Takeshis'

Quirky? yes. Disjointed? Yes. Hysterical? Absolutely. Having watched Kitano's interpretation of Zatoichi, Blood and Bones, Brother, Kikujiro and Battle Royal I and II, this movie is a complete spoof of his recent movie making career. How he managed to bring so many actors from all of these previous films onto one stage is quite something. In all honesty, viewers shouldn't try to read too much into Takeshis'. It's Kitano. It's Kitano showing us what he feels we know of him in his films. Explosive, comical, distant, a little off the hook. Takeshis' won't make much sense to someone who hasn't at least seen some of the aforementioned movies. Takeshis' is classic Kitano. You either like and understand this fellow, or you scratch your head in wonderment.

The film is very poetic! If you are looking for a traditional narrative format, you may not be satisfied. It is a very complex film, and the structure is very complicated, too. The plot seems not making any sense, but it is so attractive, making you watch it all the way from the top to the end. Though the flow of the film is like dreaming, all the transitions are so smooth and surprising. The film creates you a very rare film-watching experience, which is very unique and new. Maybe, it is Takeshi's version of Fellini's "8 1/2" In my opinion, it is the 2nd best film of all Takeshi's work, after Hana-bi. It is very courage for Takeshi making this successful film.

Before I get into anything, I'll admit the film was pretty funny. I laughed more than a few times, and I wasn't alone. There were definitely some funny moments.

Now to my impressions, and I'll include some high level feedback I got from others as well. I'm a mid-tier Kitano fan. I've seen a handful of his directorial films, and many of the films he's acted in. I went with two other people (bear with me, this has a purpose), one of which has seen all of his films, another who hasn't seen a single film by Kitano. Why do I mention this? Because I think it might be one of the keys to enjoying this film As mentioned in the synopsis, the film is about his life. It starts with Beat Kitano the superstar, and follows him around "off set" to give the viewer an idea of what he's face in his daily life. At some point he comes across a "Mr. Kitano" (also played by Beat) in which the story starts to explore the fantasy world of this "Mr. Kitano" who idolizes Beat. While fantasizing, he touches on aspects of his others films, and this is where the experience will differ depending on your prior "Kitano" experience. There were a few scenes I laughed at, where as my friend who had not seen a single Kitano film look puzzled. On the other hand, there were some scenes in which I didn't really react, yet my friend who is a "Kitano Fan" smiled from ear to ear. I guess what I'm trying to say is while I think anyone can enjoy this film, it really seems to truly experience what Kitano was trying to do you have to know a little about his other films. If you don't have prior knowledge, I'd be willing to bet by the end you'll question if 25-30 minutes of the film couldn't have been removed with little impact on the end result.

One of the question I thought about while watching the film was why the movie moved so far way from Beat? I actually found the Beat segments to be more enjoyable than the later part of the film, but unfortunately Beat doesn't remain in the film for long before he runs into "Mr Kitano". I also wonder if he didn't spend too much time exploring this fantasy world, and the end resulted in too much for the viewer. It was fun at first, but I'll admit as much as I love art film, this started to get a bit redundant after a while.

I'd also like to mention that the film (at least in my eyes) is by far his most "artsy" film to date. It almost seemed Ki-Duk like at times, as the last 40 minutes or so of the film had very, very little dialog. Somewhat like HWAL.

Anyhow, I'd probably give the film something between a 7 and 8. I'm pretty sure it's going to get some outstanding reviews, as critics who've had more experience with Kitano should get more out of the film. When the DVD drops I might give it another spin.

TAKESHIS' I have been thinking about what exactly the apostrophe in the title is doing.

An apostrophe is used to indicate the omission of a letter or letters from a word, the possessive case, or the plurals of numbers, letters, and abbreviations. To have a plural of "Takeshi", you just add an "s". To show that Takeshi owns something, you would simply write "Takeshi's thing". Therefore, the title "Takeshis'" would be the possessive of the plural "Takeshis".

Perhaps the title isn't (incorrectly) denoting a plural, but actually means that this film belongs to "more than one Takeshi"? It belongs to all of Takeshi's personas, and characters. It COULD just be another example of misuse of the poor apostrophe, but maybe Takeshi studied hard at school, and has dedicated this self-parody to himself, and his own multiplicity.

That being said, he reportably not all of the Takeshis are happy, as one was reportably quoted as saying: "Today I saw the film again and it's terrible. 'Who the hell made this?' I thought to myself. I set out to make a strange, groundbreaking film, and I think it succeeds, but it feels like I made a car that was so fast I couldn't drive it and fell out. If I win the Grand Prix, it must mean I'm nearing death, so I don't need it. This period is over. Next time I'm going to make an orthodox film in the style of the masters and then maybe I'll win." I think he was being too hard on himself (himselves?), but perhaps it never ends for an artists such as him (them?).

