26 April 2016
BEST SHOT: THRONE OF BLOOD
An auspicious event: for the first time in the six seasons of Hit Me with Your Best Shot, Nathaniel has selected a movie directed by Kurosawa Akira, and shot by Nakai Asakazu, Throne of Blood. It was the seventh of twelve films the pair made together, and some of the titles they collaborated on - Stray Dog, Ikiru, Seven Samurai, High and Low (with Saito Takao), Ran (with Saito and Ueda Shoji), and today's subject as well - are all high up on my list of the most perfectly-composed movies in the history of the art form (Kurosawa has for a very long time, in fact, been probably the director responsible for most of the films I regard as having the best compositions).
That results in an embarrassment of riches to pick from, but the minute I heard that Throne of Blood was on the schedule, I knew I was going to choose a particular shot from near the beginning, or particular shot from near the end. In the spirit of avoiding spoilers for a 59-year-old masterpiece of the world art cinema canon based on one of the best-known stories in all of Western literature, I elected to go with the former shot. It is a shot with movement, and a very long shot - too long to make a .gif of it, though I toyed with just selecting a brief swatch of it. But no, I think you need to see all of it. P.S. there's no sound:
(But if you are strapped for time, here's a still)
Throne of Blood teaches us how to watch it. Based on William Shakespeare's Macbeth - rather faithfully, especially considering that it transfers the action to Sengoku-era Japan (it's my favorite filmed version of the play and among my favorite screen incarnations of Shakespeare) - the film finds a cinematic analogue to Shakespearean blank verse in the form of Japan's own theater traditions. Famously, the film is based upon the traditions of Noh theater, which are not remotely the traditions of cinema in Japan or any other country, and while I certainly don't know the history of Japanese film well enough to claim that this was or wasn't unprecedented (my guess is not: at the very least, movies drawing from kabuki tradition had certainly already been made by '57), but at the very least it is quite unusual, and Kurosawa was enough of a populist filmmaker - moreover, enough of a populist who by this point in his career was keenly aware of American filmmaking idiom and the potential of an international audience - to ease us into the stylistic extremes of his film.
And so, the movie doesn't simply tromp right off the deep end into extreme style, it finds its way there over the course of the first couple of reels; it's really only during the sequence in which General Washizu (Mifune Toshiro) and General Miki (Kubo Akira), the Macbeth and Banquo analogues, find their way into an uncanny forest where unconventional editing choices and a wholly alien sound design abound that the stylisation goes from "a little, but it's a period film" to "what the hell is this movie doing". Particularly when they meet a spirit (Naniwa Chieko), lit up in a most peculiar way as it patiently winds yarn, chanting. Oh how I wish I could have included that chanting in my shot. But working with video is enough of a chore, and you'll just have to go watch a great movie if you want the full effect. Besides, it's not "Hit Me with Your Best Marriage of Sound and Image".
So there is, first, a gorgeous left-to-right tracking shot that glides from the bug-eyed generals to our first shot of the spirit, and then the image holds; it cuts to the men, then back, then back to the men as they walk around in front of the spirit, then over their shoulders, then back to their faces, then back over their shoulders, and that is the 38-second take I had you watch way back up there.
The point of all this being: the film is in no hurry. More than two minutes of screentime elapse while the men are watching the spirit chanting and winding, and in those two minutes, their quarter-circle walk around in front of the spirit is the only action of any sort. It is magnificent. It is, I suppose, frustrating, but it's also the film's way, I think, of forcibly placing us into the mindset that we'll have to live in for the rest of the movie. What Throne of Blood takes from Noh is a system of highly formulaic, ritualistic tropes for acting and presenting action. This particular shot, I don't suppose, is part of that system - but it is entirely ritualistic, giving us absolutely nothing to do besides look at the cross-shaped wheel turning in circle after circle while the spirit sings, and leaving us only the options of finding reflective pleasure in the knowledge of a repetitive task being performed impeccably, or bailing out of the movie from sheet boredom. It is aggressively static. We, as viewers, don't get to do anything, just like Washizu and Miki don't: they're transfixed and confused in presumably the same way that we are, if the film is doing its job right.
We are watching a ritual act in a film that is henceforth going to be made out of ritual acts, then, and I think this shot (this sequence, really) is the film's gatekeeping moment: if you can modulate your viewing to match the rhythmic stasis of this image, then you get to keep watching. Because even as the film never stops in its tracks in quite this way again, it never really does stop being about this unconventional.
