उपयोगकर्ता समीक्षाएं

The only time I can recall being as spooked by a film was when my parents took me to see "Hangover Square" - a gothic Jack the Ripper thriller - when I was 8 years old. I guess they couldn't find a baby-sitter. That took me about a year to get over, a low-key, all-too-realistic chiller about the banality of insanity.

"Cure" is such a perfect depiction of madness that just about every shot could be framed & hung in a gallery. You can't analyze this one, it doesn't follow a cartesian line of logic; nor does it blast you with halloweenish surprises in the style of Elm Street & its knock-offs. This has far deeper & subtler impact. I found as I relaxed into this film that images of recurring dreams & nightmares I've had since childhood arose & blended into what I was watching. Can't get much creepier than that.

That said, the images & emotions that this film evokes are on a very high level of poetic art. One of the most impressive elements of "Cure" is the director's ability to convey the magnetic manipulative appeal of Mamiya - surely one of the scariest things in real life & very difficult to convincingly convey on screen.

This movie has a simple premise and a simple story that is nevertheless explored in an incredibly delicate and talented way. Kiyoshi Kurosawa is an extremely talented individual and perhaps the only writer/director who is able to simultaneously scare and mentally challenge me at the same time (note that very few are capable of doing one or the other). Although the writing is very good (story and dialogue), Kurosawa's real strength is his ability to represent visually the progressive denouement of his story. He rather subtly show you and let your imagination and intellect figure it out for you than to spell out bluntly what the straightforward storyline should be. It does not, however, get to the point of chaotic untidiness or pointlessness, for he is able to guide you slowly along the way (I would then say that he is slightly easier to follow than David Lynch is, but then again who is not). He uses here a strikingly effective technique where he shows you a room from one angle and later lets you discover that room more and more as the movie advances. His camera shots are always well planned and he is thus able to draw you in the movie bit by bit-quite an eerie sensation.

The acting is generally good and believable. The camera-work is a stand out.

There are many scenes where you will be able to appreciate this superior artistic and technical quality. The music is good and tenseful, but it is sparse and what is used instead is a contrast of minimalist and grossly amplified everyday sounds that vibrate through the movie. When there is no sound, you often find yourself holding your breath. This is not used strictly as a ploy, but rather creates a mood and further pulls you in the general atmosphere of the movie. Most of all, again, the directing is top notch. The pace which is slow enough for you to have the time to both think and be afraid is not slow enough that it gets boring, although you should not expect a North American expeditious run through the film. Everything is there, but it comes to you in slow, meticulously chosen dosage. Only, at the end can you truly see the masterpiece that has been drawn stroke by stroke in front of you.

One of the reason this movie actually works is that it is designed to play with your mind and trigger fear and reaction based not only on emotion, but on reason. People are dying, but everything is calm, rational. The tone and story are pretty much realistic and, at the end of the experience, you may feel beyond your volitional control that you are actually convinced of the "strange" things in the movie. Hopefully this feeling will subside...

The serial killer movie has by now been done to death (so to speak), so it's especially rewarding to see this assured film that takes a truly ingenious approach. Kurosawa's protagonist is a seemingly dazed young man who, in spite of his aimless demeanor, is a master hypnotist. To reveal any more of what happens would be to give a bit too much away.

The subtlety and fluidity of this film is remarkable. The main character can be charming and simultaneously irritating when he speaks. He turns his speaking partner's question back on the speaker; he answers with vague phrases that nevertheless, over the course of the film, gradually bring out the complexity of his psyche. Pitting him against a cop whose wife seems to suffer from something like the hypnotist's 'brand' of mental wanderings underlines the thematic context of the film: what we know is almost certainly only what we think we know. And what we think we know is almost certainly based on someone else's 'knowledge', derived the same as ours.

That knowledge is a collective phenomenon, a shared and critical feature of the 'hive' is not a novel concept in film. But its presentation here is bold and original. To link that idea with a person who destroys life is a master stroke; it says that what we know vanishes in a suddenly extinguished flame, or a tiny stream of water that appears, runs, and then is seen no more.

