Essays on movie

I saw the movie, Kandahar (2001) by Mohsen Makhmalbaf. This movie became very famous after 9.11 and the war in the Afghanistan. So, I guess you've already seen this movie or heard of its story. (If you don't know the plot, please check here.)

Many people expect to see some kind of the reality of Afghanistan in this movie. I was also in the same expectation. In other words, we see this movie

to "interpret" the political situation of Taliban ruled Afghanistan. But, the movie is against our expectation. And it is with a good surprise. We cannot see the heroine, who are desperately trying to go to Kandahar, arrives at Kandahar or meets with her sister. This movie leaves problems unsolved, ending with the heroine's monologue in the desert.

I guess the people who made this movie wanted to go to Kandahar, but couldn't get into Afghanistan. So, we cannot see the reality of Kandahar! We only can see the desert, beautiful colors of burgas, and prosthetic limbs being parachuted down from the sky. As a result, it was better without Kandahar scene. The closest movie to Kandahar might be The Sheltering Sky (1990) by Bernardo Bertolucci. It is a movie of woman going on and on into the deep desert, far from the civilization, losing the consciousness.

Whether you like Kandahar or not depends on whether you like the sur-realistic scene of prosthetic limbs with parachute. I don't blame it is unreal, but I thought it is going too far, over-produced. And I felt some incompatibility with the heroine's attitude. She very often speaks English. And she often takes off her burga carelessly in front of public. This attitude seems to be rather strange. (Um? Am I toward Talibun???)
(.30/September/2002)

I saw Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002) yesterday. It was a good entertainment. Though the story is similar to the first one, it is inevitable as one-year-of-the-school series. There are not many outside scenes. (The flying car scene is fun.) This makes this movie darker than the first one, but it makes the story concentrate on the theme, the battle of the good vs. the evil. I could get some hints about secrets, and there are other puzzles arose. (I don't read books of the series. I only see Harry Potter on the movie.. I don't know what will happen next.)

In each movie of the series, the evil Voldemort is destroyed. But we know that he will be back on the next movie in the series one year later, like Darth Vader in the Star Wars series.

This reminds me of the recent "return" of Osama Bin Ladin. What most people first felt about 9.11 was "Oh! it's like a movie! Is it really real?" It was a movie like Apocalyptic image of the falling "two towers" and the movie like activity of the president of the United States. And movie like decisive attack on the Talibun and Al Kaeda in Afghanistan and the impressive liberation of Afghanistan. It was like Star Wars, Independence Day, or something like that, and like Star Wars, Osama Bin Ladin fled somewhere. And he "strikes back" one year after, with a serial terrorism in October, and with his voice. The voice to announce to kill us. It is like the secret voice in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002). (Of course, you can tell the story from the other side, describing the U.S. as an evil empire.)

This looks like fiction invaded the reality. Is the world really a war between the good and the evil?

I saw The Sheltering Sky (1990) of Bernardo Bertolucci on DVD. (It was my favorite movie and I wanted to have it on DVD. It was released on DVD last November, and I realized the release recently. ) My impression for the second time was moderate. I still think it is a great movie, but I cannot enjoy it as much as the first time. There may be some reasons.

First of all, I read major works of Paul Bowles after having seen this movie. He is a kind of the late comer of the lost generation. His works are really incredible. So, compared to the complex novel world of Bowles, the movie seems to be thin. The movie tries to put the simple meaning on the story. When I saw Out of Africa (1985), after having read the original novel of Isak Dinesen, I felt it was a stupid interpretation. The Sheltering Sky is not that bad, it is not good as the original novel. According to the interview of Bowles, which is the bonus of this DVD, Bertolucci interpreted the story as an autobiographical one, Port as Paul Bowles and Kit as his wife, Jane. Even though Bowles denied that interpretation, Bertolucci insisted it. And he made the movie on his interpretation. When making the movie, it is unavoidable to focus on one theme. But, when seeing the movie over again, it makes the movie a little plain.

