why were the samurai rebelling
one of the best movies ever in my opinion but i still dont understand why the samurai were rebelling in the first place, does anybody know.
shareThe movie wasn't very good.
They were rebelling because they felt the modernization of Japan wasn't in their interest.
how could a person not think this movie is good?
sharethomasww92 simply didn't like the movie and he's already made that point on several threads.
Regardless, as to why the samurai are rebelling, the English linguist/narrator character explains to Cruise's character that the country is modernizing too quickly for the samurai class' tastes. So, in the old tradition of taking drastic action in order to point out a superior's error, Katsumoto's samurai opt to rebel.
Further, as Katsumoto explains to the Emperor Meiji, he rises up not against the Emperor directly, but rather those in the government who 'advise [the Emperor] in their interest'. The very same who, as it happens, are pushing for rapid modernization of the country.
This theme would be also touched up on in the Japanese samurai film The Hidden Blade, also set around thist ime. In that film, one young, forward-thinking, but low-ranking, samurai discusses with his elderly uncles on how the country needs to modernize by embracing Western technology. In response, his uncle disgustedly disagrees, saying that, in the olden days, it was far more honourable to pick up your sword or spear, challenge your opponent on the field of battle, and leave all up to your individual skills. Firearms, in his view, were dishonorable. That they're used at a critical point in that movie seems to underscore his uncle's point.
Consider the history of the US. One could make a very strong case that once the Civil War ended, Lincoln's concerns about corporatization materialized. Gold was discovered in California in 1848 but the great middle of the nation remained untamed. After 1865, there was a mad dash at exploitation. We gave away millions of acres to the railroads, we passed a mining law in 1872 still in effect that permits anyone to exploit public land for its mineral wealth, we dammed rivers and drilled wells for massive agriculture before we had the slightest clue about effects, we gave away timberland and grazing lands for pennies on the dollar. Easterners and city folk visit the west and see its grandeur but what they don't understand is what they are really seeing is a pale reflection of what the land looked like in the 1870s. Sure, dozens of families become wealthy but the exploitation of the wealth of the American west did not really benefit the majority of the US population. We're told that it did. That's the popular story we're fed from birth but in truth the ecological damage done to the west by development that was too rapid and too mindless has left us with many serious problems that may never get resolved. Perhaps if we hadn't killed off a few million Indians and listened to what they had to say about the land we might not be facing the ecological disasters we are today. Development is a double edged sword. Sure, it generates wealth and gives people jobs but how often do we ask ourselves at what cost? Whose to say that if Japan took a more deliberate path to modernization their nation wouldn't be facing the ecological crises that it is?
share