|Page 1 of 2:|| |
|Index||18 reviews in total|
The tale of Myamoto Musashi - thief, lover, rogue, then warrior, hero
and master - is enshrined in Japanese culture, perfect showcase
material as it were. It has been adapted more than once to the screen,
and Inagaki's classy, colorful version is perhaps the best known. It is
everything you'd expect from a period samurai film if you've never seen
one and harbor no negative preconceptions.
After a playful first part that has a classic hero's journey structure, part II takes things to the next level without having to rush to the finish, and is the more interesting film. It allows the hero to wield his newfound power without the restraint and inner peace he will later find. It allows him the get mad, and nobody does unleashed fury like Toshiro Mifune, not when you throw 80+ armed fools in this way.
I chose to review this one because it is a good sample of the very best this trilogy accomplishes: compelling archetypical characters, lush cinematography and that "oriental" elegance that always seduces non-Japanese audiences, drawn in as they are by the very universal plot and character dynamics.
I cannot put it in the same leagues as the masterpieces of Kurosawa, Ozu and Kobayashi, but if it is to be a gateway film experience, then it is a bloody good one, and laudable for what it accomplishes.
You might really enjoy this, and if you do, it's just the beginning!
The great cast that was in Musashi Miyamoto, the first part of this
samurai trilogy continues in the second part with a few additions.
By this time Musashi Miyamoto has been on the road for three years and is still learning. The most important lesson as a Samurai will not be learned until the film is almost over. Another important lesson comes quickly after that, and it will interesting to see how it plays out in the final part.
In the opening Musashi Miyamoto is doing battle with a samurai similar to our buddy Hanzo. They are the only two I have ever seen use chains.
After this he heads to Kyoto to do battle with the best in the capital, and also to get himself mixed up with the two women who are in love with him.
Love, fickleness, treachery, rape, revenge, honor, and great sword fighting all have a place in this magnificent film.
The amazing cinematography and scenery also place an important part.
This is truly a samurai classic.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
"Duel at Ichijoji Temple" is one of the greatest samurai films I have
seen. It is the second part of the trilogy about Japan's most famous
and arguably greatest swordsman Miyamoto Musashi, author of the book
"Five rings". Mifune is again superb as the lone wolf hero who is torn
between his love to the orphan girl Otsu and his own samurai call. Koji
Tsuruta was unknown to me before this and was a pleasant surprise as
the charming, ambitious and cunning Kojiro Sasaki, who later becomes
Musashi's principal rival. Daisuke Kato, one of the Seven Samurai,
makes a fun appearance as one of the most loathsome characters in the
movie and the trilogy.The actresses playing Akemi and Otsu were quite
impressive as well.
Hiroshi Inagaki was a highly capable director and proves that clearly here. His attempt to cross swordfighting action with melodrama works very well. The photography is excellent and is one of the real treats of this movie. The scenery was even more spectacular in the third film, but here it doesn't disappoint either. The ending might disappoint those waiting for a happy end and to see Musashi and Otsu get together at last. It is a bit of a letdown, but it also makes you more eager to see the third and final part. There is nothing to criticize here, those who do are missing the point and shouldn't have seen the film in the first place.10/10
The first part of the trilogy was setting up the story, visually
resplendent but leaves you out in the open. In this second part the
direction is solidified. Musashi is set up to choose between the way of
the sword or love for the girl Otsu, while having to face his nemesis,
foreshadowed for the closing chapter.
What puts me off this second chapter, which I rate the lowest of the three, is that we had a set of characters in the first film, and suddenly we have another set of characters. The film revolves around his feud with the Yoshioki school.
So in a way, this loose narrative foreshadows the third chapter. As it emerges in this second film, the film is not one long epic split in three parts. Neither is each of these first two films self-enclosed. The narrative is a loose stitching together of episode and digress, thrust and feint in many directions; observant viewers will notice the same in the elliptical shooting mode.
I will not say more about this as a film since we are still halfway there, instead let's look at some context around the film, here on the fluidity of self.
This is a core precept of Buddhism, which features prominently in the films; Musashi receives key lessons by monks, his journey is one of self-realization, internal abating of ego.
This fluidity is seen in the transmission and establishment of Buddhism in Japan over several hundred years through several attempts, several travels of Japanese monks in China. Both notable Zen schools in Japan were initiated by monks of the Tendai sect who had been to China. The film's main two centerpieces take place outside Buddhist temples (one is referenced in the title, the other is Sanjusangen-do), both belonging to Tendai. The Sanjusangen-do, a marvelous structure, is also famous for housing one thousand and one statues of the thousand armed Kannon, the boddhisatva of compassion. The little wooden statuette that Musashi is seen carving in spots is of Kannon.
Now simply saying that the self is illusory sounds weird, metaphysical or philosophical at best. Buddhists have many of the same lofty words as we do, about 'void' and 'self', but whereas we're accustomed to theoretical construction and analytical philosophy (we love words in the West), they resort to words as a last means of describing a practicealso evident in Musashi's own writings where he stresses experiential appreciation.
