Kurosawa 101: Day Two, 1946 - 1948

Day Two of Kurosawa 101 examines three of the director's films that attempt to come to terms with the nature of life in Japan immediately following the end of WWII and the American Occupation.

No Regrets for Our Youth

No Regrets for Our Youth is an idealistic movie. It is full of noble sentiments about freedom and sacrifice. These values are very Japanese; they are also very American. When Kurosawa made the picture in 1946, he was accountable to American censors, but he was also responding to a vision of post-war Japan that he would develop throughout his career. No Regrets for Our Youth is a product of that period just as much as it is a product of Kurosawa’s assertive moral convictions. It is a movie of abrupt shifts and dramatic decisions, growth, decay, and renewal.

Yukie (Setsuko Hara) is the daughter of a well-known professor of law (Denjirô Ôkôchi, who had major roles in four of Kurosawa’s first five films) at the university in Kyoto. Nestled safely in her home, nourished on quiet family dinners and long hours at the piano, she is nonetheless surrounded by her father's leftist ideas and the students who adopt them. He is suddenly forced to resign for preaching communistic ideas and some of his followers are forced to compromise their principles in order to finish their degrees. One student, though, the blunt and incorrigible Noge (Susumu Fujita), takes the harder road and eventually is imprisoned. Yukie is forced to reconsider her life by her seemingly futile love for Noge and by the political circumstances, becoming increasingly impossible to ignore, that created the problem in the first place. She decides to move to Tokyo, to live more truly, and is swept up the ensuing course of events until her lifestyle and her ambitions are utterly transformed.

Yukie's father and lover are based on real people, the professor involved in the Takigawa incident of 1933 and his former student, a communist spy who worked with Richard Sorge. It's the fictional girl herself, though, who clearly stands at the center of this movie. The political and historical turmoil, which would have weighed so heavily on the message of the 1946 release, are ultimately trimmings for her personal transformation from a spoiled and weak young woman to a disciplined and uncompromising activist of the most practical stripe. Hara brings the depth and winsomeness to Kurosawa’s movie with which she would later charm Japanese audiences in Ozu's family dramas. Her performance and the studied compassion of the director's machinations make No Regrets for Our Youth a meaningful exception to the hackneyed cinematic adage that Kurosawa did not work well with women.

The film stretches from Yukie's adolescence to her mature adulthood, a span of twelve years, from 1933 to 1945, and sometimes the heavy use of montage and dissolves to express time's passage wear the story a bit thin. The social philosophy it espouses all too explicitly makes the movie feel, to the unsympathetic American viewer, a bit like a Japanese version of Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. Pace and tone are thus occasional disruptions in the flow of Kurosawa’s film, an awkwardness he himself acknowledged when he lamented the studio's interference in the writing process. At the film's end, however, one has the feeling that Yukie's plight is our own, that her questions about living life to the fullest, about holding herself responsible to the demands of adulthood, apply to everyone. Kurosawa also felt that because of the excessive interference that the Japanese military censors has exercised during WW II, No Regrets for Our Youth was the first movie in which he was able to express himself freely. If this movie is a paradigm for the master director's concerns, his vision of the human condition, it is not surprising that his later work consistently addresses the same fundamental questions. No Regrets for Our Youth is unique because it gives such bold, even brash answers.

Dylan Nelson

Next Page

So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.