386 Sansho the Bailiff

[HerrSchreck]

An utterly beautiful package, an outstanding job of restoration and cleanup. Beautiful, beautiful.. just sublime. One of the most beautiful packaging jobs I've seen from CC ever, and thats saying a lot.

More than almost any other, Mizoguchi combined the most modern techniques available in the cinema at the time and put them in the service of the most sublime material to create an art that most fully lived up to the power of the most ancient aesthetics of art. The meticulous perfection, the rapturous beauty, the cinema of his latter days more than any other filmmaker contains the timeless raw power and wisdom and impeccable nature of ancient wisdom tales, classic painting, the prfoundest philosophical tracts of ancient elders, etc. It really comes down to you from on high in a biblical sense, the hugeness of the otherworldliness... just an endlessly rewarding art no matter how many times you see it. The fuckin guy should be canonized. I love this grim, stoical dude. They dont make em like him very often.

[Nothing]

Damn right.

[Michael Kerpan]

While I think Sansho is a "must see", I think HerrSchreck is rather overselling it. It is NOT a sacred text, just a fine film. It is not perfect -- at least one major role is rather poorly handled -- but is wonderful despite this.

Mizoguchi, whatever his virtues, was not a modernist -- in technique or in themes (except, perhaps, for a short period in the 1920s). And whatever his genius as a film maker, Mizoguchi is not prospect for canonization because -- as a human being -- he was rather rotten in many respects.

[Gigi M.]

Sorry Michael, but what's a modernist in your opinion?

[Michael Kerpan]

Sorry Michael, but what's a modernist in your opinion?

It is easier to say why Mizoguchi was NOT a modernist -- than to say (in the abstract) what a modernist is.

Mizoguchi's dramaturgy (rooted tightly in shimpa melodramas of the teens) was slightly old-fashioned in the late 20s -- and virtually antique by the 50s. His politics, which had briefly been leftist in the 20s, had turned towards conservatism by the 40s. His compositional methods in the 50s owed far more to those of the 20s than to innovations during subsequent decades.

Rather like Bach (who was far more old-fashioned than the always up-to-date Telemann and Handel), Mizoguchi's worth depends primarily on the ultra refinement of styles and techniques on the verge of becoming "obsolete" -- and not on keeping up with (or inventing) the latest innovation.

[Gigi M.]

Amazing argument Michael, but as a technician/filmmaker (not as a storyteller), would you consider Mizo a modernist? I believe that was Schreck's point.

[Michael Kerpan]

Amazing argument Michael, but as a technician/filmmaker (not as a storyteller), would you consider Mizo a modernist? I believe that was Schreck's point.

No. Not even slightly. On the contrary, aesthetically very much a conservative by the 50s.

No presumption at all as to whether being (or not being) "modernist" is good or bad. Bach was absolutely great -- being the most "old-fashioned" great composer of his generation doesn't dim his luster at all.

[Michael Kerpan]

David --- I don't really disagree with anything you've written -- except the evocation of the notion of "avant-garde". I think it makes much more sense to avoid a term of this sort in the case of late Mizoguchi.

[GringoTex]

His compositional methods in the 50s owed far more to those of the 20s than to innovations during subsequent decades.

I've read that his big influences were Sternberg, Ford, and Wyler, which would suggest the 30s as a strong decade of influence.

[Michael Kerpan]

Cinematically, 30s Hollywood had a strong influence on Mizoguchi -- as it did on almost all Japanese film makers (except maybe the makers of the most atavistic swordfight films). But his underlying aesthetic foundation never strayed too far from the shimpa theater of the teens and early 20s. That said, I'm sure M appropriated any stylistic ideas that could aid in presenting his own idiosyncratic vision.

[sidehacker]

Mizoguchi's style, as great as his films may be, is far more old-fashioned than Kurosawa's.

Mizoguchi is probably the earliest "classic" director I am sort of in to. I do agree that a lot of films, at least on a technical level, come off as being very, well let's just say it, boring. However, I definitely find his themes and interests far more humane and ahead of the time than Kurosawa's. Truth be told, outside of Ikiru and Rashomon, Kurosawa is of no interest to me but Mizoguchi definitely is. I'm not sure where I'm going with this post but I was hoping you would go a bit deeper in to why you think Kurosawa was a more advanced than Mizoguchi.

Perhaps a reevaluation of Kurosawa is in order? I still have yet to see Ran and that definitely looks like his most visually interesting film.

[Michael Kerpan]

I like both Kurosawa and Mizoguchi -- about equally, but for different reasons.

In saying that Mizoguchi's style has a very old-fashioned foundation I am not _saying_ his style is bad at all. I think it is often visually extraordinary. I do think this quality makes it much harder for modern audiences to connect with his work (both in Japan and the West) -- while Kurosawa's cinematic style is both based on more modern Western influences -- and in turn strongly influenced Western cinema. Consequently Kurosawa does not feel as foreign and remote to modern viewers as Mizoguchi does.

I rarely find Mizoguchi technically boring, quite the contrary. It is his thematic material that I sometimes find overly simplistic.

[Michael]

Just bought Sansho. It's the most beautiful package I've seen coming from Criterion. I'm going to watch Sansho and Ugetsu back to back tonight. Should I order the AE disc of Life of Oharu (via xpoitedcinema)?

