Vivre dans la peur

In 1955 millions of Japanese signed petitions against American atomic testing in the Pacific. Needless to say their concerns were totally ignored and there were reports of people moving to Brazil, although the numbers are not known.

Here we have seventy-year old foundry owner Nakajima played by thirty-five year old Toshiro Mifune, who is so obsessed with the threat of a nuclear holocaust that he plans to sell up and move his extended family, including two mistresses and their offspring, to South America. His family's attempts to have him declared mentally incompetent have the most dire and tragic consequences for them all.

Apart from his ill-conceived and interminable version of Gorky's 'Lower Depths', the consistent quality of Kurosawa's work throughout the fifties and sixties is both staggering and unparalleled.

Unsurprisingly this gloomy opus was a commercial failure and had to wait six years before being shown at the Berlin Film Festival. A further six years were to elapse before its theatrical release in America. It still remains mystifyingly underrated.

All of the acting kudos has been reserved of course for Mifune who is mesmerising in the role. It is such a pity that he and Kurosawa parted company in the late sixties as theirs was a partnership made in heaven.

Every character in this is beautifully drawn and one cannot fail to mention Kurosawa regular Takashi Shimura as domestic mediator Harada who is consumed with guilt and remorse over Nakajima's fate. This comes three years after his own stunning performance in 'Ikiru' for the same director. Ironically he appeared a year earlier in another film dealing with fear of a nuclear holocaust, 'Godzilla', which naturally cleaned up at the box office.

The touches of a master film maker are here in terms of sound effects, editing and grouping of actors. The constant mopping of brows and waving of fans captures perfectly the unbearable heat and of course a Kurosawa film would not be complete without a torrential downpour or two.

This is an immensely powerful work which raises so many issues not least of which is the thin dividing line between rational/irrational behaviour. Does Nakajima 'go too far'? Many would say 'yes'.

It is Nobuo Nakamura as the psychologist who has the most telling speech when asking: "Is he crazy or are those who are unperturbed in an insane world the crazy ones?"

The final shot of the disconsolate Harada trudging down the stairs of the asylum whilst one of Nakajima's daughters, with child on back, walks up to visit her deranged father, is one of cinema's most devastating endings.

In a world presently paralysed by fear and paranoia this timeless film is ripe for rediscovery.

I felt I had to post because this film, not one of my favorites by Kurosawa but still a one of quality and intelligence, keeps getting bashed by reviewers. The low score (compared to other Kurosawa films) shouldn't discourage potential viewers. Granted, this film takes more patience than some of his other films. However, the subject matter of the atomic bomb and how Japanese society and individuals deal I thought was very seminal. The whole concept of fear is deeply imbued into the film and it questions the sanity of the viewer and the world who live under the constant threat of universal destruction with ignorant self-assurance. The ideas are intelligent and presented with clarity. This film is complete and good in itself and doesn't need to rely on the name of Kurosawa to justify itself. Not a good Kurosawa film to start off with if one is trying to nurse an interest in his fecund movies but a good movie to watch nonetheless particularly if one is at all curious about how Japanese people feel about the horror of the atomic bomb.

I Live in Fear is yet another masterpiece by Akira Kurosawa. It tells the story of an aging patriarch who is terrified nuclear attack will destroy his family and the business he has worked to build up his entire life. His children do not wish to leave the comfortable life in Japan which his labours have provided. They believe he is mad and take him to family court for mediation. It becomes the difficult duty of a mediator to decide whether his fears are rational or not. The shadow of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are palpable in the feverish eyes of legendary actor Toshiro Mifune as the father. A thought-provoking time capsule of post-war Japan, the combination of Kurosawa and Mifune should never be missed.

From the very very beginning during the opening credits sequence, we are given the ominous feeling of paranoia, the feeling with which it's vital to sympathize with Toshiro Mifune's character, an old foundry owner convinced that Japan is on the brink of nuclear obliteration, trying to force his reluctant and resentful family to safety in Brazil.

Mifune's performance is so very masculine and real, as are nearly all of them. In this film, he displays a self-assurance that allows him to descend into pathetic helplessness. Of all the post-war Kurosawa films that I've seen so far, I Live In Fear is the most direct and informative. America may feed off of the dread showcased by the Japanese culture in this film and some may feel terribly sad for the individualistic portrayal of the debilitating fear stricken into the immovable hearts of stubborn old men like Mifune's character.

Even as early as WWII, I learned, America's most powerful weapon has been fear. However, in those times, it was a much purer, less vain utility. But what about the people it destroys for the sake of its own feeling of security?

Based on reviews I had read, I was expecting either a facile ban-the-bomb message film, or a story about greedy relatives trying to have an old man committed so they can get his money.

I should have known better. Part of Kurosawa's genius in his great middle period (1950-1965) is that he refuses to insist on anything. He fairly presents a series of events and invites us to decide what, if anything, they mean.

Everyone in this film has a point. No one here is really a villain. Even those who are jerks (notably the second son, Jiro) are really trying to do the right thing. And the film reminds me a little of THE CAINE MUTINY in that it very artfully moves our sympathies in one direction for most of the film before presenting us with events that make us wonder if we were wrong.

Toshiro Mifune gives a fine performance as Nakajima, but to tell the truth, I wish Kurosawa had given the role to Takashi Shimura, not only because I think Shimura would have played the role even better, but because it would have given him one more tour-de-force leading role in a Kurosawa film, coming directly after IKIRU and SEVEN SAMURAI. Granted, though, that such a move probably would have caused problems with both Toho and Mifune.