302 Harakiri

[tryavna]

I strenuously disagree with you about this movie, Ando. I think it's absolutely brilliant. I agree that it's slow-moving (i.e., "static") at times, but that's precisely the point of the movie. The story is all about how the thin veneer of social niceties/formalities barely masks the brutality and oppression of the larger social order. Hence the contrasts between the carefully composed/formalized audiences and talks vs. the explosions of violence, and the stoicism vs. selfishness of various characters. And then there's just something about Kobayashi's compositions and pacing that I particularly love. The more I see of his work, the more convinced I become that he is probably the most underrated -- or, at least, the least discussed -- of the great Japanese directors.

I am curious, however, if you've ever seen or what you might think of Kobayashi's Samurai Rebellion, which is very much a companion piece to -- or out-and-out reworking of -- this movie? It's similarly slow-moving, but you might find it more appealing, since its narrative is more straightforward and it shifts part of its attention to gender politics.

As for the repeated use of flashbacks, it's nowhere as complex as Okamoto's use of flashbacks and flashforwards in his 1965 film Samurai, which was clearly influenced by Kobayashi's work here. So being familiar with that movie, I guess I didn't find it particularly frustrating in this one.

[Michael Kerpan]

Kobayashi is comparatively well-known compared to his (all too many) great unknown contemporaries. I would say that Tadashi Imai might be the best of this group of neglected (in the West) directors. And none of his films are available.

[tryavna]

Kobayashi is comparatively well-known compared to his (all too many) great unknown contemporaries. I would say that Tadashi Imai might be the best of this group of neglected (in the West) directors. And none of his films are available.

Yes, very true, Michael. I should have said something to the effect of "the most underrated of the great Japanese directors currently available on some sort of home video in the West." At any rate, I was particularly thinking in terms of his standing in relationship to Kurosawa, Mizoguchi, et al. -- the ones who are widely recognized as masters in the West.

[Michael Kerpan]

Kobayashi didn't just make historical films (or war films), but those are the only ones that have been available in the West over the past couple of decades.

[tryavna]

Kobayashi didn't just make historical films (or war films), but those are the only ones that have been available in the West over the past couple of decades.

Who said that he did?

I'm not following your meaning here.

[Michael Kerpan]

Kobayashi didn't just make historical films (or war films), but those are the only ones that have been available in the West over the past couple of decades.

Who said that he did?

I'm not following your meaning here.

Sorry.

I was just making the point that even though Kobayashi was one of the best known members of his cohort in the West, most of what he did still remains totally unknown.

[tryavna]

Michael, I think we've been talking at cross-purposes for the last few posts. I don't deny that Kobayashi is better known in the West than many other Japanese directors; I simply said that, in my opinion, based on the handful of his films that I've managed to see, he's still underrated. Of course, when we're talking about classic Japanese directors and their reputations in the West, there's a high degree of relativity when it comes to talking about "known" and "rated," so I don't think we're too far apart in what we really mean.

All I really mean to say, I suppose, is that I think that Kobayashi's reputation should be even higher than it appears to be (based on availability of his films, number of extras lavished on those films that are available on DVD, book-length studies of his work, references to his work by Western directors, etc.).

[Michael Kerpan]

Part of the reason that Ozu, Mizoguchi, Kurosawa -- and now Naruse -- have been rated at the highest level is that a wide selection of their work has become available (if not on DVD yet -- at least at retrospectives in important cultural centers). Kobayashi's output is only sketchily known by comparison. I think only three (or 5, depending on how you count) of his films have been available in the West over the last couple of decades (and Human Condition has sort of been out of circulation for a while).

I think that without the support of either retrospectives or extensive home video releases, one can't leap into the top tier. Just having made a couple of highly-lauded films is usually insufficient to accomplish this.

BTW -- I'm not aware of any English or French monographs on Kobayashi's career. Have you run across any?

[jt]

I'm kind of in agreement with you both, in that I've only seen the three films that MoC/ CC have put out but I think they're all masterpieces and Harakiri in particular is one of my favourite Japanese films of all time. If CC do eventually put the Human Condition out, that will effectively double his output that I have seen.

Michael, do you consider his place in the second league of Japanese greats purely because of the unavailability of his early and late films, because these films are not very good or because you don't rate his middle films as highly as some of us do?

