Tokyo Chorus

(image source)

Yasujiro Ozu's Tokyo Chorus (1931) is the film that (as David Bordwell said) was the important turning point for the director: it made him a major director. It is a fascinating mixture of comedy, drama and vastly different subjects - and all of that is charged with strong social values that are common for Ozu. There is a downside to the screenplay: it barely keeps its explosive expression together throughout the film. There's a constant change in mood and there are times when that almost doesn't work.

Like the writing, the form is also a bit different from what we are used to in later Ozu films. The kinetic yet precise camerawork and fast pacing make the film a bit exhaustive, but with its short running time (90 minutes) that's not a problem. Acting is good in general, but I'd like to give a nod to Tokihiko Okada for his great performance as the lead. He manages to combine the acting style common for silent films with a more grounded and tangible presence.

In the end Tokyo Chorus is a satisfying Ozu film even if it does not reach the height of his later masterpieces.

Score: 8 out of 10

Samurai Rebellion

(image source)

Masaki Kobayashi's Samurai Rebellion (1967) is a spiritual sequel to Harakiri (1964): Kobayashi's critique of authority in a heavily dramatized form. After Isaburo (Toshiro Mifune) is forced to have his son marry a former mistress of a powerful lord the entire family discovers that the girl isn't as bad as her reputation suggests. Due to a grim turn of events Isaburo and his son decide to disobey the lord's newer orders even though it puts their family in danger.

Even though I would call Samurai Rebellion Kobayashi's bloody revenge story it doesn't involve a lot of action until the final third of the film (which has a lot of it). Most of the focus is on the fascinating central family that is used heavily for the director's strong message that is approached in a possibly better way than in Harakiri. The downside of the screenplay has to be the ending. While the final scenes are perfect it stumbles for 10 minutes before that. The tension generated in the film is released way too early and some of the scenes lose the dramatic impact they were supposed to have. There's also the mystery of Tatsuya Nakadai's character whose relevance is questionable and it almost feels like his role was severely cut in the editing room.

Kobayashi's form is full of menacing energy that stems from the absolutely brilliant photography and the intense yet "slow" editing that hits the viewer like a ton of bricks when it is needed. The approach to the climactic action scenes is surprisingly tame, but they are still powerful enough. Toru Takemitsu's soundtrack is great again. The entire cast delivers magnificent performances and especially Toshiro Mifune is in top form this time.

Samurai Rebellion could have become another masterpiece for Kobayashi in the vein of Harakiri, but the slight (but drastical) mistake near the end hinders the film a bit too much.

Score: 9 out of 10

The Killer

(image source)

I've never been a fan of action movies in particular. Recently it has become more and more rare for me to like one. When I decided to rewatch John Woo's The Killer (1989) I was unsure how I would react to it - even though I had seen it once about 2 years ago. At first I was ready to say that the film is quite good, but its climax showed how ridiculously masculine, dim-witted and ludicrous the entire film was.

The Killer uses a lot of clichéd action film tropes and uses them a lot better than most other films I have seen. However, the climax opened my eyes to the laughable concepts the film offers. Certainly it is the wet dream of an action fan, but its simple-minded take on honor and friendship is so frustrating. When you add a few moments of so-called tranquility, you pretty much have the complete image of the film in your head. I have to admit that I did admire some of the setpieces they came up with, but in the end they can not redeem the film.

But don't get me wrong: I can laud the film for its mostly fascinating form. Woo's moody cinematography and editing are quite spot-on although his use of slow motion is always extremely irritating. Slow motion can be found in almost every scene in the entire film and it becomes more of an eye sore whenever it is used. The music is not bad either although it is probably a bit too moody and over-the-top.

Score: 5 out of 10

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