Movies The Last Samurai

I haveto say...

I loved the movie. I know it didn't quite follow along some of the historical lines, but just the whole concept of the story was astonishing. It couldn't have been more beautifully done.

 

well, if i may ask what didnt you get in the movie?

 

Hitokiri_Gensai, i want you for my study buddy!!!! :anime: would you mind very much if i asked you questions about japanese history when i don't understand? my test is coming up in May, and it would be great if you helped me out with the studying! ur so smart!

oh yes, i forgot to ask. did you write all that (the whole historical para.) from memory?!?! :dizzy2:

 

the movie was filmed in where else but, New Zealand. apparently they chose a small valley with bamboo in it and spent 4 months creating the village there....

 

!!!!

I havn't seen it but i would really like to now that i've got some opinion on the movie. i hope its what you guys say it is. well i'll have to wait a while to see it though because i've got lots of family members over for the holidays. I think it would be cool if we all went and saw it together. but i think the older members of my family don't care for action movies.

 

Hav'nt seen it yet....but Tom Cruise is the last Samurai? That's ridiculous, sounds like a Hollywood slant.

 

It's not an action movie, really.
After seeing the movie, I must say that I was impressed by the direction during all the fights except one: The big, climatic battle sequence. There was one shot in there that I could have done without. Gratuitous use of slow motion and stage blood spraying everywhere, just like in just about every war-based film I've ever seen. I've come to know this as the "War is Hell" shot, because they always through it in a big battle scene to show that war isn't all about glorious heroes and all that. It wouldn't be so bad if every director and every cinematographer didn't use that same shot.
The historical inaccuracies boggle the mind, but this is true with any film. Just throw the concept of history out the window and enjoy the film.
The really surprising thing for me is that I didn't hate Tom Cruise in this one. Normally, the guy just can't act, but he was really good in this film.
The suggested romance between Taka and Allgren (Cruise's character) was the Ubercheese, however. It was just about the most predictable thing in any film I've ever seen, and I remind you that I have seen many Classical Hollywood Style films (well, that may not mean a lot to any of you, but suffice it to say that such CHS films are VERY predictable).
What I particularly enjoyed was the scene in which Allgren introduced himself to the Japanese family that was caring for him, and they tried to repeat his name, but it came out "Arugren" or something like that.
As for inaccuracies in the manner of speaking among the Japanese characters, consider this: the target audience is American. The bulk of Americans do not speak Japanese at all. If any second language at all, it is probably Spanish, but that's not really the issue. Besides, would you watch something set in Medieval England and complain that they weren't speaking Middle English? I mean, come on, at least they tried. They could have done a total 13th Warrior-style cop-out and just said that Allgren somehow picked up the language and started filling everything in with English. That would have been ... unfortunate.
Anyway, I'm just rambling now, so I'll draw this review of sorts to a close. Overall, four out of five stars. Two thumbs up. Definitely worth the $8.75 I shovelled out to see it on the big screen.

 

This was a very good movie if you take it only as a movie, and f**k history and reality out the window, the love story wasn't to badly done, at least Taka and Allgren didn't make love during the film, only slowly came to appreciate each other.

Also the sense of humour in the film was brilliant, Billy Connolly being of particular note, btw, he was possibly the best actor in the film =0).

And the action scenes were awesome.

The reality of it is, that when Algren was finally worn out, and had killed the warrior in red, they would probably have just given him an honourable death for being such a good warrior and leader, as he had shown them he was.

Still worth seeing though :bleed:

 

well its somewhat of a clever combination of two points in history, the first being the shipwrecking of the English Sailor...whose name escapes me at the moment. and the southwest war against Saigo Takimori. although there are mahor differences to say that this couldnt have happened is flawed. yes historically there is nothing recorded but this very easily could have happened. um...and as far as giving him an honorable death...probably not...hes is one of the "hairy barabarians" as all Europeans were called...yes he has the spirit of a warrior but still he was sent to wipe them out...most likely he would have been beheaded right there...besides which honorable suicide is not a European custom...more than likely after being given the blade to commit seppuku he would have attacked them with it....though a tanto, sharp none the less...still a considerable weapon. actually the tanto used in seppuku was developed from the need to have a short blade during hand to hand combat. since only samurai could carry swords a rich merchant would often sport a fancy tanto in his belt which was walking the line of showing off ones wealth and punishment.

