Change Your Image
syd111
Reviews
Bewitched (2005)
Bewitched (2005) - Is Not A Remake
Note: This "comment" contains "spoilers", if you want to see a "remake" of the original.
Can I say one thing? Just because a film has the same title as its predecessor doesn't mean that it is a "remake", and you cannot blame the film or its maker for failing to live up to your expectations.
"Bewitched" is a fine example. From what I remember from the TV series that I saw as a child, a fun part of this series was the husband trying to hide the fact that his wife is a witch, from his friends, relatives, neighbors and what not. Right? But this film covers the part that the two meet, fall in love and get married. So, there can be no fun of the original in this film in the first place.
Secondly, as I was watching Kidman playing Sam, I thought the voice was familiar, and realized half way thru the film that she was playing not Sam but Marilyn Monroe, when, or in parts that she was not acting like a sex symbol which was an image that America forced on Norma Jean. Back home, I compared Kidman's hairstyle and red dress with the famous picture of Monroe posing in nude taken in 1949 when she was not yet famous (which you can easily find on the web - search for "Marilyn Monroe, red"; also see poster of "Niagara" on this site).
So, I enjoyed the film as a tribute to my and probably anybody's one of the most favorite actresses (or women) Marilyn Monroe instead of as a remake of "Bewitched", and I think Kidman did a fine job at that. Nora Ephron and Kidman knew what they were doing, and the film also seemed like a satire of all man-made films.
Ephron, for being a woman, also offered other funs. I especially liked Jack's separated wife kidding Kidman about her nose (surgery). I don't think any male director would do that. (9/11/05, Sunday)
Bôkoku no îjisu (2005)
Wrong Way to Make a Movie
Aegis (2005) - Wrong Way to Make a Movie
Note: This "comment" may contain "spoilers", but only in the sense that it's not worth watching.
"Aegis" (meaning "shield") was a little disappointing. Following "Lorelei: The Witch of the Pacific Ocean" and "Sengoku jieitai 1549", I probably placed too much expectations on the third film based on novels written by Harutoshi Fukui. The film uses real SDF (Self-Defense Force) vessels, and I don't know how much the producers had to pay for this, but there were obvious budgetary problems. The CG is low-grade, or is omitted entirely. The ship, Isokaze, sinks another SDF vessel, but this scene is depicted only in the form of a distant flare of explosion seen from Isokaze. If not for budgetary reasons, this scene should have been a highlight of the film, depicted in full CG.
Another major problem about this film is that non-Japanese who don't know anything about SDF or Japanese Constitutional issues or history will probably understand nothing about what is going on in the film. For instance, the SDF is a military organization, but many of the operations that its naval division should be carrying out are in reality carried out by another government agency "Japan Coast Guard" (JCG). In contrast to the naval SDF which is even prohibited from operating outside Japanese waters with a few exceptions, the JCG vessels, though not equipped with long-range weapons, are authorized to engage in counter-terrorist and -piracy operations anywhere in the world. A few years ago, several JCG vessels chased what it said was a North Korean spy vessel to outside Japanese waters and into Chinese waters where they sank the vessel killing all its crew. The JCG is also authorized to sign international agreements that concern maritime affairs, with the Foreign Office only needing to acknowledge such agreements after the fact. Additionally, some of you Japanophiles might remember how the novelist Yukio Mishima died. He visited an SDF headquarters in Tokyo and called upon the soldiers there to realize what they were there for. No one responded, so Mishima committed hara-kiri suicide in front of the Japanese public.
The original title translates as "Aegis of a Nation in Demise". The majority of the Japanese feel that something is wrong about their nation, but don't know the answer or are simply not interested. Like the other two films based on Fukui's novels, "Aegis" treats the same kind of theme, namely What is war? What is nation? What does it mean to kill your enemy? Can you really kill another human being because he happened to be your enemy? These questions are utterly irrelevant to the people of the majority of the nations of the world which are fighting for survival or national interest. Some of you might remember U.S. President Bush's slip of tongue when he said the war against Saddam Hussein was a "crusade". This means that Japan joined the Iraqi war when it was not even a Christian country. No one here even noticed this issue. The fundamental question and theme of "Aegis" is that Japan has full- fledged land, naval and air forces, but its people don't know what these are for, what it means to fight, what it means to defend their nation, or even what a "nation" is. This is the meaning of the title "Nation in Demise", implies Fukui.
