My Thoughts On The Last Samurai

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2003-12-13 08:26pm

In which Pooh learns that the only way to respond to increasing modernization is through a violent, brutal uprising and senseless killing in order to preserve outdated, regressive ideals.

Does anybody remember that one episode of the Simpsons in which they're watching a historical movie, and Lisa makes some comment about how its completely inaccurate, only to have Bart tell her to shut up, because 'here come the ninjas'?

That is this movie.

Yes, in the middle of the movie, there is a completely random ninja attack. It is not pointless or superfluous, but it is jarring, to say the least, to suddenly see ninjas come out of no where and then vanish for the rest of the movie.

Now, I'm not going to bother with nitpicking all the historical inaccuracies, the follies of the final battle, nor even will I mention Tom Cruise's merely adequate acting (looks like I lied).

Let me compare it, for a moment, with Gladiator, and the Lord of the Rings. Each of these are fairly epic historical flicks, (or historical-fantasy, as the case may be), but behind all the battles and violence there is a single overridding goal. Maximus' goal is simple: Revenge against the man who murdered his family. The goal of LotR is equally clear: Save Middle Earth from the Dark Lord.

So what is the Last Samurai about? What are the samurai fighting for? Why are they willing to risk, not only their deaths, but the slaughter of thousands? Throughout the movie, the modernists and westernizers are demonized. It is obvious from the way the subject matter is treated that we are supposed to respect and sympathize with the samurai, who are fighting, I suppose, for the preservation of their old order.

But that's not worth fighting for, and if a story's heroes fight for a worthless cause, it is much more difficult to compel the audience to believe that they are, in fact, heroes. Doubly so for The Last Samurai, in which the cause of the samurai is sickeningly glorified to the point of absurdity.

The old order is not worth fighting for because it is a backwards society. Men can only devote their lives to the martial arts if they do not need to work in the shops and the fields, and that is what the samurai represent: a warrior class, above and aloof the common man, superior in every way, arrogant and stagnant. They are no less autocratic than the Emperor's councilors.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-12-13 08:32pm

Japanese cartoons and comic books present a more balanced, comprehensive picture of Japanese history then this movie is interested in doing. The reverse black and white history presented by this movie is no better than those old Westerns that had heroic cowboys killing the savages, or The Birth of a Nation, for that matter.

zombie84 · Post by **zombie84** » 2003-12-13 09:07pm

Enjoy it for the action and costume set pieces i guess. I wish i could comment but unfortunatly i have yet to see it.

Otherwise, stick with Kurosawa.

justifier · Post by **justifier** » 2003-12-13 10:57pm

HemlockGrey wrote:In which Pooh learns that the only way to respond to increasing modernization is through a violent, brutal uprising and senseless killing in order to preserve outdated, regressive ideals.

Does anybody remember that one episode of the Simpsons in which they're watching a historical movie, and Lisa makes some comment about how its completely inaccurate, only to have Bart tell her to shut up, because 'here come the ninjas'?

That is this movie.

Its like a history lession come to life!

Grand Admiral Thrawn · Post by **Grand Admiral Thrawn** » 2003-12-13 11:09pm

Hey, Tom Cruise and the Samurai Calvery Charge are ruthlessly gunned down by multiple Gatling Guns, easily the most entertaining moment in the movie. Plus it symbolises the Samurai are powerless to stop the onward march of technology.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2003-12-13 11:11pm

I kinda thought it was odd that Cruise went from being able to hold off half a dozen samurai with a flagpole to not being able to beat one, though.

Grand Admiral Thrawn · Post by **Grand Admiral Thrawn** » 2003-12-13 11:13pm

HemlockGrey wrote:I kinda thought it was odd that Cruise went from being able to hold off half a dozen samurai with a flagpole

You would think one of them would get a Bow or something.

to not being able to beat one, though.

But he can fight Evil Ninja Forces!

The Cleric · Post by **The Cleric** » 2003-12-13 11:16pm

I took it that his rage and desperation fueled him against less than steller warriors.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-12-14 01:43am

That's not the only problem.

Number 1, why the fuck do the Japanese need a drunken buffoon like Nathan Algren? There were surely plenty of American soldiers who had experience fighting Indians who would've been more than up to the task.

Number 2, the decision to send a completely inexperienced, poorly trained unit to war; a deus ex machina. No one with any military experience could possibly be that stupid, but I guess they needed a bad guy to make an implausible decision to drive forward the plot.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2003-12-14 01:57am

They do it a lot, too; the slimy modernizer also overrides the American's decision to send out skirmishers and fails to move the Gatling guns up to where they can actually support the infantry.

Crayz9000 · Post by **Crayz9000** » 2003-12-14 02:30am

I was at a theatre with my girlfriend today, and we had a choice of going to see The Last Samurai or a number of other films (most of which we never heard of).

We saw Elf.

Peregrin Toker · Post by **Peregrin Toker** » 2003-12-14 05:16am

Crayz9000 wrote:We saw Elf.

The one about a guy who's been raised by elves, or the one about an elf created by Nazis??

Crayz9000 · Post by **Crayz9000** » 2003-12-14 06:07pm

Simon H.Johansen wrote:The one about a guy who's been raised by elves, or the one about an elf created by Nazis??

The comedy about the guy raised by elves. It was very corny, of course, but what would you expect from such a movie?

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2003-12-14 07:15pm

There's a movie about the Nazis making an elf?

Jadeite · Post by **Jadeite** » 2003-12-14 08:02pm

I rather liked the movie. I wasn't expecting it to be some deep and historically accurate piece of art. I expected entertainment and that's what I got. Of course, I am a sucker for war movies set in that time period, when battles still consisted of mass ranks of infantry marching into each others fire.

Raoul Duke, Jr. · Post by **Raoul Duke, Jr.** » 2003-12-14 08:17pm

Grand Admiral Thrawn wrote:
HemlockGrey wrote:I kinda thought it was odd that Cruise went from being able to hold off half a dozen samurai with a flagpole
You would think one of them would get a Bow or something.
to not being able to beat one, though.

But he can fight Evil Ninja Forces!

Oh, please tell me this movie didn't butcher the history of the shinobi yet again...

Grand Admiral Thrawn · Post by **Grand Admiral Thrawn** » 2003-12-14 08:56pm

Raoul Duke, Jr. wrote:
Oh, please tell me this movie didn't butcher the history of the shinobi yet again...

Er, no? Yes? Please explain.

Cosmic Average · Post by **Cosmic Average** » 2003-12-14 09:52pm

neoolong wrote:There's a movie about the Nazis making an elf?

I think he's referring to Hellboy, where Nazis summon a demon in an attempt to destroy the world in the closing days of WWII.

He turns out to be good, instead of evil. Based on a comicbook.

Beaker · Post by **Beaker** » 2003-12-14 09:55pm

Who cares...what were you expecting...a history lesson?

It has Tom Cruise in it for gods sake...

If you want to see a real Samurai movie watch Akira Kurosawas Seven Samurai

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-12-14 10:14pm

The first hour of the movie wasn't so horrible, but by the second hour one of the people I saw it with was fast asleep, I was repressing an urge to yell out at the screen (several others failed at that) and the movie was generally being treated as the joke it was.

Grand Admiral Thrawn wrote:Hey, Tom Cruise and the Samurai Calvery Charge are ruthlessly gunned down by multiple Gatling Guns, easily the most entertaining moment in the movie. Plus it symbolises the Samurai are powerless to stop the onward march of technology.

If the movie wasn't so stupid, all Samurai would have been gunned down by the first three ranks of infantry, because the morons would have deployed in ranks rather then a huge mass in which most couldn't shoot. Though if the few that could fire remembered how to reload it wouldn't have mattered anyway.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2003-12-14 10:21pm

I was screaming at the fucking infantry to keep unit cohesion, too, because if they had kept relatively tight ranks a massed bayonet charge should have swept away the samurai.

And for the love of God, the point of heavy weaponry is to support the infantry! The Gatling guns are useless in the back row!

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2003-12-15 12:02am

Grand Admiral Thrawn wrote:
Raoul Duke, Jr. wrote: Oh, please tell me this movie didn't butcher the history of the shinobi yet again...
Er, no? Yes? Please explain.

Shinobi is another term for ninja. The ninja that are commonly seen in movies are hardly representative of the historical ninja that were effective throughout Japanese history. At least, that is the impression I got from reading through everyone's various replies to the film (I haven't seen it, and not sure I want to).

Because I haven't seen the film I have to ask: when the ninja do attack are they driven off by Tom Cruise single-handed or do they succeed in their mission? (I can already see their mission being none other than an assassination mission, not surprising unfortunately.)

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-12-15 12:43am

HemlockGrey wrote:I was screaming at the fucking infantry to keep unit cohesion, too, because if they had kept relatively tight ranks a massed bayonet charge should have swept away the samurai.

And for the love of God, the point of heavy weaponry is to support the infantry! The Gatling guns are useless in the back row!

Actually that's one point in which the movie was right on, in the 1870's everyone handled machine guns very poorly, and generally thought of and used them as another form of artillery, though it wouldn't be usual for a commander to simply leave them in reserve and not know what to do with them. Gatling's (especially the ten barreled version shown in the movie) where really too heavy to bring up with the infantry anyway. It was only with the Maxim, and to a much lesser extent the Nordenfelt and Gardner guns all of which where much lighter for the rates of fire they provided that machine guns began to accompany the infantry forward.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-12-15 12:47am

Stofsk wrote:
Because I haven't seen the film I have to ask: when the ninja do attack are they driven off by Tom Cruise single-handed or do they succeed in their mission? (I can already see their mission being none other than an assassination mission, not surprising unfortunately.)

Cruise kills a couple, but he's fighting with a number of other Samurai and would have been very dead without help. I think it was one of the "better" parts of the movie, it at least didn't have my brain screening "why/what the fuck?"

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2003-12-15 12:53am

Sea Skimmer wrote:Cruise kills a couple, but he's fighting with a number of other Samurai and would have been very dead without help. I think it was one of the "better" parts of the movie, it at least didn't have my brain screening "why/what the fuck?"

That's fine then, if the Samurai were helping and it was clear that Cruise would be dead otherwise I sorta don't have a problem with it. But then, how does Cruise kill any at all? Does he surprise them? Do they surprise him and yet somehow he recovers? How many ninja were there?

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

My Thoughts On The Last Samurai

My Thoughts On The Last Samurai

Re: My Thoughts On The Last Samurai