Well, I disagree with the notion that this is only enjoyable for Film Studies, or is an Oscar Bait type of film, or whatever these sentiments are supposed to mean. I generally enjoyed the movies I saw in freshman film class and art appreciation class and critical thinking class. The one exception was Citizen Cane, which I do think of as a Film Studies class, because you really need the teacher to tell you in what areas it innovated and why it is well regarded. It didn’t make me feel any emotions except boredom, which was not the intent. A movie like Tokyo Story did induce some boredom at points, but even those sections are what made the later sections more meaningful to me, and so I’m loathe to dump this into a Film Studies bucket or an Oscar Bait bucket.
I suppose my film vocabulary is weak. I have no idea who you guys are talking about when you start talking Japanese film makers. Perhaps if I had seen more films by Japanese film makers, this movie wouldn’t have been as impressive to me? I don’t see how that could be true. The film had a pretty hard hill to climb being viewed in 2018 to a viewer like me who is used to modern movies. And it climbed that hill and then some. It was able to express a view of life that I’ve never seen articulated this way and this well. I can try to analyze how it managed to do so, and come away somewhat confounded, like Navaronegun, but nevertheless it did it. Just because I don’t understand the voodoo that Ozu used to get to me, doesn’t mean that he wasn’t successful.
I don’t mean to imply that it would only work for that type of viewer, but that I am not surprised it’s so well regarded by critics and film historians because it’s exactly the sort of movie that tends to be the bread and butter of that type of viewer.
Thanks, I was going to say exactly the same thing (even going to put Citizen Kane as the counter example). The movie is enjoyable and accessible on its own, it just has a different and non mainstream narrative style, but one that is not unusual once you go out of mainstream and genre films (and American indies, most of which use a mainstream narrative style anyway).
Now, for most people, they will have get used to this style through film studies or through a deep interest in film (the same way you get used to poetry by having a strong interest in literature, seldom through casual reading), but that’s just one of the ways.
I went through a heavy film education, sure, but nowadays I have no interest in “Film Studies” as such. I watch movies for what they tell me, what they make me feel, and what they make me think of, but I don’t care much about the technique or (especially) the place of the film in film history. Actually, the more I notice those things, the most likely I’m not really enjoying the film (well except for things like Marvel stuff, that it’s so bad even trying to look at the technique feels mind numbing). The only technique I still deeply care about is acting.
Tokyo Story is slow and I certainly understand why some people disliked it (and after this first contact I’m modifying my future nominations so more people enjoy the films, since the most voices here the better, so no Tarkovsky ) but, specially for the people who didn’t even finish it, I would suggest it could be just a matter of getting used to this narrative style ( which requires some work (forcing yourself through some slow movies), as most things worthwhile). I say this as somebody who has taught intro to film history and film appreciation at an undergraduate level and has seen some students shift their preferences after a while. I’m not saying that you have to enjoy this movie (nothing farther from my intention, really), but I think it’s eminently watchable once you assume it’s a low key slow paced movie, even if you end up not liking it for many of the reasons people talked about above.
Like most acquired tastes, I’m not convinced it’s worth acquiring. Might I eventually appreciate these sorts of slow, meditative, old-fashioned movies in a way I don’t now? Sure, I suppose. Are there literally hundreds if not thousands of movies that already suit my existing sensibilities that I have not yet seen and would be able to pick up without any time spent conditioning said sensibilities and thoroughly enjoy? Yes, yes there are. And more being made all the time. Do I have time to watch all of them? Not remotely. Ergo…
I respect that attitude, but it’s one I will never understand, as it defies the very reason I consume culture.
For me is about opening myself to different kinds of enjoyment and experiences, as to broaden the range of emotions and thoughts I get to feel. My tastes have changed so much and so wildly as time has gone on that I can’t imagine myself limiting myself to stuff I know I’ll like (granted, this way I have discovered incredible gems, but also seen some stuff I really disliked). It’s actually the reason why I joined the Movie Club!!
But anyway, if I’m able to slowly plough through the Malazan series (halfway through the third book, I think), you might be able to force yourself to watch a boring 2 hour movie :P. I honestly think there’s something worthwhile at the other end.
Whereas I would tell you to put the Malazan books down if you’re finding them a slog. I personally found the series one of the most rewarding things I have ever read… but I never struggled with it.
My sentiments are pretty much Craig’s here. Once I start watching a movie, I rarely find it so dull that I can’t continue (though Terrence Mallick does try my patience), and this movie was no exception–I was engaged throughout. That said, I don’t think I’d recommend the film to anyone. I found myself paying more attention to the framing and lighting and props than to the acting and narrative.
This is me too. I know Kurosawa and Miyasaki and that’s about it. So I’m definitely approaching this film from an American perspective. I’m also not a cinephile–I’ve seen most of the greats, but my knowledge of film before about 1990 is pretty shallow. I didn’t take notes while watching, but here are a few of my random thoughts:
What struck me the most about the narrative was how utterly plausible it is. When my parents come for a visit, it’s much the same–their adult kids juggling work and schedules and their lives to accommodate them. I found all of the characters pretty sympathetic. I really appreciated @Left_Empty’s comments about about how their interactions fit within the Japanese culture of the 40’s, but I found the situation entirely relatable to the contemporary United States as well.
Doorframes: so many shots were literally framed by a doorway. Part of the reason this works so well is the 4:3 aspect ratio. But another reason is that it really emphasizes the domesticity of the scene. Instead of removing the fourth wall, we see the action through a doorway. This could feel voyeuristic, but instead it makes the scene more intimate.
Bells: I was struck by the number of bells. Given the deliberate pace of the film, and the quiet domesticity of the scenes, and the reserved nature of the characters, it was always jarring to hear a bell–at the train station, the telephone, and especially the bell that rang when the doorway was opened to Shige’s apartment. The bells feel (and I think are meant to feel) like an imposition, a curious juxtaposition of the modern into a traditional setting.
I had wondered about this. The whole aggressively laconic nature of the father’s character was kind of off-putting: an older gentlemen doing an impression of a younger man’s idea of an old man.
A good film, but not one I’d return to. I didn’t have a particularly strong emotional reaction to the film. And I didn’t think any of the characters was very selfish or very selfless. They were just going about their lives.
Next month’s film better have some explosions and a chase scene in it.
I should add that I am absolutely for testing the waters outside one’s comfort zone. It’s one reason I gave this movie half an hour instead of just assuming I wouldn’t like it. But I think there’s a difference between seeing if something is to your taste and going out of your way to acquire that taste, and I see no reason to do the latter when I already find time a much bigger constraint.
Why yes, that would be acceptable, but if you can combine explosions, chases, sex, and even throw in a little martial arts mayhem, that would be the best.
Bearing in mind I have zero idea how it was back then, Japan is an incredibly noisy country. Taking the subway at rush hour in Paris feels almost like a contemplative experience compared to the daily Japanese suburbs, even when nobody is around. I wouldn’t be surprised if there were tons and tons of klang-klangs and bells and whatnot already back then.
So I’ve finally finished watching the movie. This is one of those movies that I can respect and understand why so many people enjoy it and yet at the same time not really enjoy it all that much myself. While I think the story is quite good (once you actually figure out if there is a plot or if this is just a slice of life), the execution left me wanting.
Now, I understand that this is an older movie and that things were made a little bit differently back than. But the cuts and what seemed to me to be the actors looking right into the camera far too often was quite jarring. It was something that kept taking me out of the movie. Perhaps in a less stressful and busy time I can watch this again and give it another chance.
Even though I found it hard to get into the movie, I certainly could appreciate what the Director was trying to get across. It’s made me think about what will be awaiting me as my parents age and get to a point where they might need extra care. But that’s for a different thread I think. :)
I’m glad that I got to see the movie since it’s so well regarded. It’s nice to now say I’ve watched one of the classics.
I completely respect this. It certainly confounded me, and as much as I feel it was worthwhile watching it, I don’t think I will do so again for some time to come.
A reminder to all, nominations for November movie club will begin in a new thread on NOV 1. This thread will stay open for all who wish to comment on this film.
It does seem to be the common refrain @marquac. I respect this film more than enjoyed it. I recognize what it does well, even if the style of shooting, framing, and editing feel very stilted to me. @Left_Empty used the term ‘vegetable framing’ or something similar, and it made me laugh. But I knew exactly what he meant by it.
I’m glad it got picked, I’m glad to have watched it. I don’t have any burning need to watch it, or other Ozu films, in the near future.
In my opinion, that was one of the central aims of the filmmaker, and core of this film, so I don’t think it can just be “dismissed” as an idea for another thread, though I realize that’s not what you’re doing. But you get my point. It’s one of the reasons why I really appreciated the movie.
Thank you for your post marquac. It reminded me of this one scene in the movie that I dismissed when i first watched it. The parents had come back from their disastrous stay at the resort, and just been turned away from their daughter’s home. But before they split up, they were on the rooftop of a building, talking to one another. They were talking about how big and intimidating the city was, and how they could get lost in it. This is right before they’re about to go their separate ways within that city. I initially dismissed this scene later because they both ended up not getting lost in the city, and both ended up safe with family. But looking back, this scene really did make me feel a certain amount of mini-panic for these parents, thinking about the possibilities of them getting lost in the city, away from each other. There was a certain level of comfort you felt when they were still together, and that scene was kind of important in taking away that comfort. It made me scared for them, and so I think it was pretty effective, even if it turned out to be a red herring in terms of plot.
This has been brought up by a few people now as a quasi-negative point against the movie. I just don’t ever count that as a negative point myself against movies. If a movie is a slow burn like this one, where it takes a long time to get to the inflection point, or if a movie relies heavily on a mystery that is revealed late in the movie, or if a movie is just hard to watch because it deals with difficult material, then in each case, I don’t have a desire to watch it again. But that doesn’t diminish the movie in my eyes.
As for myself, I fall in the same category as you guys. Tokyo Story, similar to some of my other favorite movies of all time, I have no desire to see again, and I don’t count that against it. In fact, I agree with CraigM that I don’t really want to see this style of movie again for a while. And I don’t count that against it either. :) So I’ll definitely be voting for something different next month.
Neither do I, I meant it more as a qualifier with my other statement that the film confounded me. Sometimes, I have a desire to re-watch films that get a confounded reaction from me. I don’t think that will happen in this case, just because I don’t think there was anything I misunderstood, or could reinterpret on a second viewing that would explain my confounded reaction to this film. My confoundedness is a result of Ozu slowly undermining, through sight and plot, the banal normalcy of a family visit and turning it into an existential exploration of mortality and the nature of being alone.
So, I watched this movie before I left on my vacation, but I couldn’t easily come up with something to say quickly so I waited until I returned.
I appreciate art, in its many forms, and I often support it but this movie reminds me why I do that but at the same time admit I don’t enjoy a lot of it. I’m sure there are explanations as to why the camera shots are often so low, or why so many of the characters talk to each other without looking at each other, or why we get solo shots of smokestacks, but that’s all fun for talking points after the movie, or academic studies, it’s not something that helped me enjoy or appreciate the movie more while actually watching it.
The fuax politeness, like giving crackers as a gift while secretly hoarding cake like it’s too good for your guests, the praise of the children while later admitting disappointment. even the way Noriko smiles all the time even as she entertains when the children can’t be bothered is just all so fake, and since that’s not unique to the movie, It didn’t really resonate so much as enforce something I already know and experienced.
The movie didn’t hold my attention very well, but it got my full attention in two sittings it took to finish it (aka, no internet, gaming or anything just watching). Now I will and have admitted I rarely ever watch old movies, regardless of who made them, so that general bias is not this movie’s fault. It didn’t do anything to make me change my inclination though.
