IMDb-BEWERTUNG
7,3/10
7274
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Füge eine Handlung in deiner Sprache hinzuMusashi Miyamoto returns to Kyoto after years of absence. After a series of fights against the Yoshioka School, he challenges its master to a duel.Musashi Miyamoto returns to Kyoto after years of absence. After a series of fights against the Yoshioka School, he challenges its master to a duel.Musashi Miyamoto returns to Kyoto after years of absence. After a series of fights against the Yoshioka School, he challenges its master to a duel.
Empfohlene Bewertungen
Samurai II: Duel at Ichijoji Temple is the second part of the so-called Samurai trilogy by Inagaki Hiroshi about legendary historical figure Miyamoto Musashi who was a highly accomplished samurai who wasn't only a great fighter but also an intellectual philosopher and a skilled artist. This movie shows how a young ronin travels the country for enlightenment and training for several years to become an accomplished samurai.
The main plot of the movie focuses on Miyamoto Musashi challenging a martial arts school. He also meets respectable opponent Sasaki Kojiro who he will eventually fight in the last film. His relationship with Otsu is further explored as she patiently waits for his destiny to be fulfilled.
In comparison to the first movie, this sequel has more fight scenes that are quite dynamic, epic and tense. The movie starts with an impressive duel and ends with a fight between Miyamoto Musashi on one side and eighty martial arts school students on the other side. The film has an overall quicker pace than the first part and is thoroughly entertaining.
All beloved characters from the first movie are back in the sequel and Mifune Toshiro's acting skills are once again quite impressive even though he seems to be acting too impulsively at times to portray a character who has undergone changes to find peace of mind. Mifune Toshiro fits the role much better in the energetic first film and accomplished third movie of the trilogy.
The main reason why this movie is the weakest part of the trilogy is because it skips three years in the life of Miyamoto Musashi and fails to tell how the protagonist has changed. This is even more inappropriate regarding the side characters. The last time we saw the protagonist's childhood friend Matahachi, he was engaged to Otsu but had parted with beautiful Akemi and her manipulative mother Oko to protect them against bandits. Three years later, he has suddenly married Oko who is though having a romantic relationship with Toji who works for a wealthy martial arts school owner whom he expects to marry Akemi and hopes to make lots of money in the process. It's never explained how Oko and Matahachi got married, how their relationship failed and how Toji met the unstable trio.
Despite a few plot holes and some lack of character development, it's essential to watch Samurai II: Duel at Ichijoji Temple as a link between the energetic first film and the accomplished third movie. This second part is still entertaining with its wonderful cinematography, improved fight scenes and plot filled with sinister intrigues. Don't jump on the tiring Game of Thrones bandwagon and watch this movie instead which offers similar contents with more style.
The main plot of the movie focuses on Miyamoto Musashi challenging a martial arts school. He also meets respectable opponent Sasaki Kojiro who he will eventually fight in the last film. His relationship with Otsu is further explored as she patiently waits for his destiny to be fulfilled.
In comparison to the first movie, this sequel has more fight scenes that are quite dynamic, epic and tense. The movie starts with an impressive duel and ends with a fight between Miyamoto Musashi on one side and eighty martial arts school students on the other side. The film has an overall quicker pace than the first part and is thoroughly entertaining.
All beloved characters from the first movie are back in the sequel and Mifune Toshiro's acting skills are once again quite impressive even though he seems to be acting too impulsively at times to portray a character who has undergone changes to find peace of mind. Mifune Toshiro fits the role much better in the energetic first film and accomplished third movie of the trilogy.
The main reason why this movie is the weakest part of the trilogy is because it skips three years in the life of Miyamoto Musashi and fails to tell how the protagonist has changed. This is even more inappropriate regarding the side characters. The last time we saw the protagonist's childhood friend Matahachi, he was engaged to Otsu but had parted with beautiful Akemi and her manipulative mother Oko to protect them against bandits. Three years later, he has suddenly married Oko who is though having a romantic relationship with Toji who works for a wealthy martial arts school owner whom he expects to marry Akemi and hopes to make lots of money in the process. It's never explained how Oko and Matahachi got married, how their relationship failed and how Toji met the unstable trio.
Despite a few plot holes and some lack of character development, it's essential to watch Samurai II: Duel at Ichijoji Temple as a link between the energetic first film and the accomplished third movie. This second part is still entertaining with its wonderful cinematography, improved fight scenes and plot filled with sinister intrigues. Don't jump on the tiring Game of Thrones bandwagon and watch this movie instead which offers similar contents with more style.
The first part of the trilogy was setting up the story, visually resplendent but leaves you out in the open. In this second part the direction is solidified. Musashi is set up to choose between the way of the sword or love for the girl Otsu, while having to face his nemesis, foreshadowed for the closing chapter.
What puts me off this second chapter, which I rate the lowest of the three, is that we had a set of characters in the first film, and suddenly we have another set of characters. The film revolves around his feud with the Yoshioki school.
So in a way, this loose narrative foreshadows the third chapter. As it emerges in this second film, the film is not one long epic split in three parts. Neither is each of these first two films self-enclosed. The narrative is a loose stitching together of episode and digress, thrust and feint in many directions; observant viewers will notice the same in the elliptical shooting mode.
I will not say more about this as a film since we are still halfway there, instead let's look at some context around the film, here on the fluidity of self.
--
This is a core precept of Buddhism, which features prominently in the films; Musashi receives key lessons by monks, his journey is one of self-realization, internal abating of ego.
This fluidity is seen in the transmission and establishment of Buddhism in Japan over several hundred years through several attempts, several travels of Japanese monks in China. Both notable Zen schools in Japan were initiated by monks of the Tendai sect who had been to China. The film's main two centerpieces take place outside Buddhist temples (one is referenced in the title, the other is Sanjusangen-do), both belonging to Tendai. The Sanjusangen-do, a marvelous structure, is also famous for housing one thousand and one statues of the thousand armed Kannon, the boddhisatva of compassion. The little wooden statuette that Musashi is seen carving in spots is of Kannon.
Now simply saying that the self is illusory sounds weird, metaphysical or philosophical at best. Buddhists have many of the same lofty words as we do, about 'void' and 'self', but whereas we're accustomed to theoretical construction and analytical philosophy (we love words in the West), they resort to words as a last means of describing a practice—also evident in Musashi's own writings where he stresses experiential appreciation.
So when they say 'void', they don't mean a generality but something which can be felt, has been felt, as one feels the temperature of water. When they say 'self', they mean when a single thought arises while you're washing the dishes.
It's a pain in the ass to talk of it, because how can you say exactly how warm it is? It either is to you or isn't. Stick your hand in. Zen Masters (as well as Musashi whose 'Way of strategy' is Zen-flavored) knew this, which is why they loved paradox, urged silence or beat and kicked their students when they asked logical questions. The point is to know for yourself. A similar thing happens to Musashi in the first film when he is tied by a Zen monk from a tree, a fictional event.
This monk, Takuan, existed; though his interactions with Musashi in the film are fiction, presumably he did know Musashi. He wrote on this business of illusion and nonself using sword metaphors, because the writings were intended for Yagyu Munenori, sword instructor to three shoguns and with Musashi the most famous swordsman in his day. Munenori briefly appears in the third film.
Munenori and Musashi both wrote books with background in all this. Both are still being widely read in the martial arts and business worlds, by people looking for insights on real or metaphorical war.
Musashi's first four books comprise technique and strategy. The last one and shortest, Book of the Void, which is held in separate esteem, probably because of the portentous title, is where Musashi speaks of the Zen void as deeper principle—it should be the most interesting but isn't, Musashi's practical conveyance falls short. No, it's the books on strategy that deserve study once you look past hand-to-hand combat, at least for our purposes here.
Suffice to say, both Zen and Musashi urge direct observation of mind instead of general reasoning. Suffice to say, from the perspective of Zen a Kannon statue is no more sacred than the piece of wood it was carved from. And that the act of carving is the manifestation of self, this can be practically observed in the carved image—is it sloppy, elegant? This is important. So neither spoken word, nor teachings in a book, nor sacred image, nor Zen or not Zen, but observation of the mind behind. I'm going to wrap this in the third post.
What puts me off this second chapter, which I rate the lowest of the three, is that we had a set of characters in the first film, and suddenly we have another set of characters. The film revolves around his feud with the Yoshioki school.
So in a way, this loose narrative foreshadows the third chapter. As it emerges in this second film, the film is not one long epic split in three parts. Neither is each of these first two films self-enclosed. The narrative is a loose stitching together of episode and digress, thrust and feint in many directions; observant viewers will notice the same in the elliptical shooting mode.
I will not say more about this as a film since we are still halfway there, instead let's look at some context around the film, here on the fluidity of self.