"Aegis" probably takes lines right from the novel. For this reason, statements are often interesting. "Peace is a kind of void between wars". Or, "Japanese didn't earn peace; they were just given it" (by the United States) says the terrorist leader played by Kiichi Nakai who usually appears in films and dramas as a typical Japanese soldier (interesting casting). But the film was disappointing, because it seemed like it just took the main plot and words from the novel and did nothing else than to let the SDF advertise its state-of-the-art Aegis vessel. And, partly for the mentioned omission of the scene of another SDF vessel being Harpoon-sunk by Isokaze, the entire film lacks the tension that the novel probably had, and also lacks the detailed character development that the novel probably spent a lot of pages for. We are just presented with this cold-hearted terrorist leader. But there is a girl who seems like his relative. We are supplied nothing about the relationship between these people, or the real feelings of this terrorist leader. The only watchable plot evolves around Sengoku, who is a junior officer of this SDF vessel, fighting the terrorists to "protect my men and vessel".
Having watched the film, I think the novel might be interesting. But I don't recommend either the film or the novel to anybody without good knowledge of the things that I mentioned.
You might hear interesting lines. But you never get to know who these people really are. Sengoku has a daughter but his wife is dead. That's all we know about him. Summarizing the novel and taking lines from it is not the way to make a movie. If the lines are more distracting for being so interesting, they should have been dumped, the story should be changed, subplots should be trashed and necessary ones should be created. By making a film that is faithful to the novel, the film probably undermined the whole point of the novel. (9/11/05, Sunday)
Lorelei (2005)
What do you fight for?
"Lorelei: The Witch of the Pacific Ocean" could be said the first of the "trilogy" (though almost entirely made, distributed and directed by different entities, for a good reason, to "divide the pie") based on novels written by Harutoshi Fukui (born 1968), with the other two being "Sengoku jieitai 1549" and the upcoming "AEGIS". A German- made submarine equipped with a secret weapon is dispatched on a mission to prevent the third A-bombing of Japan, the target this time being Tokyo. The film has all the elements to make it a good submarine movie including special effects underwater sequences and a mutiny, so I won't go into that. What makes this film, and the Fukui trilogy, special is how it treats the motivations for fighting a war.
Just a few years ago, "Hotaru" (2001, starred by Ken Takakura, who's starred in so many yakuza movies) treated "the same old stuff" about the tragedy of kamikaze pilots, for whom fighting and dying was "Imperial will" and no one doubted it, but in actuality, the real soldiers weren't sure if they were dying from their own will, or were just being forced to die. That is basically the theme that Japanese war movies have treated for the last 60 years.
"Lorelei" makes a little departure from that tradition in a good way. But it also drags that tradition. A young crew (who is convinced that he is fighting for the Emperor) asks a young girl "What do you fight for?" and the girl answers "Because I can sing, if I survive". Or, the Captain, after communication with the command structure was broken, solicits for volunteers to go shoot down the B29 strategic bomber that is about to take off to A-bomb Tokyo. He does not force his men to follow him in this suicidal mission, nor does he fight for any Imperial will; he and those who volunteered wanted to protect Tokyo their beloved city and its people their friends. Sounds normal? But this motivation was quite ABNORMAL in the war times. Soldiers had no free will to fight. They believed, or were forced into believing that to fight and die was virtue and honor. Anyone who doubted it was treated as traitor. It was patriotism elevated to religion. For 60 years, countless Japanese TV dramas and movies have doubted this belief, but were not able to come up with any alternative motivation for fighting a war. "Lorelei"'s answer to this question is that one fights for what he/she believes in, no matter what it is. But, that's all that the film can say anything about this issue.
So, "What do you fight for?" is not just a question that the young soldier asks. It has been a question that almost every Japanese has been asking since the end of WWII and not many have been able to come up with definitive answers. "Because I can sing, if I survive" could be one of the most definitive (and in my opinion, convincing) answers that anyone's ever been able to produce. See the array of the Japanese ground force weaponry in "Sengoku jieitai 1549" and naval and air weaponry in the upcoming "AEGIS". Then think about the situation that not too many soldiers who will be using those weapons will have any definitive idea as to what they will be using them for. I guess I'm being sarcastic. But this is the situation that has resulted from the defeat in WWII and the "peace Constitution" nonsense. Find parallels in (German) "Das Boot" (1981), but note the fundamental differences. Also defeated in WWII, THEY knew what they were fighting for. So, statements like "ask not what your country can do for you--ask what you can do for your country" will fall on dead ears in Japan. People here aren't sure if their country is doing anything for them other than ripping off taxes, and have no idea what they can do for their country; or rather, doing anything "for the country" had been and is still considered a taboo (considered "ultranationalism"). This point is clearly made in "Lorelei", and if you missed this point, you've missed the whole point.