That results in an embarrassment of riches to pick from, but the minute I heard that Throne of Blood was on the schedule, I knew I was going to choose a particular shot from near the beginning, or particular shot from near the end. In the spirit of avoiding spoilers for a 59-year-old masterpiece of the world art cinema canon based on one of the best-known stories in all of Western literature, I elected to go with the former shot. It is a shot with movement, and a very long shot - too long to make a .gif of it, though I toyed with just selecting a brief swatch of it. But no, I think you need to see all of it. P.S. there's no sound:
(But if you are strapped for time, here's a still)
Throne of Blood teaches us how to watch it. Based on William Shakespeare's Macbeth - rather faithfully, especially considering that it transfers the action to Sengoku-era Japan (it's my favorite filmed version of the play and among my favorite screen incarnations of Shakespeare) - the film finds a cinematic analogue to Shakespearean blank verse in the form of Japan's own theater traditions. Famously, the film is based upon the traditions of Noh theater, which are not remotely the traditions of cinema in Japan or any other country, and while I certainly don't know the history of Japanese film well enough to claim that this was or wasn't unprecedented (my guess is not: at the very least, movies drawing from kabuki tradition had certainly already been made by '57), but at the very least it is quite unusual, and Kurosawa was enough of a populist filmmaker - moreover, enough of a populist who by this point in his career was keenly aware of American filmmaking idiom and the potential of an international audience - to ease us into the stylistic extremes of his film.
And so, the movie doesn't simply tromp right off the deep end into extreme style, it finds its way there over the course of the first couple of reels; it's really only during the sequence in which General Washizu (Mifune Toshiro) and General Miki (Kubo Akira), the Macbeth and Banquo analogues, find their way into an uncanny forest where unconventional editing choices and a wholly alien sound design abound that the stylisation goes from "a little, but it's a period film" to "what the hell is this movie doing". Particularly when they meet a spirit (Naniwa Chieko), lit up in a most peculiar way as it patiently winds yarn, chanting. Oh how I wish I could have included that chanting in my shot. But working with video is enough of a chore, and you'll just have to go watch a great movie if you want the full effect. Besides, it's not "Hit Me with Your Best Marriage of Sound and Image".
So there is, first, a gorgeous left-to-right tracking shot that glides from the bug-eyed generals to our first shot of the spirit, and then the image holds; it cuts to the men, then back, then back to the men as they walk around in front of the spirit, then over their shoulders, then back to their faces, then back over their shoulders, and that is the 38-second take I had you watch way back up there.
The point of all this being: the film is in no hurry. More than two minutes of screentime elapse while the men are watching the spirit chanting and winding, and in those two minutes, their quarter-circle walk around in front of the spirit is the only action of any sort. It is magnificent. It is, I suppose, frustrating, but it's also the film's way, I think, of forcibly placing us into the mindset that we'll have to live in for the rest of the movie. What Throne of Blood takes from Noh is a system of highly formulaic, ritualistic tropes for acting and presenting action. This particular shot, I don't suppose, is part of that system - but it is entirely ritualistic, giving us absolutely nothing to do besides look at the cross-shaped wheel turning in circle after circle while the spirit sings, and leaving us only the options of finding reflective pleasure in the knowledge of a repetitive task being performed impeccably, or bailing out of the movie from sheet boredom. It is aggressively static. We, as viewers, don't get to do anything, just like Washizu and Miki don't: they're transfixed and confused in presumably the same way that we are, if the film is doing its job right.
We are watching a ritual act in a film that is henceforth going to be made out of ritual acts, then, and I think this shot (this sequence, really) is the film's gatekeeping moment: if you can modulate your viewing to match the rhythmic stasis of this image, then you get to keep watching. Because even as the film never stops in its tracks in quite this way again, it never really does stop being about this unconventional.
6 comments:
Just a few rules so that everybody can have fun: ad hominem attacks on the blogger are fair; ad hominem attacks on other commenters will be deleted. And I will absolutely not stand for anything that is, in my judgment, demeaning, insulting or hateful to any gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or religion. And though I won't insist on keeping politics out, let's think long and hard before we say anything particularly inflammatory.
Also, sorry about the whole "must be a registered user" thing, but I do deeply hate to get spam, and I refuse to take on the totalitarian mantle of moderating comments, and I am much too lazy to try to migrate over to a better comments system than the one that comes pre-loaded with Blogger.
