MovieChat Forums > Rashômon (1951) Discussion > Took me 10 minutes to realize this movie...

Took me 10 minutes to realize this movie is good..


I just watched the movie. Now I was kind of expecting more, however after It ended I just thought about it for 10 minutes and its really impressive...

We can't take any story as the truth since everyone is telling some impressive lies, even the last story could be false because the guy stole the dagger from the crime scene, so he could have switched it with a sword, so we don't know if the woman killed the husband/killed himself or the sword fight actually took place.


This is really a nice movie.

Personally, I think the wife's version was correct. You've gotta look at motivation.

The bandit was caught, he knew he was going to die (for his other crimes) so he took credit for killing the husband and made it an epic fight so he'd come off as hardcore.

The deadman story was false, there is no such thing as spirits. The 'medium' just wanted to earn some $$$ by fooling the courts.

The old guy who saw everything is lying, he took the story of the bandit and made it how it would have gone down in reality (both being terrible at fighting)The real story is as the wife said but the old guy took the expensive dagger from the husbands chest and then switched it with the sword.

The wife has NO reason to admit that she killed her husband. What does she gain from doing that? Absolutely nothing, so that is why her story is the truth.

ta-da

reply

Maybe put some "spoiler" tags on you post for people who havent seen the movie yet.. Thanks

reply

They had 60+ years to see it. No harm done spoiling it.
Remember... it was his sled. :)

You are propably wondering whether this is my singature or not.

reply

Not everyone is 60+ years old.

reply

Don't go to a movie's messageboard if you haven't watched it.

I stayed away from Breaking Bad until I finished. I don't visit The Walking Dead since I'm so far behind.

Can't stop the signal.

reply

What about people spoiling films or shows in other message boards? Courtesy it seems is a rarity in the internet.

reply

What about people spoiling films or shows in other message boards?

That has nothing to do with anything previously mentioned in this thread.

reply

It has everything to do with it. Apparently spoilers it's warranted if a film is old, I disagree. Same people who make such an argument have no problem spoiling films on other message boards just because it's out. And people come to message boards for various reasons. In fact, you don't even have to go to the message boards to get spoiled, you can see it on the first page. This cavalier attitude in spoiling films for those who have yet to see it reflects a lack of courtesy for others. A very selfish mindset you folks have.

reply

Apparently spoilers it's warranted if a film is old, I disagree.
Rather strange statement when you're intent on demanding courtesy from one and all on the internet ...
A very selfish mindset you folks have.
One might ask how about giving us the courtesy of a better constructed sentence we don't have to decipher.
In fact, you don't even have to go to the message boards to get spoiled, you can see it on the first page.
So if I've read you correctly here (and as I said earlier that's a little difficult), you appear to be complaining about the whole box and dice ... e.g. IMDB home pages etc. How quaintly primitive your thinking is? 🐭

reply

Out of idle curiosity:

Why did you start with the attitude that one version (regardless of which one you chose) had to be more accurate than the others?

reply

After it ended, I just wanted to process what I had just seen. Is it possible none of the stories were even true? Hmm, probably not...

In any case, it's quite a remarkable film. But, it did take me more than 10 minutes to realize it.


Hey there, Johnny Boy, I hope you fry!

reply

Did you notice that ALL the stories except hers feature her willing to go with Tajomaru, and insisting her husband be killed?

You think everyone else told the exact same lie, even when it didn't serve them directly?

IMO, the wife hated her husband (or at least, her life with him) and in an era where the women of rank had little choice in who they married, and without the hope of divorce, she saw a chance at escaping her situation.


I believe the intention of the director is that none of the stories are completely true ... and none of the stories are completely false. Maybe her husband DID look at her with loathing, just as she described, maybe that influenced her request. We don't know. And we will never know. That is part of the point of the film.

reply

Thanks for something useful in this thread.
If memory serves right, this is the movie Bergman considered his number one in cinema. And for many, Kurosawa is the best director ever. Well.
While this movie deserves a 10/10, it is far off being the best, or Kurosawa being best. I do understand Bergman, who might have loved to be able to direct such a bleak, black-white story at actually 3 scenes only, and so little plot.

Really great: the first 10 minutes of rain, in that broken down temple. And the wood cutter rushing through the woods. World class cinematography. Absolute adequate (Japanese!) acting. Very suitable sounds and audio.
I think, I'll never be able to warm up to the always over-the-top melodramatic style of Asian cinema, though. And this also brought me to my '10/10 but' further up:

1. It is too close to theatre, the style of the 1920's and partly 1930's with its three basic locations, and very basic locations that is, think of the court. By 1950, cinema was further away from the theatre elsewhere in the world.

2. Stiff acting, be it 1950 or 2015, by East-Asian actors. Toshiro Mifune excluded.

3. With some exceptions, too static. Anywhere else in Europe, one had learned to actually render the 'running pictures' into actually running, instead of static scenes at static locations: blow life into those.

And before I forget it: I agree with you on the wife-thing. She clearly was the sort of taking a chance whenever it would pop up, not truthfully and yet supported by her own story.
She was a nobody through being raped. In those days, women couldn't just live and travel on their own, and now she had little more chance than make it as a prostitute.
I can't even exclude that she meant it, when she gave herself to the stronger party. This is corroborated by more than one the otherwise contradictory stories.
The latter could even be extended into the chance that she got hot for the stronger man of the two.

Clearly, none of the stories are supposed to be true. Everyone makes up what serves their purpose: the dagger with the pearl for the wood-cutter, the eyes of the husband that lead to something grotesque in her story, obviously the great fight of 23 touches for the bandit, plus his manly-hood, and the honour that the husband demonstrated and told through the medium. Just to name some basic ones.

And to add: it is a bit like Dante, since it ends with a baby, lying there as a product of a lie, with the people around trying to steal and lie from and for the baby. Instead of learning from their lies, everyone just continues lying, in this case lying around and about a baby growing up in a system of lies, before it can speak.

reply