[Awesome Welles]

Has anyone actually seen anything other than the six films put out? I am personally leaning with Tryavna here. I think it's impossible to discuss directors nobody knows. Imai may very well be underrated but we can only discuss what we've seen. Based on what little we've seen of Kobayashi I am inclined to say that he is not underrated as everyone who has seen his work loves it (me included) he is rather underseen and someone like Imai underrepresented. Then again this is all a rather annoying discussion of semantics so just ignore me.

Just found this - Wildside are releasing The Black River. No English subs. Let's hope someone else has picked this up for distribution in the UK/US.

[tavernier]

In addition to those Kobayashi films on DVD, I saw Black River at a NY film fest retro a few years back and Fossil at MOMA (I think it was MOMA) many years ago. So that means I've seen 8 of his films -- wow, I'm impressed!

[Steven H]

Just found this - Wildside are releasing The Black River. Given that The Human Condition didn't have subs I doubt the lazy French will bother with this either. Let's hope someone else has picked this up. And when I say soon I mean next month.

I'm getting this. I'll post screencaps when it shows up. For what its worth, I've already seen Black River and can attest to it being great. In fact, I've seen a good deal of Kobayashi's 50s and 70s work, and it's all "great" (though its been a while, and I'll need to revisit them before elaborating). Also, his Inn of Evil is available with english subs around the 'net, in bootleg form. You can also get a copy of his 1984 film Tokyo Trial (I presume with subtitles), but its prohibitively institutionally priced at around $200.

I sent an email off to Criterion/Eclipse about making an "early Kobayashi" set sometime ago. An early Kobayashi film that I haven't seen, but I would love to, is Beautiful Days, which was the first collaboration between Kobayashi and Matsuyama Zenzo (I'll Buy You, Black River, Human Condition Trilogy). Matsuyama went on to write a good chunk of Naruse's 60s output.

[Michael Kerpan]

I would say I haven't seen enough of his work to come to a firm conclusion of his overall worth. If I had seen as many as Tavenier has, I'd feel a lot more confident. From my limited sample, I'd rate him below Kurosawa and Imai and Uchida -- but not a long way below.

[tavernier]

Based on the films I've seen, I'd rate Kobayashi right after Naruse and Kurosawa....a close third.

[tryavna]

I'm not aware of any English or French monographs on Kobayashi's career. Have you run across any?

There is apparently one Canadian monograph (in French):

Blouin, Claude R., Le Chemin détourné: Essai sur Kobayashi et let cinéma japonais, Quebec, 1982. 277 pp.

It's available at UNC's library, so I may take a look at it, but I don't read French, so I can't give anything but a very superficial impression of it.

To my knowledge the only other major sources of information come from Donald Richie, Joan Mellen, Audie Bock, and a handful of articles and reviews.

I sent an email off to Criterion/Eclipse about making an "early Kobayashi" set sometime ago.

A wonderful idea -- right up Eclipse's alley, I would think.

It's been great to see so many people speak so positively of Kobayashi's work in this thread. I was afraid I was on a fan-boy ramble....

[Awesome Welles]

I sent an email off to Criterion/Eclipse about making an "early Kobayashi" set sometime ago.

What a great idea, I'm sure that would be perfect for Eclipse and would probably sell quite well.

[ando]

The story is all about how the thin veneer of social niceties/formalities barely masks the brutality and oppression of the larger social order. Hence the contrasts between the carefully composed/formalized audiences and talks vs. the explosions of violence, and the stoicism vs. selfishness of various characters.

This point is driven home mercilessly by Kobayashi, which is part of my point. There's something empty within the structure of the narrative - it's almost, well, I'll even go so far as to say it is a kind of ghost story. The spirit of the dead adopted son who commits harahiri and the corruption and cover-up of the clan lie just below the surface of complete artifice. This tension makes the film extremely uncomfortable to watch, initially, for which I applaud Kobayashi. But there's no accumulative tension, no build-up. There's certainly no lift - only the violent explosion at the end. Until the climax there was very little for me to remain interested in visually or dramatically as much of the narrative elements are simply extended and/or repeated.