Damn Tim, your timing is as perfect as always. Only a week ago this was screened at my local cinematheque, so I naturally went to finally watch it. Well, it's as great a Kurosawa as any, of course, and I could certainly see it was absolutely ravishing.
ReplyDeleteThe print, however, looked as if it were held in a box full of salt, with a ton of artefacts, combing and vertical lines (it also tore down a few minutes away from the ending, and it took them some 10 minutes to get it fixed). Because of that, the picture looked really muddy and I can't really name a favourite shot from the movie.
Looking at the shot you picked now, it really does seem like I must watch it in a more acceptable condition. Any good Europeam BR releases, anyone?
love that you call it the gatekeeping moment because the way the warriors move through that haunted forest brush and into that eerily bright space to watch this evil spirit felt not unlike curtains opening. NOW we begin.
ReplyDeletesomehow i had never seen this (though I love the Kurosawa pictures I've seen for the most part) and I just loved it. One of his very best surely. I might even prefer it to Ran (1985) its closest parallel given the source material.
Was Throne of Blood always 4:3 ? Why do I remember it as 2.35: 1 ? What sorcery is this?
ReplyDeleteYou're right of course that this film is PERFECTLY composed - a lot of the interior shots reminded me of Ozu in their careful, patient, nearly static compositions (yes, I know they were basically contemporaries, let me have this). I almost prefer to think of the shots as "staged" as opposed to "composed" given how much of that composition derives from Noh - a lot of it is like looking at a filmed Noh production, and a lot of the film's power comes from putting that tradition on film in a dynamic way. Noh is all about small, deliberate gestures, and the closeness of the camera and largeness of the screen amplifies that. The spirit sitting there, spinning the wheel and chanting is absolutely something you would see in a Noh theater piece.
ReplyDeleteThe journey through Spider's Web forest that opens the film is freaking gorgeous, and that editing with the lightning is really something, especially for the 50s. I will admit that the chanting bored me to tears in a way that this scene usually doesn't in other versions of Macbeth, but it sets the tone for this version of the story wonderfully. For me, the film doesn't really get going until the first scene with Washizu and Lady Asaji, when the Noh-style staging gets a full scene to make an even bigger impact than with the spirit.
Awesome choice and write-up like always (even if my biggest memory of watching that scene was making cocaine jokes with my regular cinematographer in my room).
ReplyDeleteI'm in the middle of personal matters that uprooted me from Miami to NYC and so its keeping me off blogging for a bit, but when I get back into it, my own shot choice is actually from Washizu's second encounter with the spectre... A shot with a mind for geometry lending itself to theatricality and keeping the screen busy that I really admired.
Hey Tim, greetings from sunny Chicago! Screenings just aren't the same down here without you. I've been lurking your blog for years and this seemed the perfect time to chip in a bit of film historical wankery.
ReplyDeleteSo re: Japanese stage tradition on film, you are absolutely right that kabuki adaptation goes way way back. The earliest J films we might call "narrative" or "fiction" (pretty meaningless distinctions back then) were filmed kabuki performances; likewise the oldest surviving film made in Japan (discounting Lumieres travelogues and the like) is a kabuki version of the 47 Loyal Ronin, circa 1912.
Noh's a totally different beast, though. Unlike kabuki, which was bloody, bawdy, spectacular entertainment for the early-modern townsfolk, Noh was basically a medieval religious form for Zen-practicing elites. So think the difference between Shakespeare and like a 13th century passion play set to Gregorian chant. Like you say, not an aesthetic system with a lot of affinity for most forms of commercial or art (e.g. montage) cinematic practice prior to the development of the international long-take style in the 50s.
With one notable exception: Kenji Mizoguchi. In particular, the films Mizoguchi made from 1939-1945. In particular particular, his 1941-42 version of Chushingura (aka 47 Ronin), a flat-out masterpiece of fascist cinema - a bit of a paradox, I know - as relayed through the aesthetic experience and sensorium of an "authentic" pre-modern Japanese subject. (I gave a paper on it this past weekend; it's on my mind.) It's on Hulu if you haven't seen it, all three-and-a-half glorious, glacial hours. And it's a world of difference from Kurosawa, who for all his good (nay, glorious) experimentation in Throne of Blood, was still at heart a visual/action storyteller for whom Stagecoach was the pinnacle of the form. Not that I'd much disagree.
-Richard D.