Kurosawa’s Rashomon is a masterpiece on at least two levels: the use of deep focus photography combined with character blocking compositions (which rivals Citizen Kane– which is funny because Kane is also the film the subjective, unreliable narration, flashback structure is compared to) – and that aspect of Rashomon is probably overlooked because of the shock wave sent from the film’s audacious formal storytelling structure
This is description not a critique, but at 88 minutes Kurosawa would never again have this sort of brevity I believe (presumably because after this he could do more of what he wanted which leads me to believe he preferred the longer gestation of a lengthy running time)
A mediation on subjectivity, truth, man’s self-serving dog-eat-dog nature – “It is human to lie” in the text- the world is hell- Kurosawa’s nihilistic vision
the use of deep focus photography combined with character blocking compositions
Yet another triumph of Rashomon is the use of weather, the rain beating down on the three characters telling the story in flashback— through a series of shots Kurosawa gets closer and closer to the three, and then shoots Shimura in a powerful composition in the foreground. The rain would symbolically lift at the end of the film
through a series of shots Kurosawa gets closer and closer to the three at Rashomon, and then shoots Shimura in a powerful composition in the foreground
Rhythmic score from Fumio Hayasaka that helps set the pace
At the 8 minute mark we get the famous shot of the sun, I’ve made the mistake of attributing this to Malick (it’s a s reoccurring trait of Malick’s), Apichatpong Weerasethakul (and I’m not sure he’s seen the work of Kurosawa or Malick) but a stunner here—another shot of it hitting the sun at 31 minutes, formal work- and it’s not just a beautiful shot of course, but stresses the extreme heat, raised stakes and drama of the fateful day in the film
At the 8 minute mark we get the famous shot of the sun, I’ve made the mistake of attributing this to Malick (it’s a s reoccurring trait of Malick’s), Apichatpong Weerasethakul (and I’m not sure he’s seen the work of Kurosawa or Malick) but a stunner here—another shot of it hitting the sun at 31 minutes, formal work
The flashback structure has the characters kneeing in a stark setting (witnesses, true to Kurosawa’s form as an auteur who focuses on the various depths of field are in the background) and you can’t hear the judges, only the witnesses as they kneel and spout their subjectivity
The flashback structure has the characters kneeing in a stark setting (witnesses, true to Kurosawa’s form as an auteur who focuses on the various depths of field are in the background)
Kurosawa has some dazzling handheld tracking shots (as both as anything being done in B-movie noir at the time) pushing the camera through the woods and foliage
As mentioned in the opening the foreground/background compositions are easily the strongest in Kurosawa’s career to date (1300 glowing words from my man Ebert with nothing about this). Whether it is in the flashback or the three in the ruins of the Rashomon building in the rain Kurosawa is often playing with three figures in moving triangles and angles keeping everything, marvelously, in focus. One standout is the shot of Machiko Kyô in the foreground with her husband tied up to the tree in the background
Whether it is in the flashback or the three in the ruins of the Rashomon building in the rain Kurosawa is often playing with three figures in moving triangles and angles keeping everything, marvelously, in focus
It is tied to his work with subjectivity—but Kurosawa often with take the camera and subtlety hover it over a character’s shoulder – genius
Trivia here but often cited as the reason for the best foreign film category for the Academy award
Antonioni would master this sort of shot — using architecture in the frame- but do it a decade later
By the time the story gets to the medium- all jaws are on the floor—this is just boldness on top of boldness
Another perfect frame at 54 minutes with the husband in the background
Again this is easily Kurosawa’s most artistically ambitious film, painterly, even without the groundbreaking experimental narrative fracturing—the way he can just take three characters talking around a structure (a doomed structure with the heavens opening up on it until the sun breaks out at the end)—magnificent.
always the focus on foreground/background
the composition of the shot between Mifune’s legs at 69 minute
the composition of the shot between Mifune’s legs at 69 minute
I’ve gone on this long without talking about the performances- mainly Mifune— he’s solid in Stray Dog and Drunken Angel but this is revelatory. It’ is big, bold, primal—and you can’t take your eyes off him- just blowing everyone else off the screen
There is no answer in this film—Shimura’s own story is even upended. And of course you have the anti-sword fight to end all sword fights here absolutely demythologizing the nobility of violence
avant-garde in its innovative construction and Kurosawa’s compositions—yet thoroughly engaging
avant-garde in its innovative construction and Kurosawa’s compositions—yet thoroughly engaging
At 78 minutes you have a von Sternberg Blue Angel or Antonioni Red Desert (von Sternberg’s film isn’t in color so though both titles have color in their name this isn’t about color of course) tree branch obstructing the frame, breaking it apart with Mifune in the deep background
And just after that at 79 minutes the frame in the rain with the wood blocking the top half- gorgeous work- wall art in a museum quality and there are at least a dozen these in an 88 minute film
And just after that at 79 minutes the frame in the rain with the wood blocking the top half- gorgeous work- wall art in a museum quality and there are at least a dozen these in an 88 minute film
Great review as always, sadly this one has never worked for me, despite rewatches and research. I understand and respect the giant impact of the film, and enjoy the aesthetics of the temple sequences, but find other elements not to my taste, despite being a Kurosawa fan (High and Low, Seven Samurai are right up there for me).
@Ben Morley – thank for the kind words on my review and for visiting the site. I’m excited to continue the Kurosawa study here and to get to Seven Samurai and High and Low among others.
There’s not much to add. Terrific review of one of the greatest of all films. I like how you open by pointing out that the film would be a masterpiece solely on the basis of its exquisite visual style. And the film would also be a masterpiece solely on the basis of its brilliant and revolutionary narrative technique. But Rashomon has both… and that’s a rare thing. Throw in one of the decade’s defining performances from Mifune, and you’re more or less left with perfection.
