This movie works under a certain context, and that is the context of Japanese gay cinema from the 60s. I seriously don't understand how people can give this film a 10/10 rating, putting it next to other films that are objectively better, and that work well across different audience groups. This film is a niche product. It's like watching a shoe-making youtube video and giving it a 10/10 rating because you are a shoe-maker.
This film is a beautiful film, it has funny moments and interesting parts, but overall I think it deserves 6 or 7 stars. I am curious, did many people just watched it because "it was one of Kubrick's favorite films" or something like that?
Well, I liked it, but I didn't LOVE it. Here's my list of good and bad things:
Overall, I liked it because it put me in a different social and historical context, that of Japan during the 60s. But I don't see myself rewatching it any time soon.
This film is a beautiful film, it has funny moments and interesting parts, but overall I think it deserves 6 or 7 stars. I am curious, did many people just watched it because "it was one of Kubrick's favorite films" or something like that?
Well, I liked it, but I didn't LOVE it. Here's my list of good and bad things:
- Good: It's humorous, yet dramatic, and I like movies that have both. Characters are likable. It gets a bit weird sometimes, with the director deciding for example to break the fourth wall here and there, sitting the actors in front of the camera and asking them questions about their roles.
- Bad: It gets too self-referential at some points, and too experimental. I wish they had spent more time talking about the gay scene in Japan, and possibly their conflict with society. How about those riots? That could have been a good metaphor for the gay community, rioting against the society that they deem unjust or intolerant.
Overall, I liked it because it put me in a different social and historical context, that of Japan during the 60s. But I don't see myself rewatching it any time soon.