WILLIAM FLANIGAN Viewed on DVD. Score = four (4) stars; cinematography/lighting = three (3) stars; subtitles = three (3) stars. Director Seijun Suzuki's ludicrous and nonsensical movie provides an excellent (and, perhaps, definitive) "textbook" illustration of what not to do when making a film intended to be taken seriously (and to turn a profit). Things immediately (and appropriately) start off on the wrong foot with a Criterion disc menu that is all but impossible to navigate due to poor design and choice of colors. And the opening credits include a crooner whose crooning and talking is not subtitled. (Most signs and other writings are not subtitled either.) The film's first act is focused on stunning stunts of shot gunmen and totally nude (and highly mobile) actresses and female performers; the second act deals a lot with falling water in the form of rain and bathroom showers; and the final act inventively plays around with two killers bent on killing each other while sharing the same living space (a real predicament when one has to use the restroom!). Cinematography (wide screen, black and white) is second rate with the lighting of interior scenes often among the missing (especially early in the film). Acting ranges from pure ham to nonexistent. The lead actor looks like he has a chronic case of the mumps as a result of facial plastic surgery! A scene where this mumps character talks back to a home movie is the Director's unsubtle invitation for the viewing audience to talk back to his movie. The script (if there ever really was one) is replaced by forced improvisations (screaming often substitutes for dialog). Of course, there is no discernible plot (although many scenes have their own micro plots--a movie with a collection of plot-lets). The score consists of okay jazz rifts. Sound dubbing is usually obvious but fine (the screech of tires when different vehicles careen around corners is individualized--unusual for Japanese films of the era). It's a bit of a mystery why this film has not (yet) become more of a cult classic. Perhaps it just isn't bad enough. WILLIAM FLANIGAN, PhD.

kurosawakira Film criticism, as I see it, is not so much to do with coming to understand the films' shortcomings but instead the viewer's own failure to connect with them, and the reasons for rejection. So it is, then, that "Branded to Kill" (1967), while equally as exuberant and berserk in many similarly positive ways as Suzuki's other widely regarded yakuza film, "Tokyo Drifter" (1966), misses the mark with this particular film enthusiast.While Suzuki's adventurous visual widescreen composition and impressionistic editing remain the most rewarding aspects also ins particular film, I'm left wondering why "Tokyo Drifter" worked for me and this one didn't. Perhaps the former was easier to place in contradistinction to the genres and "film mentality" it's toying with. Perhaps it was an "easier" film, more "conventional" and thus "conventional" enough to be more readily appreciated. Or perhaps we've come so far in self-reference and parody both in the art-house and mainstream that the latter film simply hasn't aged as gracefully. I just thought it stretched too far, never inviting me in. I've felt the same about the most disconnected Greenaway, too.The Criterion Collection has other Suzukis on offer, and I think I'll somehow come back here when I've experienced them. Perhaps by then I'll understand more of Suzuki, and/or myself.

MartinHafer I noticed that all the reviewers liked this movie--and some absolutely adored it. I guess I'll be the dissenting voice, as I thought that a movie that tries so hard to be weird and incomprehensible is not worth my trouble. After all, several admitted that the narrative made little sense and the movie needed to be seen repeatedly in order to fully understand it. I say "why bother". If I cannot understand a movie and am confused by it, my first instinct is NOT to see it again! In many ways, this film looks almost as if Jean-Luc Godard took drugs, went to Japan and made a film. And if you like this sort of bizarre fare, then by all means watch it. I just want a film that makes some sense! The film is about an assassin who looks like a giant hamster because of his freakish looking cheeks (Jô Shishido--who actually paid to have plastic surgery to give his this look). He is somehow considered the #3 assassin in Japan, though I didn't realize that there was any sort of a ranking organization (maybe this is like the BCI and American college football). He wants to be #1 and much of the film shows him on various assignments killing people. Some of this is pretty neat and stylish, some of this is just strange. When he's not out killing people to improve his standings, he's at home have very, very intense and super-athletic sex with his wife.A pretty young Japanese lady with a big nose hires Mr. #3 to do an almost impossible assassination. When it fails, the film gets really goofy, as first his wife tries to kill him, then the big-nosed lady does. None of this has any sort of a linear or comprehensible narrative and you wonder if the film makers were on crack or schizophrenic.Throughout the film there are lots of bizarre fetish-like flourishes. There are lots of small dead birds--and they keep appearing throughout the film. One even has a needle through its neck. I sure felt sorry for the creatures--why killing them was necessary, I don't know. Also, Mr. #3 also had a weird fetish for the smell of boiling rice.Later, the wife returns and wonders why Mr. #3 is upset that she tried to kill her. All is apparently forgiven--that is until he knocks her down and urinates on her (at least that APPEARS to be what he's doing). She then spills the beans about some dumb plot and begins to cry in a very annoying fashion (I wanted to kill her at this point). Moments later, her clothes are off and she's begging him to do her--at which point he blows her away (I mean he kills her) and you see her head in the toilet. Nothing like a good romance, huh?! Even later, Mr. #3 finds the big-nosed lady dead along with film showing how she died. I think it's supposed to be touching and Mr. #3 cried a lot--though I had absolutely no idea why. Didn't she try to kill him ten minutes earlier?! At this point, Mr. #3 gets a call from what might be Mr. #1. He issues him a challenge and somehow Mr. #3 manages to kill everyone waiting for him at some place near the harbor. But, Mr. #1 is not there! Mr. #1 then phones to say he IS Mr. #1 and will one day kill him.The rest of the film consists of the two men trying to kill each other--as Mr. #1 calls to taunt Mr. #3 periodically. This test of wills seems to go on for days--during which 3 does a lot of mindless things that I won't even bother to describe. Eventually, Mr. #1 comes for a social call and the two of them sleep together (no sex, mind you). In the next scene, Mr. #3 is so worried about letting down his guard that he pees himself rather than take a bathroom break. No THAT'S dedication. During this long absurdist sleepover that never seems to end, the viewer is left wondering what the crap is happening. All you know is #1 and 3 could kill each other but mostly just sit around staring in space. In fact, the entire last third of the movie is just this nonsense.Eventually, Mr. #1 and #3 get around to FINALLY trying to actually kill each other--during which time Mr. #3 sweats like a hog. Thankfully, once the deed is done, the movie mercifully ends. And I have seldom been this happy to see a movie end!!! Overall, this is the lamest excuse for entertainment. The film is incomprehensible, has ridiculous characters and leads me to wonder why they made such a film? After all, 'normals' certainly won't enjoy it and it seems like it was only made for the select elite--those who "get it". Heck, haven't any of you heard the story about the Emperor's new clothes?! The only reason I give this a 2 and not a 1 is because a few of the killings were kind of cool AND it had a happy ending (because it finally ended).By the way, this film has lots and lots of nudity. However, the Japanese convention was not to show pubic hair, so all full frontal shots have the naughty regions mysteriously covered. Regardless, it's not a film you want to show to your mother!

Joseph Sylvers "Un Chien Adalou" inspired Yakuza film, with some of the finest editing I've ever seen (that goes for the black and white cinematography too).Butterflies, bullets, mirrors, again and again as death, action, and cinema, refracted around themselves and each other, in a whirl wind of jump cuts and shadows.Fans of Lynch, Buneul, or Takashi Miike will enjoy. I can see how this inspired, a lot of film makers, but it still doesn't look like anything else I've ever seen. Much better than "Gate Of Flesh", my only previous Siejen Suzuki experience, though the plot is more intentionally confusing, the images and the experience on a whole, is inspired...and a very good, very strange time.Like an miniature epic Spy Vs. Spy in Japan, in a dream you forget when you wake up in the mourning, but can't stop thinking about for the rest of the day. Funny too.