 

That's pretty much what I meant to be honest. They'd have killed him on the spot in a way that they considered honourable.

And the fact that honourable death wasn't one of his traditions wouldn't have mattered, if it had mattered, they wouldn't be called him a hiary barbarian. They would have seen that he was simply living by differant cultural standards, and killed him anyways. No?

I don't know, or claim to know a lot about japenese culture and traditions, and coming out of the film, knew exactly the same amount as when I went in btw, but this is just the way it appears to me from my limited knowledge. :sweat2:

 

well, yes and no. well there are more differences then just death by honorable suicide. so even if they did use seppuku most likely they would still be known as hairy barbarians. obviously to a society ruled by honor and a strongly upheld caste system. a culture such as European will and did seem very barbaric. obviously huge differences appear between Japan and America/Europe. to start with in Europe the social system although in place wasnt upheld as much. per se, (if i remember correctly...my major is in Japan not Europe) a peasent could rise to power through perhaps a brave act to protect the king or what not. but in Japan a lower class person say a merchant or a corpse handler *eta* could not rise to power...it was simply impossible...the samurai were near the top of the social ladder had almost free reign over the working class. a samurai could kill a commoner without reprisal. although it was against the law for a samurai to draw his sword within a court or infront of the Shogun. other differences are in the women's place in the social system. In Europe i imagine the womens place being housewife or perhaps a maid or servent...as this is partially true to Japan, it cannot be called a major difference. however in the mid to late 1500's women were trained in the same arts as her husband aka the use of a sword, bow and pole arm that either being a yari or a naginata, and would ride into battle along side her husband. now this was to change later in the mid 1600's as it was no longer seen as a womens place to be on the battlefield rather as a housewife. even later in history it became that the women werent even allowed to touch their husbands swords with their bare skin. as for Europe becoming this restrictive is somewhat unimaginable. however Japanese people saw these odd customs such as, drinking unrestrained strange. one thing that was odd to the Japanese was prostitution. Although it existed in Japan's Red Light District it was much more of an refined thing. obviously its main point was sex, at the same time a Geisha was trained in many other arts such as conversation, music, art, and anything else that could help in the comfort of a man. so the prostitution of Europe and America would seem very...barbaric because of the fact that it was about nothing more than sex. so there are quite a few other differences that would still brand the European/Americans as "hairy Barbarians".

 

You're comparing Japan circa 1876 to western Europe 1100-1500. Allgren wasn't from Europe; he was from America. By the 1870's, there were already key differences between the Americans and their European ancestors. Being at war on and off with the British would do that to you, I guess.

 

well not really...to be exact most of my points are from 1500's japan...by 1876 Japan had already gone through a huge change...the Bakumatsu had already happened and Emporer Meiji was already in power. so most of my points at this period were not in effect. By 1876 the Samurai had no place in society, therefore the "Last Samurai" were the ones who refused the ban on swords. now understandably this would happen as one of the codes of the samurai was "To live by the sword is to die by the sword" which pretty much translates to if one lives by the sword one will be struck down by it or commiting seppuku. anyway, the social class system now did not exist and commoners had just as much power as the previous Daimyo. so to be exact my points are not from 1876, rather a much earlier point in history. as for Europe and America your right but then again im majoring in japanese history not Europes..so forgive my mistakes.

 

Hey, I meant no disrespect. I'm taking European history and not Japanese .
Let me rephrase my question then: Why are you using 16th century Japanese history as a frame of reference when the film was clearly set in 1876?
Anyway, it's probably not worth the argument. Just a good film, at any rate.

 

well more or less by the Bakumatsu not much had really changed...the reason being that over the last 300 years, Japan had been ruled by the same family line. so although Japan had drastically changed, the last 300 year before little change had come so, ive been more or less comparing 1500-1800's with 1876-1877.

 

I Stand Corrected

Like I said, I don't know Japanese history. All I've learned came from anime and and some Martha Stewart thing my mom made me watch once.

 

yeah well as I said somewhere in this thread my major is in Japanese history so...anyway...

 

Eh. You cant really complain. The Ninja scene really was the awesome.
They came, the attacked, they flipped out and chopped off some heads. Pure brilliance.

 

Well said, Fist. ^_^
So Gen-san, I see you finally saw the movie.
I thought it was good. There was one thing holding it back. Cause I think it really really lacked a good soundtrack. That would have just made the movie perfect. But it was still good. ^_^