Avis des utilisateurs

This is undoubtedly the most harrowing black-and-white war film that I've watched; as a matter of fact, the only Western director during this time to remotely approach its level of intensity and sheer visceral power in his work was Samuel Fuller. By the way, I had attended a Kon Ichikawa retrospective at London's National Film Theatre in September 2002, but only managed to catch some of his work made between 1960 and 1973.

The film is certainly as depressing as it's reputed to be; however, it also displays welcome touches of black humor throughout - the 'dead' man who wakes up to answer a querying soldier and promptly 'dies' again, the deliciously ironic shoe exchange sequence, a moribund eccentric telling the famished hero which part of the body he should eat, etc. Incidentally, the script was written by a woman - Natto Wada, the director's own wife!

Ichikawa is a versatile and prolific film-maker whose reputation may not be as high as it was during his peak years (1956-65), but his direction here is often striking - the startling pre-credits sequence (the hero is violently rebuked by his superior officer for being discharged from hospital earlier than expected!), the death of a surrendering Japanese at the hands of a gun-toting Philippine woman, the bombing of a hospital (with the medical staff running away to save themselves, leaving the wounded soldiers behind to crawl out of the shack at their own limited pace), the automated march in the rain of the disillusioned soldiers (which also involves the afore-mentioned business with the shoes that, actually, recalls a similar scene in ALL QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT [1930]), a hill littered with the bodies of soldiers attempting to climb it, the finale, etc. Surely one of the film's major assets is the stunning cinematography of the unforgiving and desolate muddy landscape.

The film is notorious for treating the taboo subject of cannibalism (almost 10 years before it became a staple of horror movies) but Ichikawa's approach is not only subtle but highly effective: the flesh is actually referred to as "monkey meat", while the hero is seen partaking only once (and promptly spits out the piece along with most of his decaying teeth!); conversely, when the weak underling soldier (played by Mickey Curtis who, despite his name, was a Japanese pop idol of the time!) rabidly indulges, the ground nearby is splashed with blood.

In the supplements, Ichikawa remembers that Method-practicing lead actor Eiji Funakoshi (whose portrayal is unforgettable, by the way) arrived on the set at starvation point - with the result that production was forced to shut down for two weeks until he recuperated! Donald Richie's perceptive interview favors the nihilism of the film over the underlying patriotism behind such gut-wrenching recent Hollywood fare as SAVING PRIVATE RYAN (1998).

FIRES ON THE PLAIN is universally considered to be one of its director's top efforts and, out of the several films of Ichikawa I've watched, the closest to it in spirit are THE BURMESE HARP (1956; another character-driven war film but with a spiritual tone, and which is also available on DVD from Criterion) and ENJO aka CONFLAGRATION (1958; which was actually given a limited theatrical showing locally, as part of a foreign-film week, a couple of years ago). Personally, I also have a particular soft spot for the director's stunningly stylized color extravaganza, AN ACTOR'S REVENGE (1963), which I've actually caught twice at the NFT in 1999 and the afore-mentioned 2002 retrospective.

I got this movie out a week after the death of Ichikawa Kon - I suppose if there is one way to mark the passing of a great director, its to raise a glass of wine to him while watching one of his greatest movies. Ichikawa had one of the finest careers in Japanese film, but as he never had a distinctive style or theme he often seems to be overlooked compared to his near contemporaries such as Ozu and Kurosawa (he was a little younger than them, but not by much). He is one of those directors who defies auteur theories - its likely that his wife (who wrote the screenplay for this and many other of his movies) was as much responsible for the quality of the movies as he was. But at his best, he was as good as any Japanese film maker at the time. In particular, he had great technical skills, allowing him to tell complex stories in an accessible manner. But in terms of theme, this movie could hardly be simpler - war is hell. No really, its seriously hell.

Fire on the Plain doesn't follow the normal war genre rules. There is no real beginning - we start as the wretched Tamura, who is a regular private (although it is implied he is more thoughtful and educated than most of the others - at one stage it is shown he understands English, but he clams up when the others ask him how he knows it) is ordered to hospital, as his unit is already in an appalling state. The soldiers are defeated and starving to death. They are no longer an army, just a rag bag group of refugees - hunted by the locals, and pretty much ignored by the Americans, who have bigger fish to fry. Hunger and despair is driving the soldiers to the edge and beyond of madness.

In typical Ichikawa style, its not all just grim - its oddly funny in parts (a very black humour of course).

The high points of this movie to me are the outstanding performances from the leads and the vivid photography. The characters, in all their humanity, but also their complete loss of humanity, are all too believable. This is that rare film - one which will refuse to erase itself from your head, even if you want to forget it.

When people think post-war Japanese cinema, they automatically think of Akira Kurosawa. His exported samurai epics have done a good job creating a sense of history, nobility and grace among the art cinema crowd. Yet arguably more important to Japan's unique cinematic history during that era, are the humanistic war stories brought to life by the likes of Masaki Kobayashi, Nagisa Oshima and Kon Ichikawa. Comprising a portion of the Japanese New Wave, these war dramas challenged their viewers head-on, illustrating the ugliness of war in all it's absurdity and horror. These movies were noble in their own way by angrily confronting the attitudes tolerated by Japan during it's peak nationalist period. Fires on the Plain is just as incendiary as it's title would suggest and serves as a prime example of such a film. It may also just be the most engaging and accessible war tale Japan has ever produced.

Set during the closing days of Japan's dominance in the Philippines, our sick, fatigued and jaded hero, Private Tamura attempts to survive the on-coming slaughter. Tamura is forced out of his unit due to tuberculosis; if he's not well enough to dig trenches than he's useless according to his superiors. He treks to the hospital just past the hills only to be rebuffed by the hospital who tells him if he can walk, he's not sick. Before he can return and presumably commit suicide via grenade, Tamura's unit is wiped out in a fierce battle with allied forces. He then wonders aimlessly through the countryside staving starvation, fatigue, death and worse still, fellow brothers in arms.

If Kurosawa is considered the Spielberg of Japan than director Kon Ichikawa is it's Martin Scorsese. Known less for an all-permeating thesis that seeps into his oeuvre, Ichikawa gives his work an idiosyncratic style and a visceral veneer. Throughout his career Ichikawa was known for taking on all popular genres, all of which balanced his knack for realism and expressionism. His worlds always have a beautiful wholeness and lets the pathos from each situation dig into the audiences cranium through all sides. Sometimes he accomplishes this with shock, other times with a mischievous sense of humor. One such iconic moment happens in Fires on the Plain when a platoon of soldiers march upon a pair of jungle boots. One soldier swiftly puts them on and discards his own, the next soldier takes the previous soldier's boots, and so on and so forth until Tamura looks down on the tattered remains of the last guy's boots, takes his off and keeps walking barefooted.

There are many more scenes of contradicting sentiments occupying the same earnest frame. We as the audience must decide whether we should laugh or cry or both yet we never feel the need to look away. There's a dark sense of realism that makes Fires on the Plain stand out from other contemporary works such as The Human Condition Trilogy (1959-1961). The realism, tinged with an expressionistic flare keeps us engrossed; pensively hoping Tamura and his fellow soldiers don't do the unthinkable.

As things become more desperate and deprived on the island of Leyte, the true intentions of the film start to soar with devastating economy. The film was adapted from Shohei Ooka's novel of the same name. Much ado was made at the time about Ichikawa's radical ending change which is surprisingly antithetical to the traditional Hollywood ending we're all so drearily used to. With Ichikawa's ending however there is no absolution, no completion, no sigh of relief. Much like All Quiet on the Western Front (1930) the film's resolution comes with a simple message about the inhumanity of war.

