Film 101: False endings

*the links in this post contain affiliate links and I will receive a small commission if you make a purchase after clicking on my link.

*warning, I’m discussing the endings of multiple films so I suppose I should include a spoiler warning

You’ve seen it before: after a long and arduous battle, the bad guy (or group of bad guys) is defeated/killed and the surviving heroes all breathe a sigh of relief as they prepare to return to their mostly normal lives. But wait…what’s that noise? Oh no one of the bad guys isn’t dead and here he comes again!! That, in a nutshell, is the essence of a false ending in film. For a few minutes it seems like the story is wrapping up but it’s actually the prelude to another fight (or in some cases another full act of the story).

False endings are extremely common in horror films and are usually employed to lure the audience into a false sense of security (believing the danger is passed) before using a final jump scare that often takes the last surviving character. In non-horror examples, false endings are usually employed as an excuse to stretch out the ending of a film, either for dramatic or comedic reasons. There are far too many examples for an exhaustive list, but I will do my best to list some of the most notable examples from film history:

The Ten Commandments (1956): There’s a scene towards the end of the film when Rameses returns after his army is destroyed in the Red Sea. He vowed to kill his wife when he returned but when she points out that he failed to kill Moses, he flings the sword down and slumps onto his throne, his only explanation being “His god…IS God.” The way this scene ends, it could almost be viewed as the end of the film, as Moses and his people have safely crossed the Red Sea and Rameses has been thoroughly chastised for his hubris. But then the scene shifts back to the desert and the final act of the film truly begins.

hqdefault

Alien (1979): This is probably one of the more famous examples. Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) has destroyed the Nostromo, escaping with her cat into a small shuttle. The danger seemingly passed, she prepares to put herself back into stasis to await rescue when OMG the Alien’s hand shoots out from a wall revealing it had stowed away on the escape ship. This leads to a final battle where a terrified Ripley must blow the Alien into space.

Aliens (1986): An equally notable example: the colony on LV-426 was blasted into oblivion with only Bishop, Hicks, Newt and Ripley escaping alive. They make it back to the Sulacco and prepare to get medical help for Hicks before setting a course for home when suddenly…Bishop is impaled from behind, revealing the fearsome Alien Queen stowed away and she’s madder than ever!

Alien2

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003): As anyone who has seen this film knows, the end of this film has multiple false endings, with it seemingly taking forever to reach the true ending of Frodo sailing away into the West while Sam returns home to his family.

 

Shop Movies + Spend $35, Get Free Shipping

 

The Descent (2005): This is possibly one of the cruelest false endings ever made. Sarah barely manages to escape the cave with her life and speeds away in her car. Suddenly she sees Juno, one of her dead companions sitting in the passenger seat which causes Sarah to snap awake and realize…it was all a dream, she’s still in the cave and the monsters are closing in.

John Wick (2014): A notable recent example comes in the first John Wick film. After fulfilling his mission and killing Iosef in revenge for killing his dog, the weary assassin prepares to return home. He’s even given a new car as ‘compensation’ for everything. All seems to be well…until Viggo learns that Marcus could’ve killed Wick several times before this and chose not too. When he informs Wick that he’s going after Marcus, the film shifts back into action and we get almost a full act of action and violence before finally reaching the true ending (Wick saves a dog from being put down and limps for home).

Atomic Blonde (2017): It could be argued that the ending sequence of this movie contains several false endings. For a few minutes it seems like the film is going to end with the revelation that Lorraine was Satchel all the time only to shift into an attempted assassination by her Russian handlers (which she escapes), leading to the shock revelation that Lorraine is actually American CIA (and there’s no way of knowing if that’s the actual truth but it’s where the film ends).

Other films with notable false endings include: Spectre (2015); A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984); 47 Meters Down (2017) and Final Destination 2 (2003).

What do you think of these false endings? Are there any examples you can think of that I didn’t list? Please let me know your thoughts in the comments below and have a great day!

See also:

Film 101

You can become a patron of the blog at patreon.com/musicgamer460

Check out the YouTube channel (and consider hitting the subscribe button)

Don’t forget to like Film Music Central on Facebook 🙂

Advertisements

Film 101: Unreliable Narrator

*the links in this post contain affiliate links and I will receive a small commission if you make a purchase after clicking on my link.

Yesterday in talking about the Rashomon effect I mentioned the term ‘unreliable narrator’ and I thought I would go into more detail about it today. This concept is one that has grown incredibly popular in recent years and is responsible for one of the biggest television hits of the 21st century.

The concept is simple enough at first glance: an unreliable narrator is any character who relays information about the story (either to the audience or another character (often serving as the audience surrogate)) that is untrue or a series of half-truths mixed together. In short, you cannot trust what this character says to be the truth. And as this character often serves as THE narrator (more or less) of the film/series/book, it makes the story that much more interesting because (assuming you are aware they are unreliable) the entire time you are wondering if you can believe anything being told to you.

 

Shop Movies + Spend $35, Get Free Shipping

 

To really understand this concept though, you have to keep in mind that the unreliable narrator is, in my opinion, a relatively recent development. For most of film history, the narrator (if there is one) is a figure above reproach, one that will consistently let us (the audience) know what is really going on and who is doing what. It seems that the studios discovered that having an unreliable narrator made for a good story. Of course they weren’t the first: the big television hit I referred to at the beginning was none other than HBO’s Game of Thrones, which of course is based on George R.R. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire series (that may or may not ever see completion, I finished reading A Dance with Dragons almost FIVE years ago). The books are notorious for having no overarching narrator that you might find in other book series. Instead, each chapter is told from one character’s point of view, meaning everything we see is biased by the perceptions of that character. Since none of the characters know the full picture (except for maybe Varys and I’m not sure even he knows about what’s going on north of the Wall), you can’t fully trust (and in the case of some like Littlefinger, not at all) what these characters see/know/think they know. And this mostly carries over to the TV show.

Other good examples of an unreliable narrator in film include:

  • Fight Club (1999): It turns out that only one of the two main protagonists actually exists, the other is in the main character’s head.
  • A Beautiful Mind (2001): The main character is eventually diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia and it turns out several characters we’ve come to know are not real.
  • Atomic Blonde (2017): It could be said this film has several examples as the “true” story does not come out towards the end. Lorraine, being the main character, is probably the chief example as her search for “Satchel” is revealed to be based on a lie

And that’s pretty much what an unreliable narrator is 🙂 What are some examples of an unreliable narrator that you can think of? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below and have a great day 🙂

See also:

Film 101

You can become a patron of the blog at patreon.com/musicgamer460

Check out the YouTube channel (and consider hitting the subscribe button)

Don’t forget to like Film Music Central on Facebook 🙂

Film 101: The Rashomon Effect

*the links in this post contain affiliate links and I will receive a small commission if you make a purchase after clicking on my link.

japanese-movie-poster-rashomon_u-L-PGF0RP0

poster from Rashomon

It’s been a long time since I updated Film 101, so I decided to pick something that I’ve wanted to cover for a while: the Rashomon effect, which you’ve most likely seen even if you didn’t know it was called that.

First, the definition: The Rashomon effect occurs when the same event is given contradictory interpretations by the different individuals involved. The name derives from Akira Kurosawa’s 1950 film Rashomon, where the murder of a samurai is described in four mutually contradictory ways, with the final description presented as “the truth.”

If this sounds familiar, it’s because it appears a lot in crime shows (imagine episodes of CSI where different suspects are being interviewed and they each describe what happened from their perspective, but everything is different each time it is told). Another good example is the third season Star Trek: The Next Generation episode “A Matter of Perspective” where Commander Riker is put on trial for allegedly murdering a scientist. Using the ship’s holodeck, the events are recreated using each person’s testimony, with radically different interpretations of the same events.

Tanuga_Station_simulation_begins.jpg

Still from “A Matter of Perspective”

The Rashomon effect is interesting because it often forces the audience to ask themselves “what is the truth?” and even when the “solution” is given, there is sometimes an implication that there is no correct answer and the truth must be determined for oneself. As a side note, given that the characters involved give contradictory accounts of certain events, they can also be considered unreliable narrators (meaning, unlike certain shows where you have no reason to question what a character says, an unreliable narrator cannot be trusted under any circumstances).

Thinking about the Rashomon effect, do any examples come to mind? List one or two in the comments below, along with what you think about the Rashomon effect (like, is it still a good technique or has it had its day?) Have a good day and thank you again for supporting Film Music Central 🙂

See also:

Film 101

You can become a patron of the blog at patreon.com/musicgamer460

Check out the YouTube channel (and consider hitting the subscribe button)

Don’t forget to like Film Music Central on Facebook 🙂

My thoughts on: Gate of Hell (1953)

*the links in this post contain affiliate links and I will receive a small commission if you make a purchase after clicking on my link.

