***1/2 (out of ****)
Starring Tom Cruise, Ken Watanabe, Timothy Spall, Masato Harada, Koyuki, Billy Connolly, Tony Goldwyn, Hiroyuki Sanada, and Shichinosuke Nakamura
Directed by Edward Zwick & written by John Logan, Marshall Herskovitz, and Edward Zwick
2003
144 min R
You’d think the last samurai would be an Asian, but if Hollywood has taught us anything, it’s that every story can be seen through the eyes of a white guy.
But I kid. “The Last Samurai” is a much, much, much better movie than I thought it would be. But what keeps it from greatness can be summed up by my opening piece of pith. It is an old-fashioned, big-budget Hollywood movie, and that requires it to obey certain conventions: it sees things through American eyes, it has a villain it doesn’t really need, and it follows a few other conventions which I won’t spoil, except to say “The Last Samurai” does not end quite how it ought. Superstar Tom Cruise is clearly the movie’s main character, although a more powerful version of the same story might have been divided equally between Cruise and Ken Watanabe, who gives a splendid performance as the leader of the samurai. In a perfect world, Watanabe’s name on the poster would be just as big as Cruise’s.
But within the Hollywood framework “The Last Samurai” is still a powerful film. As Kurosawa and “The Magnificent Seven” (as well as “Kill Bill”) made abundantly clear, the Old East and the Old West are easily interchangeable. “The Last Samurai” begins in one and spends the rest of the time in the other. The year is 1876 and Captain Algren (Cruise) is a wreck. Drunken and disillusioned by his wartime experiences against the Indians, old acquaintances hire him to help modernize Japan’s army, which is attempting to put down a samurai rebellion. But after an ill-advised skirmish Algren is taken prisoner by the samurai and, while spending a winter in their village, he comes to see things their way. The samurai lord Katsumoto’s (Watanabe) rebellion is not against the Emperor, but against a too-swift modernization, which he fears will destroy Japan’s culture and heritage, including the way of the samurai.
What follows is honor and morality trying to withstand the march of time and progress, and bridge the gap from one epoch to the next. To return to the East-West connection I made earlier, the best western to which “The Last Samurai” bears the strongest kinship is probably “The Wild Bunch.” That movie is also about the world moving beneath our feet, and about a violent way of life that has outlived its usefulness. As such, “The Last Samurai” need not have a villain, because “villainy” is provided by the merciless indifference of progress. Those in favor of progress, which is more often than not a good thing, have the good of Japan in mind probably just as much as Katsumoto. It is inaccurate, a cheap shot, and an affront to those two sociology classes I took to vilify the character of the industrialist Omura (Masato Harada). But, like I said, this is a Hollywood movie, and that means you’re only smart enough to understand bad people doing bad things, and not giant socio-economic forces.
Page two of “The Last Samurai.” Back to home.