MovieChat Forums > Rurôni Kenshin: Densetsu no saigo-hen (2014) Discussion > Where the first live action movie comitt...

Where the first live action movie comitted the biggest mistake

posted 11 years ago by JohnBonDon
22 replies | jump to latest

While I thought the first movie was decent with the fight scenes easily being the standout there was one mistake the movie had that was so huge I am surprised more have not mentioned it.

It's not the fact that the movie stupidly tried to cram in several different storylines from the original in one movie.

It's the fact that the movie reveals the origin of Kenshin's scar. And not only does it reveal it, it does so in such a matter of fact way.

Having seen the anime, I am familiar with how the story is supposed to go and the fact is you are not supposed to know how Kenshin got his scar until much later in the saga. In fact, it is towards the end. Up to that point, not only are you never told how he got his scar but Kenshin purposely never talks about it. It is supposed to build up to a big reveal when that whole part of his life is told eventually. This is why the Trust/Betrayal OVA animes (which adapt that part of the manga) were made after the anime TV series and not before.

This bothered me so much that I wonder if the director/writer actually got Rurouni Kenshin at all. This clumsy but big mistake really makes me not want them involved for the eventual movies based on that part of the manga.

I wish I could cut out that one part of the movie before showing it to anyone who hasn't seen the anime series or read the manga yet.

[–] MagusTruthseeker 10 years ago

When the movie was made, it was considered to be a somewhat risky project. There was never any assurance whatsoever that there would be any future movies like the second and third now coming along.

While I too was a bit disappointed to see the Jine story and the rest of the Meiji Arc all combined into one, it was a necessity of adapting the story to live-action film. There are easily three full-length films that could have been made out of Meiji alone. All things considered, I think they did a very fine job of blending the stories to create one, self-contained story.

While it was disappointing to not see Aoshi in the first movie, including him would have doubled the length of the movie if there was to be any respect for his story given.

The story of Kenshin's scar is a truly significant one. But if you only have the green-light for one film, then that one film is where the revelation of how he got his scar goes. Leaving the story out entirely diminishes the back story of the protagonist far too much.

In hindsight, had the financial backers realized it was going to be one of the largest films in Japan for 2012/13, chances are that a multi-film deal is struck to begin with, with a three movie script developed to match, making it a planned trilogy. But that's the beauty of hindsight, it's 20/20.

[–] JohnBonDon 10 years ago

But if you only have the green-light for one film, then that one film is where the revelation of how he got his scar goes. Leaving the story out entirely diminishes the back story of the protagonist far too much.

[–] Gadget110 10 years ago

Like the earlier comic book films Kenshin was not a "oh hell yeah this will bring in a major pay day, of course we are doing 3 films", it was a risk as maybe it does well, or maybe they think it is not good enough. Kenshin is one of the biggest known animes known practically everyone but had they "screwed up" the first film would be the only film so they did the safe bet and gave more of Kenshin's backstory.

Now that they have proven "we are laughing all the way to the bank with this gold mine" they will not see it as a big risk as the fans love it, the non fans love it, and the international watchers love it. On the flip side had Kenshin failed then they would be in a bad way money wise, plus studioes would not touch the idea of a major blockbuster live action anime film in Japan for atleast a decade.

"Always two there are , a master and an apprentice"

[–] JohnBonDon 10 years ago

That isn't convincing. Even if they were not planning to adapt the Trust/Betrayal storyline (which doesn't make much sense if so) that isn't a good enough excuse to just drop that revelation in the movie as if it was nothing more than a piece of curiosity. It is literally what the entire storyline is building towards. The way it's revealed in this movie destroys the story of Trust/Betrayal. It would be as if Obi Wan Kenobi just told Luke Skywalker in the first Star Wars movie that Darth Vader was his father as if it was nothing. That would've obviously have spoiled the big moment in Empire Strikes Back.

[–] eamonlahrach 9 years ago

Like the other posters said, it's because only 1 film was green-lit and this was supposedly a risky project. So the director probably wanted to cram that bit of detail into the film just in case sequels were out of the question.

The first film was filmed stand-alone.

Kyoto Inferno and The Legend Ends were filmed as one then split into 2.

If a third project (i.e. fourth film) gets green-lit, then it'll likely be the third arc of the manga which is the Jinchū arc so it'll have a lot of flashbacks to Kenshin's days as Hitokiri Battousai.

Though I kinda want a movie that's completely set in the Bakumatsu like Trust/Betrayal OVAs. A film that shows Kenshin's humanity slowly and bloodily fading away. To show his unhealing wound on his face stop bleeding during his peaceful time with Tomoe only for it to bleed again when he has to go back to killing.

Perhaps Jinchu arc will be 2 film too? That would be great.

[–] JohnBonDon 9 years ago

If you read what the others wrote then surely you read my responses so there is no reason you should've written what you did because I have already taken care of that bad argument already.

[–] jakkfrost 9 years ago

Just because you think it's a bad argument, doesn't mean it's an incorrect argument.

----------------------------------------
If it's tourist season, why can't we shoot them?

[–] JohnBonDon 9 years ago

It is a bad argument because I explained how it is one in the reply I made that is found right above yours.

[–] jakkfrost 9 years ago

I know exactly what you said, you don't seem to comprehend what I said, so I'll say it again, just because you think it's a bad argument, doesn't mean it's wrong.

What you're saying is "I don't like that explanation, therefore it's not true."

What I'm saying is "You don't like that explanation, but it might still be true."

----------------------------------------
If it's tourist season, why can't we shoot them?

[–] spookyrat1 7 years ago

What you're saying is "I don't like that explanation, therefore it's not true."

No man, you don't realise the OP's a legend himself ... in is own mind.🐭

[–] JohnBonDon 7 years ago

I know exactly what you said, you don't seem to comprehend what I said, so I'll say it again, just because you think it's a bad argument, doesn't mean it's wrong.

No, you don't know what I said. I told you more than once that I debunked your argument already. Your argument is bad because it has been debunked.

[–] exciterRC 9 years ago

They never planned to adapt the Trust/Betrayal arc (and probably still don't). If there was only 1 Rurouni Kenshin movie and they didn't explain it, how the hell would the audience who had never seen the anime know about the origin of the scar? It might not be done in the best way, but it was necessary.

[–] JohnBonDon 9 years ago

I've already debunked this argument you have presented. Please read the thread before deciding to comment.

[–] jakkfrost 9 years ago

You did not debunk anything at all. You don't like the reason, that's fine, but it's your opinion. That doesn't mean it's not the real reason.

Think of it this way; let's say you're a junkie, and you go to a bank and tell them you want a loan so you can buy drugs. It's a stupid reason, but it's the real reason, whether or not you think it's stupid.

----------------------------------------
If it's tourist season, why can't we shoot them?

[–] cis-opmi 9 years ago

I think it was nice that they inserted stuff from the OVA in Kenshins flashbacks. I have no idea why that is a problem.. anime fans know that is part of his past, and seeing him think about his past (which anime watchers imagine crosses his mind even before the Kyoto arc) was a nice twist IMO.

They don't need to make the movie all exact to the anime. My biggest problem with the movie was Aoishi though. I think he should have been in the first movie: being the guy kenshin fought instead of the dude with the guns.. it just would have given aoishi a bigger impact in the final battle with shishio. I thought Aoishi's character was written badly, he was just some dude no one knew who is going around hunting kenshin for a title. Aoishi in the anime hunted kenshin down out of vengence and retirbution for his fallen comrads. This movie just had a bum Aoishi... the actor looked old too.

[–] Huvan 9 years ago

I agree that Aoshi should've been in the first movie, but they never intended more than that so that's why he was left out. Quite unfortunate.

[–] cis-opmi 9 years ago

Eventhough they never intended to go past the 1st, i don't understand why Aoishi should have been left out. If Saito was able to be placed in then why not Aoishi since he, originally, is in the first episodes?

[–] JohnBonDon 9 years ago

I think it was nice that they inserted stuff from the OVA in Kenshins flashbacks.

No, it isn't. It destroys the story and I have explained why.

I have no idea why that is a problem..

Because you didn't bother to read what I wrote. You skimmed it. Read back what I wrote.

They don't need to make the movie all exact to the anime

Horrible argument. In fact, this horrible argument can be used against what you decided to complain about (i.e. Aoishi). It can be used to defend anything therefore it is meaningless.

[–] macedoniall 9 years ago

When I first saw the movie I always thought it was strange as well that they would even show how Kenshin got his scar in the first place. I do know that the first was supposed to be standalone so I can sort of see why the Director would do that. I understand your frustration though, although my biggest frustration in the first film was omitting Aoshi since he's my favourite character. Imagine my disappointment in how they handled his character.

I watched an interview on youtube with the director and he has said that he plans on making a Trust and Betrayal movie next. I just assume he's taking a break from Kenshin for a while. For most people that I've known I've shown them the film. All of them haven't even heard of Kenshin so the reveal really didn't bother them that much because they were in the dark on how it happened, they've gone on to watching the anime and OVA and have been given a great appreciation for the series.

I always hope that when something gets adapted for screen it gets some people interested in checking out the source materiel. I do understand why you're upset because I felt the same way with Iron man 3 and the new reveal that there really is a Mandarin, you can only successfully sell that character to audiences once, but I digress.

I will not fear, fear is the mind killer

[–] JohnBonDon 9 years ago

Thanks for your response, macedoniall.  I appreciate you understanding where I am coming from in regards to this. However,

I do know that the first was supposed to be standalone so I can sort of see why the Director would do that.

that just makes no sense. A standalone film does not require that the major secret of Kenshin's past be revealed. The story of the film works exactly as it does currently without that being revealed. It adds nothing to the movie whatsoever and only takes away in the long run.

[–] z-41181 8 years ago

Has the director said that he plans on making a Trust and Betrayal movie next? If so,I will be very glad.I really enjoy OVA!

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]