"THE LAST SAMURAI" - Man, it's ALWAYS about the one white guy in the film, isn't it?

[carly]

"In The Last Samurai, Tom Cruise stars as an American officer recruited by the Emperor of Japan to modernize his country's warfare techniques.
Cruise's character ends up becoming quite taken by the samurais and their art form."

[GunnedDownAtrocity]

lmao

[dezhen2001]

that sounds like a c.rappy movie :(

dawood

[Kristoffer]

:D

[@PLUGO]

Saw the preview for this movie at MATRIX 2...

EVERYONE in the thearter howled at sight of Tom Cruise playing mr Bas@ss Samurai...

The tragic thing is that with TC involved it's gonna have excellent production. Costumes, sets, etc... will surely be top notch... It's just a question of weither I could tolerate TOM getting in the way of the scenery...

[Chang Style Novice]

> that sounds like a c.rappy movie

The words "Tom Cruise" are pretty much a guarantee of that.

[Daredevil]

You guys are weird.

I'm definately waiting for this one.

[StickyHands]

Nah I rather have the Mejican (Mexican) Aztec warrior acting as a samurai than the top gun white boy! lol. We already know that the American will mess up the traditional portryal of Japanese culture, hehe, he lacks Bushido. The Montezuma will have revenge on you! (I hope they put some Aikido moves in the movie).

[Surferdude]

Wait.....could a white dude do that back then?:confused: :eek:
Just become a samurai back in the good ole Meiji Reconstruction Era?

[SevenStar]

I posted a thread on this movie several months ago, when I first heard about it. you may see more replies there

[@PLUGO]

could a white dude do that back then?

Well, Richard Chamberlin did it in SHOGON.... and that was WAYYYYYYYYY back in the early 80's....

[Surferdude]

O yea that was cool

[SanSoo Student]

They should have a native american guy play the part in that movie, because according to the movie Windtalkers: native american people look almost exactly like Japanese people.

And then the movie could have comic relief when he yells out in Japanese, "Im Indian You Stupid Fools!", and then gets chased around by samurais.

:p :D

[Mr. Horse]

I finally saw it. I don't want to give anything away. I'll give it two grades.

Hollywood movie: B

Historical correctness: C-

It is a good movie and worth seeing at the theater. However, some of the events in the movie would not happen. I know it was LOOSELY about Saigo Takamori's last stand, but some of the things that people did would not be done. I am sorry, but I got my degree in Japanese studies focusing on this time period and it kind of bothered me.

[doug maverick]

I was surprised this movie was great. i won't tell you what its about so go see it.

[Shaolinlueb]

its entertainment aka fiction. its not supposed to be correct. if it was a documentary then yes it would. its liek in fast and furious people were like "oph got the tecxh is wrong" its entertainment, stop bashing they're not always right. plus its hollywood they believe they can rewrite stuff.

oh i saw it too. very good movie.

[cerebus]

Or seeing him with a drop-dead gorgeous, 6 foot tall redhead named Nicole Kidman as his wife? (Well, ex-wife now).:D

[neit]

i always thought i had an ugly nose. until people started to point out that it looks exactly like tom cruise's. now i'm not suire either way.

[DragonzRage]

What were the major inaccuracies that you saw? Could you be more specific (for those of us who did not get our degrees in Japanese studies)? I'm actually curious.

I thought the movie was very spirited and entertaining, and the battle scenes were spectacular. But it could have been a much more provocative and intelligent film had it addressed the actual politics behind the conflict in greater detail. The movie really glorified the mythological image of the samurai warrior without really explaining the samurai's place in Japanese society and why they were so disenchanted with the new Imperial government....
but then again, if the movie had explained that the samurai were a useless class of land owning aristocrats in an obsolete and backward feudal system who had not fought a real war in a couple centuries, then the movie would not have been so inspiring:D

[WanderingMonk]

I don't know much about Japanese, but in China, if you kill someone's husband, don't expect the widow and her kid would be nice to you or forgive you.

wm

[Kristoffer]

cool, I'm lookin forward to seeing it now

[Mr. Horse]

I will try without giving too much away. Ok. The problems are small but you can tell. However, people CAN argue the opposite.

1. The Japanese that they used seemed a little too modern.

2. The samurai would probably have killed him.

3. It seemed like his with the samurai for a little under a year. It seemed late summer/ early fall. They started teaching him before it got cold. I dont think they would teach him that fast. I am not saying they would never have taught him, because right after WWII, SOME of the martial art teacher taught US troops.

