Morrer ou Viver 2

Takashi Miike's Dead or Alive 2: Birds is loaded with allegory and symbolism, some that works (like having feathers continually popping up from time to time in the midst of murders, or the sometimes mentioned comet representing wonder in the unknown) and some that doesn't (the re-appearances of the wings on the backs of Mizuki and Shu, and the over-usage of archive clips of impoverished people in Africa to emphasize the two hit men's end goal to donate all their money to that). But at the core Miike has a very thematically rich film, where the insanity, shame and/or brutality of bloodshed and violence and death are contrasted with what comes before people go down the path of crime- childhood.

It's maybe that one is given sight to bloody scenes in person as a child, as Mizuki does when he sees his step-father dying on the bathroom floor dialing on the phone (one of the great images in the film). Or it's just that there doesn't seem to be much of a choice, or out of convenience, it's hard to say. Miike isn't out for easy answers anyway, but after a sort of bizarre meditation on the loss of the innocence we all have in youth, and how it can become uglier and without meaning. It's also, on top of this, a very good story of friendship and ties that bind that friendship going beyond professional duty or consequence.

Mizuki and Shu, played by Riki Takeuchi and Sho Aikawa, also from the first DOA (however not connected by character or plot, only in part by mood), are hit men for a hire, and Mizuki, who hasn't seen Shu in many years, witnesses him kill a bunch of gangsters that he was supposed to fire on with a sniper. He follows him, and it leads the both of them, as they're in hiding for suspected/actual murders and money stolen, to the island of their youth. We see flashbacks of said childhood, of fun playing on the beach (a sweet gag, uncommon for Miike, is when one of the kids is buried in the sand and the other kids run away), but also the pain of separating and finding violence among them, like with Mizuki. Nostalgia comes back tenfold, as they reunite with another old friend, and Miike actually crafts sentimental scenes in this middle chunk that work, somehow, because they don't feel very cheap. Then, as if trying to cleanse themselves of their old crime-syndicate ways, they work at a playground helping out kids, and they even put on a demented play involving goofy innuendo with Cinderella and various animals.

This play scene is juxtaposed with the sprawling yakuza/triad warfare that breaks out back at home, and it's here that Miike has not only, for my money, the best sequence of the film, but one of his best sequences to date. The play Mizuzki, Shu and the others put on is immature and a little crude, but shown to be all the more innocent and playful when compared to the manic, multiple murders that occur between the two gangs, as bullets fly, blood flows, and bodies contort all over the place as neither side really comes out victorious, or with many members left. It's Miike leashing out his wicked, no-holds-barred style, but also the goodness on the other side of the coin, and it doesn't get much better for a fan like myself. On the other hand, Dead or Alive 2, following this sequence, gets weirder by the minute, and sometimes not always for the best. With the focused narrative flow given for the Mizuki/Shu story, where they decide to come back to the mainland and keep going with their killings for money in un-selfish reasons, there's another subplot involving, I'd guess, the other killers out to kill them. But it comes off muddled, and even with Miike going for enjoyably crazy images like a midget walking on stilts, or the fate of a character named Jiro, it suddenly felt as if Miike was getting off track of what was working best.

But if anything, DOA 2 tops the first one by delivering the goods on substance just as well as the style. Miike is always out for experimentation, with his editing and transitions and usage of a symbolic inter-title "Where are you Going". And isn't above getting some touching last scenes with Mizuki and Shu on the boat (Takeuchi, by the way, is one of Miike's best actors), even if it feels very sudden, that could be forced by another director but through him feel compassionate to their doom. While Miike and his screenwriter don't quite get deep enough to make this a great film about lifelong criminal friends, and he's still into getting laughs out of depraved acts of violence and bizarre sex (i.e. that giant penis in a couple of scenes), it's surely one of the better yakuza movies I've yet to see to go past its limitations and make it a movie where the main characters aren't just cardboard cut-outs meant for shouting dialog and dying at a clip.

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

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.

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.

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.