Second, it is related to the first reason. There is an appearance of Paul Bowles in the movie at the cafe scene. I didn't know who was Bowles when I first saw the movie. Now, I know his face, and I realized he appears not only in the last scene, but also in the early scene at the cafe. This appearance reinforces the autobiographical interpretation. Susan Sontag used to write that the only defect of Vivre Sa Vie (1962) of Godard is the abrupt death of Anna Karina at the last scene. Sontag didn't criticized that the last scene did not have dramatic necessity, but she criticized that Godard suggested that Anna was his wife in the real life. So, the invasion of autobiographical element lessens the purity and intensity of the movie.

Third, I cannot see the movie without thinking about the war. When I first saw the movie, I was overwhelmed by the beauty of the Sahara Desert. But now it is hard to see it without thinking about the desert in Iraq. Or the scenery looking from the bus windows, palm trees in the oasis, personally reminds me of Bali. And this reminds me of the last year bombing of Bali...

On the other hand, there is a wonderful finding. I found Amina Annabi in the movie. She was playing the role of sexy Arabic woman, Mahrnia. She is so exotically beautiful here. And this DVD of The Sheltering Sky is uncensored, so I can see the sexy scene without shading! (Now, we can also see some movies of Godard like Je Vous Salue, Marie (1985) in uncensored version. I wonder whether Prénom Carmen (1983) is censored or not. When I saw it in the theater for the first time, there was a shading scene, and subtitle explained that they were not making love, but he was doing masturbation in front of her etc.. It was the stupidest subtitle I've ever seen.)

By the way, Tea in the Sahara (1983) of the Police mentions about The Sheltering Sky. It not only mentions about it, but also its lyrics are based on the anecdote in the novel.

Ryuichi Sakamoto played the role of Masahiko Amakasu (1891-1945) in The Last Emperor (1987) of Bernardo Bertolucci. Amakasu was the president of Manchuria movie company. It was said, "Manchuria empire is ruled by Japanese army in the daytime, and is ruled by Amakasu in the night time." Like in the movie, Amakasu played the role in kidnapping Pu Yi. Actually, he may be the true last emperor of Manchuria.

The movie described Amakasu as a mysterious Machiavellian. But he was much more complex person, and the story of his life was full of surprise. In 1923, Sakae Ousugi and his lover and his infant nephew were slaughtered in the confusion after the Kantou earthquake. Ousugi was a famous Japanese anarchist. Amakasu was arrested for the murder, and sentenced 10 years imprisonment. It was known that the murder was not a crime of one person. But he accepted the sentence without saying anything about anybody else. Because of his behavior, killing of anarchist and his attitude in the trial, he became a hero in Japanese army. So, he secretly got out of jail two years after, and went to France, where Ousugi used to stay for anarchist activity. (Ousugi was playing around in Paris in order to hide his intention from the police!) In 1929, he went to Manchuria. He got to know Japanese military officers like Seishirou Itagaki there. Amakasu was said to play roles in the secret operations of Japanese army. In 1932, he took Pu Yi to Manchuria in order to make him the emperor of Manchuria, the puppet government of Japanese army. In 1939, he became the president of Manchuria movie company. In 1945, he killed himself with cyanide, as Japan lost the war.

This is the movie-like short biography of Amakasu. He seems to have been an evil person as shown in the movie. But, many people who actually knew him said that he was a wonderful person with a great dream. Many questioned if he really killed Ousugi, saying "he is not a kind of guy." In the testimony of the case, he said he gave sweets or something to the boy. It is not likely the behavior of the man who would kill that boy soon. Actor Shigehisaya Mori said, "He had a dream. His dream was not small such as making money or making building. He dreamed of making a new great state." Before he died, he made a speech to Chinese employees of his movie company. "I will die here soon. But you people will live and keep making wonderful movies whoever controls China. Please keep the movie machines and materials from the war." And there were many Chinese people coming to his funeral.

