By Jake Howell jake.howell@utoronto.ca

Countdown to Cannes: Takashi Miike

TAKASHI MIIKE

Background: Japanese; born Yao, Osaka, Japan, 1960.

Known for / style: 13 Assassins (2010), Ichi the Killer (2001), Audition (1999); an eclectic promiscuity of genre play, including martial arts extravaganzas, family-friendly films, and crime dramas; excessive, cartoonish violence and sexual themes; releasing some titles directly-to-video.

Notable accolades: In his home country, the Japanese Professional Movie Awards have been kind to Miike, handing him five Best Director wins (1997’s Rainy Dog and Young Thugs: Innocent Blood, 2000’s The Guys from Paradise, 2001’s Visitor Q and Ichi the Killer), a Best Film nod (Ichi the Killer), and finally the title of Movie King of the 1990s in 2001. Outside of Japan, Miike snagged both a FIPRESCI prize and the KNF Award for Audition (the KNF Award, oddly, is given to “the best feature film that has yet to find distribution within the Netherlands”). In 2010, Venice gave a Future Film Festival Digital Award (Special Mention) to Miike’s 13 Assassins.

Previous Cannes appearances: Miike has played the Croisette twice: once in Competition (2011’s 3D Hara-Kiri: Death of a Samurai) and once out of Competition (For Love’s Sake, 2012). Hara-Kiri was the first 3D film ever to screen in Competition.

Film he’s bringing to Cannes: Wara no Tate (Shield of Straw), a police thriller based on Kazuhiro Kiuchi’s best-selling novel of the same name. Takao Osawa (from Japanese TV show Jin) and Nanako Matsushima (I am Mita, Your Housekeeper) star as two cops tasked with escorting a convicted killer across Japan. Getting in the way are ruthless bounty hunters, eager to cash in on the head of the killer (played by Tatsuya Fujiwara, Death Note).

Could it win the Palme? While no director is truly exempt from winning the Palme d’Or, it would appear Miike’s latest thriller has the Japanese equivalent of “zilch” at taking home the prize. Cannes is not exactly known for awarding by-the-numbers action movies (2011’s Best Director-winning Drive resists genre conformity), and the film is released today in Japan—the latter point hurting Miike’s chances in the long run. The film may not be Miike’s best work: Time Out Tokyo gave the film two stars (out of five) on April 18, writing: Wara no Tate is “slick, empty, and rather dim.” If a local critic can’t get down with Miike’s latest, it ain’t looking good for the rest of us. The Japan Times review of the film is slightly sunnier (giving Miike three out of five stars), but that’s still less than stellar. If Miike has a friend on the jury, it’s director Naomi Kawase—a Japanese compatriot who may have a hell of a time convincing her fellow members that Wara no Tate is worth its weight in gold. Given her influences, though, that seems highly unlikely.

Why you should care: Miike releases so many films that it’s hard to get overly excited for a reportedly lesser entry. Still, Miike has produced at least one masterpiece in his prolific career (13 Assassins tops out at 96% on Rotten Tomatoes). Either way, with an explosive trailer and a strong cast, genre fans can look forward to a fun blitz through urban Japan. Wara no Tate could be just a good ol’ time at the movies, not the arthouse favorite that the Competition would ordinarily prize. And there’s nothing wrong with that.

One Response to “Countdown to Cannes: Takashi Miike”

  1. prunktanner says:

    A magician, for sure.

Leave a Reply

Quote Unquotesee all »

“I’ve been pleasantly surprised by how many recappers, while clearly over their heads, are baseline sympathetic to finding themselves routinely unmoored, even if that means repeating over and over that this is closer to “avant-garde art” than  normal TV to meet the word count. My feed was busy connecting the dots to Peter Tscherkassky (gas station), Tony Conrad (the giant staring at feedback of what we’ve just seen), Pat O’Neill (bombs away) et al., and this is all apposite — visual and conceptual thinking along possibly inadvertent parallel lines. If recappers can’t find those exact reference points to latch onto, that speaks less to willful ignorance than to how unfortunately severed experimental film is from nearly all mainstream discussions of film because it’s generally hard to see outside of privileged contexts (fests, academia, the secret knowledge of a self-preserving circle working with a very finite set of resources and publicity access to the larger world); resources/capital/access/etc. So I won’t assign demerits for willful incuriosity, even if some recappers are reduced, in some unpleasantly condescending/bluffing cases, to dismissing this as a “student film” — because presumably experimentation is something the seasoned artist gets out of their system in maturity, following the George Lucas Model of graduating from Bruce Conner visuals to Lawrence Kasdan’s screenwriting.”
~ Vadim Rizov Goes For It, A Bit

“On the first ‘Twin Peaks,’ doing TV was like going from a mansion to a hut. But the arthouses are gone now, so cable television is a godsend — they’re the new art houses. You’ve got tons of freedom to do the work you want to do on TV, but there is a restriction in terms of picture and sound. The range of television is restricted. It’s hard for the power and the glory to come through. In other words, you can have things in a theater much louder and also much quieter. With TV, the quieter things have to be louder and the louder things have to be quieter, so you have less dynamics. The picture quality — it’s fine if you have a giant television with a good speaker system, but a lot of people will watch this on their laptops or whatever, so the picture and the sound are going to suffer big time. Optimally, people should be watching TV in a dark room with no disturbances and with as big and good a picture as possible and with as great sound as possible.”
~ David Lynch