MV5BOGI2NTY4OWMtZTU1NS00ZjY0LWE4YjMtYjE3MWQ0YTgzZTY3L2ltYWdlXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjc1NTYyMjg@._V1_UY268_CR3,0,182,268_AL_

Gate of Hell (Jigokumon) is a 1953 jidaigeki film directed by Teinosuke Kinugasa. It was restored and released on DVD by the Criterion Collection in 2013. The film tells the story of a samurai (Kazuo Hasegawa) who falls in love with a married woman (Machiko Kyō).

I’d honestly never heard of this film before a few weeks ago, so when I found a copy of the film at the local bookstore, I decided to buy it and give it a try. I’ve since learned that this was the first Japanese color film to be released outside Japan and it won the Academy Award for Best Costume Design. Unlike other jidaigeki I’ve seen which are set in the Edo period (1603-1868), Gate of Hell is set during the Heiji Rebellion in 1160. When the palace is attacked by rebels, Morito (Kazuo Hasegawa) is assigned to protect Lady Kesa (Machiko Kyō) who is acting as a decoy for the queen. Morito is clearly smitten by the beautiful lady, and when he is offered a boon in return for his loyal service, Morito asks for Kesa to be his wife. There’s just one small problem: Kesa is already married! Morito refuses to give up however and continues to obsess over making Kesa his, despite the lady making it pointedly clear that she is not interested in him.

71ev1rlfvrl_sl1466

The story definitely plays with your expectations as to who the hero of the story is. Initially, Morito is presented as a heroic figure who refuses to give in to treason and defends Kesa as best he can. But once he’s informed that Kesa is already married and he can’t have her, Morito changes from possibly being a hero to a selfish, unreasonable creep! And what makes the story worse is, for most of the film Kesa seems to be the only one who understands just how much trouble Morito is! Wataru, her husband, and the other court officials seem convinced that all of this will blow over once it sinks in with Morito that Kesa does not love him back, but if anything it makes his obsession with her even stronger.

Shop Movies + Spend $35, Get Free Shipping

The film contains some beautiful scenes of Kesa playing the koto, a traditional Japanese stringed instrument. The one I’d like to highlight is when Morito is given one chance to pour out his heart to Kesa and see if she returns his feelings. She is playing the koto when Morito comes into the room and though he asks her to stop playing (so he can talk), she makes her feelings clear by refusing to stop and playing more and more elaborate music that only ends when Morito smashes the instrument.

gate-of-hell

I’m mostly satisfied with how the film ends, though part of me believes Morito should have paid with his life. Let me explain: the story comes to a head when the samurai corners Kesa at her aunt’s home and gives her an ultimatum: either Kesa goes with him or he will kill her husband, her aunt and even Kesa herself. Seemingly defeated, Kesa agrees and a plan is set: Kesa will blow out the light in her husband’s room at midnight, which will be Morito’s signal to run in and kill him. But it’s really a trick, Kesa gets her husband to sleep in her room while she lays down in his. Thus, Morito kills her, removing Kesa from his grasp forever. But instead of getting killed by her husband or even being hauled away for a trial (because he killed an innocent woman for crying out loud), he’s spared because killing him “won’t bring Kesa back.” And so Morito cuts off his top knot and vows to become a monk. I sort of understand why Wataru didn’t kill him, but I still would have liked to see him be punished somehow for killing Kesa (and no, I don’t think losing his samurai status is punishment enough).

9169f2b7fcaa7b2c487342cfe0c97449

The colors in this film are absolutely beautiful, Kesa’s kimonos draw your eye no matter where she is in the shot. There’s also a fabulous horse race scene that is fun to watch. All in all, Gate of Hell was a good purchase and is a worthy addition to my collection of Criterion films.

Have you seen Gate of Hell? If you have, let me know what you thought about it in the comments below and have a great day.

See also:

Film/TV Reviews

You can become a patron of the blog at patreon.com/musicgamer460

Check out the YouTube channel (and consider hitting the subscribe button)

Don’t forget to like Film Music Central on Facebook 🙂

My thoughts on: Citizen Kane (1941)

*the links in this post contain affiliate links and I will receive a small commission if you make a purchase after clicking on my link.

If you look at a list of the greatest films ever made, you will consistently find one title at or very near the top: Citizen Kane (1941), the first feature film from the legendary Orson Welles. The film presents itself as a biography of the unbelievably rich (fictional) tycoon Charles Foster Kane (Welles) who has just died in Xanadu, his lavish estate. His last word was “Rosebud” and the rest of the film follows a reporter piecing together Kane’s life in an attempt to find out what the word means.

53087917.jpg

You know the saying “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely” ? Well, in the case of this film, I think it is also true that “money corrupts and a lot of money corrupts absolutely.” The bulk of Kane’s life is dominated by a massive inheritance that comes after a gold mine is discovered on his mother’s property. The young Kane starts with all the good intentions in the world; for example, when he purchases a newspaper, he’s determined to report the truth and when he later marries the President’s niece and enters politics, he sets himself up as a man above corruption. But one mistake after another gradually pulls Kane down and ultimately costs him everything that really matters: he loses his first wife and child, his second wife ultimately leaves him too; he loses any chance of a political career and by the end of his life doesn’t have any real friends.

Shop Movies + Spend $35, Get Free Shipping

As Kane slips into old age, he is clearly operating under the belief that money and/or material possessions can fix any problem. He literally buys an opera career for his second wife and is angry when she doesn’t become an instant success (ignoring the fact that her voice isn’t suited for opera). In fact, Kane tries to give his second wife everything a woman could want, but instead of making her happy, it ultimately drives her away, leaving Kane all alone in a palatial mansion.

Susan-and-Charles-at-Xanadu

It’s such a tragedy to watch Kane slip farther away from everyone around him and wrap himself in a cocoon of money and things. I think the discovery of that gold mine was the worst possible thing that could’ve happened to him. As for the meaning of “Rosebud” well…I can’t bear to spoil that. All I will say is, watch the final sequence very closely, the answer comes right at the end.

Now for some interesting trivia about Citizen Kane:

-The film was one of the first (if not the very first) to shoot scenes angled up at the ceiling, which required ceilings to be created for the sets (because up until then you didn’t need ceilings for sets because the cameras didn’t look up that way).

-For the sequence in which Susan (Kane’s second wife) sings an operatic aria, the music was deliberately written just out of the singer’s range, to better create the impression that she is singing music beyond her skills. It’s not that Susan can’t sing, she just wasn’t meant to perform opera.

-While Kane is an based on several real-life figures, one of the biggest influences came from William Randolph Hearst, a big newspaper tycoon. Hearst was so enraged by his perception of the film mocking him and his life that he banned any and all mention of the film from any of his papers, no advertisements, no reviews, nothing!

If you haven’t watched Citizen Kane before, I highly recommend viewing it at least once. Bernard Herrmann provided a magnificent score for this film: two moments in particular that stick out to me are the opening as the camera slowly travels up to Xanadu and the ending scene as unwanted items are thrown into the furnace to be burned and the camera pans over all the many items Kane acquired throughout his life.

If you’ve seen Citizen Kane, what did you think about it? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below and have a great day!

See also:

Film/TV Reviews

You can become a patron of the blog at patreon.com/musicgamer460

Check out the YouTube channel (and consider hitting the subscribe button)

Don’t forget to like Film Music Central on Facebook 🙂

My thoughts on: Harakiri (1962)

*the links in this post contain affiliate links and I will receive a small commission if you make a purchase after clicking on my link.

img05

While browsing through Criterion films at the bookstore, I came across a copy of Harakiri (1962) (directed by Masaki Kobayashi) and realized this was a film I’d neither seen nor heard of before (and it sounded really good). Fortunately, my library had a copy I could borrow and last night I dove in headfirst and discovered a tragedy in every sense of the word.

Shop Movies + Spend $35, Get Free Shipping

Harakiri is set in 1630 during the Edo period (the rule of the Tokugawa shogunate). It starts simply enough with a ronin named Tsugumo Hanshirō (Tatsuya Nakadai) approaching the Iyi Clan to formally ask permission to perform harakiri (ritual suicide) in their forecourt as he is tired of living in abject poverty. As it turns out, he is not the first ronin to have approached with this request. Some months prior, another ronin, Chijiiwa Motome had come with the same request. The problem is, at this time, many ronin were approaching various lords to make this request in order to receive alms to make them go away. Fed up with this practice, the Iyi Clan forces Motome to perform harakiri, even though it’s revealed his swords are only made of bamboo.

yHVvR

The scene where Motome slowly kills himself is incredibly painful to watch. The way it’s put together, you literally feel every thrust of that dull bamboo blade as he thrusts it into himself. To compound the nightmare, the clan has determined that his suffering will not end by beheading until he has thoroughly ripped himself open (it’s made clear that they could have beheaded him straight off, so they’re choosing to make him suffer).

