29 / BD 228 Kwaidan

[denti alligator]

Peerpee,

Great disc. Perhaps you can explain something that bears on the discussing going on in the windowboxing thread. The opening title sequence of this film is windowboxed. Is that a part of the original negative or is that something that MoC chose to do? If the former, is this usual?

[peerpee]

In haste, it was like that on Toho's HD master.

[Dorian Gray]

Perhaps you can explain something that bears on the discussing going on in the windowboxing thread. The opening title sequence of this film is windowboxed. Is that a part of the original negative or is that something that MoC chose to do? If the former, is this usual?

I think this is getting usual.
My opinion is that it enables credits to be read even when the common watcher's TV set suffers from overscan. Then he won't complain "Framing is wrong ! Give me my money back !". But the film is presented using the whole width available, so that the hardcore watcher won't complain "It reduces the full potential resolution of the image ! Give me my money back !".

[Subbuteo]

Stunning package, beautifully presented. Sadly mine came yesterday with the case smashed to smitherens

Thankfully disc and booklet survived.

Nick (Peerpee) has kindly offered to replace the case. How's that for service!

[kinjitsu]

Midnight Eye's Dean Bowman on the film

[Michael Kerpan]

I watched this tonight.

As a result, I'm giving up on Kobayashi. I watched this with my family -- and it fell almost completely flat. MOC's DVD is lovely -- but I found the film woeful.

Sigh.

[HerrSchreck]

Kerpanned!

First Dreyers Joan, then Renoirs Regle now this-- Mike you are your own man. (Admirably, fearlessly so...) But if you lie to yourself you'll never know the truth so... stay fearless Mike.


Matter of fact I'm just getting coincidentally ready to squat down for another pass thru the great Black River, subbed via back channels and graciously forwarded from Our Man Down South...

[souvenir]

Matter of fact I'm just getting coincidentally ready to squat down for another pass thru the great Black River, subbed via back channels and graciously forwarded from Our Man Down South...

Shreck, Black River is playing at Film Forum on July 4th. I take it you'd recommend the film?

[HerrSchreck]

Without question-- just don't expect the meticulous formal pictorialism on display in Kobayashi's more classic works like Kwaidan, or Rebellion, or Seppu-ku (Hara-K). It's a loose, jazzy (one bitching opening jazz score featuring one of the coolest title sequences led into by the smokinest drum roll intro to the titles) noir of a picture focusing on the squalid conditions endured by the urban poor living in the shadows of the Occupation bases, and the vice operations conducted by the japanese to service the GI's, which basically screwed the locals and chucked them the bones of life. Identifiably Kobayashi because of the conscience and fearless angry theme of speaking truth to power..

Notable also because this was Nakadai's first starring role. You'd never know it though.. the man (already solid in the theater) was totally on point from jump.

[Michael Kerpan]

Kerpanned!

First Dreyers Joan, then Renoirs Regle now this-- Mike you are your own man. (Admirably, fearlessly so...) But if you lie to yourself you'll never know the truth so... stay fearless Mike.

I don't doubt that Joan is a "great film" -- I just personally dislike it for a combination of reasons (both cinematic and not). Similarly, I don't doubt the bona fides of Rules -- it just don't have any affinity with most of its characters (or the story).

Kobayashi is different -- I just don't like the way he directs. I don't like his handling of the performers, I don't like the way he handles the camera, I don't like the way he edits. I do have Black River on tap (and may eventually take a look at it) -- but, for now, I think I can safely say I would rather watch my very least favorite Mizoguchi films than anything by Kobayashi. I now class Kobayashi with my other much-unloved Japanese K directors (Kinugasa and Kinoshita).

Anyone having problems with the "light-weight" nature of Yokihi needs to watch this in order to appreciate the (comparativelu immense) M film's cinematic virtues.

[Tommaso]

Anyone having problems with the "light-weight" nature of Yokihi needs to watch this in order to appreciate the (comparativelu immense) M film's cinematic virtues.

As I'm a big "Kwaidan" fan, please explain. What about the handling of the performers that you don't like, for instance? From your dislike of "Jeanne" and "Regle" I have the feeling that you object to the extreme artificiality of the film (also apparent to a lesser degree in "Seppuku"), the almost complete anti-realism of the acting and staging, the purely pictorial quality of the film (like paintings set in motion all the time, and sometimes without much motion, on top of it). I don't think "Kwaidan" is light -weight, it just refrains from referring to anything outside itself (no social or other sort of message I believe), a purely 'self-contented' work of art. One of my problems with "Yokihi" is that it can't decide whether it wants to be a similar 'art for art's sake" kind of film or whether it wants to tell a story and tell us about the plight of women in addition.

