MoFo Movie Club: Rashômon

It's Sunday the 28th, time to discuss Rashômon.



I hope you all managed to watch it. I've seen it a few times before already, and twice this week. So I'm ready to discuss when you are...

__________________
TOP 100 | "Don't let the bastards grind you down!"

Wish I could say I did. I couldn't get a hold of it so unfortunately I'll have to sit this one out.

__________________
"Like all dreamers, Steven mistook disenchantment for truth."

Rashômon
1950
Director: Akira Kurosawa
Writing credits: Ryunosuke Akutagawa (stories), Akira Kurosawa

Central Characters, Cast:
Toshirô Mifune .... Tajômaru
Machiko Kyô .... Masako
Masayuki Mori .... Takehiro
Takashi Shimura .... Woodcutter
Minoru Chiaki .... Priest
Kichijiro Ueda .... Commoner
Fumiko Honma .... Medium

Rashomon tells the story of an 11th century husband and wife, who are apprehended by a bandit in the woods. The husband dies, but as we hear the tale told and retold by all chacters present, it becomes clear that the events leading up to his death and all the details of it are unclear. Each person has their own honest perception of the events and they conflict almost totally. The story we are told is the illustration of the principle that truth and reality are subjective.




To sort of kick off the discussion:
I LOVED this movie. I watched it a week ago and then again yesterday with all the commentary and extras and then again by itself. There is so much in this - a compelling central story, the amazing complexity of the 5 versions of that story, the philosophy surrounding it, the acting (Toshiro Mifune... I'll take one.), the cinematography...

The thing that stayed with me after the first viewing was the sense of openness in the scenes in the woods - how you're never quite sure where you are, and how that underlined the same feeling in the story. You're really left to your own to figure out what you believe about the encounter in the woods, and so often in a critical event that is the case. The truth of that makes the film universally affecting.

Awesome choice. Thanks for everyone who voted for it - it might have been a very long time before I got it on my own.

__________________
Review: Cabin in the Woods 8/10

Exactly, that's what I love about the film. I like the fact that we never see or hear the judge that the witnesses tell their story to. It's like the characters are talking directly to us, asking us to be the judge. It's great.

So how many people, besides me and Sammy, actually watched it?

I've been watching Kurosawa all week...but still haven't plugged in Rashomon!

I've seen it before, but want a fresh viewing, so I'll watch it right now.

Poor me.

__________________
"Today, war is too important to be left to politicians. They have neither the time, the training, nor the inclination for strategic thought. I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids."

I love that it accomplishes that without leaving us feeling confused or lost. That is an amazing feat, really. And the realization that forms in your mind, while watching, that any part of any of those stories could be true, or a lie... or true to the person talking but not objectively true.

What did you think of the thing with the baby?

Rashomon



“I don’t mind a lie…if it’s interesting.”

I would like to state right from the beginning that Akira Kurosawa is my favorite director. That title used to belong to Stanley Kubrick, but upon revisiting so many classic and contemporary Kurosawa films, I couldn’t deny just how much I love his pictures. I’ve seen 16 Kurosawa movies, and am hard pressed to give any of them lower than an A- rating. There aren’t any other directors I can think of who I would score so perfectly. I still need to see quite a few of his films, but mainly from his early years, which don’t seem to be as lauded as his work from the 50’s on, but there are also a few which are peppered within his later works that I’m quite anxious for. Anywho…

Rashomon is one of my favorites for a whole helluva lot of reasons. First is the casting. Toshirô Mifune, Takashi Shimura, and Minoru Chiaki were in a lot of Kurosawa’s films and they were always perfect for the roles they were cast for. This is the only film I have ever seen Machiko Kyô in, but I’m used to women like her from other Akira flicks. He quite regularly had powerful, or at least intriguing, women in his films who were always a treat to watch.

Another thing that is exceptional is the cinematography. The opening tracking shot of the woodcutter in the woods is classic, beautiful, and at the time, completely unique. It gives a feeling of peace and tranquility…until the stark contrast used when he finds the body. I just love that shot too…the extended hands formed in a claw…the reaction on the woodcutter’s face…and the way he disappears into the foliage. It’s also interesting to see the different styles used depending on the who’s telling the story. Close-ups, shadowing, filtering, and other tricks of the trade are used differently depending on the perspective. The aesthetic properties of each tale gives subtle clues of each person’s viewpoint…but not, of course, of the truthfulness of the story. That said…

The best thing about Rashomon is the story itself and the way it’s translated. The gist of it all is this: because of our perceptions, any truth that we believe in is subjective. Our own desires, ideas of ourselves, and attitudes about others slant any subjectivity our truth holds. It’s unrealistic to believe that there is such a thing as absolute truth when the truth can, and so often does, change depending on who’s relating it. We see it all the time just in our media, let alone on a more personal level.

I like the way the characters change, even if it’s only in a subtle way, from scene to scene. I especially like the woodcutter’s idea of how the fight that led to the death of the man was fought in terror. In all the other three tales, there was some form of bravery or self-sacrifice by at least one of the players, but in the woodcutters…they’re all pathetic…and human. Though, we still can’t take his accounting as truth either…after all, it’s pretty much established that he took the knife, so he has reason to lie as well.

Anyway…I don’t want to monopolize the conversation, so I’ll stop here…but I can talk about this all day.

BTW: These are the Kurosawa films I’ve seen. If anyone has any questions about them…I’d be glad to chat about those too.

• Stray Dog (1949)
• Rashomon (1950)
• The Idiot (1951)
• Ikiru (1952)
• Seven Samurai (1954)
• Throne of Blood (1957)
• The Lower Depths (1957)
• The Hidden Fortress (1958)
• Yojimbo (1961)
• Sanjuro (1962)
• High and Low (1963)
• Red Beard (1965)
• Kagemusha (1980)
• Ran (1985)
• Dreams (1990)
• Madadayo (1993)

What is his best film in your opinion Slay?

I have things to discuss, but I am CRUSHED at work, and will have to get to it asap....

__________________

I dunno…it seems that all three men viewed the ‘truth’ of human existence quite differently, depending on their own experiences with the world.

The commoner had a nihilistic opinion of humanity and cared not for anyone other than himself. He believed completely that if it wasn’t him doing evil, it would be some one else…so why fight it.

The woodcutter was struggling over his own worth until the baby came in to play and showed him that he can be good even though he is fallible and was seduced by evil in his need.

The priest was at a crossroads with his faith in humanity but was shown by the woodcutter that there is respite from selfishness and greed, and though all humans struggle with internal evil, there is hope…because all it takes is a moment of selflessness to undo prior evils.

It follows the theme of the story itself by cementing the idea that people often see things differently, even though there is a fundamental truth right in front of them. All three of these men have lived life differently because of the path’s they’ve chosen or stumbled on.

Truth is relative. Truth is subjective. And too often, truth is what is convenient at the time.

The baby was the one awkward moment for me in this. It seemed to come from out of absolutely nowhere. The reactions to it provide the resolution we need, but it just crops up so suddenly, and so near the end that it struck me as almost funny.

About the truth being what is convenient, I like how you can see the ego at work in the story of whoever is telling their tale. The bandit making much of catching the husband's eye and laughing at him as he seduced the wife. The wife being so ultra-innocent in her version when you get the strong feeling she wasn't, entirely... so cool!

It's more than ego, though. I mean, there is ego in all the versions, but there's more. Each one of them cast themselves as victims of the others...with the exception of the woodcutter, who seemed to see himself as a victim of circumstance.

There's also selflesness in each one of them when they deliver their own narratives...

...damn, ran out of time. More tonight.

What I really like about this is how every image seems to be about something different in the story. The moral about the subjective nature of truth strikes me as kind of superficial because not all the scenes are even tied to a character's viewpoint. Shimura's first flashback to the woods for example seems to focus on the woods itself, and the shrine also seems to take precedent in the annotative sequences. The bits at the trial (Mifune and particularly the seer) are seem more focused on the orration and what's being said than the images. I wish I'd seen it again more recently so I could have something more specific to say.

Edit: says I have to spread some joy around before I rep you again Slay, but good comments.

I don’t think that is the idea with that scene. It’s more like a, “We’re not in Kansas anymore.” scene for the woodcutter. He’s happy as a lark, starting off on a sunny expedition, then all of a sudden he’s in the middle of an intrigue that casts doubt on his own morality. The forest seems to swallow him up and the light only comes through in spots…nothing is black and white anymore, just many different shades of gray. It works well as a starting point for what’s to come ahead. I wish I could say exactly what I mean here…this is a hard film to translate for me. It’s so extremely deep…deeper than even the surface shows itself to be.

I’m not exactly sure what you mean here. Could you elaborate a little, please?

Oh, I read the Criterion Collection booklet that comes with the DVD and learned that the building is actually a recreation of an actual Rashomon, which is an outer gate. These were the first lines of defense for 12th century Japanese strongholds. So it’s not a shrine.

