Viewed in
2009
Premise
Akria Kurosawa's film about a murder told from four different points of views.
Who should watch
Those who like films that make you think.
Thoughts
It was an interesting film that I found hard to comprehend.
Similar to watching 'Dark Knight' or 'Vertigo' for the first time, the first half puzzled me, but the second half blew me away. The last point of view was a masterpiece of raw energy and desperation.
The acting was my favorite part. I am sure the actors loved working on this film, as they got to indulge and explore in numerous extremes of the emotional spectrum. The great Toshiro Mifune was quite a presence.
While I was floored by the climax, I still walked out of the film unsure if what I saw was a classic. The more I thought, the less things made sense. Mainly, I could not see a theme from the different stories within the story. And if there was none, then the three untrue stories were worthless in the whole context of the film. What was the message or reason for making this film?
After reading Roger Ebert's essay, I have learned about some of the film's groundbreaking achievements cinema-wise. Also, I can understand how Ebert interpreted the film. Nevertheless, I am not convinced that I watched a classic.
I admired its ambition, historic importance, and acting, but I was unable to understand its alleged greatness. Perhaps you, the reader, can enlighten me with your point of view?
What I would change
Not sure. I thought the music stood out too much for most of the story. However, that might have been intentional.
Spoiler!
That last story within the story was mind-blowing. I loved the complete change in tone, as Kurosawa killed the music, and replaced the dialogue with grunts. In fact, all the actors pretty much transformed into desperate primitive animals, clawing their way to survival. From a film maker standpoint, I would like to revisit this film to examine the brilliant directing of the last story.