[Michael Kerpan]

I probably don't like the "artificiality" of the acting -- but I was more shocked by just how crude much of it seemed. For example, I've never seen worse performances by Haruko Sugimura and Ganjiro Nakamura -- and Kanemon Nakamura's performance descended pretty low before all was said and done (a far cry from his superb work for Yamanaka and Mizoguchi).

Kwaidan is the opposite of light-weight -- about as plodding and ponderous a film as I've ever sat through.

(BTW --My dislike of Dreyer's Joan has many facets -- but two of the major ones are -- I just can't take ultra-close-ups on such a sustained basis -- and -- I don't like his treatment of the Joan story/legend, she is too much a generic sufferer here). But this belongs on another thread (except for the fact that I have no intent to persuade anyone else that my idiosyncratic reaction should be adopted by them -- and so don't want to prolong discussion here).

Yokihi has always seemed to me to be a pretty (and reasonably affectionate) recounting of an old chestnut story (one that everyone in Japan would have known -- thus there would have been little need to provide a full background).

I felt that in Kwaidan, Kobayashi went overboard in over-explaining everything. It very much seemed like a film made largely for western consumption.

I am a big fan of Yoko Mizuki's script writing -- and found this the first disappointment ever by a script she wrote (though I'm not sure the fault is ultimately hers in this case).

Kobayashi may well have virtues that are invisible to me. But I seriously doubt I am ever likely to find them. His way of "seeing" is just too uncongenial to me.

[Tommaso]

Yokihi has always seemed to me to be a pretty (and reasonably affectionate) recounting of an old chestnut story (one that everyone in Japan would have known -- thus there would have been little need to provide a full background).

I felt that in Kwaidan, Kobayashi went overboard in over-explaining everything. It very much seemed like a film made largely for western consumption.

You may have a very good point there, on both films. Obviously, not being as immersed into Japanese culture as you or a Japanese person are, the old chestnut story of "Yokihi" was completely unknown to me, and so I couldn't fill in the gaps in the background. I guess with an intimate knowledge of the times and the historical events my reaction might have been perhaps a different one . On the other hand, I don't know anything of the backgrounds that inform "Ugetsu" or "Chikamatsu" either, and I love those films.

As to "Kwaidan" being made for western consumption, you may be right, too, but can that really be an argument against the film, or any other film? Furthermore, the stories that the film is based on were written by a westerner, Lafcadio Hearn, and they were written in English, too. In a way, the 'Japaneseness' then is 'filtered' from the beginning, is 'artificial'. The fact that there are so many explanations (especially in the third episode) is probably due to Kobayashi's often surprising closeness to Hearn's original texts. At least he didn't add very much to the original narratives, just broadened them, and made them more ciontemplative. Of course it may be surprising that a Japanese director used texts written by an American on Japanese themes (even though Hearn claimed that these were all stories he had 'collected', and seems to have been well versed in Japanese culture). But I believe that Kobayashi didn't care too much about this and was just interested in highlighting the visual and artistic possibilities these rather unassuming stories provide.

[Michael Kerpan]

Lafcadio Hearn's stories seemed far more "Japanese" than Kobayashi's adaptation of them. His stories are like traditional ink sketches.

I feel that Kobayashi departed pretty far from the spirit and the feel of Hearn's evocative little tales.

I've always suspected that Run Run Shaw funded Yokihi hoping to get some good play in Chinese markets, I wonder whether this had any success in Asia outside Japan? (Presumably Chinese audiences might also have been familiar with the background of the story). I think all kids had to learn about Tale of the Genji in school (at least back then) -- whereas Mori's stories and Chikamatsu's plays may not have been required reading for all students.

[tryavna]

I feel that Kobayashi departed pretty far from the spirit and the feel of Hearn's evocative little tales.

Actually, I agree with MK here. The stories and the film are tonally quite different from each other -- even though Kobayashi sticks very close to the original plots. One of Hearn's greatest gifts as a writer was his brevity/concision, and that's very much on display in the four stories. Kobayashi goes in a very different direction, lengthening their "run-time" about as far as they can go just to see if he can sustain them on atmosphere alone.

