Violence in Japan(ese movies)

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
I always hear that Japan is not a notably violent society, that murders are fairly exceptional compared to the US or even Europe. But Japanese films are filled to the gills with violence, sadeian violence in many cases. Yakuza routinely mow down entire families, gangs, etc. Obviously one doesn't expect or even want films to be a mirror of reality, but do you think that foreigners are getting a notably warped picture of Japan from the movies that are sent for export? I'm actually a little bit bothered by this.

amateur!st (amateurist), Friday, 26 December 2003 14:47 (twenty-two years ago)

Apart from Kurosawa, I don't know of many people who know anything about Japanese film. So, on that basis, I don't think their film colors their country in a negative light.

Alan Conceicao, Friday, 26 December 2003 15:33 (twenty-two years ago)

I stated this before: The Japanese don't really see film as a reflection of reality (as we Westerns do). So they don't see anything wrong with ultra-violence. On top of that there's a strong link to sex (which can't be portrayed as easily in Japanese films as here. Violence is seen as a replacement of sex.

nathalie (nathalie), Friday, 26 December 2003 15:37 (twenty-two years ago)

Don't forget too that the violent films are most of the films that make their way to overseas. Why? Because violence doesn't need subtitles.

TEH ONE AN ONLEY DEANN GULBAREY (deangulberry), Friday, 26 December 2003 17:22 (twenty-two years ago)

there is of course a huge market for japanese films of explicit sex and violence (explicit save for the customary censorship of genitalia)--i don't really see how one replaces the other, but if there is anything to read that advances this line i'd be interested.

i wonder whether violence is truly the best export, film-speaking. certainly hong kong established their regional supremacy (once upon a time) on the basis of swordplay and kung-fu, but can the same be said of bollywood?

it didn't really occur to me until i saw "kill bill"--yes, which is supposed to be a "movie about movies" instead of about any actually existing reality--until i began to really wonder about the nature of the appeal of yakuza films etc. to western audiences. it seems to be a kind of exoticism, against which one might counterpose the "universal" appeal of the japanese films of ozu. kitano's almost obsessive interest in the vagaries of honor and self-recrimination among the yakuza (which gets a bit boring itself i think, witness his "brother") is both a part of and, i guess, i kind of comment on the tendency.

amateur!st (amateurist), Friday, 26 December 2003 17:59 (twenty-two years ago)

While I appreciate your broadening of this discussion, to even consider Bollywood as a successful States-side import is a bit much. Despite what people like myself might want to watch, there is still a MASSIVE amount of people who cannot watch a movie that is in widescreen, let alone one that has subtitles. Violence is not necessarily the "best" export, but it definitely sells the best, I'd say.

TEH ONE AN ONLEY DEANN GULBAREY (deangulberry), Friday, 26 December 2003 18:14 (twenty-two years ago)

i was speaking of bollywood's regional dominance, at least once upon a time--the central asian markets belonged to bollywood, and hollywood has made inroads only in the last two decades or so. just as hong kong films dominated many east asian markets for decades....

amateur!st (amateurist), Friday, 26 December 2003 18:15 (twenty-two years ago)

some questions: does the violence reflect the filmmaking output of japan in general (or is it just what we see on western screens)? if it does, is that output shaped in large part by what sells abroad?

in a recent interview donald richie counterposes the great kore-eda but i imagine his is a minority tendency in the japanese cinema and doesn't attract many more paying customers there than elsewhere...

amateur!st (amateurist), Friday, 26 December 2003 18:17 (twenty-two years ago)

The big films in Japan are the Hollywood films that are big everywhere. Yakuza/violence/gore films account for a small part of the market. In Japan, Beat Takeshi is an alternative director -- I imagine Ken Ishhi would be seen as much more alternative. Also, the budgets for these films are so much less than they are here -- so they can make hundreds of these gore films a year on a relatively small budget. I worked with a Japanese teacher who didn't like yakuza films bc he thought they were just feeding stereotypes to Westerners. Kore-eda is also pretty alternative, but less so, I think. There is one director who is a bit mushy and sweet who is quite respected and popular-- let me check on the Web for his name, it's escaping me.