So when they say 'void', they don't mean a generality but something which can be felt, has been felt, as one feels the temperature of water. When they say 'self', they mean when a single thought arises while you're washing the dishes.
It's a pain in the ass to talk of it, because how can you say exactly how warm it is? It either is to you or isn't. Stick your hand in. Zen Masters (as well as Musashi whose 'Way of strategy' is Zen-flavored) knew this, which is why they loved paradox, urged silence or beat and kicked their students when they asked logical questions. The point is to know for yourself. A similar thing happens to Musashi in the first film when he is tied by a Zen monk from a tree, a fictional event.
This monk, Takuan, existed; though his interactions with Musashi in the film are fiction, presumably he did know Musashi. He wrote on this business of illusion and nonself using sword metaphors, because the writings were intended for Yagyu Munenori, sword instructor to three shoguns and with Musashi the most famous swordsman in his day. Munenori briefly appears in the third film.
Munenori and Musashi both wrote books with background in all this. Both are still being widely read in the martial arts and business worlds, by people looking for insights on real or metaphorical war.
Musashi's first four books comprise technique and strategy. The last one and shortest, Book of the Void, which is held in separate esteem, probably because of the portentous title, is where Musashi speaks of the Zen void as deeper principleit should be the most interesting but isn't, Musashi's practical conveyance falls short. No, it's the books on strategy that deserve study once you look past hand-to-hand combat, at least for our purposes here.
Suffice to say, both Zen and Musashi urge direct observation of mind instead of general reasoning. Suffice to say, from the perspective of Zen a Kannon statue is no more sacred than the piece of wood it was carved from. And that the act of carving is the manifestation of self, this can be practically observed in the carved imageis it sloppy, elegant? This is important. So neither spoken word, nor teachings in a book, nor sacred image, nor Zen or not Zen, but observation of the mind behind. I'm going to wrap this in the third post.
"Miyamoto Musashi" was already a great movie but this movie is even a
better one on basically every front.
This movie is part of a real trilogy, that follows one story and one main character. It's therefore also best to watch these 3 movies in a row, to appreciate it best. All 3 movies closely follow each other, in which the first movie is being really used as a movie to set up things, while this second movie is mostly being used to build up to its climax that will occur in the third movie.
This time the movie flows better because the story gets used better as well. Like mentioned earlier, the first movie was still being mostly a setup movie for the series. In this movie we actually get to see more epic moments and fights, as it follows the further travels of Musashi Miyamoto, on his way to become a master-swordsman. Its story and different characters all work out nicely, as things also gets developed more, with its drama and romance.
There are a couple of really great fight sequences, of course mostly featuring Toshirô Mifune. It makes the movie often exciting to watch, as does the overall look for the movie. The movie benefits from its beautiful natural environments, as well as some nicely done studio work. Using color wasn't quite that common yet for '50's Japanese cinema, since it was quite costly and not as advanced yet as in the western world. However color had always worked out nicely for these three movies and it helps to make the movie a really great looking one. You also have to give credit for this to the movie its cinematography, done by Jun Yasumoto, who strangely enough worked on just the first two movies but didn't shot the third and final one.
A movie that really has everything in it.
This comment about the "Samurai Trilogy" starts on the page for Miyamoto Musashi (Samurai I). My first viewing of the second episode was memorable because I got to take the train into town all by myself, and view it in a Tokyo theater. The first episode had just been shown on base, in a sort of cultural exchange, and my parents saw it and were pleasantly non-outraged-- I was a 9-year-old samurai-movie addict, and they believed enthusiasm beyond a certain intensity should be curbed. It was the same conflict as comic books some few years earlier. Technicolor was a big deal back then, especially in Japan, and it became the issue on which my viewing of "swordfighting movies" was decided-- the ones in color were historical films worth viewing, and even had something to teach. The black-and-white ones shown in Irumagawa and surrounding villages-- I had to sneak off to see. Ichijoji no Ketto (Duel at Ichijoji Temple) shows Miyamoto-san's achievements, while barring no holds on the issue of what they cost him. The romantic subplot continues, though its development in the western sense (toward union, wedded bliss) is thwarted at every turn. The issue is always a conflict between love and duty, and each deferment of gratification spells out a new step in the redefinition of the national character that is being mapped here. Again, some of the importance of all this is lost, even to modern Japanese audiences for whom the issues are long settled-- at the time, though, they were cliffhangers. A new character is introduced, Kojiro Sasaki who will emerge in part 3 as a rival for Musashi-- his equal except for certain features in their respective character. By the way, the score is excellent and haunting-- it extends like a symphony through all three parts, and has a leitmotif "hook" that will cause your ears to pick up in recognition, perhaps years from now, when you hear it again.
I've watched the entire trilogy of the Musashi Miyamoto films, of which
film is the second part. The first film, titled simply "Musashi
introduces us to the characters of this and the third film. Without
seen the first film and developing some interest in the welfare of the
characters, I certainly wouldn't have sat through the second and third
"Duel at Ichijoji Temple," this film, deals with Musashi's exploits as a sort of samurai knight-errant, seeking glory in a very ambiguous and roundabout way. Two women are trailing after him, as Kurosawa films would say, "like goldfish dung." Musashi himself is a flat character on whom Toshiro Mifune's acting skills are wasted. He displays very little emotion or intellect, despite his supposed interest in one of the women and enlightening education by his monk teacher (as we saw in the first film).