This is a film that should definitely be added to the great films of the 90s. Since it was not released in the U.S. until 2001, I vote for it being one of the great films of that year here.

This enigmatic, slow-burning horror focuses on a series of grisly, almost identical murders committed by people who can't remember why or how they did them. The mystery of 'Cure (1997)' shifts from uncovering the link between the killings to deciphering the true nature of a strange amnesiac who pops up near each crime scene. The movie never gives you an overt answer, remaining decidedly ambiguous even as it enters its final moments, but it's consistently compelling nevertheless. It pulls you into its beguiling world and doesn't let you go. It isn't overtly scary; its horrors creep up on you, sending shivers down your spine before you even know they're there. Its themes are fairly frightening and its cold, somewhat uncaring atmosphere doesn't afford much in the way of comfort. There are some sequences that are almost hypnotic, too. Though almost every aspect of the piece is relatively subdued, it has a rather strong overall effect. It's the sort of thing that has the potential to keep you up at night. 7/10

WOW!!!! Now THAT was an EXCELLENT ending to a GREAT movie. It stuck with me for several hours after first watching it and the second time was no different. It had slow methodical pacing, but it was never boring. I, for one, appreciated the elliptical editing as it's just a filmmaker doing something different and being creative. Actually, it added to the hypnotic arc of the story. It didn't bother me whatsoever, although it wasn't nearly as effective in Kiyoshi's other great movie, "Kairo." Koji Yakusho was brilliant as troubled Detective Takabe and the mysterious drifter with hypnotic powers was very convincing as well. The use of hypnotism to get others to kill and rendering themselves soulless, was a refreshing take on the serial-killer subgenre, of which I love. Someone commented here that only people who "buy the mumbo jumbo" hypnotism storyline would like this film, and comments like those always bother me. Narrative films are not REAL LIFE, even the ones based on true stories. They are works of art, and try to tell us entertaining, comedic, frightning, and dramatic stories to keep the audience interested. I don't have to believe in the subjects their stories are telling me, nor do I believe they need to solve the world's problems. All I care is that they give me an interesting idea, an interesting story, with well-written dialogue, and if it ends with a bang. These, blended with great acting (now that's an area that needs convincing in film), great camera work, and an engaging score. Those are what make films interesting and "Kyua" aka "Cure" has all those qualities. Highly recommended.

A wave of gruesome murders confuses the police; the perpetrators all readily admit to their crime, but can't recall why they did it. The events are undoubtedly connected though, as each victim has a giant X carved into their neck. Two detectives begin questioning a drifter who seems connected to the murders, but run the risk of falling under whatever power he wields themselves.

The premise is interesting enough and director Kiyoshi Kurosawa certainly creates a dark mood, helped considerably by the eerie soundtrack and dilapidated set designs. Maybe on another night I would have clicked with this one more, but on the night I did see it, it was too slow and ponderous for me to truly enjoy. The link to the work of Franz Mesmer seemed like it was out of a comic book, and even in just rolling with that, I wish the drifter's role had remained a mystery for longer. The tension just wasn't there for me, making me think about holes in the story and how little these characters were developed. One that I wish I would have liked more, maybe next time.

This movie is not all bad. It has a Japanese version of Charles Manson doing some influencing, without drugs, and shows effectively that Japanese justice system was far more reasonable than that of California, citing inciting to murder and actually INVESTIGATING what really happens. The plot is somewhat fanciful, and is inspired by a real cult and Sarin gas attacks, the atmosphere and film-making techniques are on par with anything from the era, but the movie does come off as somewhat pedestrian, boring and not really a master peace. Still, not too shabby.

Sometimes I just cannot get aboard the "Loved It" train and this film (1997) Cure happens to be one of those times. In my humble opinion I found the film to drag on, murder after murder, and one story line after the other. The lead actor who plays Homicide Detective Kenichi Takabe (Kôji Yakusho) plays an impressive part, struggling between solving this series of murders that are all quite different murders, and dealing with his mentally disturbed wife on his homefront.