--
This is a core precept of Buddhism, which features prominently in the films; Musashi receives key lessons by monks, his journey is one of self-realization, internal abating of ego.
This fluidity is seen in the transmission and establishment of Buddhism in Japan over several hundred years through several attempts, several travels of Japanese monks in China. Both notable Zen schools in Japan were initiated by monks of the Tendai sect who had been to China. The film's main two centerpieces take place outside Buddhist temples (one is referenced in the title, the other is Sanjusangen-do), both belonging to Tendai. The Sanjusangen-do, a marvelous structure, is also famous for housing one thousand and one statues of the thousand armed Kannon, the boddhisatva of compassion. The little wooden statuette that Musashi is seen carving in spots is of Kannon.
Now simply saying that the self is illusory sounds weird, metaphysical or philosophical at best. Buddhists have many of the same lofty words as we do, about 'void' and 'self', but whereas we're accustomed to theoretical construction and analytical philosophy (we love words in the West), they resort to words as a last means of describing a practice—also evident in Musashi's own writings where he stresses experiential appreciation.
So when they say 'void', they don't mean a generality but something which can be felt, has been felt, as one feels the temperature of water. When they say 'self', they mean when a single thought arises while you're washing the dishes.
It's a pain in the ass to talk of it, because how can you say exactly how warm it is? It either is to you or isn't. Stick your hand in. Zen Masters (as well as Musashi whose 'Way of strategy' is Zen-flavored) knew this, which is why they loved paradox, urged silence or beat and kicked their students when they asked logical questions. The point is to know for yourself. A similar thing happens to Musashi in the first film when he is tied by a Zen monk from a tree, a fictional event.
This monk, Takuan, existed; though his interactions with Musashi in the film are fiction, presumably he did know Musashi. He wrote on this business of illusion and nonself using sword metaphors, because the writings were intended for Yagyu Munenori, sword instructor to three shoguns and with Musashi the most famous swordsman in his day. Munenori briefly appears in the third film.
Munenori and Musashi both wrote books with background in all this. Both are still being widely read in the martial arts and business worlds, by people looking for insights on real or metaphorical war.
Musashi's first four books comprise technique and strategy. The last one and shortest, Book of the Void, which is held in separate esteem, probably because of the portentous title, is where Musashi speaks of the Zen void as deeper principle—it should be the most interesting but isn't, Musashi's practical conveyance falls short. No, it's the books on strategy that deserve study once you look past hand-to-hand combat, at least for our purposes here.
Suffice to say, both Zen and Musashi urge direct observation of mind instead of general reasoning. Suffice to say, from the perspective of Zen a Kannon statue is no more sacred than the piece of wood it was carved from. And that the act of carving is the manifestation of self, this can be practically observed in the carved image—is it sloppy, elegant? This is important. So neither spoken word, nor teachings in a book, nor sacred image, nor Zen or not Zen, but observation of the mind behind. I'm going to wrap this in the third post.
I've watched the entire trilogy of the Musashi Miyamoto films, of which this film is the second part. The first film, titled simply "Musashi Miyamoto," introduces us to the characters of this and the third film. Without having seen the first film and developing some interest in the welfare of the characters, I certainly wouldn't have sat through the second and third films.
"Duel at Ichijoji Temple," this film, deals with Musashi's exploits as a sort of samurai knight-errant, seeking glory in a very ambiguous and roundabout way. Two women are trailing after him, as Kurosawa films would say, "like goldfish dung." Musashi himself is a flat character on whom Toshiro Mifune's acting skills are wasted. He displays very little emotion or intellect, despite his supposed interest in one of the women and enlightening education by his monk teacher (as we saw in the first film).
If Musashi is flat, the female characters are steamrolled. Their hand wringing, collapsing, and sobbing is typical of American movies of this time period and grows tedious in a samurai film. Having seen other films from this time period set in the days of samurai, I've seen that much more can be done with female characters. The plot was likewise predictable and slow-moving.
If you don't care about characters or plot, the high points of the movie may compensate: beautiful color landscapes and Toshiro Mifune's thrilling fight scenes. Otherwise, I recommend films by Kurosawa or Mizoguchi ("Sanjuro," the mysterious "Ugetsu") over this trilogy. 5/10
"Duel at Ichijoji Temple," this film, deals with Musashi's exploits as a sort of samurai knight-errant, seeking glory in a very ambiguous and roundabout way. Two women are trailing after him, as Kurosawa films would say, "like goldfish dung." Musashi himself is a flat character on whom Toshiro Mifune's acting skills are wasted. He displays very little emotion or intellect, despite his supposed interest in one of the women and enlightening education by his monk teacher (as we saw in the first film).