4. When the samurai cut the Japanese officer's head, he PROBABLY would not cut it completely off, because they were kinda friends earlier. It is a little shameful to let his head bounce away. This is a little iffy, but I feel that he wouldn't do that.

5. Algren would not be so welcomed into the village. He would always be an outsider. It was the countryside in 1877. I live in the countryside in Japan now and there is still a feeling of being a outsider for me.

6. This is what kinda bothered me the most was the relationship between Algren and Taka. It was not the fact she was nice to him. She was told to so she was nice. However, the loving feelings they had for each other is bull****. He killed her husband. She forgave him, but this type of JAPANESE forgiveness is not the same as the forgiveness in the movie. There is a type of forgiveness in Japanese culture that is kinda like to forgive and to put those feelings behind you (it is hard to explain), but not in the way of I forgive you, oh I am starting to like you.

The kiss when she was robing him would not happen. I don't think she would do it even if it was a Japanese guy. It is the countryside in Japan over 116 years ago. She would not have a relationship with a gaikokujin. Especially if was the guy who killed your husband. Let's say she really really liked him, she would not act upon it. I had some friends and coworkers who wanted to have a relationship or marry someone but didn't because of their parents wishes or social reasons. That part would have been a better without the kiss.

7. The way people spoke to Meiji seemed a little strange.

8. Algren wear the armor of the man he killed.

There are more but I can't remember. I am going to see again and edit this post. These 8 points can be argued both ways. I feel they are mostly not going to happen

[dwid]

Visually, it was pretty impressive.

Story-wise, it was a little heavy-handed with the sappiness. Also, the character's redemption just didn't have the impact it could have had, because he never made me believe he was struggling to begin with.

Overall, the action was nice, the scenery and costumes were beautiful, and the ending sucked.

Still, I'm glad I saw it in the theater, it just should have ended about 5-10 minutes before it actually did. When you see it, you'll know what I mean.

[Judge Pen]

I'll see it Wednesday. At least I'm expecting it to be pretty. Ed Zwick is a visually impressive director.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Bluesman
I carpool with a guy who went to school with Tom Cruise, although that is his stage name. He had a funny last name that I can not recall right now. Marple something.
In high school, he was not the guy you see on tv or in the movies. He was new and quiet and only hung around with the guys that lived near him, which is understandable. He comes from a weathly family that moved often.
He thought that Tom was about 5' 6" at the most , so he must have grown some.
Can you imagine seeing some guy that sat in your class in high school up on the movie screen as Hollywood's biggest leading man ?

my wife's father dated vivica fox in high school. My dad lived around the corner from the Jacksons when they were all kids. I went to high school with quentin jackson.

[SanSoo Student]

I like how the samurai shot their bows, it looks so cool. The ending was done that way cuz it was hollywood, movie was pretty good. Worthy of spending 7 bucks.

[apoweyn]

Originally posted by Mr. Horse
I will try without giving too much away. Ok. The problems are small but you can tell. However, people CAN argue the opposite.

1. The Japanese that they used seemed a little too modern.

2. The samurai would probably have killed him.

3. It seemed like his with the samurai for a little under a year. It seemed late summer/ early fall. They started teaching him before it got cold. I dont think they would teach him that fast. I am not saying they would never have taught him, because right after WWII, SOME of the martial art teacher taught US troops.

4. When the samurai cut the Japanese officer's head, he PROBABLY would not cut it completely off, because they were kinda friends earlier. It is a little shameful to let his head bounce away. This is a little iffy, but I feel that he wouldn't do that.

5. Algren would not be so welcomed into the village. He would always be an outsider. It was the countryside in 1877. I live in the countryside in Japan now and there is still a feeling of being a outsider for me.

6. This is what kinda bothered me the most was the relationship between Algren and Taka. It was not the fact she was nice to him. She was told to so she was nice. However, the loving feelings they had for each other is bull****. He killed her husband. She forgave him, but this type of JAPANESE forgiveness is not the same as the forgiveness in the movie. There is a type of forgiveness in Japanese culture that is kinda like to forgive and to put those feelings behind you (it is hard to explain), but not in the way of I forgive you, oh I am starting to like you.