Mary (Mary), Friday, 26 December 2003 20:07 (twenty-two years ago)

The director's name I was thinking of is Shunji Iwai. His "All About Lily Chou-Chou," which I quite liked, screened here last year. He also did "Yen Town," which sounds good on paper -- about Asian foreigners in a Tokyo ghetto, but which I thought was a bit maudlin, "Yellowtail," and "Love Letter," which was sweet and very minor, about a girl's (Takako Matsu -- who was one of my favorite actresses/idols when I lived in Japan -- she is very squeaky clean) first term at college. He is a fan of the Japanese singer Chara who features in a few of his movies.

Comedies are also common, such as the one about out of work middle aged Japanese who have recently lost their jobs, as are period dramas. The only Japanese genre that is actually as big over there as here is animation.

Unagi (the Eel) was big in Japan.

The answer to your question, Amst, would I suppose be similar to the why the Japanese music that is exported and embraced here is not the everyday pop music that is loved in Japan.

Mary (Mary), Friday, 26 December 2003 20:20 (twenty-two years ago)

The big films in Japan are the Hollywood films that are big everywhere.

Isn't that true of every country, though? National cinema is an indie sideline. It's a result of monoculture, of the current monopolies over film production and distribution. American cinema is 'the particular' that is allowed to be 'the universal' (we could call it 'the designated particular' -- the cinematic equivalent of 'the chosen people'?). All other cinemas are merely 'particular' (ie, they tend to deal with peculiarities and exceptions).

One almost thinks of the cinema of one's own country as something requiring subtitles. 'What language are they speaking? Oh, it's my language! No wonder I didn't recognise it! Fancy hearing people in a film speaking like they do on the street!'

When national cinema does get produced, it tends to be for export, for art houses abroad. It tends to play up to the images foreigners have of the nation. Takeshi Kitano is a case in point. He actually has two names and two identities. In Japan he is Takeshi Kitano, the guy on TV (he's on every night, MCing gameshows). Outside Japan he is Beat Takeshi, director of whackily violent / sentimental films that get shown at festivals and on the art house circuit.

If a Japanese film manages to be universal, like the recent Ring horror films, it tends to get remade by Hollywood. It's almost as if Hollywood says, 'Nice try, guys, but the Universal is our job.'

The only exceptions I can think of are children's films like Pokemon and Spirited Away. They slip under the radar. Harry Potter is our British 'pokemon' in this sense. It's allowed to be Universal as long as it's for children. The moment it's for adults, it has to become an American product.

It's when you come to reception that you get a (small) break from monoculture. You can control what people see, but not how they see. And so it is that in Japan ET and Audrey Hepburn became sort of shinto deities -- just as Jerry Lewis became a sort of French god. The 'designated universal' can be read in particular ways. And the studios don't mind that, as long as we keep paying attention, and keep paying. What they would mind is if a local industry tried to rival them, proclaim the particular conditions of a different nation than the US 'universal'.

Pop music shows the same pattern. Japan has a record industry dominated 70% by Japanese talent -- idols with strong TV presence. This might seem to show resistance to monoculture. But big-selling Japanese pop is mostly a take on the dominant US R+B styles, with Japanese lyrics on top. If US templates are 'the universal', the Japanese industry 'particularizes' them for the local market -- on condition that this in no way gives Japanese artists 'universality'. Many Japanese artists have thought they could break America by singing in English and using 'universal' idioms. They soon found that Japanese artists who sounded different -- ie rather eccentrically Japanese -- were outselling them in the US... but still never breaking out of an arthouse ghetto.

Hollywood is always on the look-out for possible threats. If a new national cinema looks like it might begin to define the Universal, it gets co-opted. It's interesting that the fight scenes in The Matrix and Kill Bill are choreographed by the guy who did Crouching Tiger. I mean, imagine having that guy playing for the other team? Before long, everyone would be watching Chinese cinema, and they'd have distribution chains and everything.

