Just saw this film thanks in part to comments left on this site, avoiding the spoilers of course. Just wanted to give my take on the film, and some of the reviews on the film.
First if you haven't seen the film, simply put it's not just worth seeing, it's worth buying. It is a well performed, brilliantly photographed, hauntingly scored, and masterfully directed film.
That said it's often spoken of in the same breath as SWORD OF DOOM, and that is highly misleading. If you go in expecting the visceral, brilliantly choreographed sword fights and unrelenting action of that film, you will not find it here.
This is very much a drama, a morality tale of a time and a place; an exploration and an indictment of a way of life, and as such it has very few equals. The movie does lag, it is in many ways a monologue, one man talking more to himself than anyone else, of the ending of his life.
But an enthralling story, captivating visuals, and above all else, one of the most intriguing and effective soundscapes since the great Dimitri Tiomkin's work on 1950s DOA, keeps this static film... moving and engrossing.
Mentioning DOA, leads me to the bashing Hollywood takes regularly here from "critics" such as Landor28. Critics who in their rush to praise films, do it by backhanding other films. I'm not a critic, I'm just a reviewer. Critic implies you have some from the mountaintop perspective that gives you the right to criticize. Unless you've made movies, superior to what you're reviewing, you don't get to criticize. Review yes, criticize... no.
Has Hollywood made bad films? Yes Hollywood makes its share of bad films, so does Japan, so does India, so does Hong Kong, so does every other country that makes movies. However Hollywood makes the most films, the most visible films, and the largest films, so it is an easy lump-sum target as opposed to taking each film on its own merits. Hollywood in fact is judged harsher by these critics, held to a higher standard than films from elsewhere in the world.
I am no defender of Hollywood, as I don't work there, and not fortunate to know anyone who does, but I am a film fan, and a fan of the truth, and to praise films by Kurosawa and Kobayashi and to denigrate the films of Hollywood is to make a mistake these directors did not. These men, like all postwar filmmakers, were inspired by the films of Hollywood, particularly present in the work of all these directors is the large and brilliant work of John Ford.
Kurosawa would be the first to state this. Fords widescreen westerns are at the heart of the cinematic recreation of the Samurai. The samurai world as envisioned by Kurosawa as much about history as it is the heroic imagery of the western. They are Stagecoach and Searchers transplanted to the east.
A simplification to be sure, but not much of one. Postwar cinema in Japan and throughout the world copied from the states, and that's a good thing. And has started a trend that continues to this day of films successful in one country being copied in another. And we are the better for this two way copying. That's what film is people, copying.
Copying a headline, or a book, or a play, or another film, copying a moment and making it your own. That's what all art is, looking at something, copying something, a sunset, a tree, a woman, a birds cry, and adding your own... bleeding to it. That's all life is, being influenced by something people have bled on, and if we are great men, leaving our own blood on it... to influence others.
Only those with no art in their souls, don't see this. Only the very young, or the very stupid. Landor28 accuses Scorscese of stealing from Seppuku, an inane comment to make.
How many shots in Seppuku but reecho earlier brilliant compositions of Stroheim. But I don't hear you calling Kobayashi a thief. And rightly so, no one owns a shot. Cinema, and images belongs to the story that can tell it. And if that image or look, can service well a thousand films, than it should be used a thousand times. What is film noir, but the same type of look, and camera angles used repeatedly. But used from the directors own viewpoint, it becomes the director's tale. So the comment of theft shows someone ignorant of the fact that there is nothing new under the sun, there are just 7 stories and 5 angles; and all cinema since.... but each person retelling this story through the lens of their own joy or pain.
And if they are honest, the story each time... is worth hearing.
Give these directors, whether they work in India, or New Zealand or Kenya or Hollywood their due. Shymalan is a great director, Weir is a great director, Fincher is a great director, Carl Frankin is a great director, Lee is a great director, Zimmerman is a great director, Gibson (for Braveheart not Passion), Ron Howard is a great director, Edward Zwick is a great Director (his resume since 89 reads like a bloody history lesson of great films.) and they all work in Hollywood, and their work inspires all kinds of foreign flicks you do rave about.
Get off of Hollywood's back, it's always popular to hate the top dog, but it's also sometimes unwarranted.
SEPPUKU is a great film, by a master director. ***1/2 out of ****. If you like it also check out these films: GLORY (1989 Ed Zwick), COURAGE UNDER FIRE, A HERO NEVER DIES, KING OF NEW YORK, LE SAMOURAI, SWORD OF DOOM, BACKDRAFT, Excalibur, TUAREG, MENACE II SOCIETY.They are all films about, to one degree or another, displaced honor and cannibal societies.