The kiss when she was robing him would not happen. I don't think she would do it even if it was a Japanese guy. It is the countryside in Japan over 116 years ago. She would not have a relationship with a gaikokujin. Especially if was the guy who killed your husband. Let's say she really really liked him, she would not act upon it. I had some friends and coworkers who wanted to have a relationship or marry someone but didn't because of their parents wishes or social reasons. That part would have been a better without the kiss.

7. The way people spoke to Meiji seemed a little strange.

8. Algren wear the armor of the man he killed.

There are more but I can't remember. I am going to see again and edit this post. These 8 points can be argued both ways. I feel they are mostly not going to happen

I have a friend who looks at movies this same way. He was a Japanese studies major as well, so I'm sure I'll hear some of these same points from him.

But it's a movie. Its primary purpose is to entertain as many people as possible. To be entertaining to you, it would likely be less entertaining to a larger number of people.

Particularly with points like "the samurai would probably have killed him." That'd be a tough sell in Hollywood. "It's about this Civil War hero who goes to Japan to teach their military. But in the first engagement of the movie, he's captured and killed. I see Tom Cruise in the role myself."

Stories are often about extraordinary circumstances. The guys and gals that experienced something different. That made a difference. Not about how things normally go down.

The fact that he experienced this profound change in such a short time, was spared where he would normally not have been spared, was welcomed where he would normally not have been welcomed, was loved where he would not normally have been loved, etc. is part of the point. It's what makes it intense and engaging.

Stories have pretty much always been more engaging than documentaries to most people. Precisely because they don't simply account for the way things are.


Stuart B.

[Chang Style Novice]

FTR, it is possible to make a compelling, entertaining movie out of real history rather than made-up history. It is probably not possible to make a movie like that with Tom Cruise or big-moneybags hollywood producers involved, however.

I haven't seen The Last Samurai, but I did finally catch Gangs of New York on DVD last night, and they share the traits of being based loosely on historical events with imaginary characters inserted to make for an easier to follow, more commercially viable story. It's far from the best thing Scorsese's ever done, but GoNY was pretty decent, and seemed very honest in its protrayal of actual history and the behavior of the characters within that milieu. As far as I understand the criticisms of The Last Samurai, it utterly fails on that count.

[apoweyn]

FTR, it is possible to make a compelling, entertaining movie out of real history rather than made-up history. It is probably not possible to make a movie like that with Tom Cruise or big-moneybags hollywood producers involved, however.

Yes. Absolutely it's possible. But it's a different story at that point. I can see making a story about the same character going to Japan, experiencing the cultural clashes, confronting his own alcoholism (is that right?), and then being killed when his forces are overrun by the samurai. And that would be very compelling. It would also be a different story.

But rereading the original post, I think I was unfair anyway. Mr. Horse flat out says that, from an entertainment standpoint, it was pretty good. But from a factual standpoint, it falls flat. And that's a perfectly valid (and accurate) observation.

So my apologies Mr. Horse. Cool?


Stuart B.

[Mr. Horse]

Yeah we are cool Apoweyn.

I saw it again, and I BASICALLY stick with my post. I would change it a little, but I am lazy so..... (laugh).

One point I didn't think of at the time. The armor probably would not have fit him. In the 1800's the average height of a Japanese male was a little under 5 feet (150cm). If you seen any old pictures of Japanese with westerners, you would notice the size difference. Also, if you have ever viewed Japanese armor in a museum, you would see how small it was. This was probably do to their diets (mainly rice and a little bit of fish), because Japanese are much taller now.

[shaolin kungfu]

maybe. but lets remember that tom cruise only stands at a slightly less than impressive 3ft 1in. So maybe the armor would have fit him after all.

[joedoe]

Interesting discussion. I guess I like historical accuracy in a movie, but can accept that sometimes you have to change things to make the movie work better. I have an issue with out-and-out lies, but otherwise sometimes artistic license is called for.

Reminds me of a debate I had with a friend about the LOTR movies and how they weren't totally true to the book. My attitude was that the movie is not the book, and because of the difference in medium sometimes changes had to be made to the story. However, I still felt that some of the changes did not enhance the movie at all, but to each their own.

[Kempo Guy]

I thought the movie was alright. But there were some inaccuracies (both swordplay and historically). I thought the cinematography was really great and the sparring/training scenes with the bokken were pretty fun to watch.

As for the Japanese employing an American to teach military tactics... at that time... uhh... I'm not so sure about that. There is plenty of material that shows the French and the British were contracted for these things though. I recall reading that the Japanese commisionned the Americans to teach (as the education system of the Americans were the most progressive at the time).