Anyway, what is interesting is that Amakasu was trying to build a state through making movie. There was an impressive scene in The Last Emperor. The coronation ceremony in Manchuria was produced and filmed by Amakasu. Thus, the movie making became the politics. The politics was done to be taken in the movie. And the movie justified the politics. Considering that Manchuria empire was the virtual state of Japan, and that it was the dream for many Japanese outsiders who felt Japan was too small, the movie-making might fit to the existence of Manchuria empire as a state.

As a film maker, Bernardo Bertolucci must have been aware of the coincidence with Leni Riefenstahl. She was a

director of documentary movies of Nazis ceremony and Berlin Olympic. After the war, Riefenstahl denied the relations with Nazis, and she insisted her movies were art, not the political propaganda. She said that she was just capturing the Truth. But these movies were not simply picturing the events. They were produced to be taken in the film. Riefenstahl was known to play the big role in producing the spectacle ceremony. Moreover, Susan Sontag criticized that the aesthetics of the movie of Leni Riefenstahl is very fascistic. And her aesthetics has been very consistent through the years.

Clifford Geertz proposed the notion of "Theatre State" in "Negara: The Theatre State in Nineteenth-Century Bali" (1980). He argued that the state in Bali was theatre, and the purpose of existence of the king and politics was performing festivals. It was the purely "theatre state" because the purpose of the festival was not the means of ruling people, the festival itself was the ends. In 1906, when Dutch army invaded Bali, the king and his followers paraded to the enemy with gorgeous costumes. Dutch army cautioned to stop, but they did not. So, Dutch army started to shoot them. But they kept marching toward the enemy without fighting. There were massive amounts of dead bodies left in the field. The gorgeous death parade was the last performance that pure "theatre state" produced.

Even though they may not be "pure" like this, we can find easily many examples of "theatre state" as a means to rule and control people. Particularly, it is the common favorite of totalitarian society. For example, in North Korea, Kim Jong Il loves the movies, and the mass game by enormous people is very spectacular. I wonder who can see these mass games. Kim Jong Il and very chosen few can see it. And people can see it through the movie. I am not sure about the situations in other countries of "an axis of evil". But we can not forget that the ex-actor was the president of the United States. It was not a long ago. And we know that advertising agents are involved in the publicity of the foreign policy of the United States. They are making photograph-able images of the war. Of course, the suicidal attacks of terrorists are also very theatrical.

I saw La Nuit Américaine (1973) of François Truffaut on DVD. Because it is one of my most favorite movies, I've been waiting for the release in DVD. Even though other major works were released on DVD much earlier, this was just released this month in Japan. (In the U.S. and Europe, it was released several months ago.) The movie seems to be owned by American company, Warner Bros. This may have caused the delay of release. Anyway, it is so glad that I can see this in vivid visions, and I can also see many bonus videos. And this DVD has two languages, French and English. (And there are subtitles in many languages are available.)

The movie starts with the long scene shot by crane camera. Camera is incredibly moving smoothly along the crowds near the subway station and shops around the roads etc. I easily start to fall in the magic of Truffaut. It is always a visual pleasure of seeing movie, and I always feel happy without any reason even when the story hardly begins. However, my primitive pleasure is suddenly interrupted by "Cut" shouted by the director in the move. (I know this happens in the movie because I saw this movie several times. But this "cut" always surprises me.) Yes, this movie is about making movie. The director, actors, and many technical and management people are trying to make the movie called "Pamela", an old-fashioned story of forbidden love.

So, the movie proceeds in two levels, story of making movie, that is rather a comedy, and melodrama story of the movie they are making. And, because the movie making is the group work and many people are involved, many accidents happen. So, the story of making movie contains many episodes, and the movie has plural levels of stories and meanings. Moreover, because this movie shows many visual techniques of making movie, there is a plurality in visual images.

