A real landmark memorial consisting of a mangled children's school playground apparatus (or monkey bars as we called them when I was a kid) makes for a powerful location that is used more than once in the film.
The story relies on the grandchildren as its instrument to guide and teach the audience about the nuclear bombing of Nagasaki. In one segment the children are shown exploring and learning about Nagasaki, and they are used for exposition purposes repeatedly throughout the movie.
Despite this movie's subject matter and the informative scenes shot in and around Nagasaki, this is not a highly educational film. Very little is shared about the actual bombing and events surrounding it. Rhapsody in August is a simple story that seems intended to reflect upon the unnecessary loss and inconsolable grief that comes about as the result of war. There is also a strong message regarding the importance of remembrance, with the film suggesting that Japan itself is forgetting its past as the world's exclusive recipient of nuclear bomb attacks.
Much has been written about the scene where Gere supposedly apologizes on behalf of America for the bombing. I did not perceive that scene as being an apology for the bombing at all. He was apologizing for not being aware of the loss of the grandmother's husband. The scene was a simple sharing and acknowledgement of grief. This movie really doesn't have much to do with apologies and forgiveness. The events presented are a few steps further along in the cycle of life. I am sure the people that might be in a position to offer apologies have mostly passed away in this story that takes place in recent years.
Kurosawa himself has asserted in interviews that a completely different message was intended to be sent with this movie. He has said he wanted to share the viewpoint that governments and not people are responsible for wars, and that idea is indeed presented explicitly in the movie.
But I believe Kurosawa could not have been more wrong with his romantic notion. This sadly misguided viewpoint might be one of the reasons Rhapsody in August seems to self-derail with the director failing to deliver a story that carries any real weight.
Spiraling off-topic for a moment
I am guilty of using the same false "government/people argument" when I try explaining to Chinese friends, my strong aversion to the behavior of the Chinese government.
Because of the amount of time I have spent in China for a variety of reasons, I have a fairly large group of Chinese friends and acquaintances. Some (not all) of my Chinese friends who actually grew up in China have been isolated from reality too long, with fake history and hugely distorted world information being fed to them since childhood. Add that disadvantage to a normal and natural, defensive ethnocentric view, and it can be very difficult for some of them to hear and consider the truth about the ongoing murderous behavior and embarrassing antics of their government officials.
So to deflect their natural defensive reactions, I tell a partial lie when I try to explain my views concerning the Chinese government, the lie being that people and governments are separate things.
My noble intention is to explain that I can care for people in China while still being disgusted by the Chinese government's actions.
But continuing on any level to promote the false romantic notion that governments and people are completely different things is probably a harmful thing to do, especially if it causes some of us to ignore our individual responsibilities to try to better the world through the improvement of our own communities and governments.
[Admittedly the Chinese have a tougher row to hoe when it comes to initiating change, with a government ("people" in charge) that freely kills and locks up dissidents.]
But in the end, what is a government if not a product of its people? China's inappropriately revered Chairman Mao did not loft himself on his own into a position where he could become the greatest and most murderous villain in all of human history. He was assisted, supported and encouraged along the way by the failings and self-serving desires of other human beings.
George Bush, an obvious non-intellectual, did not become president of the most powerful nation in the world and was not given control of the most lethal collection of war toys in existence through a coup. He was selected using an electoral college system of our own design and by the votes of many people who felt that voting for a man they were comfortable with personality-wise was more important than electing a person that was actually qualified for the job.
The worst administrations in all democracies, dictatorships, and communist regimes are the products of people. Even if they are often products of the wrong people, human beings are still ultimately responsible.
Even with the freedoms we have in America and with access to a completely free (though sometimes distorted) press, we still have a surprisingly large number of simple minded persons that do not understand the psychology of ethnocentrism. Some who proudly proclaim themselves to be patriots actually expose themselves as bigots, when in the same breath they angrily object to suggestions that improvements may be in order in regard to our own policies and governmental behaviors. Though plainly ignorant, these simpletons are what nature designed: animals stomping around the fire, rooting for their tribe, their team, their country.
Let us hope education and the improvement of intellect becomes even more highly prized and pursued with greater vigor around the world (and within the US) in generations to come. That is surely the only thing that will improve and save this planet.
When dealing with language barriers, effective communication shortcuts really come in handy, but maybe I must stop using the faulty "governments are different than people" argument in debates with Chinese friends. It makes me something of a hypocrite to complain about Kurosawa's inappropriate use of the argument in a movie, if I then go out and use it myself because of my own intellectual laziness.
A little lengthy, but I hope I have fairly well explained my opposition to Kurosawa's faulty perspective which attempts to separate governments from the human animals that create and continue to run them.
Note: You are lucky because I just removed about a dozen or so very lengthy first draft paragraphs revolving around these misc. sociological topics.
So I don't want to receive any complaints about how long this review is; It could have been much longer. ^_^
If you are curious to hear some interesting stories about China (and maybe even some stories recorded within China), I will be including some China content and other Asia information in the upcoming Savage Japan podcast episodes.
Getting back to the review again
(Can I still call this a movie review?)
Technically as a film, Rhapsody in August's overall quality and the presentation of its story is a little on the weak side.
This movie has the feeling of an amateur or first time director's project. I assume that has to do with a low budget, possibly abbreviated shoot schedule, and the very simple, plain, and uninspiring story. But with all that said, the movie is not absolutely terrible. It is watchable and not without some appeal.