BTW, Tom Cruise's character "Algren" learning Japanese swordmanship in a short time was not too farfetched in the movie since he was supposed to have been skilled with the saber.

KG

[Tit Sa]

Can hollywood make a fuvken picture without all the BS racists love story!

[doug maverick]

i think they should have died it would have been great when he mention that greek battle(i know the name just can't spell it) it made think of 300 spartans a movie based on the event and even the king died so i thought tom would've bit the dust as well but it was stated above it's hollywood.

[dwid]

SPOILER ALERT!!!!!!!!!!







Yeah, I agree. When the sound got reduced to just the clack-clack-clack of the gatling guns, it would have been a moment worthy of Kurosawa if Tom Cruise and the other guy went down with everyone else, nice and slow, with the cherry blossoms in the background and no last dramatic moment of getting back up. They could follow this with the soldiers kneeling or not, and then cut straight to the credits. No BS at the palace and no BS about Tom Cruise living happily ever after with the woman he made into a widow...

[Mr. Horse]

. kempo guy, I am not talking about Algren's ability. I am talking about the samurai teaching it too him so soon.

Tit Sa

Yeah, I think the movie would have been a bit better if Taka forgave him but still hated him. The first time I saw the robing part, was thinking it was power, because as much as she hated Algren, he was helping her husband's cause. HOWEVER, when she kissed him, it was just some dumb forbidden love thing

[Tit Sa]

Mr. Horse-

You want some "REAL FORBIDDEN LOVE"

How bout if the story goes like this-

Algren travels to Japan with his caucasian wife.

She falls madly in love with Saigo Takamori, because he is so brave, idealistic and honorable.

Rest of the story is still the same.

Would Tom Cruise still be the hero of the show?

[The Willow Sword]

EXCELLENT all the war around. Good beginning good middle and definately a good ending. I dont agree that the ending Sucked.

Hopefully this movie will get acclaimed and get some awards for costumes and acting. I guess you have to understand somewhat of the japanese mindset when it comes to the way of the Samurai and Bushido,,,,the fact that Tom's character was not killed is an indication of the shinto concepts Kharma,,and also by putting him in the house of the samurai he killed also shows a level of the sense of duty and honor that the samurai clans had. Remember it is a great honor to die in service of ones emperor and country in fuedal japan. SO the method in which Tom's Charatcer killed the samurai was looked upon as a good death by the others especially the samurai clan leader. Plus,the clan leader had a vision of him before and this encounter,,so he had to also see kharma through by sparing him and putting him in the house
of the samurai he killed. the samurai were not savages they were very civilized except in battle when civility is not a factor.
I thought the ending fit the character Cruise played. It would seem that the director was to make a statement about the character's OWN Kharma and allow him to live through it all and then finally find his center,,which was with the woman whose husband he killed. (remember the mindset i wrote about earlier)
i doubt any of US westerners would allow an iraqi soldier into our homes that we knew killed our father or brother in battle.
we would see a need for vengence when there really is no call for it as it is WAR,,,and in this case with the Japanese woman,,accepted her husbands death and then accepted tom's characters apology for killing him. could any of us be so strong?
i think not.
YES this IS a beautiful Movie and i hope it gets at least One Oscar.

Peace,,,,,,TWS

[Ikken Hisatsu]

to be honest I think you're being pedantic. I am a bit of a scholar of european history, but I don't bleat on about how innaccurate Braveheart is, because its a good old fashioned war movie, same as the last samurai. based VERY loosely on real events. Everyone knows its bollocks, that doesnt make it a bad movie.

[Mr. Horse]

Dude, if you read my first post, I gave the movie a "B". I was just stating it wasn't historically correct.

I enjoyed Braveheart. I don't know enough about European history to say I am a scholar. I guessed that it wasn't 100 % correct. Also, in the DVD, Mel Gibbson says it isn't 100 % correct.

The movie had some shadowed messages. That could have been taken out of the movie to make it better.

PS I think it is strange that you would call yourself a scholar when you are only 17.

