The female actor, Machiko Kyo, in the film died of heart failure a few days ago at the age of 95. RIP

@kijekuyo9494

4 жыл бұрын

I thought it was remarkable when I realized she was still alive a couple of years ago. She was from a long ago era in a world far away in time and distance in a movie that seems as historical as Beethoven's music.

@NGRevenant

2 жыл бұрын

@@kijekuyo9494 rashomon wasn't even 40 years old when I was born it wasn't _that_ long ago

"It has existed in literature a long time" - shows books that have been written after Rashomon.

@22freedom33

8 жыл бұрын

+Leon Thomas It would still be more coherent to actually use pictures of examples wirtten before Rashmon since you state "It has existed in literature a long time" as the pictures appear on screen, something the audience will convey as those works being examples.

@globalcombattv

6 жыл бұрын

Yeah but why didn't you show examples of literature written before Rashomon? Good analysis though.

When I finally saw Kurosawa's 1940s films I understood Rashomon in a new way. What is "worse than floods, worse than plague"? Living in a world where there is no honor. All those earlier movies are about the importance of honor.

Another great Rashomon tribute to add to the list would be the "Who Got Dee Pregnant?" episode of It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, which they even said in the commentary is exactly the plot of Rashomon. Great stuff as always, Leon! :)

finally watched this after years thanks to the Chaz Cardigan song, and quickly knew i needed to see a video essay on it. thanks, Renegade Cut from *checks watch* eight years ago

While it is clear that Rashomon is a story told from four different perceptions, pondering the truth of an evil deed, if you just assume it is a movie demonstrating such, I admit, I get confused. If the testimony is meant to promote the lies particular to each party, the trial doesn't make sense. The bandit is his chief prosecutor, arguing that he alone is the guilty party, and attempting to sidestep potentially exculpating (you would think that it would be obvious whether the death wound was by dagger or sword) evidence. The Samorai and his wife, instead testify in his defense, and try to argue that they are brought out events to satisfy their own needs. The choice of having the Samorai testify through a medium seems first like a chance to hear the bandit called out for his trickery and cruelty, but instead, the vengeful ghost's most vehement line is: "I did it". He's more angry at his wife. Why does a ghost go out of his way to express his own evil? Isn't Rashomon saying something more than just that we have four personal viewpoints, or that memory is inconsistent or subjective, and is instead saying that , in the case of a sexual crime, in a strict and feudal society where power, place, and honor are more important than truth, humility, or mercy, that the viewpoints will change, not to exculpate oneself from the usual judgement of the law, but to defend one's agency and standing in society. The wife, not exactly married by choice or love, is more willing to seem a harlot than accepting that she is twice a victim. The bandit wants you to think his whole murdering and raping thing was something he planned and wanted. The Samorai freely admits he blames his wife more than the bandit for what transposed, and would rather claim he did not lose, however pitiful or skillfully, in battle, so thus he stabbed himself. You blame the woodcutter for not testifying. But what was he to testify? Trials are meant to decide a criminal guilt, not to assess the truth. The woodcutter's testimony would have only led to the same judgement, a bandit killed a Samorai, and why does the fact that it might have been a fair-ish fight matter? (The bandit was going to hang for claiming he beat the Samorai sword to sword, so if the fight was sucky, what does that do to affect the trial?) The woodcutter's story would only have broken the three facades that the wife, Samorai, and bandit had set up to defend their standing (not a facade aruging that they innocent/good people, but a facade arguing they are strong/fully-rational people). And the woodcutter, having the lowest feudal standing of all, would be the most to blame for defaming the name of higher caste citizens who are more concerned with society knowing they acted strongly, rather than that they were defeated through their weaknesses. So I have a hard time understanding how Rashomon compares to something like Vantage Point or the Star Trek episode, since the latter two were about showing how participants in a trial hide their guilt, while Rashomon was about how participants will go out of their way to exaggerate it.

@ILoveHuskies1

7 жыл бұрын

I agree with you, your explanation seems much more likely to be true than what was said in the video. After watching the movie and understanding it better, I still think that 12 Angry Men is better at portraying eye-witness faults although it seems that both movies focus on a certain type of bias, Rashomon with the caste system and 12 Angry men with Racism. Also, I really didn't like the philosophical tangent that the OP went in. I don't think that there is anything particularly selfless about the woodcutter adopting the kid, as he could be doing it as just a way to assuage his guilt. I certainly don't think that it "disproves" the idea that a society couldn't function without selflessness.

@RabbitShirak

4 жыл бұрын

Alan Lenarcic Samurai

@42kellys

4 жыл бұрын

Alan, I like very much your comment and your thoughts on the matter. You raised valuable concerns and I tend to agree with you. All of these parties were saving their faces. The whole film hinges on saving face. It is not the act of murder or killing that counts, it is merely the instrument propelling the story telling. I think the social standing and the hierarchy is also important. I agree that a trial does not seek for the truth and cares less for the witness of a person of the lowest class. In Japan some hundred years earlier peasants had no say. Nobody asked them they were invisible for the higher classes. They had to work and serve them and die if they disobeyed or showed no repsect. There was no consideration and their words meant nothing and they were not even asked most of the times. In a case of a samurai no peasant had a right to say anything. So, I agree with what you say there, that what he had to say meant nothing for this questioning to establish the facts necessary for the sentence. But when we see the perspecitve of the bandit and the woman and the final story of the woodcutter, the samurai sadly is a weak, cowardly person. Obviously, in his own testimony he tried to save his face and he claimed he did what a real samurai would have, if humiliated and shamed. Suicide. Of course, without a swordsman he would not try the traditional seppuku, but a stab to finish his life would have been understandable to the audience knowing the Japanese culture. So, we understand that since he is dead all his concern is to just clear his name and save his face, so people would not think him to be shamlessly cowardly. As for the wife it is complex, because she had the most complex role and the most complex motivation in the whole story. She was raped and we do not know it is not said whether she also was a samurai, likely not, she had no indication of that, but rape or a rape even if it were turned into some kind of giving into and rather being seduced at the end, was anyway a shame one cannot easliy wipe out. So, she needed somehow to tell us her part in a way that we could understand her, and in a way she lost the least face.

I'm glad that you touched Kurosawa's obsession toward the lights & the shadows in this film. Considering the equipments that they may've used at time, those images supposedly taken a place in the deep forest still captivate my imaginations !!!

I think this is your best episode so far.

3 TV shows that employ this beautifully : MAMAS FAMILY-"Rashamama", THE X FILES-"Bad blood" and SUPERNATURAL--"Tall tales"

great review. I think in the movie the character that I loved the most was the priest because it felt like I saw a reflection of me

This was a great and very interesting analysis.

I love this movie.

Keep it going, man!!! Excelent work!

@anthonycitizencain

6 жыл бұрын

great stuff thanks a

I had to keep going back to 3:12. So beautiful to watch...

Impressive movie, great analysis!

Great review Leon. I've wanted to see Rashomon for awhile now but haven't gotten around to it. This review is a reminder that I really should. Also, I didn't get the Simpsons joke until after I finished the video. LOL

we the audience is the judge of whats realy is the in our own acceptance and understanding... u notice in the movie that the judge doesnt show in the screen but only him.. qnd you also notice that they are directly talking to us.... bcoz its up to us... we are the judge

great !

This is great! Though, Kurasawa has planted the answer to what really happened. Watch the Rashomon Solved video.

I've always sympathized with the bandit (yes as bad as he could be) for he, if he were guilty of murder, felt horrible enough that he decided to tell of the man's death as if he died in proud combat, showing great skill against an equal, instead of what might be reality, that being the two of them being INCREDIBLY pathetic but the bandit comes out on top.

@Drforrester31

3 жыл бұрын

That's an interesting take. I always saw it as Tajomaru trying to convince people he's a great fighter, but in flashbacks we see that's far from the case. Just pointing out the unreliable narrator idea even more

Thank youtube . Thanks for the Memory movies

It's not how I remember this movie.