The title, La Nuit Américaine, came from the movie technique to take night scene in the daytime by

putting some filters on lenses. This technique is called Day for Night in America, and it is an Amercian title of the movie. This title is very interesting in many ways. First, this movie is about making movie with using various techniques to make fake things look realistic. Second, this movie is a homage to movies, particularly to American movies. Third, more importantly, this is also a movie about communications among various values. Jacqueline Bisset shortly works as a translator between French and English in the movie. She cannot understand the words, La Nuit Américaine, and asks director, that Truffaut himself plays the role of, what it means.

In this movie, people are trying to communicate and to get some affection from other people. And there are many types of love. Some people can get love they need, and other cannot. They get hurt by love and reality. They sometimes feel that movies are not real life. But, Truffaut says to Jean-Pierre Leaud in the movie, "Whatever your personal real life is, the movie keeps going smoothly. People like you and me have to find hapiness in making movies. That is our job." (Sorry, this is not the correct quotation. This is how I remember.)

In spite of plurality of story and meaning, there is a strong sense of continuity in this movie. It is a strong love for movies. It is shared by the people with different values who are making movie in the movie, and it is of course shared by the audience of the movie.

It is also interesting to see how the director of the movie works. The movie making is a big project that needs many people's co-operation. Actors and actresses are very sensitive people, and they act unexpectedly. So, the director has to work as a kind of therapist. There are many staffs in charge of many technical issues. They are working by their own. So, the director has to show them the direction, and make decisions on what they ask. And the director has to encourage them to do their creative job. And the director has to make the movie within a budget. He has to manage the project financially and has to control the time schedule. And he has to calculate the risk in making movie and has to discuss with insurance company. And he also has to deal with the unexpected accidents. He has to change the plan of making movie and sometime has to change the plot etc. This is exactly the job of managers which MBA schools might teach!

Thus, we can enjoy this movie in many ways, many times. Of course, Jacqueline Bisset is so young and beautiful! Very good buy for everyone.

Ozu and Embracing Defeat

5 films of Ozu were broadcasted on TV last week. However, because I was busy, I could see only two of them,"Munekata Kyoudai" (1950) and "Sannma No Aji" (1962).. They will re-broadcast them in December. I will try again.

Needless to say, they are great films, full of pure seeing pleasure. Whatever Ozu took is beautiful. Whatever story Ozu told, there is a "FILM" exists. It is worthless to interpret meanings of his films. But I realized there is a thin shadow of the war in his movie. It is maybe because I read John Dower's Embracing Defeat: Japan in the Wake of World War 2 (1999).

In this book, Dower described Japan after the war from many aspects of the society, not only political and economical aspects, also the cultural and social psychological aspects. He tried to catch not only the movement of the emperor, politicians and bureaucrats, he also tried to understand the feelings of the general public and lower class people including prostitutes. Dowers argued that the Japan's post war period was peaceful and successful because both the U.S. and Japan embraced defeat together. When Dowers said "embracing", he implied some sexual meaning. Japanese people accepted the U.S. eagerly as a liberation army just like the Japanese prostitutes accepted GI boys. But it is not a masochistic acceptance. People were basically happy, liberated from the madness of the war.

In Sannma no Aji (1962), there is a conversation like this:

"How do you think if we had won the war? We would be now in New York. Isn't it nice? American people would be learning about Japanese culture. How do you think? Wouldn't it be great?"

"Maybe, it was better that we were defeated in the war."

Two people have this conversation while they are listening to the military marching song, giving salutes in military manner, in the bar. This was really like a scene from Embracing Defeat. I felt Embracing Defeat was a fair book, trying to describe post war Japan as a whole. But, some readers might feel self-justification of American people. Even though it is not the intention of the author, this book reminds me of the U.S. self-justification about Iraq War . Is it wrong to imagine the Bush government people read this book and they thought American and Iraqi people could embrace each other?

Films of Ozu include many ambivalent feeling about the post war period. It is still a feeling that I can understand just as I can understand the description of Embracing Defeat. How long does this understanding keep existing? And how long can we understand the subtle nuance of Ozu? And, how are the foreign people understanding Ozu? Even if these understandin would be lost, the greatness of Ozu films would still be the same. But I still feel something important is fading.

