Episode 98 - Ikiru

[00:00:01] Welcome back to Movie Mistrial, the podcast where we put classic and modern films under the legal spotlight to determine if they truly stand the test of time or if their reputation is all smoke and mirrors. I'm Johannes, your co-host and cinematic clerk, ready to keep the evidence in order. And as always, joining me is the Honorable Co-host, the prosecutor with an eye for drama and a heart for truth, Raji. How are you today?

[00:00:26] I'm doing alright. The heart of truth is a strong term, but I'm doing great, Johannes. I'm particularly excited for this episode because we're diving deep into an undeniable classic. Classic being the strong term. Today, we're discussing Akira Kurosawa's Ikiru. This isn't just a film, it's a meditation on life, legacy and what it truly means to live.

[00:00:52] Ikiru, which translates to, to live, is widely considered one of Kurosawa's greatest works. It tells the story of Kanji Watanabe, a bureaucrat facing terminal illness, who embarks on a journey to find meaning in his life after decades of monotony. It's poignant, introspective and has inspired filmmakers worldwide. But the question is, does its philosophical weight hold up? Or has time rendered it more of a chore than a masterpiece?

[00:01:18] That's exactly what we're here to find out. Is Ikiru the cinematic gold standard for exploring the human condition? Or is it the case of overhyped classic syndrome? We'll break down the narrative, the performances and its impact on modern filmmaking. As always, we'll present the evidence and you, dear listeners, will be the jury. Well said. So grab your tissues and maybe a notebook for those existential epiphanies. As we take a walk through bureaucracy, purpose and Kurosawa's timeless vision.

[00:01:48] This is Movie Mistrial and today, Ikira is on trial. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God? So, Mr. Raji, flipping a coin. Flipping a coin. What's it gonna be?

[00:02:18] It's gonna be heads for me today. And heads it is. So I'm gonna argue for this film. All right. All right, all right, all right. So I guess I will start. The witness will address this quote as judge or your aunt. Ladies and gentlemen, Ikiru. I feel like I'm repeating myself a lot on this, that this movie is too goddamn long, but this movie is incredibly long, 2 hours and 40 minutes.

[00:02:47] The main beef I have with this film is this is the quintessential tell, don't show film. The third act. The third act. Well, the beginning. That's not in the beginning. The beginning is a narrator telling us this is this person. This is the condition. But we're not gonna go into it now. But this is why he's so bad off.

[00:03:15] And it's all telling us. It's not showing us. And this is culminating in a final act that takes forever. Where basically the same happens. You have his funeral, his wake, his celebration of life. And everybody's sitting around and just kind of thinking like, oh, he was such a wonderful person.

[00:03:44] This is what he did. And it's all tell, tell, tell, tell. And not a lot of show. And I feel like there's a reason why the medium of film is always show, don't tell. That's the mantra. Because otherwise we're getting a film like this. And it's just a chore. It is a chore to go through this film. And it's unfortunate. Because I think there are some things that are interesting here. For its time.

[00:04:13] This was shot in the 52, I think. Early 50s. So there are some very interesting ideas. But the way it's executed is so slow and boring. And I think the... I wonder... This might be my ignorant, you know, western... Person. I don't know. But I wonder how much culture is in this. And like how much... Probably a lot. And I may not get it.

[00:04:44] Simply based on that. But, you know, from my point of view, this film, unfortunately, is really a chore. And I wanted to root for the guy. But everybody is telling me that he's not that great. And, well, sometimes they reminisce on like, oh, he really was that great. But then, in reality, they're kind of like, oh, where was he? And if we think about bureaucracy, that is kind of at the center of it all, too.

[00:05:14] Where he was the one that broke the boundaries of bureaucracy to make this park happen. And everybody at the end is like, we've got to be better. We've got to be like him. Because we've got to break the boundaries in honor of him. And then, at the very end, we just see like, nothing changed. Nobody cares. Bureaucracy is bureaucracy. Bureaucracy.

[00:05:40] So, we basically end up where we started with, you know, with one case study in between where somebody was daring enough to break the mold a little bit. I don't know if that makes a super compelling film. I think when you understand the concepts that this movie is trying to achieve,

[00:06:06] I think the start and the finish makes a lot more sense. One of the things that we're putting is we're putting to the life of the main protagonist, who has been doing this for 30 years. He knows the system. He becomes part of the system. And we're seeing people who are being put through the rigors of the bureaucratic state.

[00:06:32] Something is very important to them, but the bureaucratic state doesn't want to do much about it. And it takes a life-changing diagnosis of stomach cancer for him to realize that he needed to leave a legacy behind.

[00:06:51] Once he gets this diagnosis of stomach cancer, which, ironically, the doctors told him was just a mild ulcer, another failure of the bureaucratic state. Rather than treat the patient, they decide they're just going to let them weather and die. He starts to feel like he's lived his life in the worst possible way.

[00:07:19] He felt like, you know, there are many indications in this movie where people talk about the fact that he's a mummy, he's a dead corpse walking and stuff like that. So he starts to reflect on his life and how he has put his life, made his life about his son all true. And then he goes into a stupor where he figures, now is the best time to live my life.

[00:07:46] And he goes, you know, is it going to be the clubs? Is it going to be music? Is it going to be women? Is it going to be the best time to live my life? Because he doesn't know, he doesn't think he has enough time. And I think that it's a realistic take on somebody who just gets a diagnosis like that.

[00:08:11] He figures out that one of the things that he needs to live behind is a legacy. He feels like his relationship with his son, despite the fact that he's sacrificed so much to his son, he doesn't have a strong relationship with him. And his son just wants money from him. So he goes back to the initial people who wanted something, who wanted their sewage taken away.

[00:08:39] And he decided that he was going to leave a legacy, leave the legacy of building a park so that they can play. And on the day he dies, he leaves his will to his son, goes on the swing, and he sings until he dies. But he's also been a bureaucrat for 30 years. His life is complicated.

[00:09:02] Some people see him as just part of the system, but some people see him as somebody who trudged through the very last few months of his life to give somebody something and leave a legacy behind. And as the guy stands on top of the bridge and looks down, he sees somebody who he admires. But the system is stronger than an individual. That concept is why this movie is powerful. It's complicated.

[00:09:30] You know, there are going to be conversations about how long this movie is. It is long. It's not linear. So it's non-linear in a sense. And so we have time jumps from time to time. But I think one of the arguments you made at the very beginning was this show don't tell. I think that towards the end of the film, especially in the third act, after the tragedy, a lot of that movie was about show.

[00:10:00] A lot of the movie is about show to emphasize the point and tell. So in a sense, we see the impact and how people are trying to take the complications of his life and buttle it down to whether he was the one who pushed for the change or not.

[00:10:20] So I think this movie, for all it's worth, for what it's worth, is a movie that carries a very poignant message and a very important message to almost anybody who watches it. Yeah, that's where I'm going to start from.

[00:10:43] I think you bring up multiple times, you've brought up multiple times that his life is ultimately very complicated. And I feel like there's not a lot there to support that claim. Because it's like, he's been a bureaucrat for 25 years, I think? 28? Something like that. The high 20s, right? Yeah. For a long time.

[00:11:09] And I think part of why making fun of bureaucracy in movies kind of works is because there's this inherent vibe of, it's a cushy job. And I think it's being brought up in this film a couple times too, right? Like the thing that sparked in my mind was from Zootopia when I go to the DMV and there's a sloth, right?

[00:11:33] Like that's kind of the epitome of like bureaucracy in film. And again, it's like show because just by using a sloth, it's like, okay, we know everything we need to know about this, right? It's slow and just kind of. So basically, I'm not sure if his life was so super complex. I think he missed out on a lot.

[00:12:02] And by happenstance, he has that encounter with that kind of vagrant person in the bar. And he just, he takes them all over the place and kind of has them experience life because he was stuck in monotony. But I don't necessarily think that life was complicated. I think it was boring probably.

