yucel81x

From the minds of two industrial music pioneers (musician Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails, and director Peter Christopherson of Coil and Throbbing Gristle) comes a perfect example of the blurring line between art and pornography. A film-short that is both celebrated and reviled for its style and content, "Broken" is one of the most shocking pieces of film ever to be unreleased. Mistaken as a snuff film by some (Reznor is no stranger to this...footage from the "Down In It" video caused some controversy some time before this film), "Broken" is a visual companion to what was arguably Reznor's most tortured and angst-ridden album. It tells the story of a man who randomly kidnaps another man for the purpose of torture and murder. He pulls the victim's teeth out, forces him to drink lighter fluid, slashes him, disembowels him, sodomizes him, all the while forcing this poor soul to watch Nine Inch Nails videos. The thing that gives this film away as a work of fiction is the style. The scenes of the killer being executed, the police finding his hideout and sifting through the remains of his past victims, and the NIN videos themselves...all done very professionally in contrast to the grainy, distorted video of the torture scenes. Not only that, but Reznor's and Christopherson's penchant for low-frequency industrial noise and sound manipulation is very present (just listen to the low-static hum that intros the whole film...very Coil, very NIN). When taking these qualities into consideration, it's easy to tell that the film is elaborate fiction. However, the film does capture a gritty realism that provides much in the way of shock value. We never see too much of the torture, just enough to know what's being done, and what we don't know is implied...subliminal horror at its best. Also, this does well to hide what are probably some very high-quality special effects, given a sense of truth by the poor video. The NIN videos are fairly violent as well. From the vinyl bodybag being drowned by fluid from the sewage pipes to the band clip of "Wish" (which oddly mirrors The Scorpions' "Rock You Like a Hurricane" video) to the mechanical torture slave of "Happiness in Slavery" (played by the dear-departed Bob Flanagan), they are a perfect mirror to the angry industrial thrash of the album. All in all, the film plays on the ultimate possibilities for an album of this level of rage. People who enjoy this film for the technical qualities are most likely able to detach themselves from the disturbing content, while people who do enjoy it for the content are simply perverts. Never was a case of art vs. pornography so clear than with NIN's "Broken." Whether it is beautiful or disgusting or both, kudos to Trent Reznor and Peter Christopherson and all at the NIN camp for making such a twisted and uniquely putrid visual work.

While Miike Takashi has not written any of the films he has directed, his style and formula (or lack thereof) has made him a force to be reckoned with in modern filmmaking. He takes the most mundane of stories and scenarios and gives it a fresh jolt of adrenaline and emotion, making his films seem as fresh and as original as anything by David Lynch or Stanley Kubrick. "Dead or Alive: Hanzaisha" was about a cop and a criminal struggling against each other and ultimately destroying both their families and themselves. "Dead or Alive 2: Tôbôsha" was about two hitmen rediscovering their innocence only to lose it again and ultimately destroy themselves. Now we have "Dead or Alive: Final," the third and final installment in a trilogy of films that are unrelated to each other...and yet they've all got something in common besides the director and the two main actors.

"Dead or Alive: Final" plunges us into Yokohama of 2346, where a homosexual mayor has outlawed human breeding and keep srigid control through use of birth control pills and his chief enforcer, Officer Honda (Takeuchi Riki). Standing in the mayor's way is a group of rebels, led by Fong (Terence Yin) and Jun (Josie Ho), who now have a new ally, a "replicant" by the name of Ryo (Aikawa Sho, still sporting his cool blond hair). Immediately, the "Blade Runner" references run rampant, right down to the terminology. The use of the word "replicant" to describe Ryo, the omnipresent floating blimp with the huge TV screens flashing advertisements, the decrepit rain-swept environment of a ravaged city, even the characters themselves, all homages to "Blade Runner." Oh but there are other sci-fi nods too. Elements of "THX-1138," "The Matrix," "The Terminator," etc...it's all there, making "Dead or Alive: Final" almost a satire (and sometimes a parody) of sci-fi cinema.

There's more than just the humorous nod to sci-fi going on. Yet again, Miike has given us a few thrills via his "Don't expect anything" style. While there is nothing truly shocking in this film compared to its predecessors (save for the ending), there is still the nod to Kitano's films (i.e. beautiful scenery, long shots of characters, and even a few beach scenes). But while Kitano is poetic, Miike is like a jackhammer, hitting you full-on in the face with his own brand of filmmaking. The story is nothing new, and even the characters are easily understood and familiar, but there is something about Miike's gritty take on the conventions of genres and cinema that gives it an originality. Who else but Miike could make three completely different and unrelated films and tie them all together into a package that is both confusing and cohesive? Okay, so the ending still threw me for a loop, but it was typical of Miike.

