This is truly a classic in the history of film. This was the first time I have seen it, as I hadn't ever really gotten into Kurosawa despite knowing a little about his work (primarily Seven Samurai) and hearing his name mentioned as one of the top directors of all time.
Rashomon offers a great philosophical dilema. The movie begins with three men seeking shelter from the rain in a dilapidated building. The priest and woodcutter have just been witness to the trial of the notorious bandit Tajomaru and are retelling the tale. The story is quite simple. A samurai and his wife were traveling through the woods when confronted by Tajomaru. The woman is violated and her husband ends up dead. The dilema comes from the retelling of the story, as three different witnesses, the bandit, the wife and the dead husband (through a medium), all relay conflicting accounts of what occurred. Whose story is to be believed? How was the samurai killed? Why are there such drastic differences in the three versions of the same event? The final straw comes when the woodcutter reveals that he actually was present in the woods throughout the entire affair. When his account of the events offers a fourth version, we are struck with the complexity of what should be a simple straight-forward crime story. The earnestness of the woodcutter, along with the fact that the whole story of the trial is coming from him (with the priest as a corroborator), makes it difficult to question the validity of his account. However, when it is revealed that he hasn't been entirely truthful about every detail, a whole array of larger questions arise about perception, subjectivity, partiality, point-of-view and memory. I can clearly understand why this movie is considered a classic. And, I also wonder why today's movie-making industry doesn't generate many films that invoke mental contemplation from its viewers. Is film losing its place as an artform and becoming solely a commodity?
No comments:
Post a Comment