[Michael Kerpan]

Just bought Sansho. It's the most beautiful package I've seen coming from Criterion. I'm going to watch Sansho and Ugetsu back to back tonight. Should I order the AE disc of Life of Oharu (via xpoitedcinema)?

Hold off -- unless you can find this at a decent price -- this is a pretty mediocre transfer. the French-subbed DVD I got was definitely better. Surely Criterion has got to tackle this sometime soon....

[ellipsis7]

I just ordered AE's LIFE OF OHARU @ £6.89/€10 including free postage (for UK & Ireland) - from sendit.com, which allows me to replace with a CC disc in due course without undue damage!...

[Michael Kerpan]

I just ordered AE's LIFE OF OHARU @ £6.89/€10 including free postage (for UK & Ireland) - from sendit.com, which allows me to replace with a CC disc in due course without undue damage!...

With free postage, it might be worth it. ;~}

The film is certainly worth seeing ( I like it more than Sansho or Ugetsu).

[Michael]

Hold off -- unless you can find this at a decent price -- this is a pretty mediocre transfer.

The exploitedcinema price is very steep but its service has always been reliable. I will probably hold off but I really would love to see all the 50s Mizoguchis before the Lists Project deadline. I just have a feeling that Life of Oharu would rank very high on my 50s list especially after reading how great it is from you, davidhare and Lino.

[Michael Kerpan]

The exploitedcinema price is very steep but its service has always been reliable. I will probably hold off but I really would love to see all the 50s Mizoguchis before the Lists Project deadline. I just have a feeling that Life of Oharu would rank very high on my 50s list especially after reading how great it is from you, davidhare and Lino.

Another option -- this was released on video -- and libraries (or very old-fashioned video stores -- if these still exist) might still have a copy. The AE DVD is not all that great an improvement over the old video (as I recall).

As much as I love "O-Haru" -- I think "Crucified Lovers" is even more essential.

[Murasaki53]

As much as I love "O-Haru" -- I think "Crucified Lovers" is even more essential.

Why Michael? What makes it stand out for you?

[Michael Kerpan]

The virtues of "Crucified Lovers"?

Well, the strongest element is obviously its visual beauty -- but Ugetsu and Sansho aren't far behind in this respect. Where CL stands out from its (Mizoguchi) competition is in the script and in the performances,

The story is more grounded in traditional Japanese drama -- and is richer and more complex. The performances present more fully characterized individuals -- rather than archetypes. Some people prefer Ugetsu and Sansho because the stories are more abstract and the characters more iconic. And that may be a reasonable choice. but I choose otherwise.

(FWIW - Crucified Lovers seems to have been Kurosawa's favorite). ;~}

[Michael Kerpan]

The only US distributor for "Crucified Lovers" listed in IMDB is New Line Cinema.

[Lino]

Seconded. Oharu was my first Mizoguchi and still is my favorite. There is something in that movie that totally transcends the celluloid it lives in.

[Michael]

Sansho is not a ghost story in the same sense as Ugetsu but watching it last night, it felt like one. It's that quality I love about those films and Mizoguchi. That eerie, otherworldly feeling ghosts keep reliving through generations and generations. Do other Mizoguchi films have that same quality?

[FilmFanSea]

My criticisms of Sansho (such as they are) have nothing to do with this. Rather I find fault with some major story lapses (not highly important), a seriously weak performance by Yoshiaki Hanayagi (a major -- but hardly crippling problem) and the almost totally generic nature of Tanaka's part (the same problem as one finds in "Ugetsu"). Any problems with Sansho are, nonetheless, minor compared to its overall level of beauty.

If IMDb can be trusted in this instance, it appears that Sanshô dayû was Hanayagi's first film, and he made only five films in a 13-year career. Personally his uneven, occasionally histrionic performance really marred my enjoyment of the film (this was my first viewing). Moreover, I had a hard time identifying with--or even liking--his character, who is so central to the film.

Spoiler

His behavior as he tries to petition the Prime Minister just looked cowardly (it looked like a bad Mifune impersonation, with the difference that Mifune would've come away looking bold and heroic, not collapsing in tears the way Zushio does when he is thrown in jail). The final reunion should have prompted tears from me, but left me strangely cold, and I blame that on Hanayagi's unsubtle performance.

Also: During the escape, why does Anju say that she should not accompany Zushio because the two of them would be caught too easily, but then asks her brother to carry the gravely ill woman on his back? I realize Mizoguchi wanted to emphasize Anju's noble sacrifice for her brother and her love for her dying friend, but the logic struck me as absurd.

Don't get me wrong: I like the film very much, but with different casting I suspect it would've been a more powerful experience for me.

[Michael Kerpan]

> If IMDb can be trusted in this instance, it appears that Sanshô dayû
> was Hanayagi's first film, and he made only five films in a 13-year career.

IMDB _can't_ be trusted on things like this. I checked the JMDB -- and he had a few more films, albeit only 8 in all -- his first being "Story of Late Chrysanthemums" in 1939. His last being Shinoda's "Clouds at Sunset" (1967). I would guess he was primarily a stage performer.

It is quite possible that his performance in "Sansho" was in full compliance with Mizoguchi's design. If so, Mizoguchi seriously misconceived the part.