Yurusarezaru mono

What goes around comes around. Just as a fair number of westerns were remakes of classic Japanese Samurai movies so Sang-il Lee's "Unforgiven" is a fairly literal remake of Clint Eastwood's Oscar winner of the same name. Here we may be dealing with samurai but that doesn't disguise the fact that these guys may as well be cowboys and this could be the American West. It's a reasonably exciting and handsome picture, gorgeously shot in widescreen by Norimichi Kasamatsu, but it is also so close to the original it feels almost negligible. Ken Watanabe plays the Eastwood role but it's something of a one-note performance; he lacks Clint's gravitas. This could have been a classic but as it is it's nothing more than a very good copy.

When I heard that Japanese were making a period samurai movie based on the modern-day Eastwood western classic UNFORGIVEN, I was in two minds. I love samurai flicks (and also leading actor Ken Watanabe), but the Eastwood film was already pretty much perfect for a lot of fans. How could the Japanese hope to better it?

The answer is that they haven't. This new UNFORGIVEN is the inferior film in every respect, with a boring villain and a lack of talented actors and characterisation that made the original such a great movie. The Japanese UNFORGIVEN feels slow and stately and is certainly well shot throughout, but aside from the exciting climax, it has no real voice or look of its own.

For the most part, this is a shot-for-shot remake and I have no interest in shot-for-shot remakes. Thematic remakes are fine; remakes that take key material and give their own slant, like Carpenter's THE THING or Aja's THE HILLS HAVE EYES, great. But all the while I was watching this film, I was wishing I was watching the superb original instead. Watanabe does his best and while it's nice to see the Japanese remaking an American film for a change (as so many times it's been the other way around), UNFORGIVEN is a bit pointless.

This is a beautiful retelling of Clint Eastwoods classic film. It's stunningly shot, well acted and very immersive. Ken Watanabe is the quintisenial reluctant badass. The only problem I had was with the film's villain. Gene Hackmans charming and terrifying performance is almost reduced to a mustache twirling villain. Like he literally has a mustache, which he twirls. Hackmans original performance is so engaging and effective, because he's so polite and charismatic. You really get the idea that he's a psychopath hiding in plain sight. Sadly the remakes villain falls short of Hackmans high bar. Beyond that, this is one of the better remakes I've ever seen.

I really wanted to like this Japanese version of the brilliant "Unforgiven" more, but it simply did not measure up to the original.

The Good: Using rural Hokkaido as the backdrop was a smart decision, though I wish there was more focus on the Ainu. They are the island's indigenous people conquered by the Japanese, and their culture suffered greatly. I think this would have made the story much more interesting, especially since the young rebel is half-Ainu.

The Bad: The movie follows the plot of the original almost to the T, and thus suffers for it. There was no need for it, and simply copying the theme of the Amercian version while telling a new story about the Japanese frontier would have made for a much stronger film. There is such a scarcity of good movies about the Ainu that it is a wasted opportunity.

When a movie is as brilliant as Eastwood's Unforgiven, it's very hard if not impossible to watch its remake with a fresh eye. I tried, but could not succeed. I kept wishing I was watching the original. Not to say it was a bad film, not at all, but there are some major flaws in this movie. First of all, the characters and actors were nowhere as charismatic as in the original. Not that they were bad, but imho they lack the emotional depth and nuance that their predecessors had. While Gene Hackman's role seemed beautifully fleshed out, his Japanese counterpart is merely a psychopath.

The film imitates parts from the original at places were they could have strayed off a bit, and vice versa. Sometimes it felt I was watching a western, just with Japanese actors, while I expected it to be a samourai movie. There are scenes from Unforgiven 1 and 2 with matching color palettes, which I think is a shame. Why not go for a totally different approach? Accentuate the differences, not the similarities. But there are scenes in the original that had a lot of punch (eg the final shootout scene), which have been given a different approach and therefore fail.

Where it succeeds is the beautiful cinematography, and the conclusion of Japanese Will Munny's character. I also like the symbolic use of the elements like rain and snow.

But as said, I'm extremely prejudiced (Eastwood's Unforgiven is one of my favourite movies) and perhaps the viewer who is not familiar with the original will love this one just as well.