Rashomon (1950)

[JSN]

Well I wouldn't say their themes are the same. The central underlying theme in SS is social dynamics (Samurai and Peasants). The thematic focus of MS is more between the heroes and the villians, what is the nature of heroes, and so on.

kind of, because that's the only way old Hollywoo could frame conflict, but then they got all sloppy and had parts like where the Messican kid who's the analog to Kikuchiyo tearfully breaks down and admits that he's actually a farmer, and it just doesn't work.

 

[europe1]

Sanshiro Sugata was great too. I was surprised to when I learned that it was Kurosawa's directorial debut.

Even undeveloped Kurisawa is really good. You can really see his raw craft in that one, the style which he possesses... despite several scenes having been lost to time.

It's about the early days of judo btw, so it holds special significense for us MMA fools. The sequel is not as great but still good, and even includes some Japanese WW2 anti-western propeganda.

 

[loyalyolayal]

Even undeveloped Kurisawa is really good. You can really see his raw craft in that one... despite several scenes having been lost to time.

It's about the early days of judo btw, so it holds special significense for us MMA fools. The sequel is not as great but still good.

Yeah, I can't even remember the sequel. I had a Kurosawa collection pirated DVD a decade ago. The lack of background score in 95% of the scenes is quite unnerving. It totally sets the mood in a less is more approach.

 

[Guestx]

It's about the early days of judo. . .

That sounds interesting.

 

[Guestx]

Apparently I posted this thread the one time Muster actually decided to take the day off from Sherdog.

 

[CerebralKnievel]

I've almost watched that one a few times just because I ran across it on Netflix.

It's a great afternoon watch, if you're sick or something. It's pretty damn long, I believe. Very rewarding, though.

 

[Guestx]

It's a great afternoon watch, if you're sick or something. It's pretty damn long, I believe. Very rewarding, though.

Cool, I'll put it on the list.

Speaking of running time, one thing I was really able to appreciate about Rashomon is that it's a lean 88 minutes. It seems like the art of telling a story in an hour and a half is a dying one.

 

[CerebralKnievel]

Those two are superb and the originators of so much greatness. They are a bit more fluffy and genre-styled that Rashomon and Seven Samurai (and I don't mean that as an negative).

Sanjuro > Yojimbo btw. I experienced some conversion about a year ago, though I like most seemed to prefer Yojimbo initially. The ending of Sanjuro is just shockingly good.



Samurai Trilogy is really good but it pales compeared to Kurusawa's film. Despite being just a few years seperated from each other it feels like they belong to completely diffrent generations. The style and sensebility of the Samurai Trilogy is so diffrent from Kurasawa's films, it feels more conventional and old-fashion in some way.



You get Tatsuya Nakadai instead though. He, likewise, should be on the A-team of any person's Badass list. Though his performances tended to be better the more unginged he was.

Your analysis is thoughtful and substantial. I havent watched any of these (other than Ran) for over 20 years and I only saw them once so my recollection isn't as insightful.

I agree on Sanjuro, though. Yhat ending was vicious.

 

[TheFakeMacoy]

TS definitely needs to watch the Seven Samurai, Yojimbo, and Sanjuro. I will say that Seven Samurai is pretty long, so don't feel bad about watching it in 2 halves (it has an intermission in it). It's an amazing film, however. I thought the Magnificent Seven was pretty good, but I still prefer the original. Still, saying a film isn't as good as the Seven Samurai, isn't really saying it's not good.

As for Rashomon, I thought going into it that it was going to be about piecing together the true story, rather than how each person has their own subjective interpretation of events and motivations. However, I definitely enjoyed it.

As for other Kurosawa films, I've seen Rashomon, Seven Samurai, Yojimbo, Sanjuro, Sugata Sanshiro I and II, and Ran. What would you guys suggest I should watch next? Ikiru? The Hidden Fortress?

 

[JSN]

TS definitely needs to watch the Seven Samurai, Yojimbo, and Sanjuro. I will say that Seven Samurai is pretty long, so don't feel bad about watching it in 2 halves (it has an intermission in it). It's an amazing film, however. I thought the Magnificent Seven was pretty good, but I still prefer the original. Still, saying a film isn't as good as the Seven Samurai, isn't really saying it's not good.

As for Rashomon, I thought going into it that it was going to be about piecing together the true story, rather than how each person has their own subjective interpretation of events and motivations. However, I definitely enjoyed it.

