Rashomon
Rashomon is a story about truth and questioning fact. In the movie we are told four different accounts of the same story. But none of them line up and we are left to question who is telling the truth. We are told from the beginning that everyone lies and it is human nature to lie. Roger Ebert says "What he doesn't understand is that while there is an explanation of the film's four eyewitness accounts of a murder, there is not a solution", which is important to consider while watching the film.
There are three people involved in a murder of a man. A bandit, the dead man and his wife. Police are brought in the investigate and they take the stories of the bandit and the wife, and call in a medium to get the story from the dead man. In the end we are left with three different stories. We can assume that the dead man is telling the truth. Then we learn there is a witness, one of three men who are later going over this case in the ruins of a temple. The witness tells what he saw, but his story doesn't line up either. Being a third party we assume he is telling the truth as he has no steak in the matter. Then one of the men he is telling what he witnessed to calls him out for stealing the dagger used to kill the dead man and he admits. By admitting we can conclude that he also lied about what happened. So they all lied.
This is the point of the film. Everyones lies, not just to others but to themselves. Kurosawa explains in his autobiography "Human beings are unable to be honest with themselves about themselves. They cannot talk about themselves without embellishing.", which contributes to each testimony being different. Each person lied about the part which makes them a truly bad person. The bandit lied about why he killed the man, the women about her lack of loyalty and the witness about stealing the dagger. The film begs us to distrust each character even though we have reason to trust each of them.
The use of false flashback is cleverly used in this film. We are very use to films using flashbacks to fill us in on the missing puzzle piece of a story. We assume that they are true because they are a characters memories. What this film is saying is that not only do we lie to others but we lie to ourselves. It tells us that we can't trust others memories or their flashbacks. It wants us to question everything. Even in the final scene when the man takes the child and says that he is going to take care of it I was left wondering what his true intentions was. The film works to leave us uncomfortable with the conclusion of the film or any part of it. We begin to question everything and that is its point.
There are three people involved in a murder of a man. A bandit, the dead man and his wife. Police are brought in the investigate and they take the stories of the bandit and the wife, and call in a medium to get the story from the dead man. In the end we are left with three different stories. We can assume that the dead man is telling the truth. Then we learn there is a witness, one of three men who are later going over this case in the ruins of a temple. The witness tells what he saw, but his story doesn't line up either. Being a third party we assume he is telling the truth as he has no steak in the matter. Then one of the men he is telling what he witnessed to calls him out for stealing the dagger used to kill the dead man and he admits. By admitting we can conclude that he also lied about what happened. So they all lied.
This is the point of the film. Everyones lies, not just to others but to themselves. Kurosawa explains in his autobiography "Human beings are unable to be honest with themselves about themselves. They cannot talk about themselves without embellishing.", which contributes to each testimony being different. Each person lied about the part which makes them a truly bad person. The bandit lied about why he killed the man, the women about her lack of loyalty and the witness about stealing the dagger. The film begs us to distrust each character even though we have reason to trust each of them.
The use of false flashback is cleverly used in this film. We are very use to films using flashbacks to fill us in on the missing puzzle piece of a story. We assume that they are true because they are a characters memories. What this film is saying is that not only do we lie to others but we lie to ourselves. It tells us that we can't trust others memories or their flashbacks. It wants us to question everything. Even in the final scene when the man takes the child and says that he is going to take care of it I was left wondering what his true intentions was. The film works to leave us uncomfortable with the conclusion of the film or any part of it. We begin to question everything and that is its point.
nicely put--the question of intention at the end (child) is interesting...most interpret it as a moment of selflessness, right?
ReplyDeleteand remember--no steak in the matter / stake :)
If the entire movie pushes you to question peoples words and intentions, then why at the final scene would we trust what a man who had just lied to us?
ReplyDelete