosawa, 1957)



Adam & Matty's takes (starts at 40:29)

Kurosawa does Macbeth with Mifune. It goes basically the way one would expect.

I struggle a bit with what to say about it because, well... it's Macbeth. Yeah there are differences, and in a way it's surprising that it feels so close to the original material given the lack of Shakesperean dialogue (and some plot differences), but it's about what Macbeth is always about. Ambition, or more to the point: the futility of it. I guess I'm back to Mifune-as-Kinski, except Kurosawa here finds men's quest for glory sad and pointless, as opposed to Herzog who sees it as ugly but somewhat admirable and, though still pointless, somehow necessary. Mifune's performance isn't as big as I expected it to be, which I suppose is appropriate: Macbeth/Washizu is a character who leaves his destiny in the hands of fate : he's pure passivity. Mifune is almost miscast, and has to reign it in... and in the end he's very solid (especially in his interactions with Banquo/Miki), but doesn't really bring much new to the character.

I suppose the main difference with the original is how hopeless and grim the ending is. It's probably not a coincidence that the ending is the best thing about the film: there's nothing recomforting about seeing him brought down, no sense that MacDuff/Noriyasu (hi Takashi Shimura, didn't recognize you there) will be any better... I get the sense that Kurosawa is like the forest spirit, but instead of laughing about men's folly, he shakes his head in dismay. There is a bit of Hirohito in Washizu: what was the purpose of Japanese imperialism really, other than glory and a sense that that's what powerful countries are supposed to do ? Makes sense to tackle it in a Western-play too, since there was a distinctly Western influence in the way Japanese imperialism developped after the Meiji restoration.

I don't think Kurosawa sees men as actually being slaves of their destinies either, if anything I see the forest spirit's laugh as an indication that this is just his way of screwing with those humans: give them a prophecy, make it believeable with a savvy prediction to start with (it's not like you'd need special powers to guess that military leaders who just won an important battle would get promoted) and they'll bend over backwards trying to realize it.

Obviously what makes the film work beyond the simple adaptation part of it are those stand-out visual touches: Washizu and Miki wandering in the fog (looking for a purpose, about to get one dropped on them) for a good five minutes, the eeriness of the forest spirit scene, and everything in the last 10 minutes. Kurosawa's take on "Birnam Wood" is enough to justify the whole endeavor, and Mifune's death is quite something. See, when Sean Bean stands after taking three arrows it looks silly, but when Mifune does it after 50 , it's tragic and haunting. It probably helps that he's wearing armor, but I'll attribute it to Kurosawa's handling of tone all the same.

8/10
« Last Edit: December 10, 2017, 12:31:22 PM by Teproc »
Legend: All-Time Favorite | Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Poor  |  Bad

Letterbox'd

Teproc

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3529
Re: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons
« Reply #535 on: December 11, 2017, 07:46:06 PM »
Kakushi-toride no san-akunin / The Hidden Fortress (Akira Kurosawa, 1958)



Adam & Matty's takes (starts at 48:45)

TOHOSCOPE!

Kurosawa in widescreen. Need I say more ? Apparently I do, since this seems to be considered a minor work of his. Adam mentions it possibly being Kurosawa's way to pay back Toho for something, which I don't really want to believe (he says it's apocryphal and some brief googling didn't bring a definitive answer) because it fits too neatly into a deeply elitist brand of auterism I strongly dislike, and feels particularly inappropriate for Kurosawa, who's not exactly known for inacessible esoterism in the first place. However, it is (of what I've seen, which is to say 11 features so far) clearly Kurosawa's most populist work, in ways both good and bad. Mostly good though.

Much has been made of George Lucas drawing inspiration from this film, to the point that I expected the basic plot to be very similar to Star Wars and to have characters directly corresponding. There is some of that, but their main commonality is in how timeless they feel: their stories are so mythical and simple in nature (insert Joseph Campbell reference here) that it seems they've always been there. I grew up reading heroic fantasy and adventure books, and that's the feeling I got from this film. It's even got a map ! A pretty basic one, but still, gotta love that. Had I seen this at that time (I guess I would have either needed to be Japanese or have cinephile parents), it would now be one of those nostalgia-fueled favorites that you're always scared won't hold up when you revisit them, but always do.

As is, it's just a very good film, and a damn good time. That Mifune manages to be so charismatic while running around in his underwear for most of the film is a testament to his movie star quality (as Adam & Matty briefly discuss, he's more Kirk Douglas than Laurence Olivier, more movie star than thespian), and that lance fight is awesome, in the bro-y sense of the word. It's so awesome in fact that I thought it would be a random interlude justifying itself by being that, so I was delighted and impressed that it turned out to be the moral fulcrum* of the film (the emotional one being the somewhat-too-short but very nice-looking fire festival), though one could argue that really that lies with the two peasants.

Let's talk about the peasants (should that be in quotes ? They're really just scavengers, might originally be peasants I suppose), because they're probably the most controversial aspect of this film. First, that's the only direct cribbing Lucas did : tell a classic heroic tale, but starting it from the perspective of two minor characters.Kurosawa also uses that opening to give us a reason to care about all the heroics to come: we see the brutality of the invasion (with a gorgeous use of the widescreen in a stairs scene that I assume to be a nod to Eisenstein) and the ways it affects regular people.

They also serve to constantly remind us of how pathetic and greedy humanity generally is, which both heightens and undercuts the heroic side of things. They also serve as comic relief, which is probably the biggest stumbling block for a modern viewer, both because it's quite broad (though effective for me, especially the running gag of "let's be friends forever") and because they end up coming off as goody, lovable would-be rapists. That's... unfortunate, let's just say, but it is somewhat alleviated by the fact that the princess never has to be rescued (hi George) and by Misa Uehara's performance. She hits her notes of defiance and strong-headedness a little too strongly, but that fits the tone of the story: we're looking for icons more than actual characters, and she does well on that front, looking like she absolutely belongs on screen with Mifune. Words that would apply to Carrie Fisher in Star Wars as well, now that I think of it.

Stylistically, the only thing Lucas seems to have taken from Kurosawa are those famous wipes, which work much better here than they did in Ikiru or Throne of Blood, probably because Kurosawa got rid of the actual black line (I believe that's the technical term for it. I'm very smart and knowledgeable about these things) in favor of a more seamless effect. If only he'd gotten Kurosawa to direct a fight scene for him somewow... at least he let Kershner take care of it in ESB, thank God for that.

This deserves to be remembered as more than the inspiration for the other thing (I guess me talking a lot about it doesn't help). For being Kurosawa's most accessible film (at least at the time, I guess Ran is more accessible simply because it's in colour), and as well-rounded and entertaining a straightforward heroic tale can be.

8/10

*Am I using that right ?

Legend: All-Time Favorite | Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Poor  |  Bad

Letterbox'd

Teproc

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3529
Re: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons
« Reply #536 on: December 14, 2017, 06:53:55 AM »
Yôjinbô / Yojimbo (Akira Kurosawa, 1961)



Adam & Matty's takes (starts at 41:03)

Watching Yôjinbô reminded me of something I had read about what Les Cahiers wrote about Kurosawa in the late 60s: that he was too "western" as opposed to Ozu who was more authentically Japanese to their taste. It's a preposterous claim to make on a number of levels, but with this particular film, I found myself thinking along similar lines, much to my chagrin.

It's hard to say what influence having watched the Leone version first had on me here, but I think the ways in which Kurosawa is mixing the western genre with an Edo-era setting don't fully work. It feels like a put-on at times, from the score - which is very modern and bombastic compared to what he's used so far - to the general situation: it's kind of unclear to me what the rivalry between the gangs is actually about. It's about power, sure, but specifically ? There's the idea that they run gambling halls but... their war has to be having a rather negative impact on their income, right ? And why exactly does no one tell the inspector that they need help ? I guess this is nitpicking, but I guess I only found myself thinking about this type of stuff because the film never really clicked with me. The whole thing felt artificial, just an excuse to get Mifune's Sanjuro in this situation.