First if you haven't seen the film, simply put it's not just worth seeing, it's worth buying. It is a well performed, brilliantly photographed, hauntingly scored, and masterfully directed film.
That said it's often spoken of in the same breath as SWORD OF DOOM, and that is highly misleading. If you go in expecting the visceral, brilliantly choreographed sword fights and unrelenting action of that film, you will not find it here.
This is very much a drama, a morality tale of a time and a place; an exploration and an indictment of a way of life, and as such it has very few equals. The movie does lag, it is in many ways a monologue, one man talking more to himself than anyone else, of the ending of his life.
But an enthralling story, captivating visuals, and above all else, one of the most intriguing and effective soundscapes since the great Dimitri Tiomkin's work on 1950s DOA, keeps this static film... moving and engrossing.
Mentioning DOA, leads me to the bashing Hollywood takes regularly here from "critics" such as Landor28. Critics who in their rush to praise films, do it by backhanding other films. I'm not a critic, I'm just a reviewer. Critic implies you have some from the mountaintop perspective that gives you the right to criticize. Unless you've made movies, superior to what you're reviewing, you don't get to criticize. Review yes, criticize... no.
Has Hollywood made bad films? Yes Hollywood makes its share of bad films, so does Japan, so does India, so does Hong Kong, so does every other country that makes movies. However Hollywood makes the most films, the most visible films, and the largest films, so it is an easy lump-sum target as opposed to taking each film on its own merits. Hollywood in fact is judged harsher by these critics, held to a higher standard than films from elsewhere in the world.
I am no defender of Hollywood, as I don't work there, and not fortunate to know anyone who does, but I am a film fan, and a fan of the truth, and to praise films by Kurosawa and Kobayashi and to denigrate the films of Hollywood is to make a mistake these directors did not. These men, like all postwar filmmakers, were inspired by the films of Hollywood, particularly present in the work of all these directors is the large and brilliant work of John Ford.
Kurosawa would be the first to state this. Fords widescreen westerns are at the heart of the cinematic recreation of the Samurai. The samurai world as envisioned by Kurosawa as much about history as it is the heroic imagery of the western. They are Stagecoach and Searchers transplanted to the east.
A simplification to be sure, but not much of one. Postwar cinema in Japan and throughout the world copied from the states, and that's a good thing. And has started a trend that continues to this day of films successful in one country being copied in another. And we are the better for this two way copying. That's what film is people, copying.
Copying a headline, or a book, or a play, or another film, copying a moment and making it your own. That's what all art is, looking at something, copying something, a sunset, a tree, a woman, a birds cry, and adding your own... bleeding to it. That's all life is, being influenced by something people have bled on, and if we are great men, leaving our own blood on it... to influence others.
Only those with no art in their souls, don't see this. Only the very young, or the very stupid. Landor28 accuses Scorscese of stealing from Seppuku, an inane comment to make.
How many shots in Seppuku but reecho earlier brilliant compositions of Stroheim. But I don't hear you calling Kobayashi a thief. And rightly so, no one owns a shot. Cinema, and images belongs to the story that can tell it. And if that image or look, can service well a thousand films, than it should be used a thousand times. What is film noir, but the same type of look, and camera angles used repeatedly. But used from the directors own viewpoint, it becomes the director's tale. So the comment of theft shows someone ignorant of the fact that there is nothing new under the sun, there are just 7 stories and 5 angles; and all cinema since.... but each person retelling this story through the lens of their own joy or pain.
And if they are honest, the story each time... is worth hearing.
Give these directors, whether they work in India, or New Zealand or Kenya or Hollywood their due. Shymalan is a great director, Weir is a great director, Fincher is a great director, Carl Frankin is a great director, Lee is a great director, Zimmerman is a great director, Gibson (for Braveheart not Passion), Ron Howard is a great director, Edward Zwick is a great Director (his resume since 89 reads like a bloody history lesson of great films.) and they all work in Hollywood, and their work inspires all kinds of foreign flicks you do rave about.
Get off of Hollywood's back, it's always popular to hate the top dog, but it's also sometimes unwarranted.
SEPPUKU is a great film, by a master director. ***1/2 out of ****. If you like it also check out these films: GLORY (1989 Ed Zwick), COURAGE UNDER FIRE, A HERO NEVER DIES, KING OF NEW YORK, LE SAMOURAI, SWORD OF DOOM, BACKDRAFT, Excalibur, TUAREG, MENACE II SOCIETY.They are all films about, to one degree or another, displaced honor and cannibal societies.