[tryavna]

There's something empty within the structure of the narrative - it's almost, well, I'll even go so far as to say it is a kind of ghost story. The spirit of the dead adopted son who commits harahiri and the corruption and cover-up of the clan lie just below the surface of complete artifice. This tension makes the film extremely uncomfortable to watch, initially, for which I applaud Kobayashi. But there's no accumulative tension, no build-up. There's certainly no lift - only the violent explosion at the end. Until the climax there was very little for me to remain interested in visually or dramatically as much of the narrative elements are simply extended and/or repeated.

Well, obviously, I can't force you to like the movie as much as I do, but I really don't understand what you mean by saying that the movie is "empty." I certainly agree that there's "no lift" -- in the sense that it's unrelenting in its bleakness and downbeat tone. But that doesn't mean there isn't catharsis in Nakadai's resistance -- even if we know that he can't "win" in the end.

Perhaps you're just put off by the distance Kobayashi sets up between himself (and, by extension, the viewers) and the story's characters. I suppose I could understand somebody describing the movie's style as "cold." But I'm genuinely surprised that any viewer wouldn't "remain interested [...] dramatically" and take a sort of vicarious pleasure in watching Nakadai's machinations unfold as he tells his story. The many layerings of the film's narrative still fascinate me -- including its meta-level. It is a story about telling a story, to some degree. (In fact, if anything, our exchange has made me want to watch the movie again.)

But like I said in a previous post, you might find K's Samurai Rebellion more interesting. So don't give up on him just yet.

[ando]

It is a story about telling a story, to some degree.

I think you've got it. In a way I feel as if I'm being preached to. It's impossible to separate the didactic element of the narrative from its dramatic element, which (as I'm sure you'd agree) is part of Kobayashi's strategy. But he projects his moral imperatives so plainly, specifically through Hanshiro Tsugumo's manipulation of the clan, that I have little patience for any possible outcome (though I do admire Tsugumo's sagacity and the dramatic reward at the end). The point is that the narrative is so painstaking that I see the lesson (the moral and dramatic lesson) coming a mile away. You never get that kind of simple projection from Mizuguchi (one never knows what to expect from him). And his films always seem to expose some kind of moral flaw within the social structure, despite the apparent "immorality" of the subject matter.

[Robotron]

The many layerings of the film's narrative still fascinate me -- including its meta-level. It is a story about telling a story, to some degree.

That is so radically common that I'm surprised you would bring it up as something notable. In terms of the complexity of a story about storytelling, 300 is about as smart.

[Le Samouraï]

Yay! I finally found this and got it Monday. I once saw a very nice Italian poster, and the Cuban re-release poster Criterion used for their cover is also quite lovely, but I believe this original Danish 1-sheet from the mid-60's is the coolest poster ever made for the film.

The text in the top says: "A fantastic shock film has arrived in the country"; the box reads: "WARNING! As is well-known, Harakiri is a suicide ritual of such bloody/gory horror that even the most hardened spectator might feel unwell -.You are therefore warned!"; and the bottom: "With sweaty foreheads, moist hands, and staring eyes, the audiences around the world have watched the horrifying harakiri scenes! How will You react?"

I just love how the text and the picture make it sound like pure exploitation.

[tryavna]

That is so radically common that I'm surprised you would bring it up as something notable. In terms of the complexity of a story about storytelling, 300 is about as smart.

Well, obviously, there's a difference between utilizing a particular dramatic device and utilizing it well or thoughtfully. In fact, I find your objection slightly puzzling, since rejecting a dramatic device simply because of its commonality (or its employment by lesser artists later) doesn't seem like sound aesthetic logic to me. After all, Shakespeare's utilization of mistaken identity can still be interesting even though it was already a common device when he used it and it's become de rigueur in teen comedies nowadays. In my opinion, Kobayashi's approach is still intelligent -- partly because it's part and parcel of Nakadai's character's machinations. (Thus it's interwoven into the fabric of the picture and doesn't just seem tacked on.)

It's impossible to separate the didactic element of the narrative from its dramatic element, which (as I'm sure you'd agree) is part of Kobayashi's strategy.

Frankly, I'm not sure that I do agree, but that's mainly because I don't perceive the film as being overly didactic. Sure, Kobayashi's position is highly moralistic, but I don't see the film as being any more didactic than, say, Kurosawa's The Bad Sleep Well. In many respects, they're very similar films, with similar "messages." (I like both, by the way.)