[Ikken Hisatsu]

well I guess having studied english history (real studying, not in a classroom) for about seven years, I would hope that I know enough to know what Im talking about. if you know what I mean ;)

and I just got the impression that you expected it to be historically accurate, and were complaining that it wasnt. which struck me as more than a little strange when we are talking about a hollywood movie starring Tom Cruise/samurais/ninjas (Im guessing, it isnt out here yet but it wouldn't be old school japan without ninjas)

and just as a little bit of free information to make the world a better place- for a start, William Wallace was far from a peasant- his father was a minor noble, and he lived most of his life up until around the age of twenty with his uncle where he was destined for a life in the church. he only actually won a single pitched battle- the battle of falkirk, where the english forces were lured over a bridge and slaughtered in what was probably scotlands finest strategical hour. After this, king edward or "longshanks" (who oddly enough is played by a rather short man in the movie, despite him having been well over 6 foot- much taller than most men of that time, and hence the reason for his nickname) left the french frontline to concentrate on the scottish who were raiding across the border into northumbria. A massive force of around 90,000 men were sent to scotland- the battle of Falkirk was a devastating defeat for the scottish, who were torn apart by the english longbows. around 10,000 scottish were estimated to have been killed, while english fatalities were measured in the hundreds.

after that wallace hid and Robert the Bruce (this was the only part of the movie that irked me- I dont know how they got away with showing Robert the Bruce as a traitor, when he was one of Wallaces greatest supporters and also one of Scotlands greatest leaders) took over control of scotland, leading to a long and drawn out war, which ultimately ended in peace, after longshanks died. It is true though that wallace was caught and killed- an unknown scottish knight turned him in to the english and he was tried as a traitor and killer of women and children several years after the battle of Falkirk.

and so now you are that much more informed :D

[Youngmantis]

the movie can be summed up like this, from beginning to end this is what i thought "Awesome" "Epic" "Ok" it climaxes at the end but in the middle is where it really shines

[grlyncher99]

There are a lot worse things you could be watching. But when Hollywood gets it right, as it does in this case, you should pay attention. Yes, it does get sappy, but what Ed Zwick film doesn't. He does seem to have a fascination with civil war soldiers, though. And I wish Billy Connelly had more to do in this film. Alas. Go see it.

[SanSoo Student]

The movie made Tom Cruise look good. The story was really good. I wonder how the book differs from the movie...

[Judge Pen]

I think the ending would have been better if they had all died on the battlefield. Serioulsy, Tom's character surviving when EVERYONE else was killed just underscores the Western bias the movie's theme was working against. Other than that, this was a great movie.

[foolinthedeck]

i liked the ending alot.
there is honour in death
there is also honour in telling the story of that death which is what nathan algren was able to do. western bias? why cant we let the character be an individual who individually may have be stronger willed then most samurai - at the beginning when he took on so many with a flag pole i thought yes this is unrealistic, but at the end he was just a warrior like any other.

my other favorite point - lots of beards, good strong creative beards - is there a beard stylist as well as a hair and makeup? they should get an oscar. (i too have a beard, men with beards are better in every way ha ha )

[foolinthedeck]

oh and another thing:
battle strategy - realistic. compare to 'helms deep' in the two towers, the worst representation of a battle i have ever seen in a film... (stood for hundreds of years? i could take it with a hundred hobbit lesbians!)

[foolinthedeck]

well i cant comment on historical accuracy, but then none of us can because none of us were there! No matter how much you think you know, you dont KNOW any of it.

i would like to comment on emotional accuracy. i felt it was accurate - war is horrible and ****s people up. but there is beauty in everything. But then i dont know if it is emotionally accurate because i wasnt there.

the film had for me more passion, more heart than braveheart. If i was to compare it to any film it would be 'glory' - same director?

again for me, the film was not about samurai, it was about horizons, fields, the restless tide of the future, nostalgia, and cherry blossom, especially cherry blossom.

[Judge Pen]

Originally posted by foolinthedeck
i liked the ending alot.
there is honour in death
there is also honour in telling the story of that death which is what nathan algren was able to do.

I can agree with that, but why couldn't the english translator have told the honorable story of both men, American and Japanese, dying noble deaths as samurai? I'm being picky, I know, but that would have been more satisfying in my mind and more true to the theme of the movie, imho.

[Judge Pen]

Originally posted by foolinthedeck
oh and another thing:
battle strategy - realistic. compare to 'helms deep' in the two towers, the worst representation of a battle i have ever seen in a film... (stood for hundreds of years? i could take it with a hundred hobbit lesbians!)

I'd like to see 100 hobit lesbians take helms deep. :p

[grlyncher99]

I don't think Tom Cruise's character was searching for death in the movie. He was looking for something honorable to accomplish to wipe away the stains of the dishonorable things he had done. Would the lesson have been lost if had died.