If Musashi is flat, the female characters are steamrolled. Their hand wringing, collapsing, and sobbing is typical of American movies of this time period and grows tedious in a samurai film. Having seen other films from this time period set in the days of samurai, I've seen that much more can be done with female characters. The plot was likewise predictable and slow-moving.
If you don't care about characters or plot, the high points of the movie may compensate: beautiful color landscapes and Toshiro Mifune's thrilling fight scenes. Otherwise, I recommend films by Kurosawa or Mizoguchi ("Sanjuro," the mysterious "Ugetsu") over this trilogy. 5/10
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
The second installment opens up with a duel. Musashi arrives at a sight
early at dawn and encounters a stubborn young child. The opening
samurai duel sets the stage for artistic, well choreographed fights
with a high level of suspense. Musashi is immediately put down by a
wandering Zen monk who says that he is still too wild to be considered
a true samurai; thus begins the balancing act and spiritual
transformation of Musashi.
In this film we see the tragedy of Matahachi in his relationship fleshed out. In addition, the love triangle between Akemi, Otsu and Musashi continues. Musashi wants to make a name for himself and ends up seeking out the master of the Yoshioka clan for a duel. The students of the master continue to try to ambush and kill off Musashi. We meet a new character that will be more fully developed in the third movie: Kojiro Sasaki. Kojiro is a ronin as well seeking out to become the best samurai of the land. He is interested in Musashi's growth as a legend so that he can face him off later and gain an even greater reputation.
The film is shot at 1:33:1 aspect ratio which creates shots with greater depth within the composition. The position and use of the camera is done masterfully. One of the most memorable scenes is when Musashi leads his gang of attackers into the muddy rice fields. It creates great tension and memorable fights. Inagaki is also very skillful in setting up great scenes, like a duel with snow falling and then cutting to another simple scene that takes place after the fight. He teases the audience and leaves it wanting for more.
One of the most surprising aspects of the film is how forward the female characters are portrayed. They are not simple, obedient women, but have strong personalities and own their sexuality. Toshiro Mifune plays the character flawlessly and displays his commanding presence as a skilled swordsman that is later perfected within the great Kurosawa films.
The first Musashi Miyamoto movie was a tremendous hit in North America,
but its sequels weren't released there until after ten years had
passed. The second movie continues Musashi's search for personal
enlightenment, but I consider it to be inferior to the first
installment (which was basically just a setup, but an excellent one at
The second movie's story is notably more melodramatic and it has too many unnecessary love triangles. All of the characters that are introduced here should had been presented better, as they seem bluntly crammed in.
The visuals are astonishing and far better than in the first movie. The usage of colors is fantastic not only because of the excellent framing and composition, but also because it takes more talent to produce exceptional color shots of towns and populated human environment than of nature. And while it does have a lot of scenes taking place in the forests, Duel at Ichijoji Temple is predominantly an urban movie, especially when compared to its predecessor. The main villains are no longer nameless amateur soldiers and villagers like in the first movie, but instead well- trained swordsmen from a prestige samurai school.
The fight scenes are an improvement over the first film, but not by a long shot. The two most memorable fights are the final one, when Musashi takes on an entire swordfighting school, and the very first one, when he fights a guy with a chain and sickle (this element was refreshed many years later in Tarantino's Kill Bill: Vol.1, as the fight between The Bride and Gogo Yubari). However, where Duel at Ichijoji Temple fails is having too many battles set during nighttime, when you can barely see the action happening on-screen.
The follow-up to 1954's excellent Musashi Miyamoto, Duel at Ichijoji Temple picks up the story several years later, as an exiled orphan-turned-swordsman gains notoriety via a bloody tour of fatal duels. His reputation precedes him in returning to his hometown, where old rivals of both a violent and intimate nature await. This is a film about personal growth - specifically that of the samurai himself, who struggles to learn the key concepts of what his new life actually entails and where the rift lies between honor and reverence. We're never quite sure if Musashi takes this lesson to heart, particularly since he's so keen to maintain an impenetrable outer facade in almost every situation. It's a tricky role for period veteran Toshiro Mifune, who struggles with the more nuanced, flatter aspects of the character. In the previous episode, with the fires of young-adulthood to toy with, he excelled. Here, faced with the malaise of mid-life and the accompanying questions of his own being, his performance is far less sublime. The plot, cramped with too many faces and several seemingly-pointless subplots, does him no favors in dancing around the issues and repeating itself on more than one occasion. This could have been an excellent one-act show, and the final half-hour could still stand alone as precisely that. It lacks the gumption of its predecessor, however, and too often cuts away just as the action is getting good.
|Page 1 of 2:|| |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|External reviews||Parents Guide||Plot keywords|
|Main details||Your user reviews||Your vote history|