As much as I like Drunken Angel (a great deal) and love Stray Dog, Rashomon represents a major leveling up for Kurosawa, and ushers in one of the greatest decades (15 year stretch really) from any director in history, and my choice for the very best. I’m excited to follow your journey through it!
@Matt Harris – appreciate the nice words on my page here. It is extremely rare for a film to be such an accomplishment on two levels like this. I thought about it often with Ozu the way he’d edit a film with his trademark cutaway pillow shots to create a rhythm and then, of course, how he would stage and frame each setting. Kurosawa’s triumph here is different but on that level- clearly two of the all-time greats. And yes- as good as Stray Dog or Drunken Angel is this where you stop saying “talent” (think about how people use that word to describe like an athlete) when describing Kurosawa–(no longer like an up and comer)– this is his arrival.
You say “at.least two levels” and I’d say a strong case could be made for editing as a third. That case is even stronger for Seven Samurai, but Rashomon is also a remarkably well edited film. I refer not only to the editing on a structural level, where the brilliance of the narrative and of the editing go hand in hand, but also in the way Kurosawa seemlessly stitches together all the incredible tracking shots in the woods, and constructs the action. In the commentary, Donald Richie makes the claim that only Eisenstein understood the relationship of one shot to another like Kurosawa did, and while I’m sure fair arguments could be made for other filmmakers between Eisenstein and Kurosawa, that statement at least speaks to the caliber of editing on display.
@Aldo– I typically think of editing, camera movement, what’s in front of the frame (typically referred to as mise-en-scene), and film form — they’re often tied together.
@Matt Harris– interesting. I think of him as master of editing in action sequences, and of course the trademark wipe editing- something to keep an eye on as I move along here.
James Trapp
September 17, 2021 at 12:07 pm - Reply
Is there a name for the sun shot? It is such a magnificent shot it deserves a name if it does not have one already.
Another viewing got me thinking…you sometimes talk about architecture as character in film, Red Desert (1964) for example.
What about weather as character? The rain in Rashomon feels about as central to our experience watching it as the architecture in Red Desert. Maybe I’m way off base here, just a thought.
@James-Trapp – I think you’re totally right. Not only that, but also how it destroys the gate that separates the town from the forest, and how the commoner breaks off pieces of the gate and burns them. Very complex, but very rewarding.
If you had to guess, do you think you will be moving Rashomon up or down on your top 500?
Great review as always, sadly this one has never worked for me, despite rewatches and research. I understand and respect the giant impact of the film, and enjoy the aesthetics of the temple sequences, but find other elements not to my taste, despite being a Kurosawa fan (High and Low, Seven Samurai are right up there for me).
@Ben Morley – thank for the kind words on my review and for visiting the site. I’m excited to continue the Kurosawa study here and to get to Seven Samurai and High and Low among others.
There’s not much to add. Terrific review of one of the greatest of all films. I like how you open by pointing out that the film would be a masterpiece solely on the basis of its exquisite visual style. And the film would also be a masterpiece solely on the basis of its brilliant and revolutionary narrative technique. But Rashomon has both… and that’s a rare thing. Throw in one of the decade’s defining performances from Mifune, and you’re more or less left with perfection.
As much as I like Drunken Angel (a great deal) and love Stray Dog, Rashomon represents a major leveling up for Kurosawa, and ushers in one of the greatest decades (15 year stretch really) from any director in history, and my choice for the very best. I’m excited to follow your journey through it!
@Matt Harris – appreciate the nice words on my page here. It is extremely rare for a film to be such an accomplishment on two levels like this. I thought about it often with Ozu the way he’d edit a film with his trademark cutaway pillow shots to create a rhythm and then, of course, how he would stage and frame each setting. Kurosawa’s triumph here is different but on that level- clearly two of the all-time greats. And yes- as good as Stray Dog or Drunken Angel is this where you stop saying “talent” (think about how people use that word to describe like an athlete) when describing Kurosawa–(no longer like an up and comer)– this is his arrival.
You say “at.least two levels” and I’d say a strong case could be made for editing as a third. That case is even stronger for Seven Samurai, but Rashomon is also a remarkably well edited film. I refer not only to the editing on a structural level, where the brilliance of the narrative and of the editing go hand in hand, but also in the way Kurosawa seemlessly stitches together all the incredible tracking shots in the woods, and constructs the action. In the commentary, Donald Richie makes the claim that only Eisenstein understood the relationship of one shot to another like Kurosawa did, and while I’m sure fair arguments could be made for other filmmakers between Eisenstein and Kurosawa, that statement at least speaks to the caliber of editing on display.
Would you be so kind as to tell me how many levels are there? And some movies
@Aldo– I typically think of editing, camera movement, what’s in front of the frame (typically referred to as mise-en-scene), and film form — they’re often tied together.
@Matt Harris– interesting. I think of him as master of editing in action sequences, and of course the trademark wipe editing- something to keep an eye on as I move along here.
Is there a name for the sun shot? It is such a magnificent shot it deserves a name if it does not have one already.
Another viewing got me thinking…you sometimes talk about architecture as character in film, Red Desert (1964) for example.
What about weather as character? The rain in Rashomon feels about as central to our experience watching it as the architecture in Red Desert. Maybe I’m way off base here, just a thought.
@James Trapp- I think you’re spot on here actually
@James-Trapp – I think you’re totally right. Not only that, but also how it destroys the gate that separates the town from the forest, and how the commoner breaks off pieces of the gate and burns them. Very complex, but very rewarding.
@James – Drake mentions this himself at the end of his review of Kurosawa’s The Idiot.
@Zane – interesting, this is one of the few Kurosawa films I still have to see
[…] Rashomon– Kurosawa […]