Stometer Save your money for something good and enjoyable

FeistyUpper If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

Invaderbank The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

Suman Roberson It's a movie as timely as it is provocative and amazingly, for much of its running time, it is weirdly funny.

WILLIAM FLANIGAN Viewed on DVD. Score = seven (7) stars; cinematography = barely five (5) stars; restoration = four (4) stars; script = four (4) stars. Director Akira Kurosawa (who also wrote the movie script, but not the play) presents a less-than-successful mash up of stage play and motion picture. This slice-of-life or existential play/movie has no beginning (unless you count the extensive lead-in expository text and singing which is essentially a filmed version of a play's program notes) or end with not much happening in between. The title (mentioned in the expository text) may be semi historical, but does not make much/any sense for the name of the play/movie. Fleeting mature acting is all but buried (or blown up) by the juvenile antics of comedian Motohiko Itou who Kurosawa allows to run roughshod over the play/movie. (This character seems to be a fugitive from a Saturday-morning TV show for three-year old's.) Itou's performance is not only a self caricature, but gives a vast new meaning to the word "ludicrous." (His persistent performance soon becomes extremely painful to watch!) The pace of the play/movie is slow and the result is boring. Kurosawa's focus is on talking heads with almost zero physical action. A major reediting seems to be in order to both shorten the play/movie and remove 90 percent of Itou's "bolt-on" embarrassing performance. Phony studio "exterior" sets look OK for a play, but are a distraction for a movie with set decoration dominated by poorly painted canvas. Cinematography (narrow screen, black and white) is OK. Score and subtitles are fine. Restoration has a way to go (but may not be worth further investment for such an inferior film). Wear marks, dirt artifacts, and frame shrinkage occur throughout the film. Not recommended even for the most fanatical of Kurosawa fans! WILLIAM FLANIGAN, PhD.

crossbow0106 This film is just less than an hour long and tells a simple tale about a warrior with his six followers (one is a "driver" who almost reminds me of a Japanese Stan Laurel) and their quest to move on. They disguise themselves as monks. The film is set in the year 1195. The second half of the film is better, where they have to prove to others that they indeed are monks. The tension, including facing otherwise certain death, is extremely well done. I labeled the film curious due to its simplicity in telling the story. Kurosawa is rarely this straightforward, usually there are interesting twists and turns. That said, this watchable, there is a little comic relief, but it is not A list Kurosawa. Thats fine in and of itself.

Carlos Mora This is a very intelligent movie, telling the story of two men who ride the tiger's tail out of loyalty and grace. The courage of one of them is explicitly portrayed in the film. It is the samurai Benkei who cleverly defends his lord at a very high personal risk. Benkei improvises an eloquent speech reading out of a blank scroll the prospectus for the temple when required to do so by the commander of the military outpost seeking to capture his master. Benkei uses logic to convince his comrades that it is not a good idea to fight the soldiers of the barrier. The samurai may kill all the soldiers this time but that will result in more soldiers and more persecution later on. Benkei uses a clever trick, to flog his master who is posing as a porter when the second-in-command suspects that the porter is the master they are trying to capture. Since a servant would never beat his master, the porter cannot be the master, reasons the top commander.But more impressive than Benkei is the street-wise guy, the real porter played by Kenichi Enomoto, who joins the party of samurai in the forest. He treads on two tigers' tails. The first tiger is represented by the party of samurai. He is rejected by them, he is called a nobody, he is treated harshly, he is even threatened with death. He disappears at times but he returns to help the samurai who walk in the forest pretending to be itinerant priests. He collects information valuable to them and shares that information. And the second tiger is the military outpost who will surely kill him if they discover that the master is among the party of fake itinerant priests.While Benkei does his heroic deeds in a ceremonial manner framed by rituals and high tension, the loquacious porter does his heroic deeds in a discreet, even awkward manner, without fanfare or rituals. His heroism is so discreet that even seasoned Kurosawa critics missed the point of the movie: natural, humble heroism offered not out of loyalty, but out of grace.(The master of the party of samurai is such an obscure figure that out of respect to Kurosawa I have not even mentioned his name in my review)

frankfar This film is a thrilling, stylized tale of courage, loyalty, and the human comedy. It's not necessary to reveal details of the plot other than to say it involves a band of loyal retainers escorting their master to safety after a coup, with a lot of quick-witted verbal ju-jitsu. It's every bit as satisfying on the third viewing as the first. The writing is both profound and funny. Among its many delights are the very Japanese, sing-song style of speech by Denjirô Ôkôchi as "Benkei," and the comic relief of Kenichi Enomoto, the porter. It's also an early version of the "Seven Samurai" conceit of the samurais and the buffoon who wins them over. Interestingly (for academic reasons), Kurosawa and Shintaro Katsu teamed up in 1970 to make "Zatoichi Meets Yojimbo." I haven't seen it yet but the Zatoichi films, while enjoyable, are nowhere near as artful or provocative as Yojimbo or anything by Kurosawa. With Zatoichi, see one, you've seen 'em all. I highly recommend this beautiful and satisfying masterpiece of serious filmmaking.