Fires on the Plain is a frightfully good film that tells it's story through imagery both stark, maddening and sublime. Powerful in every sober sense, Ichikawa should be on everyone's short list of most important Japanese filmmakers. He's got a style full of contradiction yet permeating with an excess of feeling. I promise that once you've seen this provocative, bleak, heart-wrenching picture, you won't soon forget it.

This is probably one of the best examples of that film genre known as the anti-war movie. It is a story about a group a Japanese soldiers in the last days of the second world war,weakened,demoralized,and starving. The situation deteriorates even further when one of them resorts to cannibalism in an attempt to ward off hunger. As they shuffle their way through the jungle one notices their shabby appearance with their feet sticking out of their boots and a sense of resignation or futility about them. It has even an element of the absurd about it in one of the scenes when one of the soldiers pleads to a comrade to eat him. This portrayal of them appeals to one's sense of pity or sympathy regardless of what cause or nation they're fighting for. For their situation could be anyone's unfortunate fate if circumstances were unfavorable. If there is one thing this film can show or get across is that our sense of humanity or what makes us feel civilized, is but a thin veneer or facade that in the right or wrong situation can vanish. The stark truth as depicted in this movie is that we are only always a few steps away from returning to the jungle if given the chance. This reminds me of another movie"Lord Of The Flies" which was about a group of English schoolboys stranded on an island after a plane crash. After awhile they descend or regress into a bunch of jungle savages or barbarians losing whatever decorum or civilization they possessed.

Every American who thinks he or she understands World War Two should see this movie. Few Hollywood films about the war have defied the stereotype of Japanese soldiers as emotionless brutes obeying orders without thinking. We like to think that every Japanese man was ready and able to fight to the death, right up to the day we bombed Nagasaki. "Fires on the Plain" shows a different reality: troops pathetically undersupplied, demoralized and starved to the point of cannibalism. They euphemistically refer to human flesh as "monkey meat." The movie and novel on which it was based also put to death the myth that Japanese soldiers all preferred death to surrender: They had good reason to believe that their enemies were in no mood to take prisoners. To me it raises a question most Americans would rather avoid: If the Japanese military was so beaten down at this point in the war, why was it necessary to nuke Hiroshima?

I saw this in 1993 on a VHS tape but have been unable to find it at any source since. This is a very bleak and uncompromising look at the last days of the Japanese Army in the Phillipines. Anyone with an interest in the Pacific war would do well to view this film and see what conditions the other side fought under.From what I can tell, this is historically accurate, and depicts how easily men can descend into complete barbarism. I understand the Japanese Army was completely cut off from any re-supply in the Phillipines by 1945, so there is no doubt many of the horrific incidents depicted here happened. I might not have been able to identify with the film's characters, but I appreciate their humanity and struggle to survive. If I had to compile a list of the ten greatest war films, this film would be on it. See it if you can get it.

Fires on The Plain (1959) ****

You don't see films like this anymore. 'Fires on the Plain' is an incredible depiction of the lives of the soldiers of the Japanese Imperial Army. Kon Ichikawa's masterpiece follows Tamura, a soldier with Tuberculosis as he wanders around the Philippine landscape in the last year of the war. He is sent away to the hospital by his commanding officer only to be refused treatment and so he is sent back. His CO tells him to go back and if they refuse him again then his last order is to kill himself with his grenade. He is refused again, but meets up with a band of squatters sitting outside the hospital. The next day they are shelled by American troops and Tamura flees, choosing not to kill himself, and from there he wanders from place to place trying to get to Palompon. He discovers that some men have been eating human flesh in order to survive, while others trade as much tobacco as they can for whatever they can get back.

The film is filled with a quiet sense of desperation and desolation, with a hint of insanity. Everyone we see is skin and bones, covered in dirt wearing torn and tattered rags. Ichikawa uses his camera to catch some beautiful shots of the destructed landscape and the Japanese soldiers who walk it. Kon Ichikawa was famous in Japan for making many comedies and satires, and there are moments in Fires on the Plain that are bitingly hilarious. Take for example a shot of what appears to be a dead man lying face down in a pool of water; a soldier walks but and asks himself aloud if that is how they will all end up, to which the man lifts his head out of the water and replies "what was that?" and then drops his face even deeper into the puddle than before. Another hilarious sequence involves one man finding a pair of boots along the trail. He takes the boots, replacing them with his old ones. Another man walks by and sees that pair of boots and switches up for his old boots. The scene continues until finally Tamura finds the exchange spot and examines the boots left without hardly any sole. He looks carefully at his own and at ones on the ground, and deciding that they're both kaput he removes his own and goes barefoot. The film is filled with incredible scenes, one after another. Like Mizoguchi and Kurosawa, Ichikawa knew how to use his camera to paint beautiful and stunning pictures. There are many stunning shots of men in barren empty plains surrounded by nothing but smoke in the air and dead or dying bodies on the broken earth. There is another incredible scene where dozens of Japanese soldiers attempt to cross a road guarded by Yanks in the middle of the night, all crawling on their hands and knees as the camera watches on from above.

The film gets its name from the columns of smoke rising up from fires on the plains seen throughout the film. They represent to the soldiers life a little more ordinary; the lives of Japanese farmers back home burning husks of corn. Their beacons of hope for the normal life however are in hostile hands.

The film caused a stir in its day with its graphic content. Much emphasis is placed on the horror of war, not just with the enemy but within your ranks and yourself. Kon Ichikawa's Fires on the Plains is an incredibly authentic and moving, and somewhat disturbing, portrait of the horror suffered by the men making up the lower ranks of the Imperial Army. Clint Eastwood's Letters From Iwo Jima, while it is a very good film, comes nowhere close to realizing the horror of war depicted in Fires on the Plain. (Eastwood was no doubt influenced by the film, seeing as he claims to be such a classic Japanese film buff.) Many war films show that war is hell through the eyes of the winners. In Fires on the Plain, we're shown that war is even more hellish when you're on the losing end

4/4

One person wrote: "To me it raises a question most Americans would rather avoid: If the Japanese military was so beaten down at this point in the war, why was it necessary to nuke Hiroshima?" This question is really a comment which reflects a certain pre-disposition. One answer is: because Japan had not yet surrendered and stopped fighting.

However, if the Japanese military was so beaten down at this point in the war why didn't the Japanese leaders stop the fighting and stop the suffering by stopping the war?

This criticism of the atomic bomb fails to recognize that no one knew in August 1945 when Japan would stop fighting. Also this approach seems not to recognize that even without an atomic bomb the fighting and dying would continue as long as the war continued, not only in Japan but in China and elsewhere. Even another two months of war (and conventional bombing and blockade) would have killed more people than died at Hiroshima AND Nagasaki combined.

