A direct sequel to his earlier JU-ON (2002), this finds Takashi Shimizu offering us more of the same brand of chills, shocks and guttural throat noises. Unwisely though he clearly felt he had to up the ante with the result that the film feels less together than the previous one and more a succession of set pieces. The spectres are seen more often, and earlier, thereby reducing their impact. Recognising this, Takashi gives them new powers - like the ability to crawl across ceilings or rise up through the floor. The net effect of which is to make the apparitions seem less like hateful but tragic ghosts and more like indestructible franchise super-villains, a la Freddy Krueger, Michael Myers and Jason Voorhees. The nadir is reached when one character gives birth to a full grown female spectre, which proceeds to butcher all the nurses.
In summary, JU-ON 2 is to JU-ON as THE FLY 2 is to THE FLY.
Showing posts with label Japan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Japan. Show all posts
Monday, 30 May 2011
Sunday, 29 May 2011
Ju-On (2002)
JU-ON is a Japanese horror film that was directed by Takashi Shimizu in 2002. It was one of several Japanese horror films that were enormously popular in Asia and enjoyed some success in the West. The biggest were even afforded the dubious honour of being remade as English-language features.
JU-ON is translated as "grudge" which seems a rather trivial word to describe the film's central idea of the ripples of malevolence and hate which spread out across time from the unquiet spirits of those who have met a violent end. It's a great conceit and one which is well served by the unusual structure Takashi employs to tell his story. The film is divided into chapters, each with its own title, telling the story of a particular person who has come into contact with the grudge. The chapters jump around in time and it's not immediately apparent how they relate to each other; but they do, so stick with it.
In my experience, Japanese horror (or J-horror) is distinct from modern Western (particularly American) horror films in that it is more concerned with subtle, insidious ghost stories rather than dreary tales about masked lunatics slicing up over-sexed teenagers. Indeed, the victims in J-horror tend to be rather ordinary folk - social workers, policemen, housewives, school kids - which not only makes their interaction with the supernatural seem of greater significance but also makes their demise have greater impact.
Similarly, the J-horror doesn't rely on violence or gore to provide its shocks. In fact there really isn't any violence in JU-ON. Most of the horror comes from fleeting shots of the spectres or, worse still, the unnatural sounds which presage their appearance. The violence which brought the grudge into being is referred to but never shown or even described; it's a cliche I know but leaving it ambiguous means the viewer has to imagine for himself what might have happened and usually one can dream up something far worse than the film-makers.
I like films that ask the viewer to fill in the gaps, that take risks with leaving things ambiguous. You may have noticed from my reviews that one of my bugbears in films is dreadful expository sequences: not only do they slow the film down but, to me, they represent failure. What I mean by that is a failure on the part of the director (or screenwriter) to tell the story effectively. If you've got to the last twenty minutes of a film without really knowing what's going on (and I don't mean whodunnit) then something has gone wrong. My other problem is that expository sequences represent an adherence to the prevailing belief, certainly in Hollywood, that a film has to make sense and tell a conventional story in a conventional way. In my experience, the best films - the ones that stay in the memory longest - tend to be those which contain ambiguities or uncertainties, and thereby promote discussion.
JU-ON is translated as "grudge" which seems a rather trivial word to describe the film's central idea of the ripples of malevolence and hate which spread out across time from the unquiet spirits of those who have met a violent end. It's a great conceit and one which is well served by the unusual structure Takashi employs to tell his story. The film is divided into chapters, each with its own title, telling the story of a particular person who has come into contact with the grudge. The chapters jump around in time and it's not immediately apparent how they relate to each other; but they do, so stick with it.
In my experience, Japanese horror (or J-horror) is distinct from modern Western (particularly American) horror films in that it is more concerned with subtle, insidious ghost stories rather than dreary tales about masked lunatics slicing up over-sexed teenagers. Indeed, the victims in J-horror tend to be rather ordinary folk - social workers, policemen, housewives, school kids - which not only makes their interaction with the supernatural seem of greater significance but also makes their demise have greater impact.
