MovieChat Forums > Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence (1983) Discussion > Very very odd film.

Very very odd film.

posted 13 years ago by Punisher55
6 replies | jump to latest

This was one strange little forgotten gem. I remember I was shown this last semester and I fell asleep during the screening. I revisited the film, and while it's not as bad as I remember it being, it features some really over the top performances.

Right away I can tell this is probably a much stronger novel then film. The best qualities to the film were the terrific score and the cinematography was very clean.

The film discusses a lot of topics, but the way it handles homosexuality is odd. Why is there so much sexual frustration among the men in this movie? It's hinted at some points that almost all of the characters, with the exception of Mr. Lawrence are gay. Which is fine, but why?

The ambiance and feel of the movie were very effective, if not a bit 1980's. A lot of is the score that adds so much to the film. I'd consider buying the soundtrack.

An interesting World War 2 character study, reminded me a bit of "Aimee and Jaguar".

[–] Carly_fan 13 years ago

Why is there so much sexual frustration among the men in this movie? It's hinted at some points that almost all of the characters, with the exception of Mr. Lawrence are gay. Which is fine, but why?

This is an odd but prevalent circumstance during wartime when men are exclusively in the company of other men for extended periods of time and during times of conflict and/or war. Lawrence explained it during the first part of the film while he was speaking to Sgt. Hara, that men during wartime sometimes develop a deep love for others, but not in what we think of as a homosexual manner.

Do some research on the Spartans if you get a chance. It was common for the older men to tutor a younger man and occasionally engage in sexual intercourse with them. The civilizations at that time saw sex as sex and there was no real separation of sexual orientation.

[–] nospam-380-770625 11 years ago

*beep* on no seperation of sexual orientation... there were definitely what we'd call "gay" people in ancient cultures, even though same sex relations was more normalized in some parts of culture.

yes there was more same sex sex in society, but no people who chose only gay sex and everyone was bisexual? pure *beep*

[–] Holkospinner 13 years ago

Right away I can tell this is probably a much stronger novel then film.

Nah, not really. The movie just focuses on a small part of the novel but I have to say I found the novel to be pretty average and disjointed with exception of the story line that was picked out for the movie.

e.g. sexual frustration/gay see above, well explained. :)

As for over the top acting, I thought even though it seems odd for a western audience it was spot on to show that these two cultures live in different worlds. Even their way to talk and their manerism are completely different, they are like aliens to each other. Hey, even nowadays I can see that my Japanese co-students have a different way to talk, different gestures etc. Back then that was even more prominent.

[–] nospam-380-770625 11 years ago

you can probably blame kabuki for the over the top emotions in japanese tv and movies. in one tv shoot the director kept saying 'motto motto' for us to make bigger and bigger emotions for small script concerns

subtlety just doesn't seem to hit here, and you often see what could be powerful scenes destroyed.

edit: also it occurs to me that perhaps a more highly emotional type of acting is needed (well in stage acting certainly) in film and theatre because most people are considered to be wearing a mask anyway. most are playing their role as salaryman, wife, father, good son/daughter, attractive young wife, etc. (see 'confessions of a mask' by mishima, for another kind of evidence) in daily life.

since everyone's "acting" all the time, how do you show you're acting over and above that? an interesting possibility for debate.

[–] henrimaine 9 years ago

I just watched it for the second time (after many years) and it did feel kind of odd. And I can't quite put my finger on where does the oddness come from. In part it might stem from the somewhat over the top (but great) soundtrack, which creates a heightened emotional atmosphere for the movie.

But I think mostly it feels odd because of the cultural clash between me and the movie. This is an Asian movie, with some western actors, and for a western viewer (like me) many things are difficult to understand. For instance, the constant concern with honor among the Japanese soldiers. Or the soldier claiming that Bowie's character will steal the soul of the camp supervisor. Or the supervisor screaming after Bowie kissed his ear. I must say I didn't quite get some of this stuff. Seems there are some cultural meanings I'm not aware of. But this is not a bad thing, on the contrary, this feeling of cultural confusion is a necessary part of experiencing this movie.

Also, I was surprised to see that the movie had such a strong undercurrent of homosexuality. I didn't remember that from the last time I saw it some 15 years ago. I guess I was blind to such topics back then.

[–] chrissso 9 years ago

Very well said and honest. Growing up in the 70's we were all aware of David Bowie's sex appeal to both men and woman. He pretty much marketed himself as hyper sexual and androgynous. That said, when I finally saw this incredible film (2015) I pretty much expected the Homo undertones. What surprised me was the way the film masterfully contrasts Japanese and British war culture. The people behind this film were all very well informed on the two cultures!