a friend of DF NY

Napolean claimed that armies fought on their stomachs. He even plied his forces with wine the night before a battle to insure maximum energy. If NOBI does nothing else it demonstrates that the horrors of war, and the horrors of the horrors of war, are in large part a direct result of political and military miscalculation. During World War Two, the Allies were most likely the best fed and best equipped armies up until that time in history. Conversly, the Axis were generally poorly equipped and poorly fed, and this is especially true of the Japanese troops in the South Pacific and South East Asia venues. For example, the Japanese troops in Burma were given a bag of rice and expected to live off the land--beg, steal, or kill. NOBI, in essence, is a micro-view of a macro-problem. Tamura is a symbol of the result of military strategies and tactics that fail--the common man as victim. He cannot concern himself with grand events, he must survive on the most basic of levels. Yet, in all the misery and rapid decay of the Japanese war effort, Tamura tries to hold on to some semblance of human dignity in the most unthinkable situations. In Freudian terms, he has to satisfy his Ego (the self), by appealing to his Super-ego (institutionalized ethics), while satisfying the Id (hunger). Transposed to the film, he can only remain human by deciding not to eat human flesh although he is starving. In this he may succeed, although he may meet an unpleasant end. The Left Elbow Index considers seven aspects of film--acting, production sets, dialogue, artistry, character development, plot, and film continuity--on a scale of 10 for excellent, 5 for average, and 1 for it needs help. The acting, production sets, artistry, plot, and film continuity are rated average. There seems not much acting to be done, most of it consists of walking, sitting, or looking for food, with only occasional minor drama. The sets are outdoor scenes in which little can be done to change things, although the part were the Japanese soldiers cross the river is very good. The best of the artistry seems to be the good use of light and dark in a black and white film. The plot is well driven by two questions: Will Tamura die? Will he eat human flesh? And film continuity is not violated by extreme variations in the trappings that hold the movie together. There seems little character development to deal with since one seems to know pretty much how Tamura will behave from the beginning of the film, thereby rating a 1. Above average is the dialogue, most likely due to the talents of Natto Wada (screen name). I also sense that the music plays a role in the dialogue, much like a Greek chorus. The overall rating according to LEI is 5.14. Two more points need be made. In 2006, one film historian suggests the director Kon Ichiwawa implies that this 1959 film would never be allowed in 2006. If so, in my view, this brings up images of pre-WWII Japan, a not particularly pleasant prospect. And, secondly, A Japanese scholar, who happen to be a woman, told me that "Rumor has it that the Japanese lost World War Two. This is not so. Japanese men lost World War Two!" Military and political mismanagement? Or, perhaps, just the evils of war. This film is well worth seeing, and only seems to get better as time passes.

In Ichikawa Kon's film _The Harp of Burma_ the company of soldiers led by Captain Inoue, although a bit travel worn and homesick, looked at least to be in decent health and well fed in the foreign environs of Burma. However, in his film _Fires on the Plain_ the Japanese soldiers stationed on the Island of Leyte in the Phillipines are malnourished, desperate men who are willing to do anything to survive

The first scene in the film depicts Pvt. Tamura being slapped viciously by his superior. The superior is angry because Tamura returned to their regiment. a sufferer of tuberculosis, Tamura is unable to support himself and relies on the other soldiers, who can barely forage enough food for themselves, to gather food for him. Not wanting a dependent in their midst, Tamura superior sends him back to the hospital along with a few potatoes. Tamura does, however, have one more key item in his possession: a hand grenade.

If he tires of living or is unable to, Tamura is to kill himself with the grenade. The grenade appears several times in the film. One can almost see the gears turning in his head, an inner struggle whether he wants to live or die. However, each times he decides to keep trudging along.

Tamura does in fact arrive back at the hospital, but of course he is refused. The doctors will only let men who are very near death to stay in the hospital. Tamura, unwanted in his own camp, decides to stat with a group of stragglers who have also been cast out of their respective companies. Tamura is able to make friends with these individuals at least until the Americans begin bombing the area. The doctors leave the patients, first taking all the food, to be blown up in the bombing, and Tamura and friend are separated to the four winds.

Tamura continues his travels and eventually arrives in a small village where he kills a Fillpino girl who would not stop screaming. He also tries to kill her boyfriend, but he runs away successfully.

Tamura begins to care for the wounded girl, but pushes her out of the way when he discovers a hidden cache of salt. He soon continues his journey to no real destination.

_Fires on the Plain_ is a brutal film which depicts the remnants of the once powerful Japanese army struggling to survive, but without any hope of ever being truly rescued. These soldiers just want to live for a few hours longer, their primal instincts to survive much stronger than dieing in service of the Emperor. A will to survive that will even make some of them eat "Monkey Meat."

However, even in this bleak film there are some signs of humanity. Tamura although tubercular and emancipated willingly shares his few rations and his precious salt even when he has little. There are moments of semi friendship between Tamura and the stragglers, and also between Tamura and another soldier named Nagamatsu, however, the outlook is bleak for our pleasant spoken Tamura.

Based on a novel written by Ooka Shohei.

