Taiyô wo nusunda otoko

Make no mistake; this is an extremely violent film. At times, it is even ridiculously violent. There are no protagonists in this film, as all of the main actors and characters have severe limitations for being likeable. The Science teacher who builds a home-made atom bomb is psychotic and cruel. His love? Interest, a female DJ is self-centered and ridiculously irresponsible for her thirst for recognition, and the cop who doggedly tries to trap this fiend is immune to bullets, or so it would seem. Despite these drawbacks, the film is a perverse fantