Unlike Casablanca which I watch on a fairly regular basis, it’s been about thirty years since I watched The Seven Samurai. Long enough that a lot had faded from memory. Including how long it was. But it moved along surprisingly well for a three and a half hour movie.
A seminal film in several ways. From what I understand, it had a huge impact on Japanese cinema - it popularized a more naturalistic story telling style over the existing more formalized style. And it had a huge influence in the genre of action movies - not just in westerns but in crime thrillers (the heist genre), war movies, and science fiction.
Its international impact flowed two ways. The film was inspired by western filmmaking. But in turn it opened western audiences to Japanese films.
There were a couple of flaws. The romance seemed to be a vehicle for a social point rather than part of the narrative. As such it doesn’t work for viewers in a non-Japanese society (and probably no longer works in Japan). And the character of Kikuchiyo didn’t work for me - I felt his broad comedy didn’t fit well with the rest of the movie. (What was the meaning of Kikuchiyo’s name? It was chosen for him supposedly because it fit his character but I have no idea what it means.)
You may be right, Little Nemo, that some aspects of it may be “too Japanese” (for lack of a better term) for American audiences. There’s a lot about the class struggle of that period that might pass over some people’s heads. Yeah they actually come out and say it at a few points but there’s other more subtle moments for which some knowledge of the culture and time period are helpful.
With regard to Mifune’s acting, I noticed a lot of the acting in the film seemed a bit stagey but I expect that was due to the state of film making in Japan at that point. Just with the population depletion from World War II it seems likely that film studios would have to high more actors from the theater.
One thing that I’m always surprised by is how dense of a movie it is. Yeah it’s a more slow moving picture than your typical summer blockbuster but it’s not that slow. The way it keeps moving from complication to complication definitely keeps my interest as I watch.
And it doesn’t hurt to have Kurosawa directing. I don’t think that man could have choosen a bad shot if he tried.
I think one of Kurosawa’s points was how close the samurai and the bandits were. They were essentially two aspects of the same phenomena. Both ultimately needed the farmers to survive but the farmers didn’t ultimately need them. The farmers only needed violent people around because there were other violent people - once the bandits were defeated there was no other role for the samurai in their society.
Just from watching anime, it seems like almost every Japanese show/movie has to have a “buffoon” character wedged in somewhere. Given Seven Samurai was made several decades before most Japanese cartoons, I thought it was sort of bizarre how the same trope seems to have stayed so ubiquitous.
It’s been awhile but IIRC, all of the samurai were killed by gunfire. I assume this was meant to point out how technology made the Samurai obsolete.
I’ve been intending to rewatch this after about ten years. I just finished the anime retelling Samurai 7 which was fantastic, but approached the whole theme of the samurais’ dependence on the farmers, and the question of “are we heroes, or just more mercenaries?”
I watched this about a year and a half ago for a film class. I really liked the first half, where the villagers are trying to hire the samurai, but found the second half kind of boring. Apparently it’s the other way around for most people.
You sure? I know the guns were a big concern, with two of the samurai going on their own infiltration missions to get them, but I thought that the only two were killed by the guns, and that was at the very end.
I read it the correct way, but was still thinking that only two of them were killed with guns, but maybe that’s because they were the only two that stand out, and that was the buffoon and the ultimate warrior guy.
-Joe, not good with names he can pronounce, much less with ones he can’t
Four of the samurai were killed by gun. The two you mentioned, plus Heihachi was killed by a gun on the raid of the bandits hideout, and Gorobei was killed the night Kikuchiyo left his post. They all heard a gunshot, and went running, and witnessed the farmers carrying his dead body.
I, too, have not seen Seven Samurai in way too long, but what an incredible film. The final battle in the pissing rain and yet, every shot is meticulously executed so that you always know who is doing what to whom. Exquisite!
I’m going to venture an opinion about Kikuchiyo - I don’t know how his character fits in with Japanese traditions and culture, but that character is bang on in line with Western traditions of the fool. Think of The Idiot in Pushkin’s Boris Godunov (or the Mussorgsky opera of the same name.) The Idiot is the only one who can dare to tell the truth because he has nothing to lose. Viewed in that context, that is exactly what is going on in the scene where Kikuchiyo tells the Samurai that they aren’t the cure to the problem, they ARE the problem.
Or contrast the scene where Kikuchiyo is training the villagers with the similar scene in Shakespeare - Henry IV, Part 2 where Falstaff is raising an army of yokels (Mouldy, Bullcalf, Feeble, Shadow and Wart)
In spite of all that, the relationship between this blustering fraud and Kyuzo is absolutely key. It is Kikuchiyo who avenges Kyuzo’s death at the cost of his life. The impostor Samurai who was the opposite of Kyuzo is ennobled by this truly heroic act. We would not be so moved by the end (I’m tearing up as I write this) if one of the skilled Samurai had killed the bandit chief. It had to be Kikuchiyo!
Yes, I know that Seven Samurai predates Throne of Blood by three years, but it also comes three years after The Idiot. I’ll let someone who knows what they’re talking about comment on the Japanese roots to his stories - as far as his Western influences go, Kurosawa totally knew his stuff and fully understood the archetypes he was working with.
As I write this, I’m realizing that I have to see this incredible film again.
Am I the only one who feels that this is true cinema, that has to be seen on the big screen rather than on a TV?
I saw Kikuchiyo’s character as filling three roles in the story. The first, as I wrote, was broad comedy. The second, as you wrote, was to play the Idiot (or the Holy Fool). These two are related. But his third role was to act as the bridge between the farmers and the samurai - he had a foot in both camps and could explain each side to the other.
Seven Samurai is one of my favorite all-time movies, with its mood, and settings, and the deeper meanings to the activities. I also think the selecting of the samurai is the best part, though that doesn’t mean I think the rest is boring, just much darker and sad, too. I also don’t love Kikiyuchio - way too much ridiculousness.
“Kikuchiyo” is two girl’s names run together, like Mary Sue in English. “Kiku” means “chyrsanthemum” and “Chiyo” means “one thousand generations.” (Lest anyone think I remember stuff like that off of the top of my head, I didn’t - I had to look it up)
In fact he plays all three roles in that terrific scene where he fools all the villagers into rushing out of hiding.
One of the great things about the movie is how lucidly Kurosawa maps out the action scenes. He gives you a clear mental picture of the battlefield so that during the action climax, visceral and fast-moving though it is, you know exactly what is going on. And of course that visual device of the bandits being crossed out as they are killed. So many young directors in Hollywood today (I’m looking at you Christopher Nolan.) don’t have a clue about how to film action scenes without leaving the audience thoroughly confused.
Another point about Mifune’s performance; IMO he does ham it a bit but at the same time I would struggle to think of another actor who could have pulled of that role without looking completely ridiculous. It’s not the kind of performance where the actor disappears into his character but his sheer physical presence and energy make it extraordinary in its own way.