In the end, we are left with many of the same themes...the predominant one being that some people just never quit, and in the end it will destroy them. Honda's son is kidnapped, and even after he is returned, he is still hellbent on stopping the rebels. Ryo could easily back out of the fight and go on with his life, but he can't. The evil dictator could easily allow people to live their lives as they see fit, but he refuses to relent. Even a scene where a rebel is given the choice to either die or take the birth control drug, he decides to die for a cause that is pretty much lost. In all three "Dead or Alive" movies, nobody quits...and as a result everybody dies. The people who do know when to back down are the ones who survive. Ryo and Honda can't quit...and in the end, they meet for their final showdown, which resonates their endings in the previous two films. The tie in is not as neat as it could have been, but again, it's typical of Miike to give us something we really would not have expected, and at the same time that it's shocking, it makes a strange kind of sense. "Dead or Alive: Final" ties in all three movies, but not in the way that you might think. It yet again presents the same themes but from a completely different angle. It's like telling the same story...but not the same story. The idea is the same, but the details are different. There is the essence of the "Dead or Alive" films, and is probably the essence of Miike's films. They're nothing new...and yet, they are. It's not for everybody, but it's certainly different.

The best way to describe Miike Takashi's style would be, "Don't expect anything." It's not even "Expect the unexpected" because most of the things we don't expect...are somewhat expected simply because it's hard to fathom what we haven't seen before that we would actually WANT to see. Who wants to actually see necrophilia in a film? Who wants to actually see children being subjected to enough sexual innuendo to give Mary Whitehouse a heart attack? Who wants to see a person left for dead and eaten away by flies? Nobody really thinks about those things, so even when people tell us to expect the unexpected, there are certain things we won't even consider. This gives Miike the perfect opportunity to completely screw with the audience's preconceptions on what is and is not acceptable in film. I stated in a review of "Dead or Alive: Hanzaisha" that Miike's use of shocking imagery plays with the audience not only by the shock itself, but by the banality of it. The characters in his films have little or no reaction much of the bizarre and crazy things that are happening around them. Their indifference translates to us in a sense...so what should be shocking becomes less shocking, and more confusing...and sometimes the confusion wears off too, to the point where we don't care, it's just par for the course. And in Miike's world, it is.

So here we have a sequel that is not really a sequel, at least not literally. "Dead or Alive 2: Tôbôsha" begins completely differently from its predecessor, so immediately the audience is confused. We thought we had Miike, or at least the "Dead or Alive" formula figured out, right? Wrong, here we begin not with a frenetic ultra-violent intro, we have a humorous little scenario about Chinese Triads vs. Japanese Yakuza being explained to hitman Otamoko Mizuki (Aikawa Sho, now sporting blond hair) by a magician ("Tetsuo" director Tsukamoto Shinya turning out a funny little cameo). Just as Mizuki is about to pull a hit, his job's done for him by one of the target's henchmen. He finds out that it was his childhood friend Sawada Shuichi. What ensues is a slow-paced trip down memory lane as the two return to the place where they grew up, meet up with another friend who stayed behind, and rediscover the innocence they lost so quickly. The two decide to return to Tokyo to pull off hits together, donating all their profits to vaccinate children in third-world nations.

Like the first film, "Dead or Alive 2: Tôbôsha" has a great deal of slow-pacing, with a great deal of beautiful scenery similar to Kitano "Beat" Takeshi's "Sonatine." While the action is not entirely lacking, it does not have the frenetic pace and hip-bizareness of "Dead or Alive: Hanzaisha." Instead, action scenes are played with a great deal of symbolism. There is a scene of a Yakuza/Triad gang war being interspersed with scenes of Mizuki and Shuichi performing a play for children (which is hilarious considering the abundant sexual innuendo in the play, but nobody apart from the players seems to get it...and the kids love it). There is a recurring motif of seeing the main characters as both adults and the children they once were, with the phrase "Where are you?" popping up occasionally. In the confusing, almost David Lynch-like ending, it changes to "Where are you going?" Does violence beget violence? Is innocence truly lost when we grow up? And is it ever truly too late to get it back?

Thematically, it's similar to "Dead or Alive: Hanzaisha," with both beckoning the question of what is acceptable and unacceptable in human behavior, and is there ever a point to give up? The recurring element in both movies is that of whether or not to quit. The question seems to be answered with a resounding "no." None of the characters quit, and in the end, it ultimately destroys them, for better or for worse. Is "Dead or Alive 2: Tôbôsha" any less confusing and any less "what the hell?" then its prequel? No, but while one relies on ultra-violence and attitude, the second one relies on emotions and symbolism. Two different approaches to what ultimately are the same themes. Aside from this and the actors, there's not much of a connection between the first and second "Dead or Alive" films, but...hey, it's thoughtful storytelling, Miike-style.