Samourai sans honneur

Disfigured swordsman Tange Sazen was a very popular cinematic character in Japan during the 1930s. "The Secret of the Urn" (a remake of a 1935 film called "The Million Ryo Pot") appears to have been an attempt to revive the series, jazzing up the violence in direct competition with more recently successful characters like Zatoichi and Kyoshiro Nemuri. There's no immediately apparent reason why a new Tange Sazen series didn't pan out; Kinnosuke Nakamura's performance lacks the subtlety of a Shintaro Katsu or Raizo Ichikawa (who played Zatoichi and Kyoshiro Nemuri, respectively), but he was a good screen fighter and might have grown into the Sazen role in time. Perhaps the film's ultimate problem is that it's *so* much like the average Zatoichi or Nemuri picture as to be indistinguishable. All the formulaic clichés are here: dangerous, brooding swordsman haunted by his painful past actually has a heart of gold and works to bring down a petty official who abuses his power, etc., etc. Audiences had seen this story unfold many times already, and maybe they just weren't interested in watching a revamped Tange Sazen go through such familiar motions.

Top-notch sets, costumes and production values, and some exciting swordfights as well. (Tetsuro Tamba is relegated to a minor nonfighting role, for whatever reason.) For Hideo Gosha completists and hardcore fans of the Zatoichi and Kyoshiro Nemuri series, who have seen all of those films and crave something similar.

I wanted to add my voice as a counter opinion to the couple of reviews here that don't like this film very much. I've seen 7 Gosha films, and this is my third favourite after the superb "Sword of the Beast" and the very good "Three Outlaw Samurai". Secret of the Urn is a great, entertaining samurai film that I think many people who like this type of film would be well pleased to see.

Sure the cliché of the wounded/disadvantaged hero is present, but I found it works perfectly fine. I certainly liked the hero. If we start bitching about film clichés, why don't we mention that aside from Yamada's more realistic recent samurai fare, the cliché of the hero sword master taking on 60 enemy swordsmen at one time and winning, is present in virtually any chanbara films (personally, I love those types of scenes). Do we discard all those films because that is trite and unrealistic?

We all see films through our own subjective filter, and what expectations we have also influence what we may make of a film. I enjoyed this film quite a bit, and think this is a very worthwhile watch for most samurai film fans.

I wanted to like this one, but for a number of reasons, I just couldn't get into it. First of all, I'm not a big fan of the actor playing the hero -- perhaps its that he's missing an eye (at least, the character is), but he really doesn't put in a compelling performance, which is rare for a Gosha protagonist. The plot and theme are typical Gosha (lower-ranked samurai gets screwed by his conniving lord, and is now out for justice of his own devise), but it all feels a little half-hearted. Though there are some good examples of Gosha's camera work, he also seems to be trying a bit too hard with some shots, and not hard enough with others.

Finally, for an adventure/revenge story, this one just doesn't have a lot of "drive" to it. I kept waiting for the suspense to kick in, but it never did. I can't say that you should avoid this one, but I certainly can't recommend it to anyone who isn't already a fan of Gosha's work. If you want to see a couple of _great_ examples of Gosha's earlier B&W movies, see "Sanbiki no samurai" (his first movie) or "Kedamono no ken" (his second). If you're just looking for an introduction to Gosha (or chamabara movies), I'd start with Goyokin.