To compensate for this boring "comment", if you like anime, especially "Space Pirate Captain Herlock", though I'm not sure how its Western version turned out, the Captain of this submarine is depicted in his image ("Fight only for what you believe in"). Koji Yakusho who plays that role even looks like Herlock with his black coat and cap. The secret weapon "Lorelei" is also more animetic than scientific. There are also unrealistic, animetic scenes in which the sub shoots U.S. destroyers' screw shafts with non-detonating torpedoes. Or, can a sub shoot down a flying B29 with its cannon? These are all unrealistic, but seen as anime, they are "fantastic" if you know what I mean. But of course, this mixing of anime elements could be the film's shortcoming, especially if you've never seen an anime.
If you are tired of watching Japanese war movies that only depict the aforementioned "tragedy", you will be relieved to see this movie. It looks so NORMAL, after 60 years of self-repentance for allegedly starting the Pacific War under "brainwashed" mentality. (7/01/'05)
Sengoku jieitai 1549 (2005)
Change future? No-way, says history
Sengoku jieitai 1549 (a.k.a. "Samurai Commando Mission 1549") is a rewriting of the 1979 piece starring "Sonny Chiba" and produced by the same Kadokawa company. An SDF (Self-Defense Force) unit is blown back to 1549, the age of warring states, where its leader Matoba (Takeshi Kaga) decides to live as warrior. Two years later, SDF finds out what happened, and sends a rescue team consisting of Kashima (Yosuke Eguchi), Matoba's ex- lieutenant and now retired, joining the team as "observer", and Kanzaki (Ms. Kyoka Suzuki) who was responsible for that accident. Black holes are erupting. They have only 74 hours to "do something" about Matoba who they found out had feigned himself as Nobunaga (a historical figure who came close to unifying Japan) who wanted to "change future" with his SDF technology. Defeated, Kashima's group finds an ally in a kid called Tosuke, who was later to become the historical figure who unified Japan, and the real Nobunaga who had been with them from 2005. Compared to the 1979 Sengoku, where the SDF unit's only course was "fight to death", the 2005 Sengoku is quite positive in approach. It depicts how the characters did their best in living instead of dying and this includes Matoba despite his sinister scheme. Yosuke Eguchi, very tall, has starred in TV dramas playing wide- ranging roles. Veterans Takeshi Kaga and Kyoka Suzuki provide solid acting. The film marks departure from conventional jidaigeki (films set in samurai days). The cast is an example; another example is non-use of the Kyoto theatrical combatants. These have succeeded in making the film a pure entertainment piece, without the traditional fetters and samurai BS like "dying to live".
Notes & explanations (added 6/30/'05)
1) "Sengoku jieitai 1549" is going to be one of the "trilogy" (or more) based on novels written by Harutoshi Fukui, with the other two being "Lorelei: The Witch of the Pacific Ocean" (2005) and the upcoming "AEGIS", though these three films were directed, produced and distributed by different entities. It is not a remake of the 1979 Sengoku but more Fukui's original, inspired, perhaps, by the 1979 movie.
2) "Kyoto theatrical combatants": These are a group of stunt men called "ta'te" who belong to (Toei Company's) Kyoto studio. They are experts at getting killed in jidaigeki samurai dramas. Most jidaigeki dramas and films rely on them to save choreography time and money. But the result is that you always see the same people getting killed in different dramas and movies. By the time "Sonny" (Shin'ichi) Chiba starred in the 1979 "Sengoku", he disliked this idea, and had formed JAC (Japan Action Club). The principal members then included Etsuko Shihomi, who's starred in some "Hissatsu ken / Sister Street Fighter" series (1974-1975)(and also in "Shanhai bansukingu" (1984) and "Nidaime wa Christian" (1985) in which she doesn't kick anybody). I suppose the producers of "Sengoku jieitai 1549" agreed with Chiba in not using these stunt men. Using them would've made the film "another of those jidaigeki".