[00:12:29] And it was probably inferred by a lot of inherent kind of thought of security and needing to provide security for the family. And kind of setting them up. And I think that's kind of universal, but probably also somewhat cultural. But yeah, I'm not sure I fully buy that. I think the, like what's the big lesson we're trying to get here, right?

[00:12:58] It's like, okay, there's a critique on the system, right? And like the system is not efficient. But it seems like everybody in the system is content with that. And people outside are not. Well, the people outside are not, but the people outside have not a lot of power, right? The people inside, they're perfectly content with it because it's, from the outside perspective, it's a cushy job, right? And it's like, well, you know, that's not my department. It's the other department.

[00:13:28] And then the other, you know, it's just kind of going around. But it's a tale as old as time. Like every society that has a great deal of bureaucracy, you know, I'm from Germany. We're famous for that too. So, right, like the DUS is also kind of nuts sometimes, right? Like if you've done any immigration paperwork, like that's crazy what you have to do. Right?

[00:13:53] But so it's like there's, yeah, I'm not sure if it's just a, I'm just trying to figure out what are they trying to get at here? Because if it's purely like bureaucracy kind of sucks, am I right? Like, okay, yes.

[00:14:19] But I feel like there's more that I either didn't get or that it's just not clear. I don't know. What do you think? So, I mean, I think one of the things that is interesting is that you were talking a little bit about complications and how their lives are complicated. You feel like his life is not as complicated as you make it seem, as they make the movie seem. So, it's, I look at the fact that at the beginning of the movie, another beginning of the movie, wow.

[00:14:47] The day he finds out, he's laying in his son's room, goes to his own room, opens the cupboard and he sees the picture of his wife. He remembers the day she died. And then he dedicates his whole life to his son. And then his son was a failure at what he was supposed to do. He was supposed to be a baseball player. And the son became a failure at that.

[00:15:11] And then all of a sudden he had to live for not just himself, but his son. And because he was living for himself and his son and in order to leave something behind for his son, he dedicated his whole life to work. He never took a day off. And for 30 years in the bureaucracy system, he never took a day off. He always showed up at work, had nothing to do but just that.

[00:15:38] And then he gets the message that, yo, you're dying. You only have between six months to a year to live. And everything just turns upside down. I think that is complicated enough. I think when you think about his life, what he wants to achieve, all he's been doing throughout his life is trying to get his son. He's trying to live for his son. And that was the first time he goes, what actually do I want? What do I want?

[00:16:07] Is it the drinking, getting drunk, going out in high society, dancing with girls, going to a piano bar, hooking up with ladies at night? Is that what I want? Is it being a mentor to somebody at work, trying to live through their life? Or is it leaving something of a legacy behind, something that can stand the test of time?

[00:16:35] And I feel like that those questions that he has are some of the things that make the movie complicated. And then you now see the end of the film where everybody's trying to discuss the legacy. You have the mayor who doesn't think he deserves this. You have the son who is unaware of all these feelings. You have the policeman who felt emotional as he listened to him singing on the swing.

[00:17:02] You have the co-workers who thought that his actions were admirable and unbelievable in a world mired by bureaucracy. And then you have the other bureaucrats who just thought that he was just doing the normal thing within the scope of bureaucracy. Those are the complications we're talking about. The legacy is complicated.

[00:17:26] Nobody knows how to describe the legacy of somebody who lived 30 years in the civil service and his only main achievement was just six months before he died. And I think that dealing with that human condition is what makes it very interesting. We, the viewers, understand what's going on. We understand how these people are reacting to him.

[00:17:54] And we have emotional reactions to what people say. We're disgusted by the mayor. We are irritated by some of his co-workers who stood in his way as he was trying to do this. We are feeling emotionally invested in his actions to try to get the playground set up.

[00:18:15] And at the end of the movie, as he's swinging, we feel inspiration and uplifting that somebody was actually able to, that Watanabe was actually able to live his life and leave a legacy behind. So I think that the movie does succeed in being a complicated view of how, you know, corporations, the bureaucracy and the legacy of humans work.

