MovieChat Forums > Bunraku (2011) Discussion > Hypocritical 'philosophy' of the film

Hypocritical 'philosophy' of the film

posted 13 years ago by rex_ilusivii
15 replies | jump to latest

To me, the whole opening seqence with that extremely wide, if quick swath over history as well as the entire narration with that supposedly cynical stance seem like nothing more than the filmmakers' unconvincing, and therefore, pathetic apology of, obviously, their indulgence (of the classic exploitation filmmakers kind) in violence.

The plot is the weakest part of Bunraku, as the most have commented; the film's goals are style and fight sequences. OK, no prob, to each his own. I actually can appreciate action movies. Some, I even love. If they're not ashamed of being what they are. Stylistical excercises I can also dig as much as the next Joe. What I dispise are the filmmakers' motives to imbue their work with false philosophy in order to excuse their perverse fascination with whatever they are indulging in.

Many minutes in Bunraku are spent on pointing out how man is similar to animals and how the moto "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" is not a rational thing, but a mere biological urge. Yet, — apart from the narration — the entire script, and all visuals, and everything else in the film and about the film, compete in glorifying our having that urge.

My question is this: if you wanted to indulge in violence, and you're aware of that urge's being nothing to be proud of, did you also have to idiotically pretend like you're not actually indulging in it, but are merely depicting the realities?

That hipocrisy of the filmmakers made me take off at least one star from my rating. Without it, the film would've received a 6 or a 7 (because it's not all that great even in the style and action department); this way, I slapped it with a 5.

no i am db

[–] AlexanderKilricc 13 years ago

it's called satire -- look it up...

[–] rex_ilusivii 13 years ago

Satire serves to make fun of something. What is made fun of here? Go ahead, answer that.

Let me help you while you're preparing: not violence.

no i am db

[–] AlexanderKilricc 13 years ago

the joke is on you, my friend, i think a large portion of the audience is what is made fun of here... their sanctimonious fascination with violence and refusal to acknowledge their own part in it... but at least you figured out there is a philosophy in play here, which is way way more than most...
so in a way you should be proud of yourself....

[–] rex_ilusivii 13 years ago

Alexander, you are your own joke. You don't seem to be able to comprehend that: one's agreeing to watch from start to end a film that glorifies violence while he or she is being fully aware the film glorifies it, and is consciously refusing, out of held beliefs, to let the film make him or her condone violence — does not amount to his or her taking part in the glorification of the said ill. If it did amount to that, it would mean that even the people like, say, the pacifist Roger Ebert, who is able to appreciate even the violent films and even give them not too shabby a grade unless they attempt to hide what they are, partake in the glorification of violence — because, according to you, they're too stupid; if they were smarter, they'd push the stop button. It is your remark that lacks intelligence.

In no way have I taken my own part it Bunraku's glorification of violence just by watching it (without paying anyone one dime) and even somewhat enjoying in it (to the extent of contemplating about giving it 6-7 stars). And neither has any other viewer with two wits about him.

Had Bunraku not been hypocritical, I would still not have taken my "own part in" its concerned glorification; the only difference would've been that I would appreciate the filmmakers... about one imdb star more than I do now.

I'm under impression that you just feel the urge to gain the upper hand over the creator of a thread with the word philosophy in its title, if in any way you get lucky to, and for a quite prosaic and classic reason: you find my presence on this thread threatening to your self-conceit.

As for the film's capacity to pull a joke on anybody, you're naively overestimating Moshe; there is no joke on anyone. There is only the asinine irony pathetically attempting to come across as detached cynicism. And badly FAILing. If Bunraku does succeed in pulling a joke on anyone or anything, it is on Moshe and on his status as a screenwriter.

no i am db

[–] michaelexarkun 13 years ago

I watched this film and got from it: style and action sequences.
As for philosophy, it may have tried to present some philosphy but it didn't register with me.

The fact that man, as a product of billions of years of evolution, is a violent creature is not groundbreaking news- life on earth is violent, thus humans are violent.

[–] brownguy2004 13 years ago

could be the violence is a awfull thing
but it also a cool looking thing

most of the charcter not particularly proud of how violent they are, but they accept and accept part of them enjoy it.

Reviews..reviews and MORE reviews
http://streamingrevies.blogspot.com/

[–] Crust89 13 years ago

Really? When did the film say that violence is bad?

I think you're missing the point of this film. The theme isn't "Violence is bad", instead, I think that they pose the question "When and why should violence be used?" We see the characters ask themselves, multiple times, if the path they're choosing is the right one. But they're not asking themselves IF they're going to use violence, but how to conduct their violence.

The film "argues" that violence is inevitable. Therefore, the moral quandary comes from how we apply violence. I think the film takes a stance on this and says violence used to extend your own personal power and to subjugate others is bad. Violence used to throw off tyranny is good.

If you want to disagree with the film, by all means, go for it. I personally think violence isn't necessarily inevitable and that alternatives are available even in dire situations. But to say that this is hypocrisy is an inaccurate interpretation of the film.

There may be some argument that the film laments that peaceable means can't be used to solve problems in Yoshi's uncle, but ultimately, he resorts to violence to protect himself and his family.

[–] djstatika 13 years ago

Well said

[–] grimacy 13 years ago

Some of you are reading WAY too far into this movie.

It's an extremely fun, fast-paced action thriller that reminds me a bit of Kill Bill and Sin City in atmosphere. If there is a deep message to this film other than "Man will always find something to fight over", it's lost on me.

I bought it expecting a wild ride action film that made me laugh as well as making me say, "Whoa, that was cool!"

I got what I wanted :D.

If you want an intellectual film, don't try to make every movie you see to be what it isn't. Some movies want to make you think - others just want to entertain. Learn to sit back and smile!

[–] nathynmasters-845-608407 13 years ago

I have to agree, it does seem like the film's messages is "man will always find something to fight over." But it does showcase heroism and the violence used to bring down an oppressor (you can read many political themes into this film too) who is violent toward others simply to keep power, so I don't think the philosophy is hypocritical at all. In fact we're all watching a story that takes place in a pop up book.

-Nate

[–] dusouljah 13 years ago

man likes violence... man likes action.....man likes to laugh....man likes pretty girls...man likes to think he's smarter than he really is

ok.... so let's make a funny, violent, action movie..throw in some cool actors, prety girls, fun choreography and make it look really artsy and come off as deep.....i'm pretty sure this movie will be cool...
yea it has to be cool...

was the movie cool???

yup....

*kanye shrug*

[–] rmavers 13 years ago

Umm, pretty much what you said, yea.

[–] kadafi69 13 years ago

very very well said

[–] zipdraw 13 years ago

Meh, it is just a cool movie, to me. XD

[–] nbreyfogle-1 11 years ago

I'd say the OP, although correct, is over-thinking the philosophy/violence of this film. This film isn't smart enough for such treatment; it's basically just dumb action.