OK, enough with the plural jokes, and they probably only amuse me anyway. I just finished watching the film. It had been sitting on my shelf for a while, and I needed to relax after a frustrating mêlée in Half-Life 2 (Nova Prospekt!). I had intentionally read as little as I could about this film beforehand, and I had almost no idea what to expect when the film began. However, I instantly knew that I was watching a Takeshi Kitano film - the unmistakable style of the director completely permeates this film. Besides, there was a big blue "K" at the start.

This film is like some kind of flushing out of Kitano's creative musings. It is surreal and dreamlike, free form, and has some fantastic images and compositions. The film is almost totally devoid of complex narrative, and is instead experimental and perhaps introspective for the director. Perhaps this is what his dreams are like, and if he means what he said above, maybe this film is the end of an era - the final digestive process before moving on to the next creative banquet.

I truly respect Kitano for his bold creativity in film. He seems to attack it as he does his painting. He creates for himself, and I am sure whatever his next project is, it will be unmistakably his own.

Two years after dusting down Shintaro Katsu's blind Zatoichi persona for his quirky period-drama re-jig, Takeshi Kitano is back in his own original territory - with a somewhat intriguing inclination towards double-vision.

Takeshis', which debuted at this year's Venice International Film Festival and subsequently screened at the celluloid festas in Vancouver, Toronto and London, has thus far traversed a bumpy course, with critical maulings riding shotgun up there alongside the more expected superlatives.

On one level a homage to the yakuza gangster flicks Kitano helped to define (since taken to the violent extreme by Takeshi Miike in Ichi The Killer), this movie also doubles as a parody of the style and might just be Kitano's farewell kiss to same. The 58-year-old writer/director has quipped that this is a funeral for the genres he explored over the last dozen movies, in particular the gangster premise, and die he apparently does - several times over - as do more than half the cast and extras in a series of grandiose shoot-outs. The yakuza die. The samurai and the sumo die. Heck, even the deejay in the club scene dies.

In the process Takeshis' throws together a smattering of melancholia, a whacked- out sense of humor, tap-dancing musical interludes, a Bonnie & Clyde twist, and touts more guns than a John Woo slug-fest. The narrative structure is as peppered as a spray of bullets from an Uzi.

The gist of the story is a shake-down of two characters played by 'Beat' Takeshi (Kitano) himself: one the "real life" movie star/director, and the other a shy, deadbeat convenience store clerk who aspires to an actor. But there's a third overwhelming id here, and that's Kitano's own on-screen alter ego from those earlier yakuza romps. The question - which one of these three is the real McCoy? - disintegrates as proceedings reach out on a surreal, metaphysical limb in which dreams interplay with reality, nightmares become farce - and then all swings violently back into an unsure version of the here and now. This makes for a sublime visual feast that's as baffling as it is refreshing.

Kitano's trilogy of parts aside, there's a bevy of other doppelgangers, mirror images and dead-ringers rife throughout this movie. Kotomi Kyono, while a tad dull as the movie star Takeshi's girlfriend, bears more than just costume jewelery sparkle in her ulterior role as a glitzy, ditsy yakuza girlfriend who happens to be the deadbeat Takeshi's tormenting neighbor.

As the creative synod here, Kitano certainly isn't afraid to poke fun at himself or the genres he's looked at more seriously in the past. But, after teasing with some mischievous insights, he then skirts the issue. And the weak moments in Kitano's earlier film Dolls (2002) - self-conscious "artistic" references - are stitched into Takeshis' with abandon. A recurring clown motif, bullets-as-star- constellations riff, and heavy-handed symbolism (in this case of a caterpillar) almost bludgeon the viewer, as if Monty Python had taken a blunt instrument to David Lynch - rendering it all a bit like Eraserhead on a bad hair day.

Not that this is such a bad thing; at times, it's brilliant. In some bizarre way - don't bother asking how - Kitano pulls off the slap-stick Mothra-sized larva pantomime that appears at various stages throughout proceedings.

But on the whole it's these asides that make the movie lurch, and off-shoots like the World War II scenes that book-end the film come off as just plain obscure. Takeshis' could have been that much stronger a movie. As it stands, in spite of (or because of) the pointed vignettes, the tap-dancing, and the associated meanderings-within-daydreams, it's a minor masterpiece. Just.

ANDREZ BERGEN