[00:18:42] And I think that the message is timeless too, because, you know, you watch this movie and you feel like, all right, I need to do something too. I mean, I felt that way. But this morning I just woke up and walked my dogs. So maybe there is some truth to the fact that after it all plays out, we just go back to our default state. All right. So that's going to be the Raji dog park as a legacy.

[00:19:13] Yeah. I just, I mean, talk about failed system. Like that, it opens up with him getting the fake diagnosis, right? And, and some random person in the waiting room tells him, oh, when I give you this diagnosis, this actually means this, right? This actually means you only have six months to live.

[00:19:40] And even with that, I have so many questions of like, okay, how does this person know this? Who is this person? Why is, is that person like putting trauma onto people? Um, potential trauma. It's, it's kind of wild. And then also, why are the doctors lying to them? Like what, what, who's helped by any of this? Nobody, right? Like that, that's not doing anything for anybody.

[00:20:09] If you tell them, well, it's just an ulcer, you're, you're going to be fine. Take this medicine. And then boom, you, after six months, you're done. Like what the hell? That's, that's ethically questionable. But, um, it's like, I just think, so, so this movie has, has, has just, it's like three different films, right?

[00:20:31] It's, it's like a film about grief and, and kind of getting to terms with, uh, okay, I'm going to die and kind of dealing with that. And then the second part of it is kind of the adventure of, I only have so much, um, like so, so many months to live. What do I do with this?

[00:20:54] And this is where the movie probably is the strongest, um, because it goes into, uh, interesting establishments and kind of sceneries and all that. But I was not aware that, that this whole, um, there was a segment in a, in a French bar where you hear French music and all that. It was like, I, that felt very foreign and out of place, but I guess it's just something that was real, right? So I learned something there.

[00:21:23] I thought it was cool, but, but weird. And then that last third, where out of, out of nowhere, he's dead now and people are reminiscing about the time. And it's, it's, uh, let us tell you how he got this thing done. And I think it's so weird. It is structurally. It's weird. It's disjointed because I think it's like narratively, you could be like, okay, grief.

[00:21:50] He deals with kind of the immediate shock through debauchery and kind of trying to figure out, figures out, Hey, this is not really my thing. I want to have legacy and I want to, to make sure there's some lasting things. So I want to go on that quest. And I think the majority of the film should have been him like showing us how he gets this thing done and not just talking about it and then flashbacks. I think that makes for a more compelling film than what we got. Sure.

[00:22:18] I do, I do want to touch, um, on the, the point you made about doctors lying to their patients. Um, I think that's a very, that's a strong point, but I do think that those kinds of things existed. Um, even in America, at least till the seventies, but they had a, they had an episode of Mad Men where one of the, one of the, uh, Betty got a cancer diagnosis and the doctor didn't tell her.

[00:22:48] Uh, they, they, they only had to tell her husband. Um, so they were willing to, they couldn't give women direct consultation. So there's, there's, there's, there's a history of this bureaucratic stuff that happens. Um, and we may be living in 2000, but we can look back to the good days of 2021. Um, where, I don't know. Um, that's a joke, political joke.

[00:23:15] Um, anyway, um, I think that the movie does a good job of setting the tone. Um, I think that there's a steep nature of the fact that everything is based in Japan. So we can't distinguish what is, what is universal and what is not.

[00:23:31] Um, but I think that, um, the, the strength of the film is the fact that the, the character, um, Watanabe, um, we feel the burden of his actions, um, in his movements. Uh, and he had this physical hunch, um, that just kept getting worse throughout the film. That was an indication of how bad he was getting.

[00:23:59] Um, and he got to a point where he needed to be supported with the walls. Um, and despite it all, um, he persevered and made it true. Even in the face of gangsters who tried to, um, stop him because they had other interests. He stood his ground and made his point. He defied the mayor, deputy mayor on several occasions just to get this done.