(19/October/2003)

The Silent Movies of Ozu

The several silent movies of Ozu were broadcasted last week. It was the first time for me to see these works. And it was full of surprising and excitement. The conventional images of Ozu's movies are quiet, discreet and very "Japanese" movies; People seem to communicate deeper feelings while they are having just everyday conversations. I used to wonder why Ozu's movies were highly appreciated in the foreign countries. It seemed to me that they required a very Japanese sense to understand the subtle feelings among the people. I was just thinking that foreign people might not understand the feeling correctly, and just like to taste a little bit of "Japanese" taste from Ozu's movies.

However, after having seen the early movies of Ozu taken before the war, my perspective on Ozu has to be changed a lot. In these movies, Ozu was a kind of modernist, and he was making movies under the heavy influence of Hollywood. Who ever thought that he had made gangster movies? Or who ever thought that he made slapstick comedies? Of course we can argue that everyone has a study period. But I think these works are not only preludes to his greater works, but they are also the works to be appreciated for their own greatness.

So, what I felt from these movies is that Ozu was the great movie maker with universal language of movie. Because he had the universal language, his movie can capture the people attention in many cultures. And his movie can communicate the subtle feeling in Japanese culture to foreign people.

We have to re-see his movies from this perspective. ("We" may mean Japanese people because foreign people may have been seeing Ozu's movie from such a perspective from the beginning.)

(7/December/2003)

Making American Movies

During holidays I saw some movies of Steven Soderbergh, Out of Sight (1998), The Limey (1999), Ocean's Eleven (2001), and Solaris (2002). I was curious to know why Soderbergh is recently making commercial movies with big movie stars. In three of four movies, George Clooney plays the heroes. In Ocean's Eleven (2001), Brad Pitt, Matt Damon, Andy Garcia, and Julia Roberts appear. What a gorgeous casting!

The first Soderbergh's movie that I saw was his debut movie, Sex, Lies, and Videotape (1989). It was really a brilliant movie.When I first saw it, I was very surprised by Soderbergh's non-American sentiment. It reminds me of European movies. Actually, his debut movie is so great that we can even compare it with the debut movies of Jean-Luc Godard or Francois Truffaut.

The next movie that I saw was Erin Brockovich (2000). I was surprised by the great performance of Julia Roberts, and also surprised by the difference between two movies. I wonder how Soderbergh, who used to look as if he was a non-American, became an American hit movie maker.

The impression of seeing other "commercial" movies of Soderbergh is ambivalent. They are very entertaining movies. I enjoyed them all. Though we can recognize some features of Soderbergh, which were still clear in Erin Brockovich (2000), they are getting closer to the ordinary American movie.

It is not so simple that Soderbergh is an European tasted director born in America. It is because European directors, such as Godard, Truffaut and Wenders, whom Soderbergh reminds me of, are deeply influenced by American movies! They were really in love with the B-class American movies.

Also, I am finding that Yasujiro Ozu was very much influenced by American movies. His movies look very Japanese. But we can find many Hollywood influences in his movies. For example, can you imagine that Kinuyo Tanaka holds gun for robbery in Hijosen No Onna (1933)? And, in Sono Yo No Tsuma (1930), Emiko Yagumo holds gun to disarm a detective!

Of course, there are many good movies that are not American. But in those non-American movies, there are something theatrical, poetical, or philosophical etc in the movie. When thinking about the seeing pleasure of movie, they are not pure in term of the movie. Thus, we can argue that movie is American.

So, how is Steven Soderbergh American or not? He may be European in his techniques in telling stories. In Soderbergh's movies, there are plural stories going on at the same time, most typically in Traffic (2000). And the stories went on and back. These techniques make his movie a little difficult, but he doesn't go too far. These techniques make his movie look fashionable and stylish. It is sometimes successful like in Out of Sight (1998), but it sometimes becomes pretentious.