[Judge Pen]

Originally posted by grlyncher99
I don't think Tom Cruise's character was searching for death in the movie. He was looking for something honorable to accomplish to wipe away the stains of the dishonorable things he had done. Would the lesson have been lost if had died.

The samurai thought that death in battle was honorable to the point they would kill themselves if they lost in order to retain their honor. So, I think that Algrin's lesson wouldn't have been lost had he died, but maybe he, as an american with a different definition of honor, didn't need to die.

But it still smelled funny to me that he didn't when everyone else did. :p

[MasterKiller]

Originally posted by Judge Pen


I'd like to see 100 hobit lesbians take helms deep. :p Only hobbit men take things "deep."

[SanSoo Student]

The have "big" feet, and you know what that means...:D

[Mr Punch]

I'd like my helm to take a hundred hobbit lesbians deep.

[Mr Punch]

The film was about none of those things. It was about Koyuki.

How about this for REAL FORBIDDEN LOVE... Tom Cruise goes to Japan with his wife played by just about anyone you like... he dies in a freak yachting accident, his wife gets captured and kept in bondage by Koyuki and 100 lesbian hobbits... oh no, wait, wrong fantasy...

I enjoyed the movie but SPOILER Tom should have died. Very surprised at Zwick who has stated that Kurosawa was one of his faves. The only acceptible ending was Cruise biting the big one.

Nitpicking along Mr Horse's lines:

Koyuki's hair was wrong for the time;

She knelt, and indeed they all frequently walked on the edges of the tatami;

Her kids would not have played like that with the chopsticks;

I've never met anyone who could put on a hakama with just one small kid-correctible mistake, without having been shown... I've put the ****ers on countless times and still **** it up from time to time;

A few of the samurai, Sonada Hiroyuki's character included passed the bokuto around using the middle of the 'blade', and with the handles facing to the right of the receiver, which was and is never done;

Tom Cruise has the ugliest nose in the movies.
:D




Since we're nitpicking, a scholar is someone who is at school, by classical definition, and etymology derivation. Nice post on that wee Australian ****e's butchering of Scottish history btw.

Where do you live Mr Horse?

[foolinthedeck]

i liked your other post more mat,
fair enough - kobuki was a main character but i dont think the movie was about her. is she set to star in many more films now?
i dont even know who she is! she doesnt even have a surname! and she didnt have boobs! and she wasnt much of an actress to be fair...

[foolinthedeck]

u get the idea though dont you?
helms deep was one main wall, archers on top and a big hole underneath with a sign saying 'olympic torch orc enter here'

my 100 hobbit lesbians could have 'entered' helms deep without even having to duck. japanese castles are much more difficult to 'enter' and japanese women too, but not kobuki - shes easy.

[Mr Punch]

Well I'm sorry enni! :(

:p

KoYuki is known by every Japanese person who has a tv set (every Japanese person?), But not you huh? 126 million. And foolinthedeck...

Of course I didn't mean the movie was literally about her, just that... oh never mind...

bloody kids!

[Kristoffer]

nanja korya?
TLS was awsome, could have been more bloody though. And I wanted more Ninja action!

[GeneChing]

I liked the film's scenery, but the story seemed to similar to the Shogun miniseries starring Richard Chamberlin in the early 80's.
*spoiler alert* The final scene, Samurai charging into the artillery volleys was done so much better by Kurosawa, that Last Samurai really paled by comparison. Still, I was hoping for a little more impact on our Samurai Sword sales (http://store.yahoo.com/martialartsmart/351070.html), given the nature of the film, so I'm always in favor of that. ;)

What irritated me the most about the film was that it failed to observe basic sword etiquette. It began with this notion of the Japanese veneration the sword, then failed to show the tradition of the weapon any respect at all. Japanese swordmanship is strictly codified, it's a product of that veneration, so there are specific ways to handle a sword, how to pass it to another person, etc,. and these rules are based on intelligent behaviors for self defense. The movie repeatedly defied these simple etiquette rules, for no reason at all. That, for me, was it's complete undoing. I could live with Tom's choreography (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/article.php?article=439), since he has a fine nose*, but I disdain poor etiquette.

*it's never the nose alone, it's always in context of the face.

[Judge Pen]

Originally posted by Mat


I enjoyed the movie but SPOILER Tom should have died. Very surprised at Zwick who has stated that Kurosawa was one of his faves. The only acceptible ending was Cruise biting the big one.

YES! I couldn't agree more! :D