[00:24:23] Um, and I think that the strength, even as his body was failing him, is one of profound, um, admiration, at least for me. Um, and that evoked a strong emotional impact, uh, to me. So I, I, I do think that this movie, the message is a strong message.

[00:24:43] Um, and I think that given time and given the resources available, Kurosawa did a good job of directing this movie. Um, and trying to share some of those emotional impacts and some of those bureaucratic, uh, failings. Um, but yeah, that's all I have from the pros. Yep. All right. Uh, sidebar. Sidebar. Overruled. Sidebar. Guilty. Speculation. Here. Say. Bailiff. Briefcase.

[00:25:13] Disregard. In my chamber. Stop beaver on the witness. I rest. We could totally be lawyers. Sidebar. All right. There was. Do you want to go first? Sure. Sure. There was one moment that my husband brought up. Um, after he gets the diagnosis, there's this one moment where he walks on the street and it's quiet. And then all of a sudden the cars come in and it's, it's shockingly loud. And who's like, huh? Was that the first time in cinematic history where they did that? Because it is in the fifties, right?

[00:25:42] Like it's like, because now it's such a, such a trope when people are in their head and they're they zone everything out and then get, get thrust back into reality in a way. Um, I thought that was, that was very interesting. I think there, there's some, some interesting visuals just, just kind of like him on the, on the, um, um, what's the playground later on the swing. Um, in the snow like that, that, that's just a pretty, pretty shot.

[00:26:10] That it's, it's beautiful. Um, yeah. And then just kind of the, the crazy chaos of, of, uh, the night of debauchery is, is kind of fun too. Uh, and all the different things that, that, that they go to and see and experience. I think there, there's a weird continuity thing when they're in the car with the ladies, uh,

[00:26:34] because you see that one lady put on lipstick like 15 times, but you know, um, those are things that still happen where we're continuity. Like as I saw a recent film, um, a real pain that has tons of continuity issues. And if you notice him, it's like, uh, uh, but you know, whatever. Um, it's a fine film. I, I saw the remake with Bill Nighy.

[00:27:00] We talked about that before we started recording, um, before, before watching this. And I wasn't big on that film either because it's kind of similar reactions. Like, uh, I, I don't necessarily feel for the guy. Um, you know, because it's like every day there's somebody that works in a, in a crappy office job that gets a terminal diagnosis and, you know, has to kind of deal with it. And it sucks.

[00:27:30] Yes. And I feel for that, but I'm not super convinced that makes for a super compelling story. Unfortunately, you know, I don't know. Well, I kind of disagree. I think that's, and that's fine. The, I mean, I think there's a fundamental unfairness about life that is captured in this movie.

[00:27:52] Um, I, the question of did he deserve the stomach cancer is, is one of, um, is one that's, you know, you kind of feel for him, I guess. Um, he lived his life, um, not doing much and, uh, he still got, he still got this. Um, I feel like if I was going to give him movie, the movie criticism, it's going to be,

[00:28:20] um, the slope, the slow pacing of the film. Mm-hmm. There was, the movie was very slow. Um, and for a movie that carries so much emotional weight, the slowness just felt like a bag just, just carrying throughout the film. You're watching how people react to him. Uh, you're watching how he reacts to the world. Um, there were some points of action like the, like, you know, the, the night out at clubs where

[00:28:49] he wanted to spend as much money as possible. Um, but there were also some dated elements in the film too. Like the, the lady who wanted to resign from work and his relationship with her. Um, that, that was, that was somewhat, I mean, it's a little bit dated. Um, and his talk about how he wants to live through her was quite uncomfortable to watch. Um, but it was good.