Now to be clear, I did enjoy it. There are some great shots, from the opening tracking Sanjuro over his shoulder as he walks along the road, to the gangs facing each other in the streets while Sanjuro watches, amused, from on high, or him first entering the town. As usual, Kurosawa gives you a sense of space, of how the different places in the story relate to each other. Mifune himself... well I do prefer Clint Eastwood in the role if I'm being entirely honest, but I'm certainly not going to quibble with Mifune either, he's very good here.

I think my problem is that this is inherently a very pulpy story, and I think Kurosawa is too earnest for it. When Sanjuro actually fought people, I found myself expecting gushes of blood, just because it feels like an exploitation film (and I can only assume Yôjinbô was a massive inspiration for Japanese exploitation in the next decade... speaking of exploitation and future influence, it's nice that I get the reference to this in Kill Bill now), but no, it's just Mifune waving his sword quickly, barely touching people and they fall to ground. It's both too violent and not violent enough, in a sense. It gets back to the juxtaposition of Kurosawa's earnest souflulness with the pulpy material: it feels wrong to me. It's the uncanny valley of violence: there's something that feels too real for the package it's put in, and that combination makes me uncomfortable.

Maybe it's my expectations getting the better of me, because when I watched that amazing lance fight in The Hidden Fortress, I was hoping Yojinbo would be an excuse for more of that, but, well, it's a Western. And the way the fights go fit with that, quick and efficient rather than drawn-out and grueling. It's all about the tension building up and... well it's hard to do better than Leone in that department. Which is all very unfair, since Leone is the one who ripped off Kurosawa, but there you go.

I think I'll need to rewatch this one later on with adjusted expectations, I think. And again, though it probably doesn't come through from this review, I did like it, if only because it's hard to dislike anything as expertly-crafted as this. Also, a wild Tatsuya Nakadai appeared, which was a nice surprise to spice up the usual Kurosawa troup. I didn't realize he was this much younger than Mifune.

6/10

P.S.: I took a look at my A Fistful of Dollars review after writing this, which I close by mentioning Yôjinbô which "will be coming later... much later"... two years and some change, to be precise.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2017, 07:12:37 AM by Teproc »
Legend: All-Time Favorite | Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Poor  |  Bad

Letterbox'd

Teproc

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3529
Re: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons
« Reply #537 on: December 16, 2017, 04:54:29 PM »
Tengoku to jigoku / High and Low (Akira Kurosawa, 1963)



Adam & Matty's takes (starts at 31:36)

This is a rewatch I approached with some trepidation. I first watched High and Low on the big screen, and after being ever-so-slightly disappointed (very relatively, but still) with Rashômon the second time around. About 30 minutes in, I felt reassured: still a masterpiece, and now pretty clearly my favorite Kurosawa, pending a Seven Samurai rewatch (or something I haven't yet seen like Stray Dog or Kagemusha).

I remember being so surprised discovering after the fact that Mifune was in the main role here, having only seen him in the aforementioned period films. Even now, it's striking how different he looks from Yôjinbô, only two years before. This performance is the one that really makes the case for Mifune as a great actor as well as a movie star: it might not be as iconic as either his Rashômon/Seven Samurai wild antics or his Yôjinbô/Sanjûrô stoic coolness, but it's much more layered, and absolutely essential for the film to work at all.

The divide between the two halves isn't as stark as I remembered it to be, and I love the way Kurosawa does it: in the first half, we have no idea what the policemen might be thinking at all, they only exist as a matter of their function, letting the family/employees dynamics play out without interevening... and in the second half, it's Mifune's turn: we see him, and we get touches of character here and there: probably the most significant line he has in only related to us (him saying to his gardner that they only have time to spend now), much like the first steps of the police's investigation take place entirely off-screen in the first half. There are two scenes of transition there: the one in the train (where we get the inspector sharing his changing opinion of Mifune's character) and immediately after that in what I think is the last scene taking place in the room the entire first hour is set in. After that, we end the transition with a quick scene of the policemen in their car, going down from paradise to hell, which I believe is what the film's title translates as.

Whole books could probably be written about the way characters are positioned in relation with each other in that first half: sitting down, standing up, going to the window, facing away from each other, sitting or standing apart from everyone else, crouching, etc. I think Adam mentions it feeling like a ballet, and there is something to that. If you looked at the script here, you'd think the first part of the film would basically amount to filmed theater, but Kurosawa makes it as dynamic as it could possibly be, and he does it in a way that is very meaningful and... well maybe not subtle exactly, but not too flashy either.