If Musashi is flat, the female characters are steamrolled. Their hand wringing, collapsing, and sobbing is typical of American movies of this time period and grows tedious in a samurai film. Having seen other films from this time period set in the days of samurai, I've seen that much more can be done with female characters. The plot was likewise predictable and slow-moving.
If you don't care about characters or plot, the high points of the movie may compensate: beautiful color landscapes and Toshiro Mifune's thrilling fight scenes. Otherwise, I recommend films by Kurosawa or Mizoguchi ("Sanjuro," the mysterious "Ugetsu") over this trilogy. 5/10
The follow-up to 1954's excellent Musashi Miyamoto, Duel at Ichijoji Temple picks up the story several years later, as an exiled orphan-turned-swordsman gains notoriety via a bloody tour of fatal duels. His reputation precedes him in returning to his hometown, where old rivals of both a violent and intimate nature await. This is a film about personal growth - specifically that of the samurai himself, who struggles to learn the key concepts of what his new life actually entails and where the rift lies between honor and reverence. We're never quite sure if Musashi takes this lesson to heart, particularly since he's so keen to maintain an impenetrable outer facade in almost every situation. It's a tricky role for period veteran Toshiro Mifune, who struggles with the more nuanced, flatter aspects of the character. In the previous episode, with the fires of young-adulthood to toy with, he excelled. Here, faced with the malaise of mid-life and the accompanying questions of his own being, his performance is far less sublime. The plot, cramped with too many faces and several seemingly-pointless subplots, does him no favors in dancing around the issues and repeating itself on more than one occasion. This could have been an excellent one-act show, and the final half-hour could still stand alone as precisely that. It lacks the gumption of its predecessor, however, and too often cuts away just as the action is getting good.
The great cast that was in Musashi Miyamoto, the first part of this samurai trilogy continues in the second part with a few additions.
By this time Musashi Miyamoto has been on the road for three years and is still learning. The most important lesson as a Samurai will not be learned until the film is almost over. Another important lesson comes quickly after that, and it will interesting to see how it plays out in the final part.
In the opening Musashi Miyamoto is doing battle with a samurai similar to our buddy Hanzo. They are the only two I have ever seen use chains.
After this he heads to Kyoto to do battle with the best in the capital, and also to get himself mixed up with the two women who are in love with him.
Love, fickleness, treachery, rape, revenge, honor, and great sword fighting all have a place in this magnificent film.
The amazing cinematography and scenery also place an important part.
This is truly a samurai classic.
By this time Musashi Miyamoto has been on the road for three years and is still learning. The most important lesson as a Samurai will not be learned until the film is almost over. Another important lesson comes quickly after that, and it will interesting to see how it plays out in the final part.
In the opening Musashi Miyamoto is doing battle with a samurai similar to our buddy Hanzo. They are the only two I have ever seen use chains.
After this he heads to Kyoto to do battle with the best in the capital, and also to get himself mixed up with the two women who are in love with him.
Love, fickleness, treachery, rape, revenge, honor, and great sword fighting all have a place in this magnificent film.
The amazing cinematography and scenery also place an important part.
This is truly a samurai classic.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesMusashi Miyamoto (Toshiro Mifune) is seen carrying two swords. This was a samurai custom known as daisho. Translated this means 'big-little'. The bigger of the two blades was the curved katana, which was generally used for combat and duelling. The short sword was the wakizashi, this blade was generally associated with committing seppuku, however, as can be seen in the film was also used for combat.
- PatzerMany of the guys killed in swordplay go down with either no visible contact between their bodies and a katana, or appear to be hit in the arm or leg with a non-fatal slash that stills ends them, regardless.
- Zitate
Musashi Miyamoto (Takezo): I renounce my love of women.
- VerbindungenFeatured in Miyamoto Musashi kanketsu-hen: Kettô Ganryû-jima (1956)
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How long is Samurai II: Duel at Ichijoji Temple?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsland
- Sprache
- Auch bekannt als
- Samurai II: Duel at Ichijoji Temple
- Drehorte
- Produktionsfirma
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
- Laufzeit1 Stunde 44 Minuten
- Sound-Mix
- Seitenverhältnis
- 1.37 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen
Oberste Lücke
By what name was Zoku Miyamoto Musashi: Ichijô-ji no kettô (1955) officially released in India in English?
Antwort