Kurosawa’s Dostoevsky adaptation was taken from him by the Shochiku studio and cut down from his version (running nearly 4 ½ hours apparently) to the 166 minute version that survives
Even before his Shakespeare works (and he’s the greatest adapter of The Bard cinema has seen though I’d listen to an argument for Welles I guess) Kurosawa had an interest in adapting the great works of literature
a shot — even in 1951– that has become a staple in Kurosawa’s work– a master of using character blocking to design his frame
Has both titles and a narrator early in the film which is exhausting exposition and bad form- I have to think this is because of the Shochiku studio cutting it down—both declaring clearly that this is a “faithless world” as always in Kurosawa’s worldview – a “world full of wolves” at some point in the text
The actors on display are terrific- not only Mifune and Shimura, but Setsuko Hara (Ozu’s muse) comes off very well- a great actress
Overall there are great shots (at the seven minute mark a picture of Hara with two men reflected off the glass window framing her) and cinematic moments but too few and far between, especially for such a long film. Unless the studio cut out nearly 2 hours of cinematic bliss I don’t see this being counted alongside the great butchered films like Greed, The Magnificent Ambersons, or even A Star Is Born from Cukor
there are great shots —at the seven minute mark a picture of Hara with two men reflected off the glass window framing her
At 33 minutes Hara is in the foreground kneeling with the two rivals behind her in the frame
Long stylistically quiet stretches of speechmaking
The snow covered bridge shot and sequence at 90 minutes is a standout
The snow covered bridge shot and sequence at 90 minutes is a standout
The icicles blocking and obstructing the frame on the right at 131 minutes
At 151 minutes both male leads are lined up in parallel, Mifune in the background facing left and
Even before his Shakespeare works (and he’s the greatest adapter of The Bard cinema has seen though I’d listen to an argument for Welles I guess) Kurosawa had an interest in adapting the great works of literature
True to Kurosawa’s oeuvre the weather is a character- this is a relentless winter
I don’t have much of a bone to pick with you here. I’ve got The Idiot ranked 8th of Kurosawa’s films from the decade ahead of only Scandal. I think I found more to admire visually with it than you spotlight here, but it is really disjointed and you’re dead on about how painful all the text cards, seemingly stuck in place of the footage the studio took out, are. I’ve heard it described as a failed effort in some quarters and as a shattered masterpiece in others (with the Venus Di Milo missing its arms used as analogy). Not sure where I fall on that, I’ll have to revisit it someday. That it comes immediately after Rashomon, and immediately before Ikiru and Seven Samurai makes me want to believe the latter. As do the stories of Kurosawa searching through studio vaults late in life trying to recover what they cut. I guess we’ll never know.
@Matt Harris— it’s always a sad when someone the talent of Kurosawa has control taken away. I’m not going to compare it to his other 1950 films as they’re ahead of me yet in this study aside from Rashomon (and that’s no comparison) but I’d take at least 3-4 of his 1940’s films over this.
I don’t have much of a bone to pick with you here. I’ve got The Idiot ranked 8th of Kurosawa’s films from the decade ahead of only Scandal. I think I found more to admire visually with it than you spotlight here, but it is really disjointed and you’re dead on about how painful all the text cards, seemingly stuck in place of the footage the studio took out, are. I’ve heard it described as a failed effort in some quarters and as a shattered masterpiece in others (with the Venus Di Milo missing its arms used as analogy). Not sure where I fall on that, I’ll have to revisit it someday. That it comes immediately after Rashomon, and immediately before Ikiru and Seven Samurai makes me want to believe the latter. As do the stories of Kurosawa searching through studio vaults late in life trying to recover what they cut. I guess we’ll never know.
@Matt Harris— it’s always a sad when someone the talent of Kurosawa has control taken away. I’m not going to compare it to his other 1950 films as they’re ahead of me yet in this study aside from Rashomon (and that’s no comparison) but I’d take at least 3-4 of his 1940’s films over this.
[…] The Idiot – Kurosawa […]