There were times when I was not sure whether the film was trying to strike a dramatic or comic tone; this made it seem quite odd. Nor was I able to figure out what the symbolism of the chimneys meant (perspective is important?). But I think I enjoyed this overall.
I didn’t like the story much - a typical romantic drama which eventually becomes stale and heavy-handed. But there’s some lovely scenery, and the combination of Kaho (female lead) and Shimane Prefecture (setting) reminds one of A Gentle Breeze in the Village (a calculated connection, no doubt).
An examination of a couple in dispute. “Couple in dispute” is inaccurate, but the more accurate “insane” might be misleading. The wife is consumed by jealousy and rage, the husband by guilt, and in the two hours of screen time there isn’t a single positive, healthy moment. These two are insane, and their hell is of their own creation.
The dreary content does not appeal to me, but the film’s direction does. Muted colors, meticulously composed shots, startling cuts, ambiguous inserts — the whole movie displays an artistic precision which is stunning. I have come to expect a lot from this director (Kohei Oguri) and I am surprised that he is nearly unknown in the West. While his filmography is small, there is much in it to discover.
Sexual intrigue. Beautiful, if cold, cinematography. All typical for a Yoshida picture. The finale is abrupt and open-ended and leaves a viewer feeling very uneasy.
A story of hen-pecked husbands. It’s entertaining, if a trifle.
An obviously heavy-handed subject, but I was willing to give it a shot. The post-explosion scenes made me think that the reason Imamura wanted to make this film was for the opportunity to film all the dead and near-corpses. Death and sickness do seem to be more of a concern than the familial and community drama happening, but Imamura does show a surprising amount of interest in the latter. The story ends inconclusively, but I don’t see why it does so other than for the sake of doing something different. More than anything, it feels like the film just lost interest in its story and decided to quit. It has none of the intrigue or ambiguity of the typical abrupt ending.
The only thing that got me through this movie was the beautiful rural photography (of the Hiroshima countryside). That alone was enough to keep me interested in a film I would otherwise lose patience with.
aka A Fugitive from the Past. It’s a crime thriller set in post-war Japan. It begins with a fire, typhoon, and the original crime in question, following the criminal and the detective hunting him down. This part of the film is very compelling and enjoyable to watch. But as the film begins to transition into the second half (which is 10 years later), it loses steam. As the crime comes full circle, the final bits of “evidence” which catch the fugitive and force his confession are, for lack of better word, ridiculous. The rest of the story is quite silly. Or so I felt. As the film completely unraveled in this final section (a good 40 min in this 3-hour-long movie), I thought quite a lot about how the story could have been different. I thought, they did this all wrong. Surely, if they began with the facts of the final case and revealed everything else in the film through the testimony of the characters, the story would feel much more complete and compelling. A common crime-narrative framing device, to be sure, but it would be very effective given this particular story. At the very least, something needed to have been done about the lackluster final half.
Overall, I was very disappointed. This movie has a good reputation in Japan and is gaining reputation in the West, and there is certainly much to like about it; but with so weak a second half, I wonder that people have the patience to finish it, much less the mind to praise it.
I went into this without expecting it to be such an intellectual affair. The film is about a woodsman on a mountainous rural coast. It ambiguously depicts his life and the events of the people and community around him, much of this life revolving around the base physicality of man. This aspect reminded me of Imamura, but where Imamura focuses on this physicality as an end, Yanagimachi uses this physicality to build a mysterious and menacing atmosphere which climaxes in a shocking way. One might say the sex and petty violence throughout the film explain the finale.
What impressed me most was the way the film uses the environment (the Kumano coast). Aside from its beauty, the scenery exerts a presence which weighs heavily on both the characters and viewers. It contributes to the dark psychology of the piece.
Overall, I find there is much to praise in this movie. It is, however, something darker than my temperament can enjoy.