The adversary in the film is first identified solely as a witness named Kunio Mamiya (played by Masato Hagiwara) who is somewhat slovenly dressed and appears to have lost his memory. For every question the various people who come into Kunio Mamiya's presence ask him to help him discover who he is, Kuno retorts back with questions of his own and appears to be playing mind games with them by which they subsequently commit a murder that they have no memory of committing.

As the chess match between Detective Kenichi Takabe and his only witness to a crime Kunio Mamiya boils over Detective Takabe relies on the knowledge of Psychatrist Dr. Makoto Sakuma. (played byTsuyoshi Ujiki) to understand the inner workings of this witness who has more questions than answers to who he really is.

Yes, it is a horror/crime film but I did find it dragged on and the ambiguous ending did not impress me whatsoever. I can only give the film a low 4 out of 10 IMDb rating.

I saw CURE at the San Francisco Film Festival in around 1998, and like many, I found the concept and craftsmanship arresting. A number of audience members stayed around afterwards to discuss it - it's a psychologically complex tale of hypnotism and the seductions of altered consciousness. Koji Yakusho (DORA HEITA, 13 ASSSASSINS, etc.) is at his acting peak as a detective who tries to solve a series of murders that don't seem to relate to common logic.

Recently, I saw the DVD version of the film - and it's clear that the film had been cut severely. Most viewers have only seen the US DVD version, so they're not even aware of the problem. A few of the more graphic sequences were cut, important portions of the narrative set in an old sanatorium were excised, and the violent finish was excised entirely. (The US DVD concludes with the suggestion of a further killing; the theatrical Japanese version is more powerful and unambiguous.) In some cases, a later, recut version may be better than the original; however, that's not the case here.

There's scant online text relating to the differences between the two versions.

It speaks well for director Kiyoshi Kurosawa that he took a low-budget police procedural and made an innovative thriller out of it. Most of the scenes are under-edited and shot at a distance, to extract the most from the hypnotic storyline; the longer, hypnotic sequences are several minutes long, with no edits. Because the film uses medium-distance shots to give a sense of hypnotic disassociation, viewers with larger screens will gain an advantage.

I strongly recommend seeing it - but would suggest you seek out the original, uncut theatrical print if you can. The differences are striking. I'd rate the original print as 10/10; the cut/domestic DVD is maybe 7/10. This film would profit from a Criterion reissue, but that doesn't seem to be in the works.

Kurosawa has created a masterpiece here. This film is more than a horror thriller. It's a look at our modern society, and plays upon our innate fear that there is a monster hidden inside of us - even worse, we cannot control it.

It begins as a typical detective story, film noirish in its execution, and like typical film noir, the detective finds more to the story than originally anticipated. But this film, just like its storyline, begins to transcend the genre it purports to be a part of midway through.

More and more, we realize that it is telling the story of people today, boxed in, with our darkest desires oppressed. This theme of containment is heavy throughout, if one pays enough attention. For example, the usage of water as a symbol for the subconscious is useful for understanding many key parts of the film.

Everything is superbly framed and shot, with more than a few very long shots (a testament to the high caliber of the cast). Sound and music are used sparingly but effectively.

This film may not be very accessible to those who are only familiar with Hollywood-style film-making due to its slower pace and subtle conveyance.

Director Kiyoshi Kurosawa perfects the concept of hypnotic villainy in this film, which features a battle of wills between a detective and a genius who uses the power of suggestion to set in motion a series of killings throughout a city. Showcasing innovative suspense sequences, plot twists, and rich psychological/philosophical concepts, this film will have viewers pondering well after it ends. Kiyoshi again manages to elude the pitfalls of popular cinema to contribute not only a chilling masterpiece, but arguably one of the most awesome villains to ever grace the big screen.

