Harakiri

The story of Masaki Kobayashi's Harakiri (1962) is set into motion when a young and poor man (Akira Ishihama) is forced to do what the title suggest: a suicide by disembowelment. Why did it happen? The movie is set in Japan during the year 1630 which is 11 years after a peace was negotiated among the warring clans. This led to the dissolution of the Geishu clan that had at least 12 000 retainers under its control. All these former retainers were forced to live in poverty. As a result, some of the ex-warriors resorted to threatening the remaining clans by performing harakiri in front of the clan's estate. To avoid this, the clan would have to pay a great amount of gold. As you have probably figured out by now, the harakiri at the beginning of the film was the result of things going horribly wrong. A few months later, an older man (Tatsuya Nakadai) comes to the same clan in order to perform harakiri. As the disembowelment approaches, he begins to tell a story that is essential in order to understand the story and thematics.

The film is almost like a deconstruction of the entire Samurai code. Kobayashi observes the (implied) emptiness of the code in cruel detail. The problems are pointed out in an unflinching way. While the film mostly runs at a relatively calm pace, there are outbursts of arrhythmic violence which work perfectly in order to deliver the message even to the most dim-witted viewers - yet surprisingly the film never seems to be heavy-handed. The narrative is quite straightforward: a linear story with a few flashbacks that are smoothly handled.

I found an interesting point of view in another review (specifically, the Finnish review on Elitisti) which pointed out how the young man is "unknowingly the representative of the past" because back then harakiri was a more personal and flexible act. Now it's just another way for higher-ups to control people.

Kobayashi's form in Harakiri reminds me of Yasujiro Ozu and Hsiao-hsien Hou. His camera is set almost on the ground most of the time like in Ozu's films. Kobayashi also likes to revisit a few compositions in order to establish a connection between two scenes - either for an emotional response or for juxtaposition. This is extremely notable during the first 30 minutes when the two ex-warriors enter the estate at different times. A few key compositions are used for both of these entrances. It's also interesting how a few compositions and patterns of camera movement are used again and again during the rest of the film.

Apart from a few awkward camera zooms and pans, the cinematography is brilliant. The precise and beautiful framing rivals even Ozu, which should say a lot. Kobayashi's use of Dutch angles is extremely masterful: I would even dare to say that Harakiri should be used as an example on how you should use them. The film is very silent most of the time - only the dialogue breaks the silence throughout the film. There are a few instances when music is used - and that makes the film even more haunting.

The second view confirmed my assumption: Masaki Kobayashi's Harakiri is one of the greatest cinematic masterpieces without a doubt. Sadly, it has remained quite unknown to this day.

Score: 10 out of 10