The more I write about it, the more I feel like anything I can say about it only diminishes and trivializes what the film accomplishes. I can say that the second half, as well as being a captivating and enthralling detail-oriented police procedural, is the most gorgeous hour of his whole B&W filmography (a stipulation I have to include because Ran exists), at least from what I've seen. At one point he seems to casually invent the zombie genre five years early, with heroin addicts that are just as unsettling as Romero's living dead. The whole thing feels like a culmination of his career (maybe it's just being at the end of the marathon that makes me feel that way, I remember thinking the same thing about Bergman and Fanny & Alexander): the only thing missing is a swordfight really, even Takashi Shimura shows up for a brief cameo.

The handling of Mifune's character is the key I think. In a way Kurosawa stacks the deck in his favor, by having him be a self-made man who truly came from the bottom and worked his way to the top, and eventually proves to be willing to do it all over again. His resistance to the greedy executives early on, the choice he ultimately makes regarding the ransom and everything he does after that, all of those point to him being an impossibly great man. But that'd be forgetting that his first decision is to refuse to pay, even after sleeping on it. He only does the right thing after being betrayed by his underling, at which point he arguably has lost everything already. It doesn't diminish it exactly: it's still a tough choice because it means accepting that he's lost everything right then and now, but that's enough to make him nuanced, and to make the hero worship in the second half feel appropriately uncomfortable. His righteousness is his luxury: yes he is righteous, and yes the kidnapper is despicable, but the praise he gets (and the way the whole police department seems to dedicate itself to his cause and nothing else) is somehow indecent.

The confrontation between the two ends the film as it should: with him silent and stoic and the other desperate and frantic. There's something that feels subversive in the way Kurosawa makes the policemen so eager to please Mifune's character, to avenge him, in the second half: they're from the lower class, but they are instruments of the higher class: they're the ones doing the dirty work, he's the one who gets to be magnanimous and to get the praise.

10/10
« Last Edit: December 16, 2017, 05:21:26 PM by Teproc »
Legend: All-Time Favorite | Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Poor  |  Bad

Letterbox'd

Junior

  • Bert Macklin, FBI
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 28709
  • What's the rumpus?
    • Benefits of a Classical Education
Re: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons
« Reply #538 on: December 16, 2017, 05:07:48 PM »
I love this review. I think you're right about this and F+A being culminations of a sort. They feel both new and full of stuff from their predecessors.
Check out my blog of many topics

“I’m not a quitter, Kimmy! I watched Interstellar all the way to the end!”

Teproc

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3529
Re: A Filmspotter's Marathon of Filmspotting Marathons
« Reply #539 on: December 16, 2017, 05:36:11 PM »
The Ronins (Akira Kurosawa Awards)

In the same order as the podcast.

Best Supporting Performance: Miki Odagiri in Ikiru



Best Toshirô Mifune Performance: Gondo in Tengoku to jigoku/High and Low



Best Non-Toshirô Mifune Performance: Noriko Honma in Rashômon



Best Scene/Moment: Ending of Kumonosu-jô/Throne of Blood



Best Picture: Tengoku to jigoku/High and Low




Since I'm not 100% on board with Shimura in Ikiru, and once you exclude him "Supporting" and "Non-Mifune" are the same thing, I used the second one as a way to have two "best scene" categories essentially, though her performance certainly is a big part of why that works.

Summary/ranking

Tengoku to jigoku / High and Low (Akira Kurosawa, 1963)
Rashômon (Akira Kurosawa, 1950)
Kakushi-toride no san-akunin / The Hidden Fortress (Akira Kurosawa, 1958)
Ikiru (Akira Kurosawa, 1952)
Kumonosu-jô / Throne of Blood (Akira Kurosawa, 1957)
Yôjinbô (Akira Kurosawa, 1961)


Next up (in January probably): a random assortment of Palme d'Or winners !
« Last Edit: June 03, 2018, 02:15:41 PM by Teproc »
Legend: All-Time Favorite | Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Poor  |  Bad

Letterbox'd

 

love