As for other Kurosawa films, I've seen Rashomon, Seven Samurai, Yojimbo, Sanjuro, Sugata Sanshiro I and II, and Ran. What would you guys suggest I should watch next? Ikiru? The Hidden Fortress?

hidden fortress. I hated Ikiru and turned it off. I actually turned off his adaptation of The Idiot too. I can't believe he made those two.

To be fair though I have heard amazing things about Ikiru though and prolly didn't give it enough of a chance. But it felt like a shitty version of L'Aventurra or something like that.

 

[Slick_36]

I have Rashomon on my computer but haven't seen it yet. The family was just laying down for the last night of our vacation, so I think I'll watch it now.

In my opinion, his greatest work is Ran, that movie is a an absolute masterpiece. My favorite is Throne of Blood, underrated film of his based on MacBeth. Seven Samurai is also incredible and you should watch it.

Apparently Star Wars is based on his film, the Hidden Fortress. It's good but not on the level of his better work.

 

[Slick_36]

Whoops, my post didn't work earlier, but I just finished the film. That was great, not what I was expecting honestly and I see why it is so respected. The story was quite dark, but told in such a captivating way, nothing I would expect for 1950.

Something that has bothered me since I read the OP is the idea that a man could turn on a woman for being forced against her will to do anything. I've had two girls I've dated that had gone through it, my mother as well, how anyone could blame the victim is beyond me. My heart bleeds every time I think about it.

 

[Zer]

Just throwing my hat in and saying Ran is GOAT

 

[Goonerview]

Rashomon is my favorite Kurosawa film.

Have seen Yojimbo and ikiru

 

[MusterX]

Apparently I posted this thread the one time Muster actually decided to take the day off from Sherdog.

Ahaha, I saw your post last night just as I was leaving to go out with some friends.

First of all let me say.

I didn't have anything deep and earth shattering to discuss with you about the film, I just felt it was wrong for you to go through your life as a movie buff without ever seeing the film Rashomon. Its almost hard to believe that it was made only 1 year removed from the 1940's. In my opinion it has to be one of the best black and white era movies ever made but in addition to that one of the best foreign films ever made. I'm not saying necessarily #1 but it has to be top 10, maybe top 5 in both categories.

You can't really resolve the film, as you pointed out in your OP but that is the entire point really, isn't it? I like what Ebert said about it that in his 2002 review of the movie.

Shortly before filming was to begin on "Rashomon," Akira Kurosawa's three assistant directors came to see him. They were unhappy. They didn't understand the story. "If you read it diligently," he told them, "you should be able to understand it, because it was written with the intention of being comprehensible." They would not leave: "We believe we have read it carefully, and we still don't understand it at all."


Recalling this day in Something Like an Autobiography, Kurosawa explains the movie to them. The explanation is reprinted in the booklet that comes with the new Criterion DVD of "Rashomon." Two of the assistants are satisfied with his explanation, but the third leaves looking puzzled. What he doesn't understand is that while there is an explanation of the film's four eyewitness accounts of a murder, there is not a solution.

Kurosawa is correct that the screenplay is comprehensible as exactly what it is: Four testimonies that do not match. It is human nature to listen to witnesses and decide who is telling the truth, but the first words of the screenplay, spoken by the woodcutter, are "I just don't understand." His problem is that he has heard the same events described by all three participants in three different ways--and all three claim to be the killer.

http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-rashomon-1950

You see, his own assistant directors were baffled by the script because that is not at all how movies were made. You don't just have multiple characters tell conflicting stories and then not wrap it up, I mean WTF Kurosawa. Others involved with the project were also pretty upset about the movie.

Directed by Kurosawa in the early years of his career, before he was hailed as a grandmaster, it was made reluctantly by a minor Japanese studio, and the studio head so disliked it that he removed his name from the credits.

The studio head removed his name from the credits because he didn't want to be associated with that piece of shit Rashomon film. That bit of a disconnect between the assistant directors and even the studio head was rectified when it won the Golden Lion at the Venice Film Festival. Ebert claims that this is the film that effectively opened Japanese cinema to the West.

The methods that Kurosawa employed in this 1950 film have been used and reused again in the many decades since, and example being The Usual Suspects as it tells the same story but from different perspectives. Kurosawa was definitely ahead of his time, way ahead. I'm not going to argue specifics of the film, it doesn't matter what actually happened. In my reality his wife was a whore who set that shit up and had him killed. Your response will probably be, "But that wasn't in the testimony!"