His movie may be American in his use of colors. I love his solid and dry colors of the movie. Particularly, I love his orange color in the movies such as Erin Brockovich (2000). And I also like his picture. Actually, when I am seeing his movie, I am not really following stories. Sometimes the story becomes complicated by his complicated story telling technique, but I don't care about it. I am only enjoying his picture.

Soderbergh's movies used to look like American movie made by Wim Wenders. And his movie is becoming closer to ordinary Hollywood movie. But the pradox is that today's Hollywood movie is not so American in a sense. So, it is difficult to discuss how his movie is American. This complicated puzzle is a part of pleasure of seeing Soderbergh's movie. He might not be the great film maker, but I like to see his movies in this sense.

(12/January/2004)

The Lost Movies of Ozu

Lately, I am busy for seeing Ozu's movies on video. NHK broadcasted all of Ozu's movies that exist. They broadcasted two or three movies in a day, so I was very busy to record these movies on videos. And I am seeing two or three movies on weekends. (So, I can't update my site regularly.) There are 37 movies existing now, and 17 movies were lost. 37 are a lot of movies to see. It requires a lot of time. But I am still very sorry that 1/3 of his works were lost! Why couldn't we keep his films?

I have already discovered a lot of new aspects of Ozu. He was much influenced by Hollywood movies as I already wrote several times. He made even gangster movies and slapstick comedies. And there are always Hollywood movie posters in the room in his early movies. But there may be movies that might show more different aspects of Ozu. For example, there are movies titled Nikutaibi (1928) and Erogami No Onnryo (1930). I don't know exactly what they are, but they sound like they are erotic movies! And Bijin Aishuu (1931)! This is the longest movie of Ozu, and it seems to be a romantic love story. These lost movies could have brought other aspects of the director.

Moreover, I have to say that the conditions of the movies are not very good. For example, there are a lot of sound noises in Titi Ariki (1942), so I can't hear the conversation. Bakushuu was produced in 1951. It is just a 50 years ago, and it is after the war. But there are many noises in films.

These situations might represent how Japanese people did not appreciate Ozu properly. And it still represents the situation that we still don't treat him right. Considering the improvement of digital technology, we can get much cleaner images and sounds from old films. I don't know the quality of DVD set of Ozu's movies. But I haven't heard that they are different from the ones broadcasted. Because the DVD box are really expensive, they should be digitally "re-mastered" with using the latest technology.

While I find more beauties from Ozu's movies, I get sorry for this poverty of Japanese cultural situation.

(25/January/2004)

The Last Samurai

I saw The Last Samurai (2003), the other day. When I heard that Tom Cruise played the role of Samurai, I thought it was a ridiculous story. I was not so interested in this movie, but I went to see it because my son wanted to see. After seeing it, the story looks less ridiculous. The war hero of the civil war was invited to Japan in order to build the modern military. He was captured by Samurais during the battle with them. And he was impressed by the Samurai culture. When thinking about this story again now, it is not realistic at all. However, I didn't think it was unrealistic at all when I was seeing it. The story has its reality in the movie.

This may be because the story of The Last Samurai is in the tradition of Hollywood movie. It is a story of the man who encountered the different culture and fell in love with it. The story usually includes the love story with a beautiful "native" woman. The quickest resemblance may be Dances With Wolves (1990). They are so alike that I don't repeat the story. It is a typical Hollywood story. It describes the healing process of the man who was mentally wounded by the war.

Also, the story cheers up the heart of Japanese people who are depressed by the economic stagnation. The way of describing Samurai may be too idealistic. Ken Watanabe is doing a very good job, but he speaks too much and explains too much. He may be against the good tradition of "silence". But the positive way of describing Samurai is very comfortable to Japanese people. This movie may even make young Japanese people find their own culture!

