Japón (2002)

A painter from the big city goes to a remote canyon to commit suicide. To reach some calmness, he stays at the farmstead of Ascen, an old, religious woman. Although but a few words are spoken, love grows.

Director:

Carlos Reygadas

Writer:

Carlos Reygadas

Stars:

Alejandro Ferretis, Magdalena Flores, Yolanda Villa

16 wins & 8 nominations.

Cast

Credited cast:
Alejandro Ferretis	...	The man
Magdalena Flores	...	Ascen
Yolanda Villa	...	Sabina
Martín Serrano	...	Juan Luis
Rolando Hernández	...	The judge
Bernabe Pérez	...	The singer
Fernando Benítez	...	Fernando
Rest of cast listed alphabetically:
Carlo Reygadas Barquín	...	The hunter

Storyline

A painter from the big city goes to a remote canyon to commit suicide. To reach some calmness, he stays at the farmstead of Ascen, an old, religious woman. Although but a few words are spoken, love grows.

---

Plot Keywords:

canyon | suicide contemplation | lizard | horse penis | gun held to chest | 

---

Genres:

Drama

---

Motion Picture Rating (MPAA)

Rated R for some strong sexuality, nudity and language

Details

Country:

Mexico Germany Netherlands Spain

Language:

Spanish

Release Date:

4 April 2003 (Mexico)

Also Known As:

Japan

Box Office

Budget:

$250,050 (estimated)

Company Credits

Production Co:

No Dream Cinema, Mantarraya Producciones, Hubert Bals Fund

Technical Specs

Runtime:

130 min 122 min 128 min (unrated)

Sound Mix:

Dolby

Color:

Color

Aspect Ratio:

2.66 : 1

Did You Know?

Trivia

Director Carlos Reygadas financed the initial shoot of $50,000 himself.

---

Connections

Featured in Ayacatzintla (2003)

User Reviews

Intense story, well performed by non-professional actors

My reactions to this film are on two levels. On one level the director has shown great skill in his handling of his cast, whom I presume mostly to be inhabitants of the locale. He was less successful in developing the story, particularly in developing the motivations of the characters. The denouement was clumsily handled and seems as much an accident in the screenplay as in it is in the film. On another level, the cinematography was technically atrocious. Presumably intentionally so, for I cannot perceive anybody showing such little technical skill getting the job (mind, I have known one guy who got such a job without even knowing how to determine exposure). There are lengthy tracking shots that are unwatchable on the big screen. There are many 360 blurred pans and many out of focus shots. I got to waiting, during these lengthy out of focus shots to see what in-focus thing would eventually move into frame. One presumes that everybody knows about depth of field and pulling focus, so I guess the director intended to suggest mystery (which he did: what is the mystery object that the camera is focused on?). In many ways this film rehashes techniques of 50s European "reality" films (eg. Bicycle Thieves, The Goatherd, etc), but less successfully. Presently there is a fashion for rough cinematography - bumpy hand held, soft, muddy in the belief that this represents "truth" (compared to Hollywood slickness). In fact, it distracts the viewer from the story.