Of course, I think that Kobayashi's re-interpretation works. (I suspect people know I'm a huge apologist for this director.)

At the same time, however, there's absolutely no doubt that Hearn was writing for American readers. (Nearly all of his short writings from about 1898 onwards appeared in Atlantic Monthly or a similar magazine before being collected into book-form afterwards.) So I'm not sure that I totally understand MK's objection on that ground. Hearn was very much a part of the "local color" movement in American literature, whose members typically accentuated idiosyncrasies of an exotic (sub)culture for mainstream American readers.

it may be surprising that a Japanese director used texts written by an American on Japanese themes

BTW, just to slip into total pedant mode, Hearn never naturalized while he was living in the United States. He did become a Japanese citizen, though.

[tavernier]

Of course, I think that Kobayashi's re-interpretation works. (I suspect people know I'm a huge apologist for this director.)

No need to apologize for liking Kobayashi.

[HerrSchreck]

Of course, I think that Kobayashi's re-interpretation works. (I suspect people know I'm a huge apologist for this director.)

No need to apologize for liking Kobayashi.

Indeed. He's probably my favorite Japanese director. We're talking all cyclinders turning globally acclaimed masterpieces one after the other.

[tryavna]

Of course, I think that Kobayashi's re-interpretation works. (I suspect people know I'm a huge apologist for this director.)

No need to apologize for liking Kobayashi.

Of course, I mean "apologia" in its original Greek sense -- in honor of Hearn's birthplace....

[Michael Kerpan]

I'm not sure that I totally understand MK's objection on that ground.

My central objection is that I found Kobayashi's film excruciating dull for the most part.

The fact that Hearn's little stories _feel_ more traditionally Japanese than Kobayashi's movie is simply an incidental observation.

He's probably my favorite Japanese director.

I can't imagine prizing Kobayashi over every other Japanese director. I'm afraid he wouldn't even make it onto my top 50 list. Oh well, he outranks Kinugasa....

[Harry White]

i had this in my hand yesterday while taking advantage of the B&N "buy two get one free" sale, but put it back in favor of Blast Of Silence; Clean, Shaven; and The Browning Version.

mistake?

[tryavna]

mistake?

No. It sounds like you were looking at Criterion's release. The MoC is much better.


Michael, I thought this was one of your central criticisms:

I felt that in Kwaidan, Kobayashi went overboard in over-explaining everything. It very much seemed like a film made largely for western consumption.

I.e., that, in comparison to Hearn's original stories, Kwaidan seemed to pander to a Western audience. At any rate, I didn't read it as "incidental," but rather as one of the reasons for the reaction you had.

[Michael Kerpan]

No, I wouldn't say "pander" at all. Making something for Western audiences may involve all sorts of over-explanation -- and yet no pandering.

I feel the excessive level of "exposition" helped make the film uninteresting to me. But I have never felt that any of Kobayashi's films were dishonest or insincere. I sometimes feel he is _too_ earnest, in fact.

(Remember, this is some I would have no problem liking -- except for the minor fact that I am totally out of sympathy with his "style").

And to all concerned -- if you think you want Kwaidan on DVD, you absolutely must buy the MOC version.

[HerrSchreck]

He's probably my favorite Japanese director.

I can't imagine prizing Kobayashi over every other Japanese director.

I'm afraid we have very different ideas about what constitutes cinema Mike. I think the radical, avant visual plane gets me going when executed in a certain way, where eastern quietude is your ongoing ideal.

I couldn't imagine spending so much time on a single national cinema at the expense of the rest of the world-- but Vivre La Différence!

[Michael Kerpan]

Not a single national cinema -- in addition to Japan, all the varieties of Chinese cinema, and Korean cinema, and a toe dipped into Philippine cinema, and Quebecois cinema, and certain sub-sets of French cinema, and Hollywood cinema through the 40s (along with a number of other things). ;~}

I don't see Kobayashi as particularly avant garde-ish -- visually or otherwise.

[HerrSchreck]

What would cause you to identify an element as avant garde? This may be the issue..

PLenty of touches echoing both expressionism as well as impressionism in Kwaidan in particular. Impressionism of course being the founding core identity of the avant garde.