The best part of the movie may be the battle scene. I don't say it is realistic. I say it has a visual pleasure. I am not sure if they used CG effects on the battle scene or not, but I felt they made the battle scene without CG. I get used to see CG battle scenes nowadays, and they seem to bring new excitement. But when seeing this non-CG-like battle scene of The Last Samurai, I come to think that I've forgot the non-CG beauty of the movie. It is a primitive fun, and it is very Hollywood-like. (If they used CG for the battle scenes, it would be even greater thing. They used modern technology in such a natural way.)

Because The Last Samurai picks up the exotic theme, and describes it in a not-exotic way with respect to the different culture, it is seemingly a non-Hollywood-like movie. But the best parts of the movies are very Hollywood. And it is a good movie to see.

(31/January/2004)

The Return of the King

Many have already talked a lot about The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003). Mostly they are positive. And it won 11 Oscars. Yes, I agree. This is the great movie.

When I saw the first movie of the trilogy, I felt ambivalent. It was a good movie, but I felt many deja vu. It looked like Star Wars and Harry Potter. Of course, Star Wars and Harry Potter were heavily influenced by the original book of The Lord Of The Rings. But, as a movie, other two movies proceeded the Fellowship of the Ring (2001). Even though the story of The Lord of the Rings is much deeper and more complex than other two, the movie seems to be a repetition of other two, with similar visual effects. This impression remained when I saw The Two Towers (2002). The battle scene was amazing, but it was mainly a technical surprise.

All these complaints disappeared when I saw The Return of the King (2003). It is a great technical achievement. The visual effects of The Lord of the Rings are much more sophisticated than the original Star Wars series which were made more than 20 years ago. Yet, I was feeling a continuity with Star Wars until The Two Towers (2002). The visual pleasure of seeing The Return of the King (2003) was something beyond deja vu. It reached another dimension. Look how many weired creatures move smoothly!

More than visual effects, it has a strong emotional kick. It mainly comes from the original story. But, considering that two movies before The Return of the King (2003) sometimes seem to be busy in following the story of the original book, I think The Return of the King (2003) is a very good story telling. (The impression of "being busy about story telling" gets much weaker when I saw special extended editions DVDs. They are 40 minutes longer than the theater versions. And it is much better in story telling.)

So, I think The Lord of the Rings finally overwhelmed Star Wars! In Star Wars series, the movies tend to finish with the scenes of blessing of heroes by the queen and the parade etc. Return of the Jedi (1983), the last movie of the series, was not the exception. I wanted to see something more than a happy end as an ending of the long series. On the other hand, in The Return of the King (2003), the story does not end with the scene of the destroy of the ring or the crowning of Aragorn and blessing of Hobbits. The movie still continues for about 20 minutes after these events. I don't tell you the ending, but I think because of this ending The Lord of the Rings exceeds Star Wars. Needless to say, this ending is not the invention of Peter Jackson; it is basically faithful to the original novel. But, as a movie, this type of ending is something new. And it is a great achievement of Jackson to make this ending visual.

Moreover, the movie The Lord of the Rings has a theme of writing books. Bilbo and Frodo write books of their experiences; they are The Hobbits and The Lord of the Rings! And, in The Two Towers (2002), Sam says their stories will be told for a long time. This theme is interesting, and it is pleasant to find Jackson's respect to the author, JRR Tolkien. So, I have to read an original novel, and see the movie again.

(7/March/2004)

Setsuko Hara in Kurosawa

I saw almost all existing movies of Ozu, and I am searching for the next movies to see. Because I found there were Kurasawa's movies featuring Setsuko Hara, who was very impressive in Ozu's movies, I saw Waga Seishun Ni Kuinashi - No Regrets for My Youth (1946). ( Haruko Sugimura, who was also the regular star in Ozu's movies, was also in the movie.)

Even though Akira Kurosawa and Yasujiro Ozu are regarded as the greatest Japanese directors, I've never felt in love with Kurosawa's movies. I've been feeling that there are too many non-movie fragments in his movies which make his movies mysterious, but also make them impure as movies.

