5/10
2.14.2024
14 February 2024
Akira Kurosawa made it for his wife and the second of his career. But I didn't expect it to be a huge hit and totally hard to chew on.

Militaristic overtones aside, the drama in this one can be held up as mediocre and uninspired, and aside from Akira Kurosawa's own brilliant audiovisual approach, it can almost be described as a disaster of a film. If you compare it to the emotional evocation of the characters in the film, you can't beat Bergman at all, and if you compare it to what poetry there is in the dull plot of a boring movie, you can't beat Tarkovsky. This is not a comment on its militaristic overtones, but rather on the actual lack of performance. But I'm still a little shocked by the use of jump cuts even before Godard.

But if you look at it in terms of the film's inherent thoughtfulness, it's a total loss. All of the women's "beauty" in the film is predicated on a militaristic context, and any discussion of beauty under this premise becomes a reproduction of militarism over and over again. What is even more unbearable is the one-sided and empty image of women in the film, worthy of a male director to write women's movies, is it only Antonioni in this point can be a little bit to restore the status of the male director's posture.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed