Criterion Collection From A to Z: The 47 Ronin Part Two (1942)

This hopefully will be a shorter review since I tried to put all the historical things that might be necessary to know in the review of Part One.

Yet again we have the beginning of the film be that message to Defend Greater Asia. Yet again this was made during World War Two. Wonder if they took those messages out in the release of the America version in the late Seventies. I don't know but I could see that.

Going to probably be another three minute opening credit sequence.

At three minutes and twenty four seconds, the opening actual narration starts where the entirety of Part one gets summarized in about a minute or two so the whole of Part One might be somewhat skippable because of this.

But yeah the Tokugawa Shogunate is an important part of Japanese history and the Shogunate idea itself influenced a lot of Japanese history and had the Shogun vs. the Imperial Palace a lot of times. Japanese History, or the quick stuff I learned of it is a bit convoluted and weird.

Looks like the opening shot of this film starts with people watching a Noh Theater performance- that or Kabuki- but either way they are watching a play and I think its the more aristocratically preferred Noh that is being seen.

The person that is going to ask the emperor to reinstate the Asano household- one of the Tokugawa himself and next in line to be Shogun has heard the Oishi is plotting to kill Lord Kira. And Tsunayoshi Tokugawa's talk of how the Chinese sages (referencing Confucian ideals) talked about filial duty and how he thinks that sometimes people have to actually not just use the sages to do actions is rather nice to see. China was for a long time the like ideal Asian superpower cultural hotbed of Asia to Japan until the foreign powers really destroyed this worldview in the mid 1800's with unequal treaties and Western superiority of weapons showed that maybe China was a bit backwards. The defeat of China and the opening of the ports of Japan thanks to what Japan termed his Black Ships really made the Japanese have a existential crisis. And the modernization of Japan commenced really around that time and decades later the Japanese military in the 1860's rebuilt their military on the French model of the army- which is ironic in hindsight because the French would lose to the Prussian military in the Franco-Prussian War. But realize that Western idea still existed in even the years of 1700 or so because the Dutch have a trading port in Japan- enough so the view of the West ironically was that the Dutch were a superpower in the European stage and that the study of Western ideas was termed in Japanese as "Dutch Studies" Tangentially explaining that there's Western ideas in Japan is somewhat important when talking about China because while the Chinese were seen as pretty sweet creators of culture even in the 1700's there was beginning to be an influx of Western ideas that went against Japanese Eastern ideas. And one of them was Christianity which really had some foreign ideas and the Japanese really persecuted Japanese Christians as being like anti Japanese or something like that.

Just saying that the cool Jidai Geki films and what they are showing aren't really the whole picture since there were western ideas coming in and Christian missionaries mucking stuff up for the Tokugawa period. Samurai films are super awesome but some of these other things that also happened don't really appear in them.

Also realize that Tsunayoshi's "We are not Chinese" speech is also probably referencing Japan's World War Two effort because Japan in 1937 started invading China and had the whole mess in Nanking that the West really didn't like since it was a complete massacre, raping and pillaging with the Japanese military just doing atrocities of war. But the beauty of Japan Westernizing is that they looked like the most forward thinking in Asia and really started their war machine going. And since they thought they were amazing, they now thought that they were the best in Asia. So there might be a sense of just being better than their neighbors in this speech.

I was right- those were Noh performances that they were watching for fun. And dange one of the Ronin is coming to see the Noh performance and Lord Kira will be in attendance- this may be a problem. Looks like Tsunayoshi is trying to goad the Ronin into action. Good guy Ronin calling out the Tokugaw for being rather not great people with abolishing 20 House of good repute and for Asano's judgement being unfair. But Suke'emon is the person calling the Tokugawa out for having Asano die- I bet this won't go well since he's also calling out the idea that he's a descendant of Ieyasu Tokugawa and he should have done something.

As a side note, the Tokugawa clan ruled pretty much from 1600-1868 which was the Meiji Restoration so having a general clamp on power for almost three hundred years is rather impressive. Probably why the Jidai Geki/ chanbara films of Japan like using the Tokugawa Shogunate Eras as a backdrop is because that covers a lot of times and the Warring States period gets rather confusing. the Heian Period before that was a really long time ago- but the Tokugawa had a really long time of relative peace for the land. Dang it Kiyo you and Suke'emon will try to kill Kira during a Noh performance? That's going to be bad- and on another note, because of the attack Kira looks rather sinister or at least kind of more ugly than he was though just slightly. Probably just the use of makeup to get that effect. Okay so Kiyo lied and the Noh player that Suke'emon attacks is on their side but its still a bit funny to see Suke'emon get beat up by a dude in a Noh performance dress.

Didn't expect to see a Noh performance filmed but some of the shots they can do because of the camera  is nice with the performer guy getting up close to the camera and all that jazz.

And Oishi gets the news that the person he wanted to take the Asano household forward seems to be going to continue being under house arrest. Still a little more than 30 minutes into the film and nobody has died or anything. Wonder how this will end. But seemingly now that I think their supplication to get the Asano house back in order has failed now they don't have to worry about seemingly now being unjustified in their action to kill Kira.

Finally after 35 minutes into this film Oishi agrees that they can now FINALLY avenge Asano. No more don't do it cause we will get the household back soon junk. Nope now we are finally starting for the main event action to start. Oh man looks like Oishi slightly glanced at the camera there just like silently saying oh hey there now we can get on with this. Aren't you glad?

Yes. Yes I am.

Scene transition explanation that now its December 14, 1702. Ooh snow. That's rather pretty. Hope its real and not that stuff they used in the Wizard of Oz- I think that was like asbestos or something equally terrible. And now Oishi has come to the Lady Asano's residence in Edo. Somehow Lady Asano hasn't seen Oishi in three years since he's in the domain that the Asano branch rules and she's been in Edo. I guess it would make sense since samurai seem to not leave the domain they were in that often. Those Edo troublemakers that wanted to take the fight into their own hands want to do the deed in the open. And with Kira seemingly afraid of retaliation he seems to be headed off inot his household's castle to wait until Spring. Though Oishi does have a point, with Kira getting on in years the idea of attacking now because he might die at anytime is foolish because there are retainers of the Asano household themselves that are that old and yet those guys aren't dead yet.

Finally. 55 minutes in and Lady Asano gets the news that Oishi and the other retainers broke into Lord Kira's place.

Okay so maybe calling Kuranosuke and Oishi the same person was wrong of me- because on the scroll Lady Asano gets that explains what happened to Lord Kira and the 47 Ronin Oishi leads one batallion and Kuranosuke another.

I'll just chalk this up to there being like a lot of people in this and without color and really long focuses on scenes and sorry but everyone looks similar in dress since all of them are samurai and they dress similar that I messed up on the names.

So if I accidentally have been saying that Oishi does everything like I have been doing, blame my sheer inability to seemingly get the difference betweeen people. Since the use of names can change in Japanese with how close you are to someone- using the last name and an honorific or the first name and an honorific I guess I got confused who was who and who people were playing.

No  wait I checked wikipedia- the name of the main character is Oishi Kuranosuke and the other Oishi is just that- a different person.

See this is why I like and don't like this film right now. Well besides that I don't get to see the 47 Ronin just wreck Lord Kira's place and behead him in revenge- and therefore three hours into this experience of two parts, I have not seen more than one fight scene and that was short.

This is like an event study instead of a character study and I am ambivalent towards it. Wait- if this was like just now how did Lady Asano get the scroll cause somebody had to write this by hand and whatnot. Still mad that I didn't see any form of action sequence god and this seems to be the best so far look into the 47 Ronin event on film that I right now know of.

And still with fifty minutes left and the 47 Ronin alive and well right now- they are first of all going to die for their action but they have finally accomplished their mission and on March 14- the anniversary of the death of Lord Asano the Ronin go to his grave to present the head of Kira. It's actually kind of touching how loyal they were to the end mission of avenging their master. And in a way they kind of become thanks to this event like folk hero samurai that to some are like the ideal samurai because of their sheer loyalty to their cause. Sheer loyalty to a cause is useful and why possibly the story was filmed when it was because the Japanese military use the code of bushido to put a code of ethics into their troops. They seemingly styled themselves as a continuation of the samurai.

The whole kneeling at the shrine scene explaining the hardships they endured to complete their mission is really touching.

And Good Guy Oishi makes Sake'emon go to the Inspector General to tell him what happened. Even though they were loyal to Asano- the Shogun will be super mad that this happened because having disorder like this looks bad and so the Ronin will be criminals to the Shogunate because of what they did.

Actually forgot that there was a intertitle transition because its been like thirty/ forty minutes since the last one. Its says 46 Ronin were ordered to commit harakiri- I think I remember that one of them was too young or something that it would be weird for him to die too. I could be entirely wrong but the movie says 46 Ronin in this one. And now yet again a change in time- February 3, 1703. And Lady Asano sends the 47 Ronin flowers- they are going to die very soon and she is sending flowers in mourning. What's sad is that in celebration since this is probably going to be their last night alive, some of the men decide to perform a variety show because why not they are going to die anyway and spending their night enjoying themselves is better than the opposite. I do have to say though that having some levity here is nice because watching three hours of sad stuff happening without some funny stuff happening is kind of hard to take.

And now there's a woman pretending to be a samurai to see one of the Ronin. Don't really care since still there's thirty minutes left but sure let's spend some time with Samurai Lady. Oh so she feel in love with one of the Ronin and was going to marry him but he stood her up on the altar and then they found out about the attack on Kira's estate and then she came here to see him. Thank you Exposition Old Guy, I have definitely needed to know why Samurai Lady plot device/plot point is here. Actually how did nobody question your samurai look Samurai Lady- you look super feminine close up. What? Were people just like of course that is a samurai no questions asked. That's dumb of them. Good on you Oishi- saying that Samurai Lady should be actually mad at being stood up at the altar and that this love and devotion is a flight of fancy because the 47 Ronin are now cause celebre. Don't see your lover Samurai Lady or else he will lose his resolve to commit harakiri- Oishi just laying the knowlege on this girl. Still having a woman crossdress to see if the man that stood her up on her wedding day that's cool to see in a 1940's movie. And the man she loves talks to Oishi while she's in the room and he says he doesn't know her. Dang that's pretty cold man. But no actually he keeps one of her things as a memento so he does love her. Good Guy Samurai Dude good job there- cause hey the last five to ten minutes has

And hey while they have to perform harakiri- it could have been worse with them having to be hanged or beheaded for having an affront to the Shogun's laws. I do have to say that while the Part Two has not gotten any better- I have to give them due props for the set design and the costumes. And hey Lord Kira's son got his lands confiscated and house abolished and he is in house arrest. The fight for justice on the part of the 47/46? Ronin (thanks movie) was not in vain. I have to comment that one of my favorite things in old movies is the use of large sets and a lot of extras. Without CGI and stuff like that, they had to use a lot of practical effects or strange effects to make things work and its just cool to see how large some casts for a film could be.

Oh and remember Samurai Lady? Yeah she decided to commit harakiri too to show her loyalty to the man she loved. And while her dad got reinstated into the service of the dude that helped keep the 47 Ronin chill at his place- with the whole news of his daughter committing seppuku, that'd probably kill him so there goes that household name. Good job Samurai Lady for killing your family name for love. That was a terrible death scene- she just collapses forward so stupidly. And since Oishi is the leader of the samurai he has to be the captain going down with his ship. And so the movie ends with like three minutes of relative silence with the names of the Ronin being called for execution and Oishi standing up and slowly walking topretwards the camera when he hears him name being called.

Finally after 223 minutes or about 3 hours and 40 minutes so ends the tale of the 47 Ronin movies. Sure Seven Samurai by Kurosawa is like if I remember correctly like 3 hours 47 or whatever but this felt so much more slow and plodding to get to the final scenes and I have no idea why Samurai Lady died cause that was kind of dumb in a way.

Overall I thought this movie was pretty meh. The set design, the cinematography, the filming, the costumes- all bloody fantastic. The character of Oishi? Also super fantastic he made the movie for me all the good philosophical scenes and character deepening moments pretty much had him in it- and his sheer devotion to Asano was hearbreakingly fantastic to watch. This was a great film in a lot of ways- the thing with the extremely long takes and lots of dialogue to get to that point and that whole later added subplot in part two? Yeah a lot of that could have been taken out. And that Noh play in the beginning and Suke'emon chasing that random dude around? Could have primarily be taken out cause that looked so silly. The seven to ten minutes of the variety show put on by the samurai? Maybe could have been shortened but some of the camera work in that scene for 1940's was kind of impressive. The whole thing where we didn't actually see the beheading and killing of Kira? Sure understandable because that's super violent but I would have loved some form of sword use- the last time I saw a sword being swung around menacingly was in the one scene in Part One like eight minutes in where Asano attacks Kira the one and only time. That was it. A samurai film without really anything that would be recognizable as a Samurai film with swordfighting? Yeah never would have thought I'd have seen the day.

Overall I have to say that I liked this about the same so six out of ten- primarily because taking the whole film as a whole, the first half had way more scenes that seemed actually plot relevant but the second half had more scenes that I felt myself feel true emotion- the scene at the grave of Asano and the final few minutes of the film come to mind- those alone and the character of Oishi being so strong and developed and some of the dialogue in these films are great.

Just sad that I think I have had way more enjoyable experiences in later Jidai Geki/ Chanbara films by at least Akira Kurosawa alone. This film really seems to be kind of weird- a propaganda film that really failed at what it might have wanted to do on some level and a financial misstep. yet critical darling.

Remember guys- critical opinions can actually be pretty trash and I say watch movies for your own enjoyment. While I might not have liked this film for the sheer length of it and epic nature for a 1940's era film when taken together it was rather nicely done. It just felt an hour too long. Somewhere it could have been shortened.

Criterion Collection From A to Z: The 47 Ronin Part One (1941)

Unlike the other films in this series so far, this two hundred and twenty three minute film (split in half on the Criterion Collection) has almost no wikipedia entry. But its taking a more period piece set of the drama than that Keanu Reeves film that I personally haven't seen but I've head is not great. The thing about the film that I could glean from the wikipedia on the film entry itself is that its release date of Part One was December 1, 1941. Now this film, being a historical retelling of The 47 Ronin being made right when Japan was in World War Two and right around the time that the attack on Pearl Harbor was being finalized is something to be thinking about. Like how Cold War Era American films of the 1950's talked about the fears of the society being invaded by alien creatures and Westerns like High Noon seemingly being a veiled hint of America going it alone against the dangers of Communism- movies can be used to show a sense of nationalism or good values that people like. Sure I may be completely wrong right now since I right these plot synopses and general info before I watch the movies, but the idea of a samurai code of ethics (which was actually somewhat adopted by the Japanese military of I remember my listening to a podcast of Japanese History I found on Itunes) so if I am reading this right it is a military film.

Edit: After a few minutes of gleaning the actual event of the 47 Ronin- there was a Cinema and Television section where it further explains that the whole project was commissioned by the Japanese military but the director chose a play that sounds rather philosophical and it was received rather poorly and too serious for what people wanted but hey the director (Kenji Mizoguchi who is known for what seems to be his cinematography skills) and the studio put out part two anyway cause they wanted to. In a way its a propaganda piece that fails at what it seems to be doing and yet its somehow in the Criterion Collection for its cinematography and critical acclaim. Which isn't a bad accomplishment- I don't think the Nazi propaganda films made are here on Criterion and yet I've heard that the director of those gave some really nice shots. But yeah war aims and philosophical bends of the nations do and will affect the cinema in times of stress or war.

Well the opening is making me definitely see that its a propaganda piece with Japanese text being translated to "Defend the homes of those who fight for a Greater Asia." or pretty much- fight against those who would be against the Empire of Japan. Thank you Shokichi Films and Cabinet Poduction Bureau. The actual title of the film translated is "The Loyal 47 Ronin of the Genroku Era" The Ronin, or leaderless samurai, avenging the death of their master and becoming sort of a folk tale in Japan seems to be a perfect thing for a film that was commissioned for  the war effort- even though the ending of the tale has them being executed for the crime of plotting and succeeding to commit their revenge plot. I'm actually surprised though that the whole credits are being translated since sometimes in foreign films they don't get that, so all you get are words that you can't read. Oh okay, scratch that, they translated the design crew of important people and the actors not so much. So for people that wonder who's playing who and don't know Japanese? Just use wikipedia though I don't think they have linked pages for the actors- older films and foreign films tend to seemingly have that issue.Wait no, the film is weird with seemingly there being no translation and then the Actors names come up and those get translated again- maybe those untranslated names were production staff or something. These credits are really long though- they end right around the three minute and forty nine second mark, but its to be expected because there needed to be a lot of actors to pull this off and with it being a nearly two hour movie just for part one alone its okay.

Just a heads up it starts that this story is eighty years after the Tokugawa established their Shogynate in Edo- later Tokyo for those who prefer a more modern name from when Emperor Meiji really stepped in after Japan realized it needed to modernize- but Tokyo and Emperor Meiji and therefore the Meiji period is still off in the distance by about 150 to 200 years give or take because the whole incident that started it was in 1701. So just to give you a heads up since Japan loves historical drama and retellings of their history and therefore they have a pretty decent period drama business in movies and tv. Jidai Geki or period drama has their own division of chanbara or the jidaigeki that really do the swordman style thing are great. And because many places in Japan are still surprisingly still standing from the Edo and Meiji period and that costuming is rather wholesale cheap and that like other nations focus on their own historical periods that they like and the idea of these period pieces make sense because you get the sense of large sets and large extra casts to fulfill the fighting in these films are known for.

And if Jidai Geki sounds like the term Jedi from Star Wars- George Lucas liked the samurai genre it seems.

I do have to say that the long take of the establishing shot for 1941 length of film is rather surprising.

The thing to recognize of Japanese History is that while the Emperor rules in name, it was really for a long time just in name only, because the Shogunates of each period for a while controlled portions of Japan. And so the real power is in the Shogun and his Daimyos that control different areas. I don't know if around this time that the Shogun really started his Daimyo to take a house in Edo and go on pilgrimages to Edo every once in a while to see him. Pretty much, to keep people be relaint on him, he made his retainers spend money so they could spend less money plotting against him. Also the whole monetary system of rice prices being tied to wages and the price of land never really got refigured after that system was created so the economic system was hurting or starting to get bad in later periods and really helped samurai in later periods to be tied to the Daimyos of their area and have privileges that commoners couldn't have like top knot hairstyles and carrying swords and yet by the Meiji period when the samurai class was discontinued, they were just poorer people with class.

For further and probably better descriptions of the whole of Japanese History see the History of Japan podcast on Itunes. Cause its a whole mess of issues.

For being a black and white film, ir is rather pretty and there isn't really much to comment on eight minutes in which for me can be a good thing. Looks like the Shogun sent one of his messengers- and if I am reading it right the old guy is maybe a practitioner/priest of Onmyodo "The Way of Ying and Yang" or something with his headdress and costume that looks like the famous legendary practitioner and somehow now popular culture figure in Japan- Abe no Semei. Pretty much its a belief system that originally came from China- one of the religions that almost got to the modern period until the whole occult thing was prohibited and many of them transitioned into  Shinto priests and the like but even currently the idea of these priests and Imperial Civil Servants which they were in a way still are used in anime and manga because they have that mystical air.

And Lord Asano is kind of a rude person so the Imperial throne is washing their hands of him or something- being impolite was a major thing that could hurt your position in Court. And it looks now that somebody, don't know who yet attacked the envoy or something and now the whole house is freaking out.The difference is striking in mise-en-scene. The big house which was seemingly empty erupts into loudness and a ton of people just stream out to carry the hurt people away and restrain the retainer of  Lord Asano, (Which I was wrong, the dude who attacked Kira is Asano himself.) I'm guessing that is is role. And as punishment the  makes the attacker revert from ceremonial dress to normal attire- which is very bad to do losing face and status. Looks like the whole thing was that the attacker- Asano- held a personal grudge against Lord Kira and that forgetting the whole thing about their being a time and a place to do these things, attacked him. Lord Kira, if I'm reading it correctly, was the Shogun's representative there and therefore the guy has to clearly make sure that people understand that this wasn't an attack on the Shogun himself. And surprisingly he missed his target of killing the dude by an inch or two. Short description why this section of events confused me is that it all happens quickly and Asano I assumed was the Daimyo.

Some of these shots are quite impressive and long takes but yeah right now its rather slow because its setting up a lot of things and idea that will be important later. But hey the guy that got attacked didn't fight back because he remembered that today was the day that the Imperial Envoys would come- therefore he was probably just a priest or somebody in the household- I would know more if they didn't leave out the honorifics. The translation seems to leave out the different honorifics to make it easier for us audiences to understand but the use of honorifics in Japanese is a way to mark the informal or formal nature of a power relationship and familial as well.

The costuming in this is also rather nice since the movements that the costumes force people to do- the flowing robes and the way moving is kind of difficult gives it an old school flair- and with how the women shuffle about makes me remember other films that I have seen where a period drama in Japan is done. Lot of Kurosawa films but yeah this is nice. And I do have to say that cinematography wise, the Japanese style of large rooms with panel interiors in these films lets the camera quickly move in a running scene following the actors or perform swooping entrances into a film.

And because Asano did what he did, the Daimyo orders him to commit harakiri. Which is ritual suicide by cutting the belly and in later practice (the more humane version) also involved another person beheading you. Not pretty. Surprisingly the investigators who were charged to investigate why it happened talked back to the decision because Asano himself seems like a okay guy. And Asano has a worth of 50,000 koku- that worth tied to rice production I referenced earlier and so hey having a rich samurai commit seppuku/harakiri (same practice with similar construction in kanji) would look pretty bad in a way. And hey you can be sure that he wouldn't mess up again and you look good because you spared his life. Pretty much the best possible thing that can be done. Let the man be judged by the samurai code and Mr. Investigator Okado here laughs at the praise Kira got for not bringing his weapon cause he says the actuality of Kira being scared of blood is pretty much super cowardly. And oh no the guy who has final say on the matter as to what happened is distantly related to Kira and therefore Okano says pretty much that's a really bad idea- family is thicker than water.

Looks like Okado is getting praised by a dude because his loyalty to Asano is commendable and that of a "true" samurai. And the whole debacle of Asano being ordered to commit seppuku and die while leaving his retainers of samurai without a way to get revenge and money (samurai were the soldier class so having them learn trades outside of tactics and refining their tastes was seen as pointless or something like that) Asano's walk to his death seesm to be partially a crane shot because we see him from above and its at a top of a building looking down. Okado must've loved his master as a retainer because him breaking down and crying outside of the place where Asano will die is rather heartbreaking. And then the random lady in the movie that I didn't know the name of is all sad too because Kiyo is the wife of Asano and they are just waiting to hear of the news of Asano's death. And samurai usually want to die with their lord so the 47 Ronin not doing that because they really want justice for Kira being able to leave the castle without a problem- that makes them mad and finally after 30 minutes we have the stage set for the rest of the film and the other film as well. It's a story for revenge against this Kira guy. Oh yeah and because Asano did that thing, all the property is being seized by I believe the Shogun or something like that. Don;t matter really who its by cause either way everybody is losing the pretty nice house and all.

Well I thought the whole intertitle sequences explaining the action would be done but nope I guess that's how we will get our relevant information for the movie. I guess this director really likes long shots of film because that was a long walk. Looks like all the things of the household are being seized though and the use of music while present in some scenes is rather minimal. Surprising that they are all going though the accounts of the domain of Asano all the samurai retainers he had.

And the retainers get the message that Asano is dead and they ask if he had performed a death poem or some final words because the moment of death and knowledge of one's life is something that was learned in what I think is Buddhism or Shinto or Samurai culture in general but the idea of final words and poetry done at one's death was rather important.

I do have to say that the use of shadows in this film is rather nice because the few times so far that shadows are heavily in a scene they can be used to either completely hide a person's features and therefore be moving around in shadow or they can accentuate a person's features in a moment of stress.

Japan is a culture of etiquette it seems because a lot of interactions are between superiors and inferiors. So all this back and forth about etiquette and decency and the main reason why Asano died is that he forgot the date and that pulling a weapon near the Imperial Majesty is a real bad thing to do- while it seems completely weird to us because culture differences it is important for Japan.

Though I do have to say that for a two hour movie part one- there's almost no sword action besides that one moment of Asano attacking and wounding Kira- this is rather wordy but that can be nice to see the back and forth nature of figuring out what to do- commit harakiri to join Asano in death the honorable thing to do or seek revenge on Lord Kira because he was ot punished for the whole mess that cost Asano his life and caused the seizure of his property. Thus scene of the old retainer coming back from Kyoto to report on the whispers of the Imperial Court on the matter was an emotional one- the noblemen and possibly the Emperor himself commented that it was a shame that Asano had failed to kill Lord Kira. Which is nice to see the sympathy from the court because they could have easily decreed that Asano had committed treason. Which this accusation would have followed his retainers and his family for generations since dishonoring your family name and committing treason hurt your future descendants- and because Asano hasn't been declared a traitor and has sympathy from the Court it wil be a lot easier to travel around and plan to kill Lord Kira.

What's difficult for me in this movie to comment on the characters because everyone looks similar and since they are like 47 Ronin and most of the characters are the retainers of Asano, their clothing all looks really similar. So it you were wondering why I commenting on the plot itself and doing the commenting through Asano's retainers vs. Lord Kira, its because they all look similar and their names don't come up all that often.

I do hope Oishi.Kuranosuke?, who looks to be the head of the retainers right about now, comes to a decision cause the others that were from Edo are starting to get mad that they haven't decided what to do about the situation. And now a retainer who turned his back on the house is back, Tokubei brought his younger teenage son as well so now we have a teenager maybe getting in on the revenge action. Looks like 51 men have decided through blood oath to follow Oishi's plan. Oishi's plan is to hand over the castle to the Shogun because otherwise, the Shogun's army will attack and kill them all. Because the handing over of the castle is an act of submission, it looks good while they will still be planning to kill Lord Kira- but now they are Ronin, samurai without a master.

And oh no but Oishi finds Tokubei is on the brink of death and Tokubei's son is dead. They had wrongfully thought that Oishi had given up and the fight and committed harakiri. Oishi tells Tokubei of the plan to stand up to the Shogunate's decision and kill Kira. Looks like that's the end of this section of the movie- with Oishi angrily staring at the audience because of what happened and an hour and twenty two minutes in we have the third time an intertitle sequence is used. And since they seem to be used to be larger scene transitions to move the plot along to another place I wonder what will be said now especially now that Part One only has twenty nine minutes left. Okay its a time and place transition with theses last thirty minutes happening six months later.

The Edo retainers are back looking for Oishi because they want an explanation and are moaning that they should have taken this into their own hands. I do have to say again that I am glad that there's a translation of what is being said because some of the sound design in this is far away hard to hear dialogue or dialogue being whispered so its hard to notice when some lines are being said. Oishi looks like a complete tool now and because of that his Edo Ronin are getting mad and his wife is being asked to leave him and return to her family home because he's off enjoying the prostitutes in the town. His wife knows that his heart isn't in the whole debauchery thing and he's acting lost to seem like he has given up the revenge. But yeah Oishi looks be a mess. Oishi's mad at himself for asking to restore the family house now cause its messing with his plans.

And there's a Asano house in Hiroshima- ironic that this movie came out in 1941 cause that line bombs later thanks to the war.

And seven minutes until the end of the film and finally the line saying that they avenge the lord thanks to the restoration of the Asano household is good. So the Asano household has around 50,000 koku vs. Lord Kira's backers, the Uesugi, with 150,000 koku. Yep this story in part two will be an underdog story. And so Oishi's wife is taking two out of the three kids (the oldest is the heir to Oishi so he has to stay) back to her father's house. It's a divorce, but its for the best because if Oishi was still married to his wife when he dies then she might have to die too to protect her honor and as a wifely duty. And sons that don't have the power to be samurai can become priests as Oishi says shis young son would be a good priest to pray for the family.

And Part One ends with Oishi watching his family leave. Impressive because there is no dialogue and besides the ending music there is just slow movement happening for the final three minutes. I can see why the people who commissioned the film and the audience were mad with Part One- its not a awesome sword fighting Jidai Geki film. Part One is two hours of set up for Part Two. And for a film released six days before Pearl Harbor it really isn't a morale booster. It's slow and plodding sadness ending on a note of quiet waiting for some plan to develop.

Overall, I liked the film and it was necessary to build the drama and characters for Part Two where the plan really comes to action. I'd give the film about a six out of ten though. Never have been a great fan of films split in half and the sheer amount of nothing happening besides coming up with a plan to kill Lord Kira and the only sword used was in like the beginning attack on Lord Kira by Asano around eight minutes in is disappointing. Great characters built in the film and the lighting and shadow and the use of long shots is great but for most people I could see this either boring people to death or seeming to be pointless and just watch the hopefully more action packed Part Two. I liked the movie because its rather historically nice but judging it as a movie, even after I have said I liked slow character pieces and whatnot, it still seems more focused on debating the actions of these 47 Ronin with the entire film being not much more than a giant back and forth discussion over what to do. Sure Seven Samurai by Akira Kurosawa is one of my favorite films and its very similar but this is just so okay that for most of this I wished I was watching a Kurosawa movie.

Going to start watching Part Two now but yeah 6 out of 10. The cinematography is fantastic but the film is so full of either long shots of people walking around or just talking that its a slog to get through. And when I noticed that Tokubei's death scene happened at the hour twenty mark and then I realized that I still had like thirty minutes left I grew bored and wished they almost ended it there on a short of Oishi sadly looking at what his refusal to let Tokubei and his son join the fight against Lord Kira caused. And the other films in the Criterion Collection that I have so far watched just love ending on a shot on a character's face so I was expecting that to happen. Now let's see what Part Two has to offer.

Criterion Collection From A to Z: The 400 Blows (1959)

Now yet again I am going to be watching a French New Wave film- though this time it is in black and white so the whole color palette of 2 or Three Things I Know About Her is gone. But that seems to not be a bad thing- the film from my quick search about it is that it yet again has the idea of the auteur in this film as well, with the character of Antoine Doinel being the alter ego in a way of the director himself. In a way its a stylized biography of the director and had a few sequels by the same director later on. And the plot synopsis makes it sound like a better French version of Rebel Without a Cause so seeing a possible kind of delinquent film from France might be rather cool. Also I do have to say that if you want to take the actual title and not directly translate it to English it would be something like a reference to a longer phrase meaning "To Raise Hell" and therefore sounds much less coporal punishment like than the American title.

I do have to say that yet again the opening of the film is rather nice. The credits are rolling and the background is just some nice shots of French buildings and the like. Rather nice use of the beauty of architecture itself. Though I have to say that the film itself makes the opening credits rather long since the film itself is only 100 minutes long so having about three and a half minutes of the film itself be opening credits is a bit weird. Though I guess it made it so people had to sit through and appreciate the film's work and cinematography and the ilk. And its rather nice to see that the film is dedicated to the memory of Andre Bazin- which I do have to say that while I did not know of him, thanks to the film class I took rather recently, I have herd of the thing he co created with a few others- Cahiers Du Cinema which really helped influence film criticism and was really a birthplace of the French New Wave himself so while it was sad that it is dedicated to his memory it seems that Francois Truffaut really wanted him to be remembered and that he really liked him as a guiding figure. So yet again we have some random trivia related to a history based thing of films.

And the films starts off in some random school that Doinel is attending and the classic idea of people passing a note of some kind is in force here. He gets caught replying to the note and gets sent to pretty much a dunce corner- while of course the film's story has this incident taking place during a test. Though I do have say its rather nice to see that in some cases the classroom behavior of children has not changed in decades with people hurriedly finishing up tests and calling each other names. Though the teacher seems real harsh with calling "recess is a reward, not a right" in regards to Doinel trying to leave and enjoy the break. And Doinel himself taking a role as a narrator (so far I think he's the only one though unlike 2 or 3 Things I Know About Her  there's been no real narration so calling out the fact that Doinel is right now his own narrator and that he's mad for getting caught with a pinup that had done the rounds at school? Definite idea of a theme. The themes are a character study, yet again, and the treatment of juvenile offenders if I am reading the wikipedia article correctly. Though I do have to say that so far because of that three minute opening credit sequence that eight minutes in and while we have a story that is much more that of a story, not much has actually happened. Though yeah the teacher character in this scene is kind of a strict teacher from another time tossing Doinel from the corner because he "abused French verse" rather comedic in a way since he's saying that Doinel is a Juvenal who was a Roman Satirist known for his prose. Ironic because the teacher says that Doinel is complete trash at actually writing in verse. Though its a rather long shot reverse shot of the teacher writing some French poem on the blackboard and some random kid just failing to write his notes. Don't know why its in there but its got a hint of slapstick comedy there- not much but seeing that he keeps trying to write down he poem that the teacher is saying and that he is failing its rather cute. I do have to give them props that yet again the kids in these films feel like kids- their mannerisms and their just goofy things that they do while the teachers back s turned is rather nice to see because some boring romantic poem in a class of twelve year old kids? Of course they will turn it into some reference to kissing and whatnot.

Though come on teacher man, calling everybody a bunch of idiots because of it and making Doinel write down that his parents will pay for the cleanup of the wall (while warranted since Doinel did actually dirty the wall). Funny though that he says that France will be doomed in ten years because of the terrible state of his class. Funny because since this was filmed in 1959 and 2 or 3 Things was filmed in 1967 and that was currently much more bleak and detached- yes somehow that line became true in a way. Though its not really funny.And finally after seven minutes of not much really happening we move onto the next scene. And the scene begins with some little delinquent kids talking abut how everyone steals from their parents to get awesome stuff- well we are eleven minutes in and I don't think this is a great film because the characters for being children are rather unlikable though that may change depending on future scenes.  And of course it seems like Doinel has a family that isn't really that great with him seemingly being alone for a while before his mother comes home. Yep terrible parent saying that he should have got all the things on the grocery list, which he says he lost, and then she calls him out on his terrible grades. Somehow losing a list and forgetting one thing shows that he might not be all that smart in her eyes. So we have a kid who has a terrible home life and a terrible school life- looks like at some point he will either act out or try to leave.

Okay so he goes to get the flour and then there's some two old ladies talking about the horrors of cnthildbirth and all that which just seems out of place so far and then a scene transition showing a change in time and Doinel is getting helped from a random old dude we've never seen before- which after I saw further into the scene is that of his father. Don;t know his name of his mom and dad and since I am calling the main character by his last name I pretty much don't care. While I thought 2 or 3 Things was rather long and talky at least it was filmed and created in a way that made me force myself to listen. So far we got in this movie some delinquent behavior and a terrible life. Great view in a character that is a teenage delinquent or something but its not really stimulating in the philosophical pursuits of the previous film I watched.

And for a bit his dad and him were just shooting the breeze while they were eating dinner. Sure this seems like I am leaving out a lot here but so far its rather lackluster in the plot- maybe it will get better once he gets caught with something illegal or something.

Yeah while I'm all for the walls being rather thin, I would hate living in this kids apartment if he can hear his parents arguing all the time. And this seems like some kind of Cinderella story with the terrible home life and him doing a ton of chores. Seems rather boring enough for it to fit right in.

Because of Sourpuss's- the teacher's- whole disdain for him, Doinel and one of his friends skip out of school and have a rad time by going to the cinema, the arcade, and what seems to be the amusement park because the film films one of those washing machine looking rides where tough static electricity and friction because of speed you can stick to the walls. Rather cool to see a movie use this even for a little bit because its a cool spinning thing in the movie and reminds me of a thing I used to go to in my own nearby amusement park because they had the exact same ride except that's been replaced now. But it was a really great little ride that is somewhat memorable. Though watching it further, it definitely gives a sense of vertigo or motion sickness because they film the people watching the ride and because its spinning so quick its like a motion blur. What I like in cinema though is these kinds of strange shots that are weird or track a character's movements. In the same scene Doinel turns himself upside down because thanks to the rotational forces in that ride he could and the spinning whirligig of faces that you've seen turns upside down. Because he himself is upside down, the film reflects what he sees. Though I do have o comment on the sound design for this scene as well- because it is supposed to be disorientating and its an amusement park ride- the sounds behind these images are a thing of hellish nightmares with how the echoing enjoyment of the ride and the  overall feel of the scene being rather hectic and disjointed in the spinning view its painful and I got some form of motion sickness headache because of it. And its like a two minute scene- you want it to end but it doesn't and it just ends when the ride itself ends.

I do have to say that its great to see that Antoine Doinel's mom is cheating on her husband and now Antoine knows it because while he is having fun and going home after a long day of skipping class he sees his mom making out with another man. The family life here is just great.This friend of his who I have no clue what his name is is a complete beast with Antoine being worried about the note back from school and the friend- Rene if I am understanding that Antoine couldn't use the note he was copying out because he accidentally put in Rene's name instead of his- still Rene is the real juvenile delinquent  because he knows all the tricks.

And actually now the dad in this next scene with them being alone cooking is rather sweet because it seems that he has an interest in Antoine and that he is a joker character yet is laying down some truth bombs for Antoine. Good guy dad figure. Okay scratch that because it seems that the one berserk button of his dad is when he can't find his stuff and because his dad expects Antoine to steal things to "trade" for stuff he gets mad at Antoine which knowing how movies work will come into play later. Its just an interesting way to graphic match two scenes that contain Antoine and his dad and one scene is loving and the other is more gruff and seriously worrying. Wonder what that means though it gives the characters more depth.

And what we find out in this next scene of Antoine listing to his parents fighting is that his mom is cheating his dad with her boss because she's a secretary and this was before sexual harassment type things were really thought of. His dad calls her a prostitute in a sneaky way and that she lies, and she says to ask Antoine. Cool dad drops the bombshell that Antoine is not his son and that actually he's Antoine's stepdad and then his terrible mom is wanting peace and quiet so she joke that she should send Antoine to the orphanage or army school.

A truly happy image of the 1950's/1960's family of course.

Well now Antoine's parents know he skipped out thanks to some random classmate of his. That's going to be a problem and I hope Antoine gets caught by the school or something because its one third of the way through the film and going by a three act structure something major will happen to change the film. Okay you idiot I know Sourpuss is a complete tool and would have not cared if you got a fake note or not but seriously why say your mom died to get away from this mess. That's a thing that is easily checked and since we know the mom isn't dead and that the idea of doing a big lie to cover up something small will bite Antoine hard- I bet Sourpuss or something will happen to realize that Antoine is lying out of his teeth.Seriously though, is this English class or Poetry since all they have been doing in the Sourpuss classroom scenes is reciting poetry and the like. And Antoine is so super busted since his mom and stepdad came to the classroom and pulled out Sourpuss- who has thought that Antoine's mom just died. Way to make extra homework and skipping class into an existential crisis of juvenile proportions. Good guy stepdad just lays the smack down on Antoine with smacking him in front of his classmates.

Rene is a dick though to Antoine and Antoine himself is a complete idiot. "I've done worse than this, Antoine" don't worry about your parents they can''t be that bad and Antoine wants to run away from home because his terrible parents- who I don't mind besides maybe his mother who's rather terrible- is going to wreck his day up because he is almost definitely close to either quitting or getting kicked out of school. This sounds so messed up since he's what like fourteen at the max and he's planning on becoming a hobo and a bum because its better than his home and school life. Though I do like that Rene right now is a foil to Antoine because unlike Antoine who's getting the stuffing handed to him because of delinquent behavior, Rene is constantly saying that why should he care about school or why should Antoine care that his parents are mad because Rene himself is a much worse delinquent with what seems like a similar situation that we don't see. But seriously Rene is a kind of devil on Antoine's should just urging him on to do worse and worse stuff because why not.

His parents find the letter and it looks like Antoine is found. And like how Die Hard is a Christmas movie but a good one- The 400 Blows seems to take place in part of the movie on Christmas. And Antoine just stole a glass bottle of milk for some stupid reason. I will now think its an alcohol reference cause he's pounding back that milk hardcore in an alley in some black trench coat like like an adolescent abroad. Seriously he's just slumming it around Paris now And for some reason he's back at school- and Sourpuss takes an interest if Antoine got his face rocked by his parents for being a tool. But no in a rather nice humorous take for French stuff, Antoine says that everything went well last night- primarily because he slummed it on the streets of Paris. On that note, why do his parents just not care that antoine is now homeless by choice- wouldn't they call some police or something?

But hey we got a new teacher- English this time and because its accented English it doesn't use a subtitle here in some sentences. At least its better than the American in 2 or 3 Things- that was painful. And on the whole bit of some people aren't able to do that sound- that of "th", I know your pain little French kid.

I do have to say that I haven't commented on the weirdest thing about Antoine's room- his parents sleep on a bed with sheets and all. Antoine sleeps in every scene except it seems like the scene right after English class, in a sleeping bag. I don't know what constituted a harmful or neglectful childhood but this seems rather weird to see his parents have him in a sleeping bag. Wow I don't care about the whole "when I was your age, I did the same things you did you should listen to me" speech by his mom. Sure that's an okay argument and can be true but she's a terrible mother figure. Antoine wants to leave school and says he can't concentrate- maybe there's some learning problems there- he does seems to have a lot of issues in school with completely trash grades and all. And it is pretty much 1960- the brain and learning was just really starting to be a thing so having a character who knows that he thinks school is complete rubbish- rather interesting.His mom doesn't like that idea since she never went past high school and his actual? father or maybe stepdad never finished high school. And she does say that the school learning is complete trash since people don't use math or science outside of school-but French? French is super important for writing and speaking and what the hell else French people love how French they are.And terrible mom figure tells Antoine that she will give him a thousand francs if Antoine gets a French essay in the top five in his class. Yes the mom is so desperate to conform her son into her beliefs of success that she has decided that outright bribery is a good thing to do.

I bet it fails.

Nope it does worse than fail- Antoine plagiarizes a bit from Honore de Balzac, a French writer well known and, well, French. I wonder if the director has an idea that Balzac himself could be similar to Antoine- I don't know a lot about him because on the subject of me reading French works, I really haven't done that cause I have no time to sit down and read through that. But it seems that to a French person or someone more in the know they could debate why the choice of Balzac was chosen by the director to be the French Essay plagiarism that Antoine does.Remember kids, cutting corners by plagiarizing can have terrible consequences so don't do that. But hey Antoine now loves Balzac's works if he hung up a picture of the writer.

But seriously? "Write about a topic/event that has influenced you personally" Well why plagiarize? I know that the internet really wasn't a thing in 1959- but the school system was more by memorization and there were things like classic books and dictionaries. Your teachers aren't stupid so plagiarizing a whole thing about "My Grandfather's Death" from, I'm guessing, Balzac? Yeah that won't be a problem even though the French take French things super seriously.Okay actually it's weirder that Antoine like Honore de Balzac- he has a shrine to him.

Also the whole thing that makes the stepdad mad every time he things about it? He's lost his Michelin guide- that is the Michelin Star guide where the best restaurants are ranked and can be known for excellence- its a French company- good old Michelin Man and all but its rather European and French in particular so its not that weird to them. Just think like French chefs or something.

And yes the candle he lit accidentally lights a fire and his stepdad gets super mad cause well Antoine did start a fire. Though because he said that he wrote a good essay his mom makes his stepdad take them to the movies. And his dad makes a great joke about how "They aren't found of arsonists in the theater." It made me chuckle and in a movie about a juvenile delinquent that doesn't do a lot of juvenile delinquent stuff thanks to movies getting more dark and real as time went on- yeah.

And yes Sourpuss calls out Antoine for having a plagiarized paper in front of the whole class. And Sourpuss sends him to the principal's office and yells that he doesn't want to see him this next term. Antoine runs away and because Rene speaks up for Antoine he gets kicked out too- but because its Rene he doesn't care.

And now it makes sense why Rene doesn't care at all- his family is loaded. Though his family is equally messed up because while they are rich, his mother is a drunk and Rene's dad is a gambler.

They go to the movies for a very short scene cause why not and then afterwards they go back and play some board games and seemingly drink wine and smoke cigars cause also why not. They don;t have to go to school so they rules of decency don't have to apply to them.But seriously I wonder how awesome it was to live before a time with smoke detectors cause the whole room is smoky and the somoke detectors don't exist so nothing beeping is happening.

I don't know why Rene and Antoine are watching what is close to a Punch and Judy show while deciding how to get money but there's so many screaming kids I don't like it. And now Rene and Antoine are stealing, I think, Antoine's Cool Dad's typewriter for some dumb reason to get money but that fails cause of course a pawn shop wouldn't want to deal in some form of stolen or shady goods. And finally Rene and Antoine are having an argument because stealing a typewriter from Antoine's dad's workplace was a terrible idea. Finally Antoine is seeing how much of a terrible person Rene is for a twelve year old and doesn't want to deal with him. Seriously though the idea of somebody not arresting Antoine for breaking into the place to return the typewriter in the stupidest hat and coat combo ever is great- his true crime is a crime against fashion. And for that crime his father takes him to the police to have him scared straight.

Finally after an hour and twenty five minutes it seems like the third part of the film really starts where Antoine is going to a place out in the country to get him okay- sure this is just talked about but finally we have the final stretch almost to the end of the movie and finally we get the out in the country bits.And the juvenile system sounds bad- signing away the rights to Antoine, the statement seemed a bit too cut and dried, and now he gets to spend the night in jail with a drunk and some prostitutes. Wonder why Antoine had to give his tie, belt, and shoelaces to the pretty much Boy's Home people- oh wait I think those could be used to commit suicide with. Of course they would take those items that would be dangerous if they let him keep it.

But hey now he lives in pretty much Boy Prison where he eats terrible food everyday so I guess he is having a wonderful time. And he only had to steal a typewriter for this fantastic experience of getting a criminal record.

And now his mother is trying to get him back but the judge is not having her story because he says that pretty much she was a terrible parent with discipline and that leaving your kid home alone is rather bad form. Though I thought he would get to the observation center seventy five minutes into the film- the film made Antoine finally get to the place by the seashore (haven't commented on this but hiis dream of seeing the sea is a character trait of Antoine- he really wants to see the sea.) and so the last fourteen or so minutes are there to just end the film on a note. Seems like it will not be a happy one. But hey we get to hear the life of a juvenile delinquent now since this is right now sharing stories of each kid in a way. Remember guys, character studies in film can be rather good. But I notice that the use of the school in the beginning to show the problems of Antoine is brought back in the joking nature of the boys in the observation center and the more disciplined nature of the people in charge here- its like a school for delinquents and since they are in the system now they might have some repeat offenders later in life.  Even the punishment is similar to his school experience with Sourpuss being a mean teacher- since Antoine ate his food early he gets to choose which hand he is hit with by the overseer. Harsh discipline to change what is seen as a delinquency problem of course honorable judge character, this is going to be a great learning experience for Antoine..

And now we get to have Antoine meet the female psychologist where he explains his reasoning for what he did. Man some of his lines here are just fantastic. Well at some point Antoine stole ten thousand francs from his grandmother cause she wouldn't notice and she was going to die soon. Rather realist in his way of doing things. Lying is easier than to tell the truth because his parent's wouldn't believe him anyway. Or that his mom had him out of wedlock and wanted to abort him- yeah that would make anyone be a little messed up. Or that for some reason he gets asked if he ever had sex with girls and then he talks about how he knew where prostitutes were and that he almost had the chance to to do it with a prostitute who liked younger ones which you know actually surprised me since this is a film from 1959- extremely out there for hinting at some perverse material. But that was a nice five minute question and answer monologue scene. Wish we really had more than what we got because I rather like character monologues it seems.

And for those who wonder- Rene comes back and is at the observation facility too but when Antoine tries to get Rene's attention, Rene just walks away barely noticing his former friend. See? Thanks to Rene, Antoine got a criminal record and Rene doesn't even care. He's the true delinquent in this film in a way. Or he's some form of uncaring figure that is- okay so Rene is not even arrested or a delinquent. I guess he was going to maybe visit Antoine and then he chickened out and takes his bike and starts on home. Rather weird characterization here but either way, Rene, for somebody like twelve years old or so I can't tell, got away completely Scot free with no actual consequences. Unlike Antoine- I don't think he even has a criminal record- or if he does it was barely mentioned for a kid who actively steals from his parents, forges notes, drinks and smokes, etc. He's the bad parts of Antoine and actively ramps up Antoine's stupid ideas- pawning the typewriter to get money and the last time we see him he's riding off into the sunset  on his bike whistling.

Hey at least for once his mom actively did mom things like actually visit him in Boy Prison. No wait she's actively pissed off- remember that weird short scene where Antoine sees his mom actively cheating on his stepdad with her boss? Yeah I forgot for a moment. But Antoine sent a letter to his stepdad to tell him about it. Seems to have hurt his Cool Dad cause he doesn't come with his Terrible Mom to even say hi. And seriously you two may be a "devoted couple" in your eyes but your marriage is a sham and you actively hurt Antoine's self esteem and everything. You uncompromising, self righteous terrible lady. And oh no now she won't take him back because for some reason she thinks Antoine told all the neighbors that she was cheating- sure that could have been possible but you know what was more likely? That your walls were made of thin plaster and everyone could hear you arguing about your infidelity Seriously I liked the dad character even if he was a bit strict at points but no I guess he's done with the kid he raised and all. At least I have to say that the choice of lighting is nice to show the change in the character of the mother- when she was trying to connect to Antoine by saying she also had some troubles in her past it was a nice soft lift that kind of brightened her features and she spoke more in a softer more attempted caring tone. In this completely unflattering scene, she's not in darkness but she's changed her appearance more with the hat and nice clothes that she rarely if ever wore in the film and there's a part of a shadow caused by that hat that covers part of her face. Short answer: They made her a truly detestable and petty character in this scene.

Though I have to give her props for bringing the ironic echo to that nice scene of Antoine saying that he wanted to leave school and earn a living. She's wiped his hands of Antoine and pretty much means that she's not going to help him ever again because in her eyes he's not earned it, in my opinion, she's reminding that he's still a child because he doesn't get how the world works and now that he's wrecked his future thanks to getting kicked out of school and getting a criminal record thanks to being an idiot? Yeah his life will be fantastic now.

Finally we see Antoine escape by leaving while the whole group of boys were out playing football or something. We've been foreshadowing a moment like this for a while with a few times that Antoine said he really wanted to see the sea. Actually this is a cool shot since he's just running and the camera is following right along side him. Wonder what kind of way they filmed that but its rather nice. He has finally reached his dream of seeing the sea. I do have to say that the cinematography is on point in this ending few running to the sea scenes with the scenery being rather pretty in the beach shots. And he steps his feet into the water, uncertain and the film ends with a moving freeze frame of his uncertain face. His future is his own but he is maybe too young to truly know what to do with it.

Overall my feelings of this film really depend on which point of the film I see to be watching- the middle thirty or so minutes with Antoine just chilling in Paris or hanging out with Rene? Didn't like those at all. Though some of the scenes were pretty in them but I thought that for a 100 minute movie it could be trimmed a few minutes out here or there and you doing miss much. While I love the cinematography and filming of the scene where Antoine is on the amusement park ride it was like two minutes long and actually almost made me have motion sickness because of the spinning. And the opening credits sequence of three and a half minutes in length could have been sped up a tad.

Overall I have to say yet again that this film isn't for everyone. In a way it reminded me of Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger with the young morally ambiguous characters and the whole idea of them being royally messed up in some ways and normal in others. And it reminded me of a less racist and much more interesting Rebel Without a Cause with like twelve year old characters and a good portrayal of topics and themes of family and juvenile delinquency.

Did I like the characters? Yeah- Antoine was a good kid making awful choices, Rene was an awful kid that looked rather good, Antoine's step-dad/dad was a weird mix of funny and wise with complete somewhat justified anger.

His mom though? Didn't like her one bit.

Overall I have to say that adding up all these ideas I'd have to give this movie a low to medium eight. This is right now the highest film on the list as of this posting.  But I know that will probably change later on.

But hey French New Wave cinema is right now killing it with the two films I watched being rather nice to see.

Criterion Collection From A to Z: 2 or 3 Things I Know About Her (1967)

Oh boy. The description on Hulu makes me worried- "A housewife from the Paris suburbs prostitutes herself for extra money." Yep this is going to be fun. Fun in that I personally don't often like the portrayal of sex in films because it doesn't always pertain to the plot or it could cut the scene entirely and I wouldn't lose much of anything. Sex scenes in movies just make me usually uncomfortable. So while I love the Criterion Collection in total because I can expect to be shown important cinematic things from the past, I always have to steel myself when nudity comes on screen. It's just makes me rather step out of the film because of that. Though the director is Jean-Luc Godard and he was part of the French New Wave movement that helped really push the boundaries of filmmaking- fourth wall breaks and partially unscripted bits of the film ight be fun for some but it is a warning. I haven't seen many French films around this period of time but I have heard that they can be rather difficult to get into. And the plot of this film given by Wikipedia seems to show this fact- its a day in the life of a surburban lady in Paris and doesn't really have a plot to speak of in that its more of the director commenting on culture and the Vietnam War. So if you like Fight Club's fourth wall breaking main character that comments on the bored nature of life and that whole shot of him being surrounded by things and whatnot- this might be for you.

I don't know. It's something- but realize that the French New Wave really helped bring some weird techniques into the cinematic arts of America and its not a terrible film. And I've seen films that have done most of their action in about a day so the length of time shown in this film isn't a bad idea (See Rebel Without a Cause and Do The Right Thing for examples) I rather like those films because you have a definite showing of events and it feels immediate. So altogether before I even turn on the film I do have to say that I probably will enjoy this film because its very much a style I have liked before. And its a shorter film being only 87 minutes long so it won't be a sit down and prepare for an epic film- though I do have to warn you that it is a foreign film so you will have to prepare because those have an added thing that changes the experience- subtitles and things so there is a definite language barrier being set up before you start. Though I do have to say that the opening of the film is colorful because its the title of the film in French and that's rather colorfully done.I do have to say that for people wondering who is doing the whisper narration- that's the film's director providing that commentary on consumer culture and the like so while its weird sounding I guess you could say it draws your attention. Also for a while the background noise of things going on is rather nice- it makes the film play with the diegetic sound (which is that it is part of the film's world unlike non-diegetic things like a soundtrack song playing over the scene in question.) On the idea of diegetic and non diegetic elements in film in regards to sound that if its not shown at some point that somebody's hearing the same sound you are it might be non diegetic. But the idea can be played with since the ediiting process of films can trick our brains into creating space that isn't there through sound or light- the idea that people are watching movies or near a bathroom in the film itself? Might not be entirely true. But in regards to ambient sound vs. soundtrack music added in later? Just realize that when I use the non diegetic vs diegetic analysis of a scene I will primarily be talking about the musical sound bits- there is more than just that but that's what I primarily notice. Being a fan of music in my regular life means that I've focused on sounds for a long time.

Moving on though since I don't want to fully bore you about sounds and the like here.

Since I don't really care about/ get the reference to what the narrator is saying about Parisian culture in this film with a message and little plot I won't comment about it since it is more subjective- what I get out of films is different than what you get out of films. I may focus on the historical and elements of costuming and sound design in films and characters if I find some that are fun to latch onto but you might not care about something I do. This is all a way to say that while there may be more interesting things that the narrator is saying, I personally don't really care all that much about it- though I do have to say that I like the camera work in the film since so far it has had some decently cool shots of Paris in the film. Setting can be useful in a film if used correctly. When its something like Lost In Translation though which I have seen recently where the plot is set in Japan and yet the use of Japanese culture is in the periphery and the cultural jokes are rather distasteful now for a film that came out of 2003. Now this is a tangent but I'm trying to get to a point that films should use the setting and not make you think that it could be set anywhere in the world and the setting in the film is used like window dressing. Setting a film in Paris for a FRench New Wave director? First of all, the French New Wave was going against the French Film Academy and they were total film nerds- they had a lot of ideas but not a lot of money. What you may realize in film is when you have not a lot of money, but you still want to have the scene as you want it- that causes people to get creative. So I do have to say that so far I don't mind this film because its very much a film set in Paris, about a Paris lady and the cinematography they can do with the setting might be rather nice because the director is commenting about consumerist culture.

I do have to say that its a rather strange choice for the narrator to show us our main character and describe her though he uses the actual actress's name and she references something Bertolt Brecht said about actors- not really important in the scheme of things but it is a fourth wall break and references an important playwright and German film director that really had a decent impact on filmmaking through the idea of Brechtian acting - whihc in the simplest of terms wants to keep the audience distant from the performance by reminding them that they are watching a play or a movie. Pretty much its a technique that's rather important to recognize that there have been films that have used the technique but its not a widely used one. Most people don't want to listen to some intentionally badly acted or weirdly designed sets and movements in film. So referencing Brecht himself and therefore probably adding to the notion that this film has a message it is trying to get across and through techniques that are noticeably strange or antithetical to normal film editing and scene creation? Yeah this is going to be a different movie itself.

Also its funny that he then describes the actress as the character while keeping the same narration going- she hasn't changed her clothes or anything that makes her actually different so he repeats the same narration but replaces her name to show that we have moved into the idea of the film world again.

What I have to say that the decision for the female main character and the narrator to have somewhat of a back and forth discussion like maybe she can hear him is something that I've never really seen before but it is a cool effect in my eyes. Though usually I have to say that usually watching a film without subtitles is the best- the use of the narrator sometimes whispering so quietly that he is saying things but you can't make it out really makes this a film I would recommend people to watch with subtitles. It's too difficult to hear otherwise.

The use of frames of the film and the film itself to focus on consumerism. What I have to give total props for the director is that, through me reading wikipedia and scouring the links, he was rather tired of American culture by this point and thought that advertising was like pimps- the things you buy would become more of an enjoyment than sex would. Which sounds very French, but realize that this film really doesn't exist in a vacuum in that the French government seems to have been focused on increasing the standard of living and you know what helps drive the economy? Spending money to buy things and therefore creating a loop where you get money and give to to businesses to help them out. Its Consumerism in a loving nutshell. And since the Vietnam War was happening- the film seems to put in that two random people are listening to what seems to be a radio broadcast of President Johnson who was talking about how the Vietnam War was going on- why is that maybe in there? Well the Sixties had Vietnam of course, but this is a French film. What you have to recognize is that Vietnam was French Indochina before the French evacuated- then a Communist regime was set up and then because America is America then they stepped in and pretty much led to the Vietnam War, And the nice thing about the scene is that it ends with the narrator calling out George Washington fighting William Pitt and saying Pax Americana is a brainwasher- the director really doesn't like what America represents- with what he's used to show it though consumerism and war. This is a film speaking about how pretty much America messed up France with their wars and the consumerism- though take that with a grain of salt since that is just my opinion.

The film loves using these fourth wall breaking monologues that highlight the character of Juliette- washing the dishes and having an aside conversation with the audience. Thank you French cinema for really bringing or defining the fourth wall break into the confines of cinema. Though describing dreams is such a silly phenomenon- they always sound funnier or near incomprehensible when there's a dream explanation. Why am I bringing this up now? Because Julliette's kid here had some weird dream about being near a precipice and seeing twins holding hands or something, You know what that meant in the context of the film- the kid says that was North and South Vietnam. Yes an eight year old kid had a dream where he thought of the closeness of war and how Vietnam should be reunified or something like that-

For those who are wondering if there is nudity ten minutes into a film that is supposed to be about some sexual situations- yes there is a bath scene and the actress is naked in the bath. Just commenting here since foreign films handle nudity much freer in a way compared to U.S. films. Though its surprising because that scene also has a very between the surprised woman and the power company guy that barges in- like everything in this film it makes more sense in context- but they don't translate her words but do his. Sometimes this happens in foreign films and when it does it looks a little weird. This whole film barely has a plot and just seems like little vignettes hence why I am trying to comment on the littlest things I can to keep this somewhat interesting in what might be important to know or slightly cool. Because so far twelve minutes in we've got nothing truly spectacular in terms of the plot in regards to how films are usually known. If you are coming into thi film for a really got plot and everything you are going to be disappointed- in a way I could see this as attempt to have some kind of philosophy paper feel- the writer/narrator having an idea of what they want and the story building disjointedly from there. Its not a pretty film in terms of continuity between scenes or scenes going quicker than sixties films were known for or films having an uncomfortably long take of film where you want it to move on but it doesn't. Films like these really make you think of what you expect in film and when you don't really get that experience you have to figure out something to connect to.

Fifteen minutes in and we finally get to hear the narrator explain why Juliette decided to become the prostitutes- her kids are all from different fathers and therefore she has needed to care for them since she has been deserted by those men. Then she finds a nice guy and settles down comfortably but oops, they have a third kid and then the nice guy can't make enough to make ends meet but they still want to live in their house and get stuff. So he tells her to become a prostitute again to get enough money to live. Rather depressing backstory but thanks narrator, I didn't want to see her life so telling me is an okay option when she was a young and dumb kid accidentally getting pregnant and whatever.

What I actually just noticed is that so far there's been no music. Its just been them talking or them doing something. The lack of music is always a cool choice because it makes the life around them the background noise and when that can get cut away in some scenes it is a noticeable lack of anything. Silence hurts in a way in movies because we've become trained to have something with our films- early silent movies had some form of film score behind them to help the action along and give the audience some music in the experience. Sheer silence? It can make people uncomfortable.Though it is cool to see that the view of the movie can focus on small characters like ladies in a shop that Juliette goes to to pick up clothes.

But what is nice about this film so far is that its very much a character and culture study- we see Juliette as a character and here motivation through monologues about her inner life and desire and we see the director show the consumerist culture of the French sixties it seems. And each "segment" of the film starts with an intertitle card saying what the coming segment will hit on. Those are like the transition sentences of a writer going from one idea to the next without a big switch in between in that the film itself might not change scenery but the idea that they are talking about now is different. Like she hasn't left the clothes shop yet and already we have had some decent monologues of Juliette about her character itself.  And I checked on why there's so many monologues in the film- the actors all wore earpieces and the director said random questions that they had to answer on the spot. These are all off the cuff ideas it seems though they all work rather well.And narrator himself styles himself a sort of human nature pathologist with his studies in the narration being something akin to maybe later affecting the world through his knowledge of things. In a way I was most definitely right about calling the film itself a study of people and culture because the narrator/ director is doing that exact thing with needing a question answered in character by the actors and that informing the character themselves. The Method school of acting where you bring things you do to your performance and that influencing the character seems to be in full effect here with this idea. The actor gets asked how they think their character should be acting and they answer to the best of their ability. Rather interesting way to do it but it works.

Now when I was checking out wikipedia, it said there was some famous long take of a cup of coffee. I thought they were joking but I think it starts right about 27 minutes in where it focuses on a shot of coffee. This scene in and of itself is rather meta in a way since before it Juliette was looking at a magazine and then another lady looked at it and the narrator used a frame of time in literal movie frames. 150 frames as a sense of time. It's a movie so remember its a movie. And then the narrator is talking about the subjective view of reality and if it can be objective and well look at that I somehow made my talk on how things are subjective in terms of what you get out of something and that being different and somehow I talked about it during a movie which is highly philosophical in themes and how there is objective and subjective things and the narrator himself can't fall into either. His fascination and whisper attitude seems to be because he can't have a state of being or fall into nothingness as he puts it. He;s loud enough for us to notice, but not loud enough to truly have a person that is him. He is a disembodied voice floating in the ether hoping to be heard and truly exist or not exist, but he can't because he doesn't have the capability to.And realize that the narrator is the director himself so its a mouthpiece- the narrator describes what is going and and sometimes influences the characters- so hearing some Marxist ideas about how the working class is in retreat and stuff and some Existentialist philosophy? That's pretty much the director being the thing that creates the film- in this film he is literally a quiet voice barely there but there. What other disembodied voice is there but a sense of a creator being there. He creates the world as he speaks, the film is at his will and the world follows around. His thoughts shape the monologues, his sight shapes the camera. his voice is what the film is. This is the auteur director at work and very powerful in his quiet. The director is the voice of the cinema. While that is just an idea it has some things that later influenced directors in America to really say its their film- a Speilberg Film. A Scorsese, Francis Ford Coppola, Tarantino- "A Film by" kind of credit. The French New Wave really made the idea of the director as a mini creative zeitgeist kind of god figure in their film having the final say of how it looks, how actors are, and how the film is. That really came about thanks to the French. Thank you French film directors. And the film is going with the narrator and everyone as God in a way- language creates things and limits, and when people die their death makes them limitless. But yeah that was a rather interesting scene of primarily a cup of coffee and a idea of the narrator studying humanity and limiting the world because in a way he creates limits on what happens. And so far there was one short piece of music but that was in the background being played by some street performers so even that strange bit of music being present was still part of the world itself.

And finally in the bit titled the Introduction To Ethnology, it seems like Juliette is going to fulfill her prostitute role in the film. Only took a third of the film (minus that like minute long clip of the girl in the bath scene) to have nudity/ Though I do have to say that I like her empowered idea that why should she be afraid of sex because she is a woman thing they have here. She has sex and it doesn't define her- there is this large inner world of hers that she has and only know are we truly getting to the sexual encounters. And no sex scene or nudity in that one. Broke y expectations and I liked it more for it. But the scene following is rather sad being sett at the call girl brothel place and we get monologues of the females in there and they are all sad because they have no future or are scared crossing the street or they lost their secretary job so they became a prostitute to get by..

And now next scene of the narrator saying that life is like a comic strip and that language is difficult because how can you accurately describe an event like how Juliette went to the garge her husband works in at 4:10 in the afternoon. Rather interesting idea since he's wondering about the subjective nature of the story and the use of language- focusing on a woman we learn nothing about for a few seconds or talking about the leaves in the trees or writing on the walls or the blue, cloudy sky. Interesting and his voice rather soothing for a movie that nothing truly interesting has actually happened in.this movie and then yet again the narrator goes look at the Consumerist culture with how objects exist and if we focus on them then that's because they are more real than people. And look a scene  transition with the Arc de Triomphe in the background. Wonder if French films just got to use a famous Paris landmark in the film at least once cause Paris?

And now I was wondering how they would introduce the supposed American character in the film. Funny how he's wearing a t-shirt with the American flag on it even in the sixties I guess other cultures were making fun of our ability to wear our American Patriotism on out sleeve. And he's a photographer that went to Vietnam and is relaxing here because its much nicer- "a dead Vietcong costs a million dollars to the U.S., Johnson could have 20,000 girls like these two for the same price." Still funny though because his wall is covered in flags of America while he's being critical of the war effort in Vietnam. And now for some reason they are talking about the nature of a city, this movie is weird. And on the note of the "American" guy- he's played by a Frenchman and he doesn't have a translation of what he's saying when he's speaking in English so its some form of mumble incomprehensible mess that I can't get the gist of. And so far the only actually nude scene is still that girl in the bathtub ten minutes in the film so if you like women only after that getting down to their undergarments than this movie is so far mostly for you. Makes sense though since this was rather risque at the time but add on 50 years and this is rather tame. I never thought I would see a goofy sex scene where the women literally wear bags over their heads and they parade around- though its primarily that we see them from the neck up and whatever but they are still walking around with bags over their heads. This isn't erotic filming at all- rather boring or humorous. And right after she takes off her bag on her head which is still funny, I noticed that the dates don't match up in the film- this is supposed to take place over one day and yet in one of the narrator's monologues, I think about the leaves or around that time, he says its a nice October day and yet Juliette gives us the actual date of the American photographer scene as August 17, 1966 which means that its can't happen over one day and yet make sense- but it does because its a movie and yet either the director didn't notice that continuity error or put it in to mess with us. Though maybe she referencing the date on the Life magazines that she's looking at because that would hopefully clear that up. I hope that's the case cause I don't enjoy noticing continuity errors. But great now her monologue is having still frames of the Vietnam War which is awkward to freeze frame onto, And the background addition of the voice saying "America uber alles" is kind of terrifying because the phrase itself is German and this was made a little over two decade after the end of World War Two and with the phrase being translated to something like America Over All is a definite slam against America. Something like showing the human cost of the Vietnam War with what looks like picture of the aftermath of a gas attack or something? There might be some parallels to the Germans since the beginning of that movie had Juliette''s husband listening to the speech by President Johnston and then the broadcast goes to one of the American Generals saying that they should bomb Vietnam back to the Stone Age? Rather harsh language used and therefore it could be seen as a genocide in the eyes of the world- and the uber alles line was in the German national anthem (later removed because of the whole thing being related to Nazism. So America uber alles? That's possibly saying that the whole America is the greatest thing is an awful idea.

And then there's some weird scene with two random dudes in a office or something with stacks of books and one of them just grabbing some and reading a line from each. I don't get it at all. And now its meta again- "People never really talk in a movie, I wanted to do that with you." Yes its a movie and you've all been talking for the last hour straight in some form- its very much a not-movie then. It is one and yet it isn't. This is weird to see a conversation happening and there being no back and forth shot-reverse shots of each person while they are talking and reacting to one another. I knew this was possible of course but seeing it in action is weird. And the scene transition is those two random novelist guys again and the scene ends with the guy reading snippets of books being the background sound and the glasses guy just staring directly at the audience for a decently uncomfortable amount of time.

Sociology of the novel is a strange thing to name the next sequence. I guess it works in a way since we've seen the writers and Juliette's husband who I don't care enough about to name both writing something in the previous scene. Since I can't read French I have no clue what the husband was writing about since it wasn't translated at the bottom or something. All I know is that he was writing. And there's a blink and you'll almost miss it black guy in the film. Yeah the whole film is a mess of white French people talking about language and philosophy and subjective vs. objective ideas and whatnot but its rather nice to see that for a few seconds there was a black dude in the film.And there's a dutch angle tilted shot now for one of the building shots- I don't know why that is. And the narrator reappears- I think for that previous about ten minutes there was almost no narrator. As the film said, it's strange to see people just talk in a movie and the narrator stepped back and let them do it.Okay when Juliette was talking in this section there's a real cool shot of the camera moving around the horizon 360 degrees which is a really long establishing shot for scenery. That was rather impressive. And then she goes home because its the end of the day and for some reason her son shares his essay for school on comradeship between boys and girls and its so weird- I mean its the same kid who dreamed he saw twins which were North and South Vietnam. I just guess that maybe he's a bit strange or something. And good lord I didn't want him to end by also looking at the screen but no he aimed his toy gun at the audience and shot us dead with how terrible his weird essay was. I mean he's like twelve or fourteen here, I guess but seriously its a weird essay to write about comradeship.Well I do have to say that the kids really act like kids with all the crying and hyperactivity involved- so I guess while the older kid being all weird and all is okay. At least it wasn't that one scene with her daughter where she dropped her off to the day care she stayed at and that background noise was just her daughter crying for like three minutes. Yeah that was something. I don't know why in her husband's monologue the director is asking him questions about Hitler and in Juliette's monologue is all about life and knowing what an eye is. Strange ending it seems but I'm chalking it up to French philosophy ideas and cinema.Ending with them in bed and her reading about the man of tomorrow.And the narrator himself goes to rest and he forgets all the tragedies in the world, all of the hostility and problems.And the ending shot is of a "city" built out of consumer goods, dish soap boxes and all. Ending on the whole consumer culture idea that he really wanted to put home.

Overall, I would say that this film is definitely not for everyone. For people that like actual plots in their movies? Stay far away because the film is driving home a message and the plot gets left by the wayside in the goal of getting the message across/ Also the whole focus on long shots of people talking and that rather artistic shot, which I loved, of the narrator monologuing over the cup of coffee scene and all of the non action that the movie thrives on getting out of its way to give everyone a monologue that they can- if you don;t like discussions of inner worlds of the person and how they can see the world and everything, this movie is not for you. But actually I was going in being worried that there would be an ungodly amount of random nudity- and I was pleasantly surprised that that wasn't the case with that one sceen that was super short of that lady in the bath and my today's standards of R R Ratings? Yeah that is very tame. Still exists of course so I am warning you for anybody that goes out of their way to not see nudity in their movies, since I know of at least a few people in my own life that really dislike the use of nudity in tv shows and movies nowadays. But if I had to rate my personal enjoyment of this film would probably have to be a low eight, or, high seven out of ten because of what was in the film and the just feel of the movie and how they built Juliette and the other characters through monologue and for anybody who cares, I don't think this movie with a fleshed out female character passes the Bechdel Test. With the use of monologues while talking to other people its rather hard to tell but I think I saw Juliette really talk to only a few other women throughout the whole movie and those were few and far between for only a minute or two in total. Overall though good film, if tending towards the philosophical and wordy.

Criterion Collection From A to Z: 21 Days (1940)

I right now don't have much hope for this film since its a 1940's film. Now I don't hate 1940's films in general but by the title and the description being on Hulu that "A man has twenty one days of freedom before he must admit to killing his lover's husband or another man will be found guilty." Now I hope it won't be a hardboiled detective crime film since I have seen a few of those and I get rather turned off by a mystery story. Don't know why that is but I do want to put out there for my readers/viewers that I do have a few biases towards the cinematic arts in terms of genre. Though I do have to say that this is a shorter film with it being just about seventy minutes long so it isn't one that you have to sit down and prepare yourself for.Though after searching wikipedia (and yes I do have to say that I use it to get a chance to know who;s in the film and what it took to make some of these films) that it stars some well known or at least known today actor names- Vivian Leigh and Lawrence Olivier. So there I know that it might be a decent story- and a nice tidbit that might be interesting for some of my people here, wikipedia says once again that filming took place in 1937 but the film was released in 1940. Now what you have to recognize in films of the time that there was a definite sense of films being all finished and ready to go for a general audience, but either shelved away to be released later because it was better and might save a career because of a earlier film flop or that reshoots could be added to any moment on a whim and that could push a film back. Realize that film is an ever changing medium and therefore in conversation with other films or the culture abroad. So having a Vivian Leigh film being pushed back to 1940? That was because she was Scarlett O'Hara in Gone With the Wind which is a groundbreaking film in a way because of it still being the most money made in a film ever- though I do have to say that I mean inflation prices. People went crazy over the film and I personally don't enjoy Gone With the Wind because it set a view of the Deep South for decades that was romanticized- but I am going on a tangent here. Though do realize that in these Criterion Films that there might be a few awkward moments racially or sexually or violence wise that might be awkward to wrap your head around.

And it seems to be a British Film in that it has in the title sequence that it is a London Films Production and a shot of Big Ben. And it's based on "The First and the Last", a play by John Galsworthy who was a British author that I have at least heard of- though I do have to say that I have never read a book by him. But I am at least hopeful that it won't be a terrible experience, though I do have to say that sometimes good writers can write okay screenplays.  So get ready for the possibility of there being a sense of a strange not quite British/ not quite American Mid-Atlantic/ transatlantic accent. That was a thing in early films it seems that phased out in the forties but it was sort of developed to have a wordly accent accepted by both Americans and British- it fell out of use after World War Two but it is something that was picked up from the stage and became big for a decade or two once the advent of sound in the film industry hit. So historical changes in accents can still be heard in the records of the past- if of course you want to include film as a historical idea though film itself is influenced by a lot of things- the cultural norms of the time, the source material if there is any, and developments around the world changing cinematography and editing techniques therefore have a thought that movies are a changing medium and can look different to the original audience of the time and us in the present- though realize that even some characters actions in films may be exaggerated or on the cusp of bad taste even during the original release of any film. Also another thing that can separate us from them- the film starts out with a credits sequence showing who directed and starred in the film. Sure we still have some holdover from the beginning sections of films sometimes telling who is directing and starring in the film, its usually a little less long than  it used to be. Though I do have to say that I rather enjoy some good overture or starting music being rather soothing and getting you ready for a movie experience. Also I do have to say that the use of cursive for the character names and capital letter font for actor names is strange and now its a bit hard to read with the falling out of favor of cursive handwriting. It also doesn't help that I am sitting a comfortable distance away from the tv to protect my eyes from further damage- either way it was a tad hard to read the character names- though that isn't the longest opening credit sequence with it being just over a minute out of the seventy minute film so its not a slog. And rather nice to see that the aspect ration of the film seems to be a nice square- so it looks like a Academy Aspect ration where the screen has those black bars on the sides and its close to a perfect square. Old films like that look I guess and it definitely makes them stand out in terms of them not yet really finding a new or different aspect ratio yet.

This is a highly British film with how it opens into the action in a courtroom and the lawyers and judges are wearing British law attire- the wig that looks goofy to American audiences but that's thanks to a different style of our judges in the judicial system. Nice to see that the film uses dissolves in that it moves into the next scene while fading out of the previous one. Rather oldschool technique but its one of my favorite scene transitions if used in moderation and all that.Now I do have to notice that this film so far is a lot of white people- and one short scene of Lawrence Olivier and Vivian Leigh has a Italian shopkeeper with the accent and selling wine and all that jazz. Rather interesting to see films of this period and later because of the use of nationality to define some characters- German jokes existed before and after World War One but the tone changes, Asian jokes, black jokes, these stereotypes and everything are a part of culture and they do change over time in response to historical events. Sure I am just saying this to show that movies d not work in a vacuum but this is just to yet again hammer in the point that while that Italian guy wasn't a stereotype in the bad sense (it has been by that point only five minutes into the film) but realize that film uses race/ethnicity or the lack thereof to comment on the society. So where I deem that there might be a troublesome or stereotypical portrayal of a character I will not hesitate to say so.

What I also have to say is that the set design is rather nice and the costuming is simple yet effective- Another short thing is that the use of black and white really lets the shadows pop in a way that might not be as pronounced in color. Shadows in this first scene with Lawrence Olivier is pronounced in him wearing a trenchcoat and covered more in shadow. Though that makes sense since right after he meets Henry Wallen- the husband of his lover who definitely sounds Germanic. Why do I say Germanic and not just German? Well I rather like the idea of first and last names and thanks to the internet it is rather simple to find out the root words or language that names are from- Wallen is from my quick search, a Swedish name. So I want to cover myself in vague terms that he might not be from Germany- though he does say that in his country women work for a living- or thereabouts since I am paraphrasing. But remember that the film was made in 1937 and released in 1940. Also known as right around the time that Nazism and Fascism were on the rise and so there could be a sense that the character is a image of a foreign thing of some power and intimidation- though of course that is my reading of Henry Wallen and that is adding to the fact that he's rather a sleazy character- though I do have to say that I have no idea if the original play had this character or if he was added later in adaptation. But the use of closer shots and focusing on Lawrence Olivier creeping closer while Henry is being rather sly about needing to be paid for the use of his legal wife? The shadows are a sense of darkness, turmoil, and violence and is a nice use of lighting to show a character's mood without the use of words. Also I was right in that the hint of violence would go into a full blown fight and I've seen much more anticlimatic battles in the movies during this time so having some kind of violent thing happening is rather nice. Though Vivian Leigh's character is rather useless in this moment- though the use of women in these hardboiled manly films? Rather blase and typical- kind of a sex object that is either a femme fatale or a woman that can't do anything- that in some portrayals might be childish. A reason I don't like films like The Big Sleep (1946)? Primarily that the script was mediocre and I was told it was a critically acclaimed film and that secondly that women in it were limited or sex objects to be won. Now women in these films could be liberated in comparison to the actual reality in that they were hinted at being promiscuous and able to have a sexuality- but I've never personally liked the early portrayal of women as needing a romantic subplot to define themselves. Women can have interesting lives without needing to be defined by a man. Rant over- back to the movie though they hide the body in an alley- which should hopefully be problematic.Good thing Lawrence Olivier's character has an attorney for a brother. Now the idea of Lawrence Olivier playing the down on his luck brother when compared to the Leslie Banks character who is a successful lawyer who is rich enough to have a rather nice study with a mirror on the other wall that shows his study door- which is rather neat since I've always liked the use of mirrors in film and the idea that he can see who entered his study without turning around really shows some form of power dynamic between him and others maybe- he doesn't even have to leave his seat to greet the person. They have to come to him. But realize that even this brother that we expect to help him really wants to be promoted as a judge and therefore actually wants his brother to leave and don't worry about the murder, because having a murderer for a brother could be career suicide.Though I do have to say that it is rather nice to see Leslie Banks play an attorney through and through because he goes through what happened and what could get him incriminated- I guess lawyers breaking the law would be scary because they could be rather good at getting away with it.

Well Lawrence Olivier meets a bum minister named John Evans who is played by Hay Petrie- a Scottish actor who was in both stage and film and he's rather nice seeming. But he gets picked up by the cops in that he accidentally took the bloody gloves and gets framed for being the murderer of Wallen. Its actually rather sad because he has a short monologue about how he had finally lost his self respect and wants to suffer even a little to get some back- he's a rather tragic figure because he's so innocent in a way and truly believes that he could go back to the way he was when he wasn't a bum. I wonder how this film will end but I'm worried that it won't end happily for John Evans.

Also looks like there's a class idea here since Lawrence Olivier doesn't like that he accidentally got a man arrested- but his brother doesn't care because its was just a bum that got arrested and it isn't a major deal. It is around this time that the Great Depression was at kind of an end so there's still some idea of class having a great affect on emotion and how they see the world. Rich people or important ones have their head in the clouds while everyone else are just dealing with their lives. I do have to say that it was nice graphic match to have the Italian innkeeper drink to the health of one of the brothers while the judges have a party for the other to celebrate the other brother. It mirrors the scene in a way and it connects to two similar experiences shared by the brothers, even if a small one and lets us fade into the next scene while seeing something that lets us transition without a disjointed effect. Hilariously enough, the judges are rich and above the law in a way since they share stories when they broke the law themselves.

Lawrence Olivier goes to see the arraignment but he doesn't speak out about his crime.And they see that Wallen had a first wife and she is German/Russian? sounding- seems like the people on the stand are foreign. The nice thing about the London Court System- the Old Bailey which was the central Criminal Court of London and where a lot of trials have been done through the centuries- the most interesting is that there is now a database of records of the Old Bailey now online- is this part of the review of the movie- not really but since I plan on finishing up a BA in History soon and that I have actually searched the Old Bailey database it just stood out to me since I am a history nerd and find that kind of record keeping interesting.

And the 21 Days title is from the idea that Lawrence Olivier's character is going to fit as much life experience in 21 days in Rio because he thinks he's going to be a dead man because he wants to save John Evans. He wants to fit 30 years of fun in three weeks and in that time they also get married- somehow this turned into a romance movie two thirds of the way through between Lawrence Olivier and Vivian Leigh and fantastically enough to save time in the movie it's told through a sort of montage sequence. And John wants to be punished because he sticks to his beliefs that since he robbed Wallen's dead body he lost his self respect. And right after there's some romantic stuff with Lawrence Olivier and Vivian Leigh that I don't really care about.but I do like that they go to sea and the "I Do Like To Go Beside The Seaside" song has a small part in here for some reason. Don't know why but its nice to see it being used because it reminds me of Queen's Seven Seas of Rhye in which it is the ending bit and while that's a strange idea to have while watching a seventy six year old film (as of 2016) its still a thing I think is important since I love the song itself.And there is a nice court scene interspersed with Lawrence Olivier and Vivian Leigh at a carnival for some reason. Lawrence Olivier has a change of heart and rushed back to try and save John Evans but is too late because John Evans has a heart attack and dies. Pretty much Lawrence Olivier's character doesn't learn anything and a nice bum dies without a cause. And they live happily ever after.

Overall I liked this film and had some good fun with it. It deserves the three star rating that Hulu currently has on it but it wasn't terrible and was well acted for the time and had some great character moments- and Lawrence Olivier was one good actor that looked the part of a leading man should.

Overall rating? I've give it a medium seven out of ten- higher than average but the romance plot was rather okay- I've seen much worse romance in old films but it just seemed like it didn't fit as well as it should have.