<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>What's in a name</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<BR>
<BR>
Let the afterlife alone. I am much more interested in whether Capra's film was in mind when Kore-eda developed the original film title ... did Kore-eda speak to that question? Certainly, Kore-eda's film could be seen as a critique of a conventional Hollywood model of fantasy, for which Capra's film is a fine example. Is it possible, even, to have avoided making that reference? Is that why he so much likes the "original"?<BR>
<BR>
Jonathan<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<B>From: </B>"Mark Anderson" <ander025@umn.edu><BR>
<B>Reply-To: </B>KineJapan@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu<BR>
<B>Date: </B>Wed, 4 Dec 2002 14:03:48 -0600<BR>
<B>To: </B><KineJapan@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu><BR>
<B>Subject: </B>Re: What's in a name<BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><FONT SIZE="2"> Mr. Koreeda's remarks involved concerns which had been brought to him by someone else about U.S. distribution. The assistant in question was present at the event I intended. As best I can recall, he was not very specific about who, what, when, and where. I was left with the impression that he was referring to the distributors of the film, but Dennis Doros's theory may well be correct--that he was in fact referring to a conversation which took place with another party before the company itself became involved. <BR>
I wouldn't know if he invented the rest of the story or not. I know that is the story he told at the event I attended. It was not a point he particularly stressed, I believe he mentioned it in answer to a question from the audience regarding whether the title was meant to have religious overtones. He replied that it actually had a very pragmatic origin involving these concerns about distribution, and suggested that it was an ad-hoc, stopgap title which he did not feel particularly expressed any artistic intent on his part. <BR>
Mark Anderson</FONT><BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
</BODY>
</HTML>