Ore-Sama
Joined Jun 2006
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews52
Ore-Sama's rating
Along with Akira Kurosawa's "Rashomon", "Ugetsu" was responsible for breaking Japanese cinema out of it's native land. The story is set during a civil war, where a farmer lives happily with his wife and son, as well as a friend who dreams of leaving his impoverished state to become a samurai. After finding some success, exploiting the war to make a grand profit, their greed brings them away from their wives: one into realizing his samurai ambitions, the other to the home of a pale beauty.
Much has been said of the film's visual splendor. One can see here the beginnings of the sort of imagery that dominates your typical studio ghibli film, only much more bombastic. For my part, I prefer Mizoguchi's, in comparison, understated approach. Maybe not as impressive initially, but it lingers in the mind for much longer. There's really not any still shorts that do justice to the film's imagery, one must see the movements of the camera to appreciate what's on the screen. Even the most simple of moments seem more potent under Mizoguchi's proverbial eye. Adding to that is the music, which is almost surreal in how it conveys both sorrow and the fantastic.
If the emphasis on visual and sounds is making it seem like Ugetsu is just a pretty but vacuous spectacle, it absolutely is not. The technical prowess only underlies the beauty of the story. On paper, the story and characters are very simple. What makes the characters realized are the incredible performances. The most powerful moments in the movie are expressed through the face. Despite the short running time giving little time to establish the character's relations, there is such a genuine chemistry among them that the significance of these bonds isn't taken for granted as it may often be in these sorts of films. Make no mistake, Genjuro loves his family, even if he isn't always appreciative. One small but wonderful moment is when he's shopping for a yukata for her, and sees an image of her holding one over herself. Genjuro's journey is the main one and the heart of the movie, with Tobei's darkly comical journey as much more of a side story.
and one can't talk about Ugetsu without mention of it's ending. I won't spoil but I will say it ranks alongside another Mizoguchi masterpierce, "Sansho the Baliff", as one of the greatest, most powerful endings to a film. and it is this ending wherein one, perhaps like Genjuro himself, takes more notice of the little moments that suddenly take much more significance.
This is the only film where, upon first viewing, I watched it again within 24 hours. The first time I was sad but overwhelmed, like I wasn't sure I liked it except for the ending. But repeat viewings have convinced me that there's an elusiveness to this movie: as much as I've said, I still feel like I don't fully understand the power this film has.
Absolutely recommended.
Much has been said of the film's visual splendor. One can see here the beginnings of the sort of imagery that dominates your typical studio ghibli film, only much more bombastic. For my part, I prefer Mizoguchi's, in comparison, understated approach. Maybe not as impressive initially, but it lingers in the mind for much longer. There's really not any still shorts that do justice to the film's imagery, one must see the movements of the camera to appreciate what's on the screen. Even the most simple of moments seem more potent under Mizoguchi's proverbial eye. Adding to that is the music, which is almost surreal in how it conveys both sorrow and the fantastic.
If the emphasis on visual and sounds is making it seem like Ugetsu is just a pretty but vacuous spectacle, it absolutely is not. The technical prowess only underlies the beauty of the story. On paper, the story and characters are very simple. What makes the characters realized are the incredible performances. The most powerful moments in the movie are expressed through the face. Despite the short running time giving little time to establish the character's relations, there is such a genuine chemistry among them that the significance of these bonds isn't taken for granted as it may often be in these sorts of films. Make no mistake, Genjuro loves his family, even if he isn't always appreciative. One small but wonderful moment is when he's shopping for a yukata for her, and sees an image of her holding one over herself. Genjuro's journey is the main one and the heart of the movie, with Tobei's darkly comical journey as much more of a side story.
and one can't talk about Ugetsu without mention of it's ending. I won't spoil but I will say it ranks alongside another Mizoguchi masterpierce, "Sansho the Baliff", as one of the greatest, most powerful endings to a film. and it is this ending wherein one, perhaps like Genjuro himself, takes more notice of the little moments that suddenly take much more significance.
This is the only film where, upon first viewing, I watched it again within 24 hours. The first time I was sad but overwhelmed, like I wasn't sure I liked it except for the ending. But repeat viewings have convinced me that there's an elusiveness to this movie: as much as I've said, I still feel like I don't fully understand the power this film has.
Absolutely recommended.
The film's story can be summed up as a cast and crew being stuck making a film that seems like it will never get off the ground: whether it's getting the film stock they need or getting the director to do his job instead of finding some other reason he can't shoot right then. During that time, the crew find ways to amuse and busy themselves.
This was a transitional period for Fassbinder: he was moving away from the abstract, visually interesting but ultimately empty Godard inspired works like "Love is Colder than Death" and "The American Soldier" and just starting to phase over to melodrama, where his great works reside. Thus this film falls somewhere between the two styles.