Small stories can be powerful; this one just seems a little hollow. I was not impacted as much as I would have expected to be by a film that delves into the subjects of loss and grief as connected to one of the single greatest man made catastrophes of all time.
Improving the Film
I don't think this is an example of terrible filmmaking as much as it is an example of a story that was not ready for or quite worthy of production.
For your amusement, I will offer a couple of suggestions on how this might have been a better film. If for no other reason, it will be fun to read the emails from enraged "Kurosawa aficionados" (a group that I also consider myself a member of).
Improvement Suggestion #1 for Rhapsody in August
I found the portrayal of the greedy and self-centered parents to be a little unbelievable. Instead of making them so over-the-top ignorant, I think more subtle shadings of the parents misguided outlook could have drawn the audience in much more effectively, by allowing us to see some of our own flaws in those characters.
I guess there are adults who behave like that in the world, but the behavior of the adults in Rhapsody in August seemed too petty and artificial, as if the characters existed only to exaggerate the idea that people are too quick to forget the past suffering and contributions of others and too eager to focus on their own selfish desires. But there was no need for the parents to be presented in such an excessively shallow manner. Their behavior in this movie is a completely exposed and naked contrivance.
Improvement Suggestion #2 for Rhapsody in August
A tight budget may have made this next suggestion more difficult, but with a little creativity it could have been done with modest expense.
This movie more than anything seemed to need "more" of a story. The easiest way to have provided that, if Kurosawa was committed to staying with the story line as shot, would have been to provide some flashback scenes sharing a little of the relationship between the grandmother and her husband before he was killed in the nuclear attack.
I am not suggesting that we needed scenes of the bombing with an overly dramatic mushroom cloud and shots of the devastation and chaos that surely followed. The quiet tone of the film could still be maintained, while giving Kurosawa more of a story to get his hands wrapped around and to show off his renowned directing and editing skills.
If you watch this film or have seen it before, imagine how emotionally powerful a flashback scene could have been showing kids playing on the monkey bars before the metal was melted and deformed.
So as not to appear too manipulative, I would likely put the children at play in the background with the focus on the husband carrying out some routine playground schoolteacher task. We might even be able to connect that to an end of day sequence and introduce the grandmother as well, wrapping up much of our flashback requirements in a matter of seconds. Maybe she is greeting one of her own children playing on the "soon to be deformed" monkey bars, to walk home with him after spending a day in town herself. A few flashback scenes would probably be required and would likely provide better balance than inserting only one.
The flashback scenes could be very sparingly applied and would not need to be an element carrying equal weight to the main story. Muffle the audio, or soften the focus of the flashback scenes if you have to, to make sure the main story line is not overwhelmed, but give us just a little emotional seasoning and invigoration to help us get through this very tedious film. Teach us, help us want to learn. We are the audience, your friends, your customers, and we need you to give us something to engage our minds.
One issue with the flashback scenes would be the grandmother's present day forgetfulness as presented in the main story. But that just provides all the more reason to keep the flashback scenes simple, short and maybe even a little "fuzzy" to match the grandmother's own present day mental condition.
Just a few simple scenes revealing the past could have really helped us to feel more sympathy and connection to the grandmother in the present day story, and it would have helped alleviate much of the boredom that comes along with watching Rhapsody in August now. I would assert that Kurosawa could have maintained the somber, slow feeling he seemed committed to with this movie, while still engaging us with a little more content.
One last suggestion for a much improved ending
Imagine if the audience had already been prepared for and introduced to the appearance of the grandmother when she was younger, then the "running through the rain" ending could have been so much more powerful. A shot could be mixed in of the grandmother in her youth running back to town, crying and collapsing to her knees in the rubble as she realizes the hopelessness of finding her husband. Cut back to the present day grandmother at the end of her "rain run" collapsing in a similar fashion at the conclusion of her sprint. Close up on the same expression of terror and anguish, matching the expression that was just revealed in the flashback.
Wow. That is an ending I would never forget.
Frustratingly, the current story already sets up this obvious and nearly perfect conclusion, but we are denied.
These suggestions would have only mandated a few changes throughout the existing screenplay, though rewriting the role of the parents as I have suggested would require some serious writing skills and intense, thoughtful labor to find the right words and tone for the parent's new, more realistic identities.
I dare say that Kurosawa's next to last film could have been much more satisfying, emotionally connective, and a generally better production all the way around if someone had woken the director up and got him to think a little more before shooting the version of the movie that did get made.
Nicknamed the Emperor on set, Kurosawa was not known as a director that was easy to talk to or give suggestions to. I can imagine in his final years, making this movie in his eighties, Kurosawa could very well have been even more of a curmudgeon, and even less likely to welcome criticism of a project before it entered production.
I realize it may seem a little audacious and disrespectful to make suggestions for improvements to a film helmed by Akira Kurosawa, but I am not out on a limb when pointing out the weaknesses of this particular Kurosawa film. Kurosawa's vision and objectives as a filmmaker definitely softened and shifted in his final years. And who better for us to deconstruct and analyze than someone we admire and value as much as the late great Akira Kurosawa.
Kurosawa has been quoted in interviews as saying that nuclear war and our world's past experiences with it are topics that we should continue to discuss and not forget. On that matter, he was correct.
