Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > History in Films and on Television
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

History in Films and on Television History in Films and on TV - Documentary Films, Historical Dramas, and history programs on PBS and the History Channel


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 6th, 2017, 09:13 AM   #21

robto's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2014
From: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 5,551

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maoistic View Post
Basically, it was because their lands were being taken. It was not so much the "samurai" but the feudal landowners of the Edo period who were rebelling and opposing to the government expropriating their property for industrialisation. The landowners being paid in money didn't make up for that loss.

Part of why this movie is so stupid is that it portrays the conflict as purely cultural, between pantheistic Buddhist warriors vs. evil Asian (dare I say "Mongoloid" given how racist this film is) modernisers, when it never was about that.
Didn't former Samurai also receive a special stipend during the Meiji era as well?
robto is offline  
Remove Ads
Old December 6th, 2017, 10:25 AM   #22

Naomasa298's Avatar
Modpool
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: T'Republic of Yorkshire
Posts: 30,700

Quote:
Originally Posted by robto View Post
Didn't former Samurai also receive a special stipend during the Meiji era as well?
Only some of them, and that as eventually abolished.
Naomasa298 is offline  
Old December 6th, 2017, 10:32 AM   #23

Commodus's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,407

If I may be frank, I am very weary of films using a Western audience proxy to tell stories about a foreign people. The history of Japan has so many amazing stories, which can easily support themselves without having to shove in Tom Cruise so the audience has someone to relate to. And it was a good performance on his part, and a finely made movie in many regards, but I don't like the trope which The Last Samurai evokes. Not just because it causes more exciting stories to be overlooked, but because it's incredibly boring.
Commodus is offline  
Old December 6th, 2017, 11:47 AM   #24
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2015
From: uk
Posts: 1,976

Not many movies are historically accurate with no plot holes or flaws.

I saw Cruise in this movie as a man partially responsible for forcibly erradicating one ancient way of life for a more modern one in America, but being damned if he would be part of the same thing happening in Japan. I did not see it in any way as enforving Western views on an Eastern civilisation; quite the opposite in fact.

Personally I thought it was an okay film, far more watchable than some other films which are perhaps more realistic
paranoid marvin is online now  
Old December 6th, 2017, 11:48 AM   #25

Aristodemus's Avatar
Archivist
 
Joined: Mar 2007
From: Philadelphia
Posts: 241
Blog Entries: 1

I know little to nothing about Japan beyond I believe we were involved in a war there a while back.

What about Keanu Reeves' in 47 Ronin? I realize it's based on a real life event that has fallen into the category of legend. Enjoyable or puke-worthy? Supposedly it was one of Hollywood's biggest box office bombs.
Aristodemus is offline  
Old December 6th, 2017, 12:45 PM   #26

Naomasa298's Avatar
Modpool
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: T'Republic of Yorkshire
Posts: 30,700

You mean this 47 Ronin?



I'm fairly familiar with the story of the 47 Ronin. I don't remember a giant dino-chicken and women turning into dragons in the history, although I may have missed something.
Naomasa298 is offline  
Old December 6th, 2017, 02:36 PM   #27

Scaeva's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 5,266

47 Ronin came about likely because some Hollywood exec was hoping to cash in on whatever made 300, which was complete drek, popular. It's a similar sort of film.
Scaeva is offline  
Old December 6th, 2017, 02:56 PM   #28

Jake10's Avatar
Guardian Knight
 
Joined: Oct 2010
From: Canada
Posts: 11,954
Blog Entries: 5

Guys, it's just a movie! There's no need to take it so seriously. The purpose of movies is to entertain, not educate, so they need to be made unrealistically. If a movie is made too realistically, people won't pay money to see it because it won't be entertaining. In the end, that's what it's all about, right? Making money. Since the Last Samurai made money, it's a success.
Jake10 is offline  
Old December 6th, 2017, 06:13 PM   #29
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,586

Quote:
Originally Posted by Commodus View Post
If I may be frank, I am very weary of films using a Western audience proxy to tell stories about a foreign people.
Guess how weary I am of Hollywood shoving ethnic casting into our face, like in The Hobbit, Thor or Disney's Star Wars. If we are going to go multicultural, then it is only fair that it goes both ways.

Personally, I would rather like to see every tradition keeping its own narrative, though, instead of drowning everything into one big globalist hodgepodge.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Commodus View Post
The history of Japan has so many amazing stories, which can easily support themselves without having to shove in Tom Cruise so the audience has someone to relate to.
True. But the movie was a resounding success with the Japanese audience. One of the highest grossing foreign movies of that year if not ever. Don't quite understand it, either, but the underlying theme of the sell-out of traditional Japan to top-down, forced Westernization seemed to have struck a chord with the Japanese. Which was odd given the inverse way how the movie ascribed the good guy - bad guy roles (TC vs Japanese advisors to the emperor).
Aetius is offline  
Old December 6th, 2017, 07:23 PM   #30
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2015
From: uk
Posts: 1,976

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aetius View Post
Guess how weary I am of Hollywood shoving ethnic casting into our face, like in The Hobbit, Thor or Disney's Star Wars. If we are going to go multicultural, then it is only fair that it goes both ways.

Personally, I would rather like to see every tradition keeping its own narrative, though, instead of drowning everything into one big globalist hodgepodge.




True. But the movie was a resounding success with the Japanese audience. One of the highest grossing foreign movies of that year if not ever. Don't quite understand it, either, but the underlying theme of the sell-out of traditional Japan to top-down, forced Westernization seemed to have struck a chord with the Japanese. Which was odd given the inverse way how the movie ascribed the good guy - bad guy roles (TC vs Japanese advisors to the emperor).
In movies , the underdogs are almost always the good guys.

But yes, as has been said, the main purpose for making a movie is to make money. The main purpose for watching a movie is to be entertained. Judging by box office takings the movie was a success on both counts.

Braveheart is a good example of a movie that is very enjoyable to watch but is pure fantasy as far as any historical reality is concerned.

Hopefully people who enjoy a movie roughly based on historical fact will like it enough to go away and read up about it on Wikipedia etc; something they never would have done if they hadn't watched and enjoyed the movie. If this happens (and I know it has for me in the past) then that can only be a good thing.
paranoid marvin is online now  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > History in Films and on Television

Tags
samurai, stupid, unwatchable



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What was the most stupid decisions in WW2? Metalman92 War and Military History 190 July 24th, 2017 12:44 PM
What is stupid? Fireatwill Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology 119 May 13th, 2014 07:36 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.