This depiction of forlorn Japanese forces in the Philipines is a tour de force in the utter meaninglessness of war. It is an effective representation of Japanese pacifist views after WW II. In the movie, Japanese soldiers have been left to fend for themselves in the jungles of the Philipines. Faced with impending starvation they resort to cannibalism and gradually lose what little humanity they have left. To call this film depressing would be something of an understatement. The viewer is left with an utterly despairing sense of life's lost value in modern combat. The final scene is almost too nihilistic but the film is a worthy statement none-the-less. Highly recommended.

Kon Ichikawa had lived through world war two, and saw what its effects it had on his people in Japan. But so did novelist Shohei Ooka, whose book was the inspiration for Ichikawa's film, Fires on the Plain. It's a film about the men in this war, or perhaps more universally in wars in general, who lose their humanity. The soldiers trudging along through these fields and jungles of the Philippenes in this story are almost completely without hope, if not already just that. It makes Stone's Platoon look like a picnic: at least they had certain things, like food, after all.

They have little to no reserves or supplies or ammunition, no back-up, no sense of anything going their way in this combat that they've been thrust into. They can't even get some proper hospital care, unless if they can no longer walk at all or have lost limbs (for example, say, if you have TB, you're on your way). But its really through the prism of one soldier, a private Tamura, that we get a full sense of the futility of war, both in its bleak scenes of nothingness and boredom and decay, and those flashes of intense and brutal violence.

In the film Tamura just wants to get some medical care. This is right at the start, and his told by his superior officer- already he is with eyes that stare off and an expression that has been drained by years of battle- that he will die if he doesn't find a hospital. He doesn't, really, but does end up in with some soldiers: at first with a platoon that seems to sort of have their act together, but is really led on by a power-hungry brute who just wants Tamura's stash of salt, and then later with two other stray soldiers who are part of a group that had previously been ambushed while crossing a road at night.

The story isn't entirely a straight line, but it doesn't need to be. Tamura's path in Fires on the Plain is told in vignettes, little stories like when he comes upon a seemingly deserted enemy village. Two of the populous comes back to get some supplies, and Tamura sneaks up on them. It's an excruciating scene, since so far with Tamura we haven't seen him do anything outright *wrong*, but he does so in this scene, not even so much out of evil but out of fear and desperation (this is also, without spoiling it, how he gets a stash of salt). Little scenes build up so brilliantly and with devastation, like a simple task of finding a pair of walkable shoes, which there seem to be none. Or when Tamura, later in the film, discovers his teeth are becoming torn apart and falling out from lack of total hygiene. So much for food, so it goes.

It should also be mentioned that this is a hauntingly realized film from Ichikawa, shot in a stark black and white view of the fields and woods, the cinematography filling everything we see in black-blacks and white-hot white. Ichikawa also makes sure to get everything authentic from his actors, not simply emotionally but with their own emaciated look and looks of desperation right on them. It's as if Ichikawa has to have them all surviving the film as well as characters surviving out in the wild; by wild, by the way, I mean also cannibalism. The shock of this is two-fold; first is the way that a soldier says half-jokingly early on about eating other soldiers to Tamaura, who asks if it was true and only in response getting a "don't ask" word of caution, and the second with the depiction of cannibalism itself, from the crazy starving man on the hill who pulls out guts out of his lap and says with a straight face to our hero that "You can eat me when I die."

This makes thing especially more brutal when it comes to the director filming the brief 'action' scenes. These are, I would argue, more brutal than 'Private Ryan' in their depictions of violence in battle, the carnage that is completely random. A scene I would point to, and that contains just a shot that is excruciating to watch, is when from a high angle we see a group of about twenty soldiers walking slowly along, a hail of gunfire comes that kills only four or five, but it just happens so fast, and the soldiers just keep walking along at the same crawl. This isn't the only shot of horrible carnage that's shown - when needing to be bloody its there, but splashed across the screen like something completely of the macabre - but it drives the point completely.

