I am reviewing this film just after re-watching it and then seeing Ozu's penultimate work An Autumn Afternoon. Unfair comparison perhaps, but Yamada's work is often considered an extension of the genre for which Japanese film masters have gained attention in world cinema. I rate it a 10 for effort beginning with Shochiku Studio still striving to finance this low key genre in the face of more box office-busting animation and glorified versions of TV shows. Yamada gets a 10 for attempting to film the award-winning novel that some have said is very difficult to present on screen.
But I am rating it 5 based on film masterpieces.The set for the pre-WW2 comes across as totally artificial unless the art direction is to portray an idealized dream-like setting in maidservant Taki's imagination. As some critics remarked, the house and especially its kitchen looks unlived in. If the intent was an idealized setting, this might occur to the viewer after repeat viewings which very few people do. I have to see a film several times due to being initially distracted by subtitles. Being an architect I am a good judge of real building and the sheer technical inability of the house roof to keep out any storm water bugs me. Maybe it would have been OK had the red roof not figured so prominently in the script and the French title for the film.
And what's with the film's depiction of the American bombing of Tokyo? It came across on the screen like a celebratory event instead of a tragedy.
A big reason for my only average rating is the casting and the acting direction. Not enough age contrast between husband and lover. In the novel the husband is much older and this would have given more plausibility to the affair. The lover acted his part well enough, but Yamada alumnus Hidetaka Yoshioka is too old to portray the part. The acting direction of the modern portion is overwrought with forced emotion. Satoshi Tsumabuki is typically successful at conveying any emotion with the most subtle facial and body expression. Here he is forced to act in artificially enthusiastic way to make the relationship between grand aunt and grand nephew seem close. He came across as a rank amateur actor here. The script kept including references to "girlfriends" to counter Takeshi's seemingly artificial relationship with older Aunt Taki. The "biographer" would have been more plausible as female, but likely at the expense of the box office.
I found the scripted ending overly dramatic for the secret it was to reveal. It did convey the idea of Japanese deference to privacy and propriety. But why did Takeshi's girlfriend have to pointedly ask permission to use the scissors? We westerners already find it odd that Japanese always use scissors to open envelopes. Too many tears were shed by Takeshi and Taki at the closing. Ozu just had his characters sit quietly with eyes downcast, but we got his message.
But I am rating it 5 based on film masterpieces.The set for the pre-WW2 comes across as totally artificial unless the art direction is to portray an idealized dream-like setting in maidservant Taki's imagination. As some critics remarked, the house and especially its kitchen looks unlived in. If the intent was an idealized setting, this might occur to the viewer after repeat viewings which very few people do. I have to see a film several times due to being initially distracted by subtitles. Being an architect I am a good judge of real building and the sheer technical inability of the house roof to keep out any storm water bugs me. Maybe it would have been OK had the red roof not figured so prominently in the script and the French title for the film.
And what's with the film's depiction of the American bombing of Tokyo? It came across on the screen like a celebratory event instead of a tragedy.
A big reason for my only average rating is the casting and the acting direction. Not enough age contrast between husband and lover. In the novel the husband is much older and this would have given more plausibility to the affair. The lover acted his part well enough, but Yamada alumnus Hidetaka Yoshioka is too old to portray the part. The acting direction of the modern portion is overwrought with forced emotion. Satoshi Tsumabuki is typically successful at conveying any emotion with the most subtle facial and body expression. Here he is forced to act in artificially enthusiastic way to make the relationship between grand aunt and grand nephew seem close. He came across as a rank amateur actor here. The script kept including references to "girlfriends" to counter Takeshi's seemingly artificial relationship with older Aunt Taki. The "biographer" would have been more plausible as female, but likely at the expense of the box office.
I found the scripted ending overly dramatic for the secret it was to reveal. It did convey the idea of Japanese deference to privacy and propriety. But why did Takeshi's girlfriend have to pointedly ask permission to use the scissors? We westerners already find it odd that Japanese always use scissors to open envelopes. Too many tears were shed by Takeshi and Taki at the closing. Ozu just had his characters sit quietly with eyes downcast, but we got his message.