Dead or Alive 2: Birds

The problem it seems for so many Miike viewers is that their expectations build up from viewing earlier films. And then they expect all of his films to meet those expectations. And then whine and bitch when he confounds them. Why can not you all accept each of his films on it's own terms? Why would you expect DOA 2 to be like DOA 1? If you do, you don't know Miike and his approach to movie making.

The DOA TRILOGY is, it seems to me, Miike's meditation on the relationship between seemingly opposing energetic masculine 'forces'. In the films these forces are characterized in various ways: 'good'/'bad', 'light'/'dark', 'white'/'black', 'social'/'antisocial', police/gangs, Yakuza/triad, bla bla bla. And in this respect the trilogy is a meditation on man-to-man relations in general in our world today. In the first film, like positive and negative electrons, the personifications of these forces eventually annihilate one another in a cataclysmic explosion that destroys the planet that really messes with the audience's mind.

In the second film the embodiment of these forces are brought back together to explore the possibility of their working together as a positive conjunction for a 'greater good'. They are also shown here to have originated from more or less the same source. Their relationship here is glossed with 'gay' overtones. (A theme in more than a few of Miike's films.) But it would seem that the 'world' is unable to accept such a relationship, such a 'love' if you will, and the world eventually hunts them down and destroys them. This inevitability suffuses the whole film with a melancholic dread. Even in the lightest (and yes) Funny moments, you are aware that fate is stalking this Appollo/Dionysius pair relentlessly to bring them down. And of course the 'Furies' do descend on them (in a bizarre contemporary incarnation only Miike would have been able to think of!) and do destroy them. Though this time with a whisper and not a BANG. In musical terms DOA 2 can be seen as a kind of 'apache adagio', a dance of death.

So many people commenting on Miike's films here talk about his 'slow' moods as if 'slow' is a bad word. (If you are a speed freak then I guess 'slow' is a bad word in your vocabulary.) But it is to Miike's credit that he so obviously understands that some of the more profound of human experiences are lived in 'slow-motion' and can only be expressed and appreciated artistically in that mode. One has only to see some of his filmed interviews to know just how much he appreciates the 'slow' and 'still' in human experience. He is, after all, the product of a Zen culture. The two protagonists, Takeuchi & Aikawa, obviously know they are doomed. So they are doing their utmost to genuinely savior their remaining days. Much of this time is spent in a lush verdant countryside rather than in the city. And we are given the opportunity to savior their experience with them at their own pace. If one will but go on the trip with them it is a delicious beautiful bittersweet painful sad trip you feel lucky to have been allowed to trail along on.

I would characterize DOA 1 as being a trip for the groin and guts. DOA 2 as a trip for the heart. And DOA 3 as a trip for the mind/intellect. It was a stroke of genius on Miike's part to realize that he could introduce 2 characters in one film. Kill them off at the end of it. And then reanimate them in a second and then a third film with more or less totally different stories. And still have all 3 films truly be about those 2 same characters. And do it in such a way that they only reach full development at the end of the third film. Undoubtedly DOA 1 is the best of the 3 films. And all 3 films can and do stand well on their own. But it is equally true that the WHOLE STORY only gets 'told' by the trilogy.

Just like Rainy Dog, the second instalment in Takashi Miike's Black Society trilogy, the second part of Dead or Alive is the most introspective part of the trilogy. It's essentially a drama carried by two superb lead actors with Sho Aikawa and Riki Takeuchi who develop great chemistry on screen, elaborates on the characters' identities in a harmonious and nostalgic vibe and features exotic natural landscapes on a remote island that contrast the big city life and define the smooth atmosphere of this movie. The movie is surprisingly relaxing for a Takashi Miike film without getting completely rid of the filmmaker's quirky trademark scenes. The brief moments of violence and sexual innuendo are probably even more efficient because they are quite short and concise this time.

Dead or Alive 2: Birds opens and closes with Takashi Miike's excessive action sequences but the main part of this film focuses on the character development of two contract killers who realize they have grown up together and been childhood friends and who decide to work as a team for a good cause in order to rid the world of pitiless criminals and donate their money to buy vaccines for children in developing countries. Aside of the facts that both movies focus on Japanese crime syndicates and its associates and that both movies feature the same main actors, this film is completely different from the first movie in terms of atmosphere, characters and story. Aside of a few experiments with flashbacks and some minor religious symbolism, this is also one of Takashi Miike's most realistic movies.

It's possible to dismiss the quirky first part and adore the more mature second part but it wouldn't be surprising to dislike the first movie for its exaggeration and the second one for its realism. Personally, I appreciate both movies for what they are but have a preference for the first part because I thought it was addicting from start to finish while the second instalment had a few minor length in the middle section. Takashi Miike fans should watch and purchase all three parts of the excellent Dead or Alive trilogy anyway.

Miike's fans are usually disappointed by this movie for it certainly lacks in violence and entertainment value. However it more than makes up in subtlety - it's nuanced to the point of lyricism. Who would expect that Miike can spin a tale of a quest for the lost innocence of childhood (soccer games in the rain, sharing bowls of noodles on the ferry, full turtle/lion costumes for a kindergarten play) and still sell it as a sequel to the yakuza audience? Yes, you could read it as cheesy and boring, but then again you could say the same about that other "angel" movie - 'Wings of Desire'. The two characters follow the 'given a second chance at life' path, blazing a trail of "benevolent" executions that add up to nothing. If 'DOA' is the incessant present (with its avalanche of impressions updated at a rate high above the processing limit), and 'DOA Final' is the ironic future of Malthusian power politics, then 'DOA2' is the trip in the past at an impossibly high cost.

Two hit men (Riki Takeuchi and Sho Aikawa) cross paths while pulling off a job. They decide to run a playground and reminisce about their shared childhood. Quite a bit lighter in tone than the original "Dead or Alive" which the sequel has (apart from the same two lead actors) nothing in common with. When I say 'lighter in tone', I of course mean for a Takashi Miike film. This movie is more about the wonders and joys of children growing up, not yet jaded by how the world really is. Fans of Miike's bizarreness won't be disappointed with it either. I myself like this film more then the first one and is superbly acted.

My Grade: B+

DVD Extras: Theatrical Trailer; and Trailers for "Dead or Alive" "Dead or Alive Final", "Sharkskin and Peach Hip Girl" and "Junk Food"

I saw the other comment on under this movie, and simply had to write something. How can you not love this movie? Once again Miike masterfully blends a multitude of genres and uncompromisingly challenges his viewer. Dead or Alive 2 is, at its core, a humanistic drama, which is definetely not what fans of the first one came to expect. Instead of choosing the easy way forward (not that there was an easy way left after the first one) and simply remaking the first movie, he has changed everything to the delight and surprise of the viewer. In the beginning it appears to be simply another Yakuza flick with no connection to the first one (except for Sho Aikawa and Riki Takeuchi), but quickly you realise that this is something completely different. It is a warm tale about childhood friendship, and since everything is seen through childrens eyes, the movie is filled with magic and wonderous moments, leaving you truly uplifted and touched to the bottom of your soul. Who would've thought?

10/10