Of the thousands of films I've seen, few have floored me to the point where I've wanted to grant them the honor of being the "Best Movie Ever." The only other film that comes to mind is "A Tale of Two Sisters" (2003), which is easily the most impressive motion picture of all time. Since that distinction is taken, that leaves "Cure" (1997) with the runner-up spot in terms of world cinema, but the medal for "Best Japanese Movie Ever" is still for the taking. This film takes it. I've seen 1,328 films from that country, and I can tell you that even Yasujiro Ozu and Shinya Tsukamoto have failed to match the brilliance of "Cure."

This is quite possibly the most engaging slow-paced film in existence. The tempo moves slower than molasses in January, but the introduction of the lead antagonist a mere 8 minutes into the film sets the seemingly endless array of intriguing moments into motion from the get go. Masato Hagiwara's character of Kunio Mamiya is spellbinding with his hypnotic technique that starts off with seemingly trivial dialogue but slowly progresses into an ingenious psychological trap. This provides for a number of memorable moments, my favorite of which is the mesmerizing water enchantment of the hospital nurse. In addition, the identity of this character is expertly crafted as a sort of ambiguous soul/personality whose essence is only truly revealed during the very last frame. No other film has created an antagonist so uniformly dangerous, sublime, and interesting as Kunio Mamiya.

Kiyoshi Kurosawa is easily one of the top five directors of all time. This guy made three perfect films that no one talks about – "Cure" (1997), "Kairo" (2001), and "Charisma" (1999). What's really interesting is that he follows a rather unique art-house style that's almost never applied to the horror/thriller genres. Kiyoshi uses long shots, deliberate pacing, and ambiguity in moderation, which is unlike most art-house directors who have no sense of discretion. Despite the mindless ramblings of mainstream cinemaphiles, Kiyoshi rarely (if ever) indulges in pompous, self-congratulatory filming techniques because his choice of lean running times (under two hours in almost every instance) helps him to avoid the bloated, masturbatory pretentiousness that rears its ugly head in other art-house style films. Think Andrei Tarkovsky with more interesting and refined philosophical content and you'll have an idea of just how special Kiyoshi Kurosawa is as a director.

Whenever possible, I like to point out the high content levels of Kiyoshi's films in an attempt to counter the nonsensical claims of some who feel that he practices a form of style over substance. Take the seemingly trivial dialogue that the Kunio Mimiya character engages in during his hypnotic acts of terrorism. The exchanges are an odd mix on a superficial level, but one comes to realize their importance when the victims are subjected to police interrogation. Only then does the viewer understand why Kunio fakes his amnesia (an attempt to elude his victims memories) and engages in circular question-begging. Also note the attention to details in other situations. Within the final 20 minutes we see Koji Yakusho in a quaint diner, but only upon further inspection do we realize that in one case his plate is filled with leftover food while in the other case it's licked clean, an important revelation of his essential change in character for the finale. And how about that final shot? This is just awesome cinema people. Magnificent.

In retrospect, "Cure" was the true beginning of the Japanese horror phenomenon that has followed it's release. While lacking in industry influence that has helped to establish Japanese horror in general (that nod goes to Nakata's "Ringu" of 1998), it provides a ground zero date for the turning of the tide so to speak. For all intents and purposes, Japanese horror has kicked everyone else's backside from 1997 onward. That said, I am truly unhappy that Kiyoshi chose to leave the genre for more dramatic fare because we're already inundated with enough art-house dramas to keep us busy. How many expertly crafted art-house horror films are there floating around today? Whatever the number, it's not nearly enough.

It's really too bad that good taste in film is practically extinct, because "Cure" should be one of those movies that everyone under the sun raves about until they're blue in the face. Kiyoshi isn't blessed with the lunatic fan base that follows guys like Akira Kurosawa or Andrei Tarkovsky. (Maybe I count as the first big fan of Kiyoshi.) It's a shame that he has established himself as an upper echelon filmmaker but somehow hasn't won over the majority of paid critics and film snobs who so easily drive the "emperor with no clothes" tide to coerce and guilt people into riding the bandwagons of lesser filmmakers.

In any case, "Cure" is the pinnacle of exceptional film-making. It's also Kiyoshi Kurosawa's best film, and that's saying something.