Momus (Momus), Saturday, 27 December 2003 22:32 (twenty-two years ago)

When national cinema does get produced, it tends to be for export, for art houses abroad.

this is really a wild generalization and i don't think it always holds. here in france i was surprised to discover genres and actors and directors who were wildly popular in france (although obviously not as popular as the select few american blockbusters which dominate screens at any given time, with rare exceptions) without being known at all in the states. in the states we get the "auteur" films--chabrol, rohmer, ozon, etc.--but not things like "je reste!" and "le furet."

france of course is itself a kind of exception--its national cinema is stronger than most others'. but you'd really have to do a breakdown of box office in many countries. i know in korea a film called "memories of murder" either topped or nearly topped the box office this year, over various american imports.

amateur!st (amateurist), Saturday, 27 December 2003 22:43 (twenty-two years ago)

however i think an interesting subsidiary point which relates to your comments, is that a lot of directors celebrated in the west are either obscure or considered commercially irrelevant in their home countries--hou, kiarostami, maybe kore-eda as well but i don't know...

amateur!st (amateurist), Saturday, 27 December 2003 22:46 (twenty-two years ago)

Check out the early Guinea Pig series for an introduction of the sort of stuff no sane person wants to see (myself included, I refuse to watch them).

C-Man (C-Man), Saturday, 27 December 2003 22:51 (twenty-two years ago)

i don't understand why you're so cynical, or presume such a conspiratorial attitude on the part of people working in hollywood. their business is to make money, so they make money. there isn't much mysterious about it...

amateur!st (amateurist), Saturday, 27 December 2003 22:52 (twenty-two years ago)

(x-post)

amateur!st (amateurist), Saturday, 27 December 2003 22:52 (twenty-two years ago)

or rather you're not cynical enough!

amateur!st (amateurist), Saturday, 27 December 2003 22:54 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't think it's a conspiracy or some sort of character failure. It's just that monopoly changes everything... and ultimately huts consumers. An example:

An American fan discovers Yuen Wo-Ping, a Chinese director whose success in Hollywood has made him 'vanish':

'The fight scenes in 'Iron Monkey' are far better than The Matrix , without the $70 million budget... I'm instantly a huge Woo-ping Yuen fan. I can barely remember his name, but I love his stuff.bI must see more... Unfortunately his stuff is pretty hard to find. It's really too bad that I discovered him so late, we may never see another movie directed by him. His last movie was Tai Chi 2 in 1996. Don't think I love his films based soley on the fact of the incredible fights. The photography of his films is beautiful. He tells some pretty good stories too, Tai-Chi Master is very Shakespearean. I guess I'll just have to live with his fight direction in the next 2 Matrix films.'

Momus (Momus), Saturday, 27 December 2003 22:55 (twenty-two years ago)

Try "Ichi The Killer", "Audition" and "Fudoh" for some example of Takeshi Miike at his best. I've got a film downstairs somewhere called Suicide Club which I believe is quite violent and a recent example of the trend. Can't comment though as it's in my "to watch" stack which grows on a daily basis. There's some great Japanese horror out there though - along with the Takeshi Miike stuff you're well advised to check out Hypnosis, Uzumaki and Dark Water - though these might be a bit tame for this discussion. Battle Royale thrilled many, but I didn't enjoy it.

The Japanese horror that is of the ultra violent sort takes in Guinea Pig 1 and 2 (the second called Flower of Flesh and Blood) and the likes of The Untold Story, Guts of a Virgin and the All Night Long series. I know of these films but I have never, and likely will never, watch them - having read descriptions I know in advance I'm likely to be really offended. So, really... draw your own line.

A good site to order Japanese DVDs is www.dddhouse.com

C-Man (C-Man), Sunday, 28 December 2003 02:41 (twenty-two years ago)

I find Japanese and Hong Kong cinema a refreshing change from Hollywood movies. The action films produced in the East are invariably much better and the horror films have a foreign mysticism that allows the genre to live up to being a fairy tale as you are cast into a story, sometimes difficult to follow, with no stars, weird plot and haphazard photography - enlivened by bouts of kinetic scares and beautiful atmospherics. A bit like when Dario Argento was at his peak and everyone thrilled to how awesome Inferno actually was when compared against the American slasher films at the time.

C-Man (C-Man), Sunday, 28 December 2003 02:46 (twenty-two years ago)

Japanese are naturally agressive but were pacified by 2 atomic bombs. There is still a lot of suppressed rage. Look at all the fools on the trains and subways of Tokyo, Yokohama and Nagoya, forinstance. And, all of the pent up rage is splatted in the porn... not to mention live sex industry. There is savage sex play all over the damn place! Model rooms. Health delivery service. Snack clubs. Soaplands. Telephone clubs. Omise. Just to name a few\\\\\\\\\\ A wonderland of sex deviants!

Shinjuku 12, Sunday, 28 December 2003 09:06 (twenty-two years ago)

Stop it! You've got my heart all aflutter!