All of this is related to Hanshirō   in an attempt to make him reconsider his request, but the ronin will not be denied. Once he’s settled for the ritual, then the full tragedy comes out.

It turns out that Motome was Hanshirō’s son-in-law, married to his only daughter Miho. They had a son named Kingo and lived happily for a while, even though they were very poor (Hanshirō lost his master and thus his living to harakiri some years prior). Then, in quick succession, Miho becomes ill and not long after so is Kingo (both die not long after Motome’s body is brought back). Motome is unable to find work as his status as a samurai makes him ineligible for common labor but none of the clans are hiring ronin since there have been no wars for many years. Desperate (and having already pawned his blades for money to help his wife and son), Motome departs one day saying he knows of a way to get more money to pay for a doctor, but he never comes back alive.

harakiri-ii-clan1

Your heart will break watching Motome struggle to find ways to support his family. If I understand correctly, samurai are considered to be “above” manual labor, which is why Motome is stopped every time he approaches a work site. He also can’t openly beg for money because that’s considered shameful as well. In effect, this family is completely screwed over by the system, small wonder that Motome resorted to asking to commit harakiri in the courtyard as a means to get alms (a practice that he had previously, in better times, said was shameful and only done by the worst kind of person).

Hanshirō’s point in relating all of this is to point out that no one should criticize another for doing something out of desperation. After all, what would you do if you were in their place? Unfortunately, Hanshirō’s lesson falls on deaf ears as the clan firmly believes they did nothing wrong. In fact, they’re so insulted by the ronin’s words that it’s decided they’ll kill him and not let him commit harakiri after all. This leads to an amazing sequence where Hanshiro fends off dozens of samurai as he moves through the building. There’s one or two strikes and then everyone freezes, but you can see them analyzing each and every move. It’s almost like watching a Mexican stand-off: at various points, though they outnumber him, the clan’s samurai stand frozen because Hanshiro has them in such a way that if any of them make a move, he can kill them. Tatsuya Nakadai is mesmerizing in this scene: you can tell he truly wants to die, but since the clan wants to make it difficult, he’ll take as many of them as he can with them.

MV5BOTAwMDFkMTYtYTJkOS00NzEyLTk3NTgtMzAwZDg4Yzg4MWFlXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTQ5ODkzMDk@._V1_.jpg

Though Hanshirō is brutally killed at the end (with guns no less, they couldn’t even kill him with swords), I do think one person learned something from this, even if he won’t admit it. Saitō Kageyu, the senior counselor for the clan, is seen with a very ponderous look on his face while Hanshirō is being pursued and killed. I believe that Hanshirō’s words did have an effect on him, and maybe he is starting to believe that the system is broken. In fact, after learning that one of the samurai who participated in forcing Motome to kill himself has also committed harakiri, he instructs a messenger to order the other two participants to kill themselves also, adding: “Send a squad of men to make sure it is done.”

Ultimately (and this may be the greatest tragedy of all) nothing seems to change as a result of Hanshirō’s actions. The courtyard is cleaned, all signs of the fight are removed, what was the point of all of this? Maybe the point is there IS no point, sometimes sacrificing yourself to prove a point accomplishes nothing. That, at least, is my thought as I consider the ending of a very moving film.

If you’ve seen Harakiri, what did you think about it? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below and have a great day!

See also:

Film/TV Reviews

You can become a patron of the blog at patreon.com/musicgamer460

Check out the YouTube channel (and consider hitting the subscribe button)

Don’t forget to like Film Music Central on Facebook 🙂

My Thoughts on: The Samurai Trilogy (1954-1956)

*the links in this post contain affiliate links and I will receive a small commission if you make a purchase after clicking on my link.

Samurai_II_Duel_at_Ichijoji_Temple_poster

Since the first time I watched Throne of Blood (1957) I have been a huge fan of the legendary Japanese actor Toshiro Mifune (1920-1997), particularly his work in jidaigeki or “period dramas.” For the past several years I’ve been working on viewing as many of these films as possible and from the start I knew this would have to include The Samurai Trilogy, a trio of films that dramatize notable incidents in the life of Miyamoto Musashi (1584-1645), arguably the greatest swordsman to ever live. I received the set as a present last year for my birthday, but due to real-life circumstances, I wasn’t able to finish it until last night.

Each film focuses on a major event (or major series of events) in the swordsman’s life:

-In Samurai I, Musashi is a young man named Takezo who dreams of finding wealth and glory far away from the humble village he lives in. His best friend Matahachi also shares dreams of glory and is engaged to Otsu. After being caught on the wrong side of the battle of Sekigahara (which led to the formation of the Tokugawa Shogunate which ruled Japan for nearly 300 years), Takezo and Matahachi are branded outlaws and go on the run. While Matahachi is lured away to Kyoto by a widow and her daughter, Takezo runs wild through the countryside until Takuan, a Buddhist priest, lures him to Himeji Castle (on the premise that Otsu, who has developed feelings for Takezo, is imprisoned there). It’s a trap (of sorts): Takezo is locked into a room inside the castle that is full of books and told he will not be let out until he has bettered himself. Three years later Takezo is released and given the samurai name of Miyamoto Musashi.

530id_110_w1600

Though the film is just over 90 minutes in length, it’s paced in such a way that it feels much longer (such was my impression). Mifune is a delight to watch, as always, and his transformation from the wild Takezo to the stoic Musashi is so extreme you’d almost swear they were played by two different people.

Shop Movies + Spend $35, Get Free Shipping

-In Samurai II, the story revolves around Musashi’s conflict with the Yoshioka school, as well as his struggle to fully realize what it means to be a samurai. Initially, Musashi believes that one only needs to be proficient with a sword (which he is), but again and again he is chided for lacking chivalry, compassion and affection. Without these, Musashi is merely a killer, not a samurai. During his journey, Musashi gains his first disciple, an orphan boy named Jotaro. Otsu is still in love with Musashi, but she’s not alone: Akemi, the daughter of the widow from the first film also fancies herself in love with the samurai, though at the moment Musashi himself claims to have chosen “the way of the sword” over the love of any woman. This film also introduces Sasaki Kojiro, another talented swordsman who seeks to build a name for himself by dueling and defeating only the best. He wields a massive longsword nicknamed “Drying Pole.” He badly wants to duel Musashi, but is willing to wait until the samurai has honed his talents further.

eV2HJeLxikDVDHIpYx6LcTVdQQC

I definitely liked this film more than Samurai I. Musashi’s conflict with the Yoshioka school was interesting, considering the students kept stopping the head of the school from meeting Musashi in a fair one-on-one duel. My favorite moments were whenever Musashi faced off with an opponent (or many opponents), sword at the ready. His movements are so precise and artful that I wish there were more moments like this. Koji Tsuruta (1924-1987), who played Sasaki Kojiro, was also a joy to watch. His performance is such that you’re never quite sure what the character is actually thinking.

featured_exhib_film_japaneseff2016_trilogy_duelatganryu

-The story concludes with Samurai III and recounts Musashi’s famous duel with Sasaki Kojiro at Ganryu Island. At the start of this film, Kojiro is frustrated that, despite all his talent, he is still a ronin (a samurai with no master). To remedy this, he applies to become the teacher of Lord Hosokawa, a position that Musashi is also being recruited for. The two swordsman nearly duel one night, but under pressure to accept the offer to become Hosokawa’s teacher, Musashi leaves town and postpones the duel for one year. As a result, Kojiro receives the position and finally receives the status and luxuries that he has always believed to be his due. Finally the duel is set to be held on Ganryu Island. The pair face off on the beach and for a time seem to be equally matched. But then, in a move so quick I honestly can’t describe it, Musashi strikes the fatal blow and Kojiro falls dead. But Musashi takes no joy in the victory.

Maybe I just wasn’t paying attention, or maybe it took a really long time for Musashi to get to the island, but I could’ve sworn the duel took place at sunset. But apparently it was sunrise because the sun kept getting higher in the sky as things went on (cause otherwise it’s a massive continuity error). I found myself pitying Kojiro as the story went on. It is made clear that this duel does not have to happen. Had he said so, Musashi would have happily continued living his life and Kojiro could have spent the rest of his days as an honored teacher and samurai. Kojiro’s downfall comes from wanting to be the very best swordsman in Japan, nothing else will do. One character summed it up perfectly when he observed “This man’s ambitions are too great.”

In conclusion, I greatly enjoyed The Samurai Trilogy, it is a must-see for anyone wishing to learn more about the great samurai films. If you’ve seen this trilogy, let me know what you thought about it in the comments below and have a great day!

See also:

Film/TV Reviews

My Thoughts on Throne of Blood (1957)

My thoughts on: Yojimbo (1961)

You can become a patron of the blog at patreon.com/musicgamer460

Check out the YouTube channel (and consider hitting the subscribe button)

Don’t forget to like Film Music Central on Facebook 🙂