It doesn't matter what the truth is, and that was Kurosawa's intent all along.

 

[Guestx]

I hated Ikiru and turned it off.

@Cint get in here.

 

[Guestx]

Whoops, my post didn't work earlier, but I just finished the film. That was great, not what I was expecting honestly and I see why it is so respected.

Cool, glad you watched it and liked it.

The story was quite dark. . .

You know, one that struck me was that, while the story dealt with the lot of dark themes, I didn't feel like the film was super heavy. Maybe it had a lot to do with Mifune's whimsical performance, but I felt like the movie was actually rather playful in a lot of ways.

. . . but told in such a captivating way, nothing I would expect for 1950.

Agreed.

Something that has bothered me since I read the OP is the idea that a man could turn on a woman for being forced against her will to do anything. I've had two girls I've dated that had gone through it, my mother as well, how anyone could blame the victim is beyond me. My heart bleeds every time I think about it.

I think that if it was something that happened in the past, before you entered into a relationship with that person, that's one thing. But if it was something that happened yesterday, it would be difficult to deal with. I'm not saying it's the woman's fault, I'm just saying it would fuck my mind up.

 

[Sir Galahad]

@Cint get in here.

What in God's name is his blasphemous comment about Ikiru?

 

[Guestx]

What in God's name is his blasphemous comment about Ikiru?

You should ask him.

 

[Guestx]

First of all let me say.

Thank you, sir. Thank you.

It was a worthy suggestion. I've got my eye on the Blu-Ray now.

Its almost hard to believe that it was made only 1 year removed from the 1940's.

I felt that way as well. Like I said in the OP, it feels surprisingly modern and it's definitely shot in a very different style from Hollywood films of the era.

Shortly before filming was to begin on "Rashomon," Akira Kurosawa's three assistant directors came to see him. They were unhappy. They didn't understand the story. "If you read it diligently," he told them, "you should be able to understand it, because it was written with the intention of being comprehensible." They would not leave: "We believe we have read it carefully, and we still don't understand it at all."


Recalling this day in Something Like an Autobiography, Kurosawa explains the movie to them. The explanation is reprinted in the booklet that comes with the new Criterion DVD of "Rashomon." Two of the assistants are satisfied with his explanation, but the third leaves looking puzzled. What he doesn't understand is that while there is an explanation of the film's four eyewitness accounts of a murder, there is not a solution.

Kurosawa is correct that the screenplay is comprehensible as exactly what it is: Four testimonies that do not match. It is human nature to listen to witnesses and decide who is telling the truth, but the first words of the screenplay, spoken by the woodcutter, are "I just don't understand." His problem is that he has heard the same events described by all three participants in three different ways--and all three claim to be the killer.

http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-rashomon-1950

Interesting. The DVD that I got from the library actually had the booklet. Kind of which I had read it now before I took it back.

Directed by Kurosawa in the early years of his career, before he was hailed as a grandmaster, it was made reluctantly by a minor Japanese studio, and the studio head so disliked it that he removed his name from the credits.

The studio head removed his name from the credits because he didn't want to be associated with that piece of shit Rashomon film. That bit of a disconnect between the assistant directors and even the studio head was rectified when it won the Golden Lion at the Venice Film Festival. Ebert claims that this is the film that effectively opened Japanese cinema to the West.

Hmm, interesting. Despite its unconventional nature, it's hard for me to believe that someone sat down and watched it and was not entertained. The fact that it's not just like every other movie out there is a strength, not a weakness.

LOL at "that bit of a disconnect between the assistant directors and even the studio head was rectified when it won the Golden Lion at the Venice Film Festival." I'd imagine so. Of course when it wins a huge award everybody wants back in again.

The methods that Kurosawa employed in this 1950 film have been used and reused again in the many decades since, and example being The Usual Suspects as it tells the same story but from different perspectives. Kurosawa was definitely ahead of his time, way ahead. I'm not going to argue specifics of the film, it doesn't matter what actually happened. In my reality his wife was a whore who set that shit up and had him killed. Your response will probably be, "But that wasn't in the testimony!"

An interesting theory. One thing I wondered to myself: Are any of the stories correct? Even if we can't know for sure. . . did Kurosawa build the correct answer into the film? Or does the full truth not reside anywhere therein?