[00:29:17] Um, I think it's a, uh, uh, uh, uh, I think it's a testament to the time they lived in. Um, and I think that I was a little bit, um, surprising was the ambiguity of the end. Um, we get, we, it wasn't ambiguous to us that, you know, this man did a lot to get this

[00:29:45] parked on, but all the characters at his wake, it was ambiguous to them. Uh, because, you know, they had lived with this person for more than 30 years within the bureaucratic state. Um, and we had to go through their whole life listening to how they viewed this man previously and how they view him now. Um, and I think that try to try the end. I was thinking, what if the girlfriend just comes in and just tells them like, Hey, this

[00:30:12] guy told me he had stomach cancer and he wanted to survive. It never happened. And I think that the uncle acknowledged it too. Like the girlfriend never came. Um, was it real? Um, it wasn't real. Um, so yes, the movie has a strong message and I think that the message is strong even until the modern times. I was looking at the Bill Nye version of this movie. It has a 96%. People care about the human condition.

[00:30:38] And I think that the human condition was the thing that carried this movie across the finish line for me. Is it going to be a movie that I'm going to watch every year? Probably not. Probably not. It's too sad. It's too, it's too, it's too slow. Um, but do I acknowledge, um, that it's one of, I'm going to say this at the beginning of the show, we talked about how some people think that this is one of Akira Kurosawa's best films.

[00:31:08] I totally disagree with that. I do not think that this is one of Akira Kurosawa's best films, but it's been said that this movie is the one that is the most impactful. Um, and I think to the, to the minds of people who lived in that time, the issue of the bureaucracy was so, was so crazy because it was just right after the war, um, and things were so slow and in government. So I can imagine how powerful the impact of this movie is to those people at that time.

[00:31:38] So that's my take on the film. Yeah. Yeah. Uh, I, I don't think I have to see this ever again, you know, it's like, yeah, okay. One and done. It's fine. Um, like I said, I wasn't a fan of the remake, not super fan of this. I think we've talked about other Kurosawa films that are much better, you know? So, um, yeah, I don't, I don't know. And again, I just kind of feel like each of these individual pieces have been told

[00:32:07] in a better way in other films. I think there's, there's a little more compelling stories about the human condition for me at least, right? Like it's just an individual thing. Um, and so, yeah, I don't know. It's just a hit and then like, it's just a miss for me and that's fine. You know, this is not the only film that, uh, what do you call it? Akira Kurosawa did with, um, uh, Takashi Shimura.

[00:32:37] He also did the, um, I mean, I don't know if you've seen, I mean, he also did a lot of movies with, uh, Mifune, but he, in this one, he did Seven Samurai. He did, uh, Sanjuro. He did Stray Dog, which is another one of those modern day films. And he also did Rashomon and Hidden Fortress. So this guy worked a lot with, um, Akira Kurosawa, um, during his time as a director.

[00:33:04] Even more, I think even more than, uh, uh, Toshiro Mifune, if I have to guess. Um, so, I mean, it's very interesting, the relationship. Um, but I think the movie is good for what, for what it is. It was good. Yeah. Um, next up, classic, also very long. Another classic? Another classic.

[00:33:32] Also a long classic and a, arguably another film about the human condition. Uh, what could that be? Uh, 2001, A Space Odyssey. Oh, 2001, A Space Odyssey. Oh, wow. How do I know that one? I know that one. That was the first movie I did on my other podcast. Oh, look at that. Wow, it's so low. It's almost like 98. It's 97, yeah. 97. Wow.

[00:34:01] All right, well, I'm looking forward to talking about that film. Yeah. And, and talk about a movie that has a lot of impact on other films. That, that is the definition of, uh, a movie with a lot of impact. For sure. For sure. Um, also these two films are like 16 years apart. So that's wild to me. Oh, man. But we'll cross that bridge when we get to 2001. We'll cross that bridge, man. A Space Odyssey. Cool.

[00:34:29] Until then, though, where can people find us? You know, you can find us on Instagram or on, uh, Blue Sky at Movie Mistral. Or you can send us an email to? Contact at MovieMistral.com. You can also send a message to us on Facebook, but, you know, Facebook is dying. Um, so yeah. Uh, Instagram or Blue Sky. Excellent. All right. Have a wonderful day, everybody. Ciao. Ciao. Thank you.