As I saw Waga Seishun Ni Kuinashi, my impression of impurity of Kurosawa's movies got stronger. The movie's story is based on the Kyoto University incident and Sorge incident that occurred actually during fascistic Japanese regime before the war. So, the political criticism to Japanese pre-war regime somehow obscures the purity as a movie. Moreover, the expression of his philosophy of life also makes me feel too much. Thus, I started to get bored with the movie. I saw the movie rather reluctantly. Again, I fail to find the greatness of Kurosawa movies.

Of course, there were some interesting points. The movie sometimes looked like German expressionist movie with deep contrast of lights and shadows. While seemingly most-Japanese director Ozu was influenced by American movies, Kurosawa might have roots in European movies. So, it was interesting to see the movie as a German expressionist movie, ignoring the story of the movie. And it was also interesting that the impression of the movie changed as the heroine went to the rural area of Japan. Suddenly, the movie started to look like Kurosawa's samurai movies. The heroine was not fighting with the outlaws, but she was fighting with old Japanese system in the village.

As for Setsuko Hara, she looked much younger than herself in Ozu movies. She first appeared in Ozu's movie, Banshun, in 1949. So, she was 3 years younger than it when she played the role in Waga Seishun Ni Kuinashi. But, more than the age, her impression look very different. She played the role of the spoiled girl, but she sometimes looked like femme fatal. Because her roles in Tokyo Monogatari was so impressive, the eccentric beauty side of Setsuko Hara looked strange and rare. (There was a little fragments of eccentric beauty left in Banshun. But it quickly faded away, as she played more roles in Ozu's movies.)

Setsuko Hara was so special that the movies suddenly begin to shine as she appears in the Ozu's movies. I thought it was her power of beautiful existence. But it didn't occur when I saw Waga Seishun Ni Kuinashi. She was just another beautiful actress. So, I re-discovered the greatness of Yasujiro Ozu.

(9/May/2004)

Love Is Stronger

I saw Truffaut's L' Histoire d'Adèle H.(1975) for the first time. I found the old video-tape at the rental video shop. There are several reasons that I haven't seen this movie in spite of my love for Truffaut; the movie was made after my most favorite Truffaut's movie, La Nuit Américaine (1973)!

First of all, it was not available on video and DVD for a long time. Though it was re-issued on DVD as a disc of box set recently, I did not want to buy the box to see this movie. Second, the story of the movie seemed to be too heavy and serious. I basically love lighter comedies so that I can concentrate on visual pleasure of seeing Truffaut movie. Third, I did not have a good impression on Isabelle Adjani. I first saw her on L'Été meurtrier (1983), in which she was playing some eccentric, hysteric woman. And the role she played seemed to be close to her nature. The impression may come from the review of L'Histoire d'Adèle H.(1975) , which said Ajdani's role was the woman who went insane. Though her record produced by Serge Gainseberg was good, it only reinforced my impression of Ajdani. In short, she is not my type.

The story of L' Histoire d'Adèle H. was even heavier than I expected. Adèle (=Ajdani) crossed the Atlantic ocean to see her disloyal lover. The lover did not love her at all. Yet, Ajdani kept giving him her love and her money, and even sent women for his pleasure! Finally, she lost all of her money and lost her mind...

Usually, the movie about such theme tends to start with the gorgeous encounter scene of lovers, and sweet meetings etc. However, this movie starts at the moment when all these sweet parts of love were over. So, I was bewildered by the story which went worse and worse. I even regretted to start seeing this movie against my long time instinct.

However, the impression suddenly had changed when her fate went worse to worst. There was some kind of liberation in spite of its tragedy. Crazy love of Adèle was too great for her lover. Her love was greater than the Atlantic ocean, and her money, pride, and even stronger than jealousy. She loved her lover so madly, so her love transcended himself at all. She went insane, and she could not recognize her lover. It was a kind of victory of love. Love, unlimited.

As for Isabelle Ajdani, my impression has changed a lot. She was simply beautiful. It was one of the most beautiful women that I saw on the films.

(23/November/2004)