Re Last Samurai

[Jonathan Minton]

Having finally seen Last Samurai, I must say I was impressed.. for a mainstream film. 

The have-your-cake-and-eat-it style 'coup' of the film was that it simultaneously rejected and embraced different elements of Western culture. And, partly related to this, that it managed to film one of the few cases where the Romantic vision of the Noble Savage may have had some grounding in reality.

What it seemed to repudiate about Westernism is that part of it most associated with it historically; that of arrogant, amoral colonialism predicated on the idea that the most important governing principle is economic reductionism. What it seems to embrace and celebrate about Westernism is the cult of the Individual; the idea that history may be improved and society saved by a single heroic figure who is prepared to reject the 'truth' of the culture that is first presented him, and instead able to be guided to act for grander and higher principles by following transcendental moral reasoning. Cruise was [SPOILER], down to his rejection of vices (apathy and alcoholism in his case), and final crucifiction and ressurection in Howitzer fire, a messianic character; and the film was geared around showing how he, somehow, brings about salvation to a people in need of saving.

The historical 'Westernism' that the film tramples on is a straw dog; a vision of the West that most in the West would be happy to deny. The ideological (Judeo-Christian inflected) 'Westernism' that the film replaces it with is a vision most in the West would prefer to believe in; hence the popular appeal of the film. The film is wish-fulfilment.

The film does not seem to present a balanced perspective on either Japan or the US (though is far from two-dimensional); but that doesn't seem to be the point of the film.

Jon
ajxjwm at nottingham.ac.uk

>>> 0934611501 at jcom.home.ne.jp 01/03/04 5:06 AM >>>
I agree with Joan that "the omission of the realities of samurai rule
comprises one of the most serious inaccuracies." Ujio, the Sanada Hiroyuki
character, is the nearest the film gets to presenting the dark side of the
samurai -- but [SPOILER ALERT] that side finds its most memorable expression
in Ujio's one-sided duel in the mud with Algren, not in his treatment of the
lower orders.

True, Graham describes the samurai as "bloodthirsty, honorable, cruel,
fabulously artistic." He also notes that "For centuries the samurai guarded
Japan and fought her wars. Everyone was expected to bow when  a samurai
passed by." But illustrations of these observations were lacking -- save for
the "honorable" and "artistic" parts of course. A few were sprinkled through
the final script, including a series of spikes with severed heads on top
that Algren encounters on his way to his first battle with the samurai
(Graham describes them as "Samurai road sign -- no trespassing") -- but they
did not make it into the finished film.

The reason, I suppose, was not to confuse the audience -- which would
presumably get all the indication it needed that the samurai were not all
sweetness and light when it glimpsed Katsumoto beheading the defeated
General Yoshitaka.

Reading the US reviews, I was surprised by not only the (in my view
mistaken) outrage that Tom Cruise should be the "last samurai," but the
sneers about the film's celebration of nobility, honor and all the rest.
After kicking around Hollywood for nearly a decade, the script finally got
the greenlight in the post-9/11 climate, when Americans of all political
stripes were mourning the cops and firefighters who had died in the twin
towers. At that time Algren's journey from self-destructive mercenary to
self-sacrificing warrior seemed to symbolize America's own awakening to the
positive side of what used to be called the "martial virtues."

When the film went into production, in October 2002, the political climate
had changed again -- and there were dark whispers on movie gossip sites that
the Algren character was a 19th century John Walker Lindh -- siding with
bloody-minded fanatics against the "progressive" forces of the West. This
attitude was later reflected in several reviews I read, one of which noted
that Algren was "12 degrees away from being a traitor."

By the time of the film's release, however, more reviewers were inclined to
see Algren in his samurai armor as the movie version of George Bush in his
flight suit. No longer the Japanese version of the Taliban, the samurai had
transformed into surrogates for all the reviewers hated about the American
rightist/military mindset. By this time, of course, America's warriors were
shooting innocent civilians in the streets of Baghdad (just as Japan's once
cut down innocent civilians in the streets on Edo) -- and the film's talk
about "nobility" now struck certain critics as a sham.

In Japan, the reaction has been less influenced by post-9/11 events in the
US than by domestic politics, cultural and otherwise. I'm not sure, though,
the film's success here will result in longer lines at SDF recruiting
offices. TLS may make the audience feel better about being Japanese -- but
only the severely delusional will dream of finding Katsumoto's sort of
glorious death in Iraq.

Mark Schilling
schill at gol.com







----- Original Message ----- 
From: <j.izbicki at att.net><~!B*+R^&>To: <KineJapan at lists.acs.ohio-state.edu><~!B*+R^&>Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2004 4:10 AM
Subject: Re Last Samurai


> Mark Schilling comments "At what point in the film does Algren truly
acquire
> samurai status?"
> Historically, in Japan an Algren couldn't acquire full samurai status
because
> one had to be born into it.  Peasants and merchants who were wealthy could
> purchase or might otherwise be promoted to certain samurai privileges.  A
non-
> samurai male might be adopted into a family to secure the succession of a
> family that had no sons.  But from the very late 16th century on, class
> status was hereditary and movement into the upper reaches of the samurai
> ruling class would've been theoretically impossible even for other
Japanese
> (although there are always exceptions to prove the rule) never mind for a
> foreigner.  The dialog Mark points out indicate Zwick grasped that (thanks
to
> Mark?).  But that's not the point; nor is Zwick's intention. Kudos for his
> efforts and no doubt Mark Schilling's input was responsible in part for
the
> best aspects of the film.  However, it's not just a matter of historical
> inaccuracies. What's left out and the cultural/historical climate in which
a
> film is viewed have as much impact as inaccuracies.  In the case of Last
> Samurai, the omission of the realities of samurai rule comprises one of
the
> most serious inaccuracies-not to mention avoidance of the decidedly
> unromantic hand-to-mouth existence of many of the lower- and even middle-
> ranking samurai in the last 250 years of their existence as a class.
These
> omissions specifically feed the ideal image of the samurai promoted by the
> film. Stereotypes of the samurai are already a part of American culture
and
> Last Samurai is more likely to reinforce rather than reeducate them,
however
> earnest the intentions. The very casting of Tom Cruise in the starring
role,
> certainly the poster ads for the film, and Algren's developing admiration
and
> adaptation of samurai ways (or what the film presents as such) link the
> Algren character with the title.  Schilling's discussion of who the last
> samurai is supposed to be offers the kind of considerations I hope the
film
> will provoke from viewers, but without deliberate discussion I'm not
> convinced the audience would apply the title to 'Katsumoto.'
>
> John Dougill's comment is well taken: "Glorification of the samurai's
> fighting spirit at this point in time seems to suit both the Bush regime
> (military hegemony) and Koizumi's brand of LDP (military expansionism and
> reclaiming of national pride)."
>  I assume Zwick was into production on the film long before the Bush
> administration invaded Iraq and he most likely would be appalled to see
such
> an association.  However, any cultural product takes on a life of its own
> once it's on the market and becomes available to political uses and to
> interpretation according to the immediate context.  That's both the glory
and
> the curse of the cultural artifact.
>
> Request for information:  The kanji only for 'samurai' is in background of
> the title frame in the movie as distributed in the U.S.   Is that the case
in
> Japan and/or is the Japanese subtitle for the English title translated
> literally as the "LAST Samurai."?