You should talk about some earlier films of Dario Argento or Mario bava

@daltorthedestroyer2016

8 жыл бұрын

+Leon Thomas I understand, I guess I mean it as more of a suggestion, no worries if don't. However, I'm kind of against patreon as a general rule. I will still support you through my subscription and views though.

The plot about bandit and a couple is actually based on a novel "Yabu no naka (In the bushes)" not the namesake Rashomon. Unreliable narrator technique had such an impact, that nowadays saying something is "Yabu no naka" is a common phrase in Japanese language. ex: So who was telling the truth, the husband, the wife, or the bandit? I guess it is Yabu no naka(in the bushes=unknowable).

Is that Ludovico Einaudi playing in the background?

(I might be wrong here, but) I don't think light is used as a metaphor for hope in Japanese the way it is used in English, yet looking/grasping at the sun as a symbol of futile hope keeps popping up in Japanese things I watch. I wonder why. Could be accidental though; a lot of the works I see it in are inspired by Evangelion, which used it for it's own internal reason (the character in question was visually associated with the sun to begin with and hands was an important motif for the show and film representing possibility, action and choice or the lack of any of those). So both Rashomon and Evangelion might have used it to mean the same thing, but for different reason, and from then on it just stuck around as a visual short-hand.

The production values are increasing, i would keep opening to other media besides cinema.

@lobachevscki

8 жыл бұрын

+Leon Thomas Hi!, i actually follow you since a year now, that's why I could say that the production values are increasing. I do wish you can literally open to other media, but that wasn't what i meant, this is the first time that i can recall you even use other media to compare, even for just a little. That's awesome because you are actually making your point even clearer, and covering a lot more of you focus subject without increasing runtime or effort. I come to your channel for narrative analysis that i can bring to my field of work, which is game development. In that regard, you sure have a audience more heterogeneous that you might think. Your analysis are wide open enough that including a few references from other media helps a big chunk of your audience already. You don't have to change if you don't want, but now that i think is clear what I meant I would say you could keep opening to ther media. In any case, keep the good work. Cheers!

This was apparently the inspiration for the "How Kylo Ren Became Evil" flashback in Star Wars Episode VIII: The Last Jedi, where there were 3 conflicting versions of the same event.

What is music playing in background at 8:30 ?

What about the supernatural elements of the film? the women how can speak for the dead husband is just a reflection of folklore and cultural differences or kusawa purposely put that in there to make a statement about that too

mifune💐

Was the bandit over-acting?

羅生門

Love the analysis! Good commentary on a brilliant movie. My 2 cents on the "no good people" thing - Actually, that's a major tenet of Christianity. "No one is righteous, no not one" - only God/Christ is righteous. People aren't good, but there is an objective good outside of ourselves, a standard, which is God. And yes, you can certainly build a society on that concept. Most of America's founding fathers were Christians or at least influenced by Christian ethics, which is one we reason we have so many checks and balances in our system, because they believed that people are inherently "not good".

Ra(t)-show-mon (not "rhashamon") has a more unreliable narrator than the book (Yabu no Naka "In a thicket"/in confusion -- I see that the translation is in a grove, but that loses the confused nature of "yabu") upon which it was based, since the book suggests that the shaman's version of the duel was erm "privileged," but in the filim, every flashback was equal. I think that this is why the listeners under the gate (this part is taken from another short story indeed called "Rashoumon") end up by saying, "that is really scary".

8:00 I see fundamental problem that "being bad" does not mean acting in self-interest, I mean, I can act selfishly but doing "good deeds", doctors want to get paycheck that is reason why he heal people etc. ... "hmm it´s almost like morality is bit complex then being good or bad, who would tough that"

Nice opinion. I just disagree with the final statement the most. Life does have a meaning. Perhaps it does not have one for Kurosawa or some other people but in reality it has a meaning. Life though only has a meaning, if one believes that there is a God who is the Supreme Intelligence and the Supreme Good. If not, I guess I would agree life has no meaning only a sequence; birth, growing, procreation and death. I also think that the woodcutter's final story is the realistic one, because he had no reason to hide the truth from strangers he would not meet again. As for the comparison with other films I have not seen them so I cannot say anything about that.