Dan I., Sunday, 28 December 2003 09:30 (twenty-two years ago)

Yesterday I watched the first 'Lady Snowblood' (1973), one of the Japanese female samurai movies that Tarantino explicitly pays tribute to in 'Kill Bill'. The soundtrack is a kind of ersatz Morricone score, while the blood-spurting violence is very reminiscent of Peckinpah, and it struck me again that 'influence' or inspiration cuts both ways (John Woo has pretty obviously learned a trick or two from Tony and Ridley Scott in his time) - Japanese exploitation steals from American cinema and is turn re-appropriated by American directors like Tarantino (and as Mary suggests, see also the back-and-forth between American and Japanese psychedelia.)

Andrew L (Andrew L), Sunday, 28 December 2003 11:16 (twenty-two years ago)

calum i'm well aware of the miiike (how many "i"s in his name anyhow?) films and suchlike--my precise problem is that it is those type of films which represent contemporary japanese cinema to people in europe and america.

amateur!st (amateurist), Sunday, 28 December 2003 14:38 (twenty-two years ago)

does anyone know where i could find reliable info on national box office--a book or web site that gives some sense of the relative popularity of national cinemas, hollywood, etc.?

(i should add to my posts above that i wasn't exactly contradicting momus. select exceptions don't really contradict his basic point that hollywood film dominates cinemas nearly everywhere. the big exception i forgot to point out is india--where the norm remains bollywood films [and in certain regions, bengali films on the bollywood model etc.] and hollywood films are, while quite popular, a kind of alternative option.

i should also note that w/r/t the remakes issue--hollywood has been remaking foreign films since the beginning, really. and it's worth noting that hong kong and bollywood films cannibalize hollywood all the time (someone has noted that if copyright were to be enforced in india the way it is in europe, bollywood would have some changes coming) and this seems to be a normal process both ways. i guess one can judge by the results--and in fact IMO the hollywood remake of "the ring" was quite good. i don't think that hollywood remakes of foreign films are by definition inferior to HK, japanese, indian borrowings from hollywood films--to insist on this point for the purpose of insulating a larger argument about capitalism and monopoly would seem pedantic to me. not that this is what you're doing, but i've read criticisms that fall along those lines.)

amateur!st (amateurist), Sunday, 28 December 2003 14:43 (twenty-two years ago)

in other words calum i'm not interested in finding out about the permutations of violence in japanese cinema as such... if you'd've read the first post...

amateur!st (amateurist), Sunday, 28 December 2003 14:44 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah. But others questioned that (and it's Miike) - Japanese cinema has a variety of arms, you get all genres catered for (again, search dddhouse for them) but, hey, the violent or fantastical films are often the most appealing because of how damn different they are. And there's nowt wrong with Miike's films, they are truely amazing works.

C-Man (C-Man), Sunday, 28 December 2003 14:53 (twenty-two years ago)

I do with the first post, but there are many japanese films that have not been put through the "AMERICANMACHINE" and been turned into crap..

Personal favorite is The Pillowbook
Beautiful yet kooky, like japan i guess

espresso fetish (espresso fetish), Sunday, 28 December 2003 14:57 (twenty-two years ago)

the pillow book is an english film by peter greenaway

amateur!st (amateurist), Sunday, 28 December 2003 14:58 (twenty-two years ago)

actually it's a british/french/dutch film technically.

amateur!st (amateurist), Sunday, 28 December 2003 15:02 (twenty-two years ago)

My mate Dr Dan (PhD in film special effects) reckons you could take all the samurai/ninja films Tarantino paid tribute to in Kill Bill and recreate Kill Bill shot-by-shot using clips from them and a digital video editing suite.

Man City have take the lead!

Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Sunday, 28 December 2003 15:34 (twenty-two years ago)

i highly doubt that. punters.

amateur!st (amateurist), Sunday, 28 December 2003 15:47 (twenty-two years ago)

i don't even like "kill bill" but this is a case of "use other criticisms, please!"

amateur!st (amateurist), Sunday, 28 December 2003 15:47 (twenty-two years ago)

Not saying it was a bad thing! We really enjoyed it!

Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Sunday, 28 December 2003 15:55 (twenty-two years ago)

violence in japan

gygax! (gygax!), Sunday, 28 December 2003 21:05 (twenty-two years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.