All of the acting is staggering (Funakoshi especially, who looks to be both most at peace and most horrified by what he sees in the subtlest of looks most of the time), all of the major set-pieces provide something else to the gruesome experience, and it all amounts to the ultimate question with an anti-war film: how can, or why, do people fight in wars like these? It's almost too depressing to put into words, and so Ichikawa pushes our noses right up into the muck and filth and blood and demands for us to take it in, so maybe, some day, it will never happen again. Or one can hope this, by the end of such a bleak and great film as this.

Despite its flaws, Fires On The Plain is one of the most harrowing and powerful films I've ever seen. With its incredible stark black and white photography, we're taken on an emotionally exhausting journey through how far a man will go to survive. It takes it to the bleak extremes and pushes the limits. It's incredible and fascinating to watch the "everyman" main character on his episodic adventure and has great points about the devastating effects of war on the human condition. This could've easily been a favourite if not for some points that hold it back. Although the journey later blossoms, the music is definitely far too overdramatic and it opens with far too on-the-nose exposition that could've easily been summed up in a few more simple visuals. Unfortunately for the excellent cinematography, the editing isn't as good and perhaps its suffers due to the amateur performances who struggle to keep up continuity in different angles. However, these flaws don't distract from its power, as depressing as it is.

8/10

They are hunted and starving. They are completely demoralized and yet they press on through sheer inertia. This film tries to answer the question "How far will human beings go to survive?" Hopelessness emanates from every of this film and like so many japanese films of this time, it condemns the blind military loyalty that pressed the japanese people into war.

This is probably the greatest war film and certainly one of the greatest films. There's no sentimentality, no patriotic agenda, not even a hopeful message of universal brotherhood in this bleak glimpse of what we can only call hell. It's this quiet rigor and lack of manipulation that give the film its astounding power. There aren't any attempts to make a hero out of Ichikawa's protagonist Tamura either. He's just a poor doomed sap trying to stay alive in a world of horror who hopes, but isn't sure, he can hang on to his humanity in the process. Ichikawa's fierce lack of cant and illusion make Fires on the Plain stand alone. Ichikawa died February 2008.

An unflinching descent into psychological and physical oblivion that will undoubtedly burn images of the truthful brutality and suffering of war into your cerebral cortex in a way not many other films will. In fact, there is simply no other war film like it.

Director Kon Ichikawa witnessed the unthinkable horror of Hiroshima first hand only 10 days after the bomb was dropped. He has said that from that day it would always be his mission to express the pointless, empty violence humans inflict on each other and themselves.

Mr. Ichikawa shows us that there are no winners in war... for the paths to victory and defeat are paved with the same soldiers soullessly marching down roads which only have death and destruction at their end.

Mr. Ichikawa succeeds in bringing his message to the world thru this haunting piece of cinema.

I recently saw "Nobi" ("Fires On the Plain"), for the second time. Of all Ichikawa's films, and most of his films - (the ones I've seen), even "Tokyo Olympiad", has a strong thread of despair running through them. This is one of the few films (especially as its from the Japanese perspective), that deals, uncompromisingly, with how ordinary soldiers deal with, and are prepared to go, to survive a war where no prisoners were taken. It's a depressing film, but it should be seen by all the people, especially the Generals and Politicians, who think war is an heroic endeavour.

1945. The US recapture of the Philippines is nearing its conclusion, resulting in a Japanese unit being cut off and lacking supplies. In order to reduce the supply problem Private Tamura is ordered to check into the hospital and, if unsuccessful, kill himself. His trip to the hospital ends up being a harrowing journey.

A Japanese war drama that shows the horrors of war in brutal, unvarnished fashion. As much a survival drama as a war drama - we hardly see the enemy at all during the film - Tamura's experiences are harrowing and realistic.

Not perfect though. The film is quite linear and plodding, which is to be expected for the nature of the plot, but it is too slow at times, feeling laboured. While meant to show the inanity and insanity of war, some aspects of the plot aren't entirely watertight.

Still, a great exposition on the wastefulness and depravity of war.