With the exception of a couple of scenes, there is no music. The performances, for the most part, are very low key. Only Sacha, the producer, and the director express any flare. This in of itself can be alienating, especially for those accustomed to more mainstream comedies, but there's also the looseness of the writing. There's no real arc or build up to anything. Scenes simply happen. Characters A and B might be having a fling in one scene, but two scenes later it's A and C, and it's as if A and B were never together. We'll have a scene of the director stating definitively he can't finish the film, but goes on making the movie with no obvious explanation. Yet there will be other moments that ARE followed up on later in the movie, even if only for a scene. Scene order is some times completely random. One scene of the director screaming at his crew he doesn't want to be near them could've been placed anywhere in the movie.
All of this together and it becomes easy to see why the movie is so polarizing: it is often emotionally flat, has a very slow pace(which is the opposite of what one expects from a comedy) and barely has a narrative. This is why you see reviews saying nothing happens, saying it's a waste of time or that it feels like improve.
So then why is it loved by others? Speaking as someone who loves the movie, I can answer.
First, the characters themselves. The director and producer are the highlights, but there's a wide cast of personalities and whether the film is going anywhere or not, it's a joy just to see all the various interactions between them. If you're willing to follow along and show patience for what's occurring, you'll grow to love watching these people, kind of like a family you wouldn't want to live in but watch from a distance. The unappreciated unit manager, the poor, abused translator, the often perplexed Eddie Constantine, they all bring something to the film and since there's such an abundance of them, none of them wear out their welcome.
Secondly, the movie is funny. It's sense of humor is somewhat dry, partially thanks to the mostly flat delivery, but it's there. The highlights of course being the director himself, whether flaunting his pretentiousness or screaming at the screw for often inane and petty reasons, the movie's laughs are earned. The randomness of the scene order also plays a part of this. The topic of the scene can be humorous or heavy, but it's all played out in the same way.
But above all else, even when it isn't funny, it's interesting. Whether just seeing what they'll do next or the ambient atmosphere, I never found myself bored with this movie. If you can get accustomed to it's style, it's a fascinating sit through.
This is certainly a film that requires a bit of work on the viewer's part, but I think it is well worth it.
This was a transitional period for Fassbinder: he was moving away from the abstract, visually interesting but ultimately empty Godard inspired works like "Love is Colder than Death" and "The American Soldier" and just starting to phase over to melodrama, where his great works reside. Thus this film falls somewhere between the two styles.
With the exception of a couple of scenes, there is no music. The performances, for the most part, are very low key. Only Sacha, the producer, and the director express any flare. This in of itself can be alienating, especially for those accustomed to more mainstream comedies, but there's also the looseness of the writing. There's no real arc or build up to anything. Scenes simply happen. Characters A and B might be having a fling in one scene, but two scenes later it's A and C, and it's as if A and B were never together. We'll have a scene of the director stating definitively he can't finish the film, but goes on making the movie with no obvious explanation. Yet there will be other moments that ARE followed up on later in the movie, even if only for a scene. Scene order is some times completely random. One scene of the director screaming at his crew he doesn't want to be near them could've been placed anywhere in the movie.
All of this together and it becomes easy to see why the movie is so polarizing: it is often emotionally flat, has a very slow pace(which is the opposite of what one expects from a comedy) and barely has a narrative. This is why you see reviews saying nothing happens, saying it's a waste of time or that it feels like improve.
So then why is it loved by others? Speaking as someone who loves the movie, I can answer.
First, the characters themselves. The director and producer are the highlights, but there's a wide cast of personalities and whether the film is going anywhere or not, it's a joy just to see all the various interactions between them. If you're willing to follow along and show patience for what's occurring, you'll grow to love watching these people, kind of like a family you wouldn't want to live in but watch from a distance. The unappreciated unit manager, the poor, abused translator, the often perplexed Eddie Constantine, they all bring something to the film and since there's such an abundance of them, none of them wear out their welcome.
Secondly, the movie is funny. It's sense of humor is somewhat dry, partially thanks to the mostly flat delivery, but it's there. The highlights of course being the director himself, whether flaunting his pretentiousness or screaming at the screw for often inane and petty reasons, the movie's laughs are earned. The randomness of the scene order also plays a part of this. The topic of the scene can be humorous or heavy, but it's all played out in the same way.
But above all else, even when it isn't funny, it's interesting. Whether just seeing what they'll do next or the ambient atmosphere, I never found myself bored with this movie. If you can get accustomed to it's style, it's a fascinating sit through.
This is certainly a film that requires a bit of work on the viewer's part, but I think it is well worth it.