[HerrSchreck]

I'd agree with tryavna's sentiment. Despite the enormous power of his films, Kobayashi simply has not become the revenue-generating "brand" on the festival and home vid -- and literature -- circuits as has Kurosawa, Ozu, Mizo (lately) et al, (hell, even Suzuki). Though, imo, his filmmaking, in visual -- and quite often in emotional (due to the muscularity of Hashimoto) -- terms regularly towers over these men... except for maybe Mizoguchi. Of all filmmakers he's right up there with say Epstein & Kirsanoff in that he's exhibited, but rarely, and if you don't want to have to wait another half decade, you wanna rush your ass out there to see him when he pops.

More than any of his counterparts, Kobayashi reaches right back over the shoulders of his counterparts, beyond von Sternberg, right into the heart of the heights & heart of Weimar German cinema. The meticulous compositions, the creeping, drifting camera so reminiscent of Freund and Wagner, the haunted expressionistic sets so reminiscent of the Lang prior to SPIES.. as well as the Masculine Fierceness of his art. He has a very definite politics to his art, but if the "liberalism" of Kurosawa, Shindo & Mizo is the humanism of Dr King, Kobayashi is the don't-fuck-with-me level-eyed hardness of a pre-Hajj Malcom X. Throw in an often Dreyer-esque sense of pacing, and an occasionally near-Brechtian self-consciousness in staging (shifting pools of light, theatrical dim-downs midscene) and you have an uncompromising sensibility which I assume idiotic programmers think is user-unfriendly. Of the Japanese Big Names, he seems to be the one who held on most to his youthful fierceness... nursed it and cherished it and watered it lovingly as a badge of authenticity. And like you guys, I need to see the rest of his work too.

[Steven H]

The point is that the narrative is so painstaking that I see the lesson (the moral and dramatic lesson) coming a mile away. You never get that kind of simple projection from Mizuguchi (one never knows what to expect from him). And his films always seem to expose some kind of moral flaw within the social structure, despite the apparent "immorality" of the subject matter.

On the contrary, Mizoguchi practically lived off of simple projection and cliches. From his early to his late work its the style that's revolutionary, not so much the subject matter. Take for instance his last film, Red Light District, which is fantastic, but uses at least four cliches (off the top of my head): rookie hooker with a heart of gold, hooker embarrassed to be seen by her son, hooker as depraved modern girl, and hooker who is betrayed by a man promising a better life. His other films are filled with shimpa and kabuki tales that audiences had full knowledge of in advance.

Kobayashi, however, was only part of a small subgenre of Samurai films, which we in the west had a huge exposure to. His film takes on a special meaning when you surround it with Toei trash (hero's honor is trampled, he leaves clan, his girl is sad, he redeems himself with violence), and his "masculine fierceness", as HerrSchreck puts it, isn't the kind of thing to be tamed for subtlety. Besides, there are still forums all over the internet that treat the feudal time in Japan as some amazing era that they wish they could go back to, who worship this film... so maybe its lesson isn't as obvious.

As an aside, all my preconceived notions of even the anti-hero (or anti-samurai) subgenre are deflated when seeing rare films by Imai, Kido, and Uchida. There are some really amazing chambara and samurai films out there waiting for mainstream discovery.

[Robotron]

That is so radically common that I'm surprised you would bring it up as something notable. In terms of the complexity of a story about storytelling, 300 is about as smart.

Well, obviously, there's a difference between utilizing a particular dramatic device and utilizing it well or thoughtfully. In fact, I find your objection slightly puzzling, since rejecting a dramatic device simply because of its commonality (or its employment by lesser artists later) doesn't seem like sound aesthetic logic to me. After all, Shakespeare's utilization of mistaken identity can still be interesting even though it was already a common device when he used it and it's become de rigueur in teen comedies nowadays. In my opinion, Kobayashi's approach is still intelligent -- partly because it's part and parcel of Nakadai's character's machinations. (Thus it's interwoven into the fabric of the picture and doesn't just seem tacked on.)

I agree that it is used more skillfully within the story as opposed to any number of other films, but my point is that it still such a simple idea, even for the time that it is pointless to bring it up as something complex and fascinating. Compare it to the films Contempt and 8 1/2, both released relatively shortly after, and the huge gap in sophistication between them (at least in regards to stories about stories). Hell, Don Quixote holds up as a more interesting example.