Ozu made two versions of the story of floating weeds, one at the beginning of his career in 1934 and one at the end in 1959. That the same story is adapted to the screen multiple times ia no exception. That the same director revisits the same story happens far less frequent. I know two other examples. Cecil B. DeMille made two versions of "The ten commandments" (1923 and 1956) and Alfred Hitchcock filmed "The man who knew too much" twice (1934 and 1956)
"Floating weeds" is in Japan a nickname for travelling vaudeville performers. In the film a travelling man visits (regularly) his old love when his theater company is in her town. He plays the uncle of her son, while in reality he is his father.
As all Ozu films, "floating weeds" is about family relations, in this film particularly about the relation of the man with his nephew/son and with his former love. The former love is still dreaming of living together with the man. At last the man seems to give in, but one wonders how sincere this desire is, as his theater company is goint through hard times commercially. The suspicions of opportunism are confirmed when at the first collision with his son (the man has finally told him the truth) he runs away.
The 1959 is in color (one of the few Ozu films in color), but in my opinion that is not the most fundamental difference. The most fundamental difference is the character of the former lover. In the 1934 version she is broken by the dissappearance of the man now the fulfilment of her dream had seemed so close. In the 1959 version she reacts more laconic. After so many years she knows the father of her son better than he knows himself.
"Floating weeds" is in Japan a nickname for travelling vaudeville performers. In the film a travelling man visits (regularly) his old love when his theater company is in her town. He plays the uncle of her son, while in reality he is his father.
As all Ozu films, "floating weeds" is about family relations, in this film particularly about the relation of the man with his nephew/son and with his former love. The former love is still dreaming of living together with the man. At last the man seems to give in, but one wonders how sincere this desire is, as his theater company is goint through hard times commercially. The suspicions of opportunism are confirmed when at the first collision with his son (the man has finally told him the truth) he runs away.
The 1959 is in color (one of the few Ozu films in color), but in my opinion that is not the most fundamental difference. The most fundamental difference is the character of the former lover. In the 1934 version she is broken by the dissappearance of the man now the fulfilment of her dream had seemed so close. In the 1959 version she reacts more laconic. After so many years she knows the father of her son better than he knows himself.