I dunno about that. There seems to be equal measures of remembrance and real time narration. Maybe you could elaborate a little more here to?

Thanks, bro. I’m surprised and extremely happy that you decided to join in. I’ll try not to scare you away.

I was too late to watch this, thanks for all the great stuff, I will put it on my Fetchmovies list.

__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha

Great posts! I've enjoyed reading all of your insights.

Eventhough I couldn't get this, it will definately stay on my mind and I'll watch out for it if ever they get this in...or if I ever switch over to Netflix.

Rashomon



Akira Kurosawa

I watched the film twice. That brings me up to four times watching the film, and it's subtle layers are starting to become more apparent for me. I must admit, the first couple of times I watched the film, I was focusing on the technical aspects for the most part, as I had heard/read so much about it's revolutionary camera work and lighting etc. before I got to see it. I must also add that watched the "walk into the woods" sequence numerous times on top of the full viewings. First off, no dialogue. Kurosawa was a fan of the silent film era, and is said to have wanted to attempt to recapture that feel for much of this film. Really, this could be a silent film. The facial acting on all parts in good enough, and the direction is certainly good enough. The only sections I feel wouldn't have gone off silently are the end sequence with the child, and the sequence where the priest communes with the dead. The communing sequence is unsettling and spooky, and I believe the sound has a lot to do with that. Regardless, most of the film comes across so well visually, that the sound was secondary.

True cinema. True visual communication of emotion and story. That's what this director is a master of. I am by no means an expert on Kurosawa, but I bet the more that I explore his works, the more I will see his mastery over the visual communication of ideas and emotion. There are so many instances in the film, but I would like to briefly touch on the scene during the bandits version, where the swordfight occurs. This scene is full of metaphor and visual communication. From the character interaction with the scenery, to the facial expressions. The way the characters get entangled in the forest can be symbolic of the characters entangled in the forest of life. It could also be viewed as the husband becoming entangled in the bandits version of the truth, which is obscured to all but the bandit. It is important always remember perception is paramount in each and every flashback scene. The second swordfight scene expresses the vast differences people can have in their perception of the same event, with both versions seen as truth.

But, alas. Perception and interpretation are just the beginning. It's the application of human nature to these concepts that Kurosawa seems the most interested in. For a time, the presentation of human nature is dark and grim, leaving little hope. This is personified by the monk at the Rashomon gate (what a set, btw), as he seems to hold out little hope for mankind until the end of the picture. The peasant is Nihilist through and through, as Slay mentioned, with his attitude and actions falling into this paradigm. His disregard for the Rashomon gate plays into this, as he casually pulls more of it apart to burn for his own needs. The gate is man, it's structural integrity waning, and the woodcutter just doesn't care nor notice.

Really, I think we could sped paragraphs on each character and how the represent different facets of human nature.

More later....

Interesting. I saw the same film, but I saw each of the central three cast himself as a murderer.

I’m not an idiot, lady…I know that. “ Interesting. I saw the same film…” Sheesh…

All three of them saw justification for causing the death…and basically claimed themselves to be victims of sorts.

The bandit claimed that he was victim to his own desire…that he couldn’t control himself. He also claimed that the woman talked him into it…meaning he was victim to her wiles. He said that he never wanted to kill the husband and he was successful…if it wasn’t for the dame, that is.

The wife claims victimization to Japanese conventionality. She was a piece of property which was befouled. The husband glared at her with contempt and fury…she couldn’t control herself. She fainted…she can’t remember. She claims justification for her actions, though she knows them too be unforgivable.

The husband was a victim to his wife’s evil mechanisms. Hell, he even thought the bandit who just raped his wife was A-Ok! She betrayed him and the pain was unbearable. That’s actually my favorite scene of the entire film….“In the forest I heard a weeping…” (I can never remember exact quotes, but they’re close enough) then it shows this mans face and the misery is plain…friggin’ goose bumps. I’m tellin’ ya’.

Then there’s the woodcutter himself…he gives in to his baser needs…becomes a victim to poverty, commits a theft, lies, and may even be responsible for murder…though we can’t believe that, or don’t want to believe that…because of the way he is at the end. There’s a particular beauty in that closing shot. The look of personal vindication on his face. Still…he sees himself as a victim throughout the film, up until that closing shot.

THAT’S what I meant by them seeing themselves as victims. I agree with you about their ego…I just meant it’s so much more complex than that. That’s one of the beauty’s of the film.