I have very split feelings when it comes to this film:

First, the film is full of long, dead moments of film that I did not find incredibly entertaining or even vital to the story of the film, and I found this to be annoying. Second, I felt as if the parts of the story that were truly interesting they did not delve into -- so much more could have been done if the focus of the story would have been centered in different aspects of it. Third, character development seems to be weak; other than sharp interest we have in the villain, I felt that the hero of the film was not sufficiently developed to cause me to sympathize on major levels; in fact, a lot of the essentials pertinent to the hero only came out when it was far too late in the story.

However, with that being said, it is a decent watch simply for the fabulous bits thrown into it; the content of the story is interesting, and it is certainly the basis for a film. I enjoyed the way the film began and ended, but the middle portions could have been done much better, and the focus of the film could have been more precise. A lot of the cinematography and story was very good, and enough to make up for the aforementioned flaws, but still I walk away with split feelings.

Overall, worth watching, but far from flawless.

The acting, filmography, set design and music are good, but the plot becomes a tad too muddled and it is built too much on top of events the film never attempts to explain. Psychic/supernatural powers at work are strongly suggested particularly the way it depicts hypnosis in a not very plausible manner. I didn't buy into the world of this film and for that reason the scares and thrills lost their effect.

Perhaps I simply set the wrong expectations by thinking I was going to see a psychological thriller confined by natural laws instead of a supernatural psychological thriller.

Great cinematography, atmosphere, and intrigue. Interesting enough premise. It's definitely unsettling.

This movie felt like it could have been a masterpiece with how well it was directed. It just chose not to be. It's extremely slow and very dull for long stretches. That would be fine, but there was absolutely no payoff for me.

This is the type of film that has some symbolic messages and commentary and basically leaves everything open to interpretation. You will be left with loads of questions that will never be answered because the answers don't exist. I have always found that unsatisfying, annoying, and pretentious.

In my view, these types of films are simply unfinished, but masquerade as mind-blowingly genius works of art because symbolism. They appeal to the type of people who stare at a literal banana in a glass case at a museum and convince themselves that the artist has presented them with something provocative and meaningful that really resonates with them.

Some people truly believe this is one of the greatest films ever made. I can't share in that sentiment, but I will give credit where credit is due. It holds more artistic value than a banana.

I think it is important to distinguish Cure from the avalanche of white-face-ghost-girl Japanese horror flicks that followed in Ringu's wake. Purely because it's a different beast and lumping it in a convenient J-horror niche is doing it a disservice. I won't go into plot specifics because it's only a skeleton for Kurosawa to hang his atmospherics. That said, I can understand the complaint many viewers seem to share ("man, it doesn't make sense") but without having any claims on solving Cure's riddle, I'm satisfied with letting wash over me, one watch at a time.

Kurosawa wisely doesn't attempt to explain his plot. He's content to lift the veil just enough for us to sneak a glimpse in before he disorients again. The plot slowly builds through little tokens that are never followed by an orchestral crescento to signal their arrival. They just happen. A small photo in a book, muffled words on a phonogram, an old video, the ramblings of an amnesiac, theories on 18th century Austrian doctors. In the course of the film, everything seems to be coming together only to remain elusive in the end. In that aspect I find Cure to be closer to Last Year at Marienbad than your average Ringu clone. It's not about making sense, it's about pushing limits within which you can. It's about soaking in the impression it makes. When muffled words come through a phonogram, they're more incoherent ramblings than a telegraphed plot solution; but they contribute just as well to the overarching feel. This elliptic mentality is abetted by Kurosawa's choice of a slow, deliberate pace and many long shots, entire scenes covered without any cuts. The gritty and rundown aspect of Tokyo is photographed like a more naturalistic version of David Fincher's work and does the job well.

It's my impression that a surrealist air hovers above and at the heart of Cure, at times reminiscent of a more languid version of Lynch. It is undoubtedly a horror movie so don't be put off by my Resnais comparison, but it's as much bleak as it is subtle and leaves enough to the mind's eye to make you carry it out with you.