ykf 483620:

I actually would give this Rashomon a 2.5... but I rounded up because... well, hell its Kurosawa, right? I have heard this film gushed over by film students and classic flick fans... but I have to say that this one didnt really blow me away. The story is about the murder of a man and the raping of his wife... but what makes this film get cited so much is the way this story is told. It plays with perspective. Were first told the story from the bandits POV, then the womans, then the dead man and finally from a third party. Each one is different... based on the characters perspective. But heres my problem with the film... while POV does change certain elements, it does not change actual facts. There is only one way things happen... and though I love the idea of seeing that one way through different eyes, I think this film actually changed that one thing... hence, destroying its own conceit. And the movie is also slghtly silly at parts... with lots of yelling and a medium and other such nonsense. I dont know... maybe you have to be a film snob to really love this film... because I barely liked it. I recommend this flick to film schoolers and people who want to learn a little about cinematic history.

8adef320a8:

This is one of my top-3 favorite Kurosawa films. It touches upon many different themes, from the manipulative power of women to the depths men will sink to survive to the value of perspective. It's also marvelously and beautifully shot by renowned cinematographer Kazuo Miyagawa. Obviously Mifune fans will eat him up here, but the lovely Machiko Kyo's performance should not be overlooked either. Clearly it's not a film everyone will appreciate or enjoy, but I personally love it and expect most die-hard Japanese classic cinema fans will love it as well.

Jeremy Thomas:

One of Akira Kurosawa's masterpieces, Rashomon tells an amazing story about perspective and the subjective nature of truth. With cinematic techniques that were revolutionary at the time--and still look wonderful now--Kurosawa takes a minimalist set and wonderful acting by Toshiro Mifune, Takashi Shimura, Masayuki Mori and the rest of the cast to bring the story to life. Rashomon has been analyzed and critiqued for years; in the modern era it may seem like an antiquated production but that is only because so many films since have taken inspiration from it. None of those films have tackled the same themes with the skill that this one does. It may not be Kurosawa's best film?that still falls to the brilliance of The Seven Samurai--but it stands as a hallmark of movie-making that still comes far closer than most films come to perfection captured on film.

crewark:

Everyone has seen Akira Kurosawa's classic film "Rashomon" ripped off (or homaged, if you prefer) on countless television shows from "All in the Family" to "The X-Files," not to mention in film, most notably "Courage Under Fire" in recent years. Consequently, seeing the original at this late date is certainly a distorted endeavor, but it is decidedly worth the effort to appreciate a film that has become a cultural touchstone. In a temple during a rainstorm, a woodcutter (Takashi Shimura) mutters that he does not understand what has happened. The story he tells to a priest (Minoru Chiaki) and a commoner (Kichijiro Ueda) is of a "rape" and a "murder." The woodcutter testified at the trial of the thief Tajomaru (Toshiro Mifune), at which the woman who was raped, Masako (Machiko Kyo), and her husband who was murdered, Takehiro (Masayuki Mori) all testify as well (the dead husband through a Medium played by Fumiko Honma). All four of the stories are different, so the question of the moment is "Which one is true?"

BlueVoid:

Akira Kurosawa does a crime movie, and does it well. A samurai is killed and a women is raped. These are the facts, and the rest is all conjecture. The point of the movie isn't to figure out exactly what happened, but rather study the nature of lies and why people do it. 'Rashomon' is set in a very bleak time. From the first shot the tone is set with a heavy rainstorm trapping a few people at the Rashomon gate, and one man repeatedly proclaiming to no one in particular "I can't understand it". People are dying from natural disasters, disease and murders, and yet there is something that has been done that is so reprehensible that it leaves even these conditioned men unable to comprehend what they heard. Being structured almost entirely in flashbacks, Kurosawa creates a masterpiece of subtlety. We know just the final outcome, and we rely on, what is proven to be unreliable, testimony of those involved. Hearing the same story told by the different participants is a telling insight into their personality and insecurities. From each vantage point they make themselves look the best in their own mind, while at the same time condemning themselves. This is the nature of the lie. What is the correct version doesn't matter, but understanding the humanity behind the lies does. Being guilty or not isn't what is important to these people, it is honor and reputation. The film asks the question what it means to be a good person. Can someone be good, or does everyone have an evil side to them? All interactions and events have a personal bias, and even clear cut events are subject to interpretation and manipulation. This is beautifully shot, and soundly conceived crime drama that goes way beyond the norm of the genre.

jerm:

Takes what is essentially a courtroom-drama, and spins it into an existential rumination of truth and justice. Dostoevsky was Kurosawa's favorite author, and Rashomon makes that quite apparent.

eclapham:

Rashomon, from director Akira Kurosawa, is widely considered a masterpiece. The film is often credited as the reason for the "Best Foreign Film" category at the Academy Awards. It's also recognized as the first film where the camera was pointed directly at the sun. But what really stood out was the story. Through the first half of the film, it seemed overly simple: three men discussing a heinous crime (that seems relatively tame by today's standards). It's not until the last thirty minutes that the true theme of the movie really comes to light. Rashomon is about life and truth. What is truth, really? How does it effect our lives, and how do our lives effect the truth? Each person involved in the story tells a different version. Which version is true, and does it really matter? Watch Rashomon, and immediately after the movie, stop and think about it. Don't let this one just roll on by without giving it some serious thought. Rashomon is many things, but it is not a popcorn flick. Don't go in expecting a simple, obvious story with no real meaning, because you will be disappointed. As usual, Criterion presents a striking DVD. The audio track was a little disappointing. I'm sure Criterion did the best they could have with what they had to work with, but there was a constant hiss over the entire film. With the exception of this hiss, the track was acceptable. It was the original mono track, restored, and most of the cracks and pops were removed or hardly noticeable. The hiss was all that remained. The video fared better. The black and white print had very good contrast levels with decent black levels. Definition was good, if not excellent. The print did still show some evidence of damage, with flecks, spots, and white lines occasionally visible. Once again, I'm sure Criterion did the best they could, considering the film is 55 years old now. None of the flaws detracted from the film in any way.

javeryt:

This was an interesting film.....I admit upon first viewing I had a hard time wrapping by brain around it. Watching Robert Altman's intro really helped me to understand what Kurosawa was trying to do...... The film is shot very well, and the music is well used. I'm sure the shot of large forests in Japan would of been gorgeous if filmed today in color. The sword fights are sort of silly and way too long, and there is some pretty bad over acting, although I mainly chalk that up to the age of the film and the different acting styles of the Japanese. There actually is quite a lot going on here. The main characters testify to the police, but you never see the police...so they are in fact telling their version of events to you, the viewer. Kurosawa never tells you which series of event is the true one, but leaves it to your interpretation. And that's what art is....everyone who sees it will see something different in it. Overall, I can see why this film is talked about by film junkies and people studying/making films. It was difficult for me watching it almost 60 years later to grasp it.

BunnyKing:

I loved the intensity of this film. From the outset, you're brought in by the disbelief of the woodcutter and priest, but as the story unfolds, you realize everyone has some kind of exagerated account of what took place. Additionally, each character's story reflects the character's personality: the bandit is a boastful man who depicts everything through the eyes of an adventerous, albeit victorious, rogue; the woman was meek and subservient, resulting in a pathetic account of being rejected by both men and not even having the strength to consciously kill her husband; the dead man was bound by his code of honor and thus treats the story as a respectable, honorable account of two men who disdain one woman, and in the end he takes his own fate into his hands; the woodcutter, the most believeable in my opinion, was a humble, frightened man who viewed the two fighters as desperate, struggling boys too afraid to actually kill one another, too afraid to not. I think there is also a plethora of other points one can take from this film as it was so masterfully created. I think the only point of confusion for myself was the ending with the baby. It seemed disembodied and forced; who cared about the child? How did this really enrich the plot? I don't think it did, and I feel like it was just a plot point to push along the idea that men aren't total cowards. But in any case, this film is excellent and well worth watching. Kurosawa is a master!

KK 137483:

Excellent movie about human psychology and how it twists the facts based on each persons needs. Can't believe the camera work done some 60 years ago. The Japanese actors were awesome and very intense.

simplygreg:

There are certain films that are so influential they become part of the canon of the medium. Rashomon is easily one. Watching it is like reading a book of magicians secrets. Defines the term classic.

movie watchers:

This isn't the masterpiece you were sold. I wanted to like this movie. I really did. I had always heard Kurosawa was such a great director, but I just wasn't getting it. I started with Kagemusha, a movie that is technically good but runs scenes far too long and gets dry because of it. Rashomon was more in this vein- I saw a lot more promise, including camerawork and lighting that were ages ahead of their time. Other elements were nowhere near up to the praise though- the main element that stopped my enjoyment was the soundtrack, which is frankly straight out of this period of Hollywood. I understand the culture of Japan's film at this time, but the music kept making me expect Cary Grant and Bogie to pop out at any moment. Most disappointing was Toshiro Mifune's part as the bandit, which just comes off as terribly overacted. After Kagemusha and Rashomon, I just didn't know what to think of Kurosawa- was all that praise so undeserved? Then I saw Seven Samurai. Trust me, skip this and go there. Seven Samurai takes every element this movie was trying to convey, and does it so startlingly better that you'll wonder how this can be the same director. Rashomon isn't a bad movie, it's just not even near the same league as Seven Samurai and others.

Rigel:

Supposedly this is a landmark and classic film...to somebody. Long stretches of just staring, crying, or talking very slowly The plot sounds interesting enough, but I've never seen an idea so promising turned into such an abysmal wreck. The characters are unlikable and the action is laughable. For a Kurosawa film about a samurai and a bandit, I'd expect something to happen. It's just a lot of writhing in the dirt, pitifully. Even the ending and moral are ridiculous non-sequiturs. Yech.

Rafo:

This is a mandatory title if you are serious about films. More than the story itself, I enjoyed the masterful cinematography by Kazuo Miyagawa, nicely explained in the featurettes. The images are beautiful and the techniques simple but very clever. Toshiro Mifune is very good as the bandit. Overacted maybe but interesting. I liked the scene with the medium, it was odd but added originality. The characters of the woodcutter and the priest are annoying though. And the ending so patronizing and dull. But again, to me the success of this film is more visual.

msh 476413:

What a pointless, self indulgent piece of drivel. "Thanks to you, I think I can keep my faith in man." "Don't mention it." Are you serious? I'd expect a line like that from The Matrix. Just becuase this was made in Japan in the 50's doesn't make it a classic. This is no where close to The Seven Samuri.