Similarly, the J-horror doesn't rely on violence or gore to provide its shocks. In fact there really isn't any violence in JU-ON. Most of the horror comes from fleeting shots of the spectres or, worse still, the unnatural sounds which presage their appearance. The violence which brought the grudge into being is referred to but never shown or even described; it's a cliche I know but leaving it ambiguous means the viewer has to imagine for himself what might have happened and usually one can dream up something far worse than the film-makers.
I like films that ask the viewer to fill in the gaps, that take risks with leaving things ambiguous. You may have noticed from my reviews that one of my bugbears in films is dreadful expository sequences: not only do they slow the film down but, to me, they represent failure. What I mean by that is a failure on the part of the director (or screenwriter) to tell the story effectively. If you've got to the last twenty minutes of a film without really knowing what's going on (and I don't mean whodunnit) then something has gone wrong. My other problem is that expository sequences represent an adherence to the prevailing belief, certainly in Hollywood, that a film has to make sense and tell a conventional story in a conventional way. In my experience, the best films - the ones that stay in the memory longest - tend to be those which contain ambiguities or uncertainties, and thereby promote discussion.
Sunday, 22 May 2011
Hausu (1977)
HAUSU is a Japanese horror / comedy / teen movie that was directed by Nobuhiko Obayashi in 1977. It is known in the west as HOUSE (not to be confused with the 1986 US Steve Miner / William Katt horror movie of the same name). It's about a bunch of teenage schoolgirls - Oshare, Fanta, Melody, Kung Fu, Sweet, Mac and Gari - who spend their summer vacation at a house in the countryside, owned by Oshare's aunt. The aunt and her house turn out to be less welcoming than the girls imagined.
A simple enough summary you might think. Maybe even a bit ordinary. But HAUSU is one of the most bizarre films I have seen: it's not only the things that happen but also the array of visual techniques used to present them. There are musical sequences, animation, shonky special effects, very good special effects, split screen, breaking of the fourth wall and all manner of editing tricks. The Japanese love of popular culture is reflected in the imagery and style, which encompasses at least four or five different genres. The tone lurches from playful to sentimental to cynical to brutal at the drop of a hat.
All of which leaves the viewer dazzled, confused, annoyed and at times thoroughly entertained. But its enormous verve and imagination is also its weakness because the film never settles down which ultimately becomes rather wearing. It's a bit like watching THE BANANA SPLITS or THE MONKEES for an hour and a half, which given that those shows only ran for 30 minutes, is asking too much of this viewer.
I should own up to having a real problem with horror-comedy films. They're never funny enough and they're never horrifying enough; and unless they get it absolutely spot on each element undercuts the other. In the whole history of cinema the only film I can think of that made me laugh out loud and frightened the wits out of me is John Landis' AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON (1981). Over a hundred years of movies and only once has the horror-comedy been done right. That's how hard it is.
Oh and don't give me SHAUN OF THE DEAD. That's a comedy which happens to be about zombies.
 |
| Our heroines |
 |
| This sequence is a good indication of the playful nature of the film: 1) bus drops off girls in front of obviously fake background ... |
 |
| 2) Bus drives off to reveal even more obviously fake background ... |
 |
| 3) Which they are then shown standing in front of! |
All of which leaves the viewer dazzled, confused, annoyed and at times thoroughly entertained. But its enormous verve and imagination is also its weakness because the film never settles down which ultimately becomes rather wearing. It's a bit like watching THE BANANA SPLITS or THE MONKEES for an hour and a half, which given that those shows only ran for 30 minutes, is asking too much of this viewer.
 |
| Mac's disembodied head bites her friend on the arse |
 |
| Aunty dances with a skeleton |
 |
| Melody's fingers are bitten off by the carnivorous piano |
 |
| Don't ask me what's going on here |
Oh and don't give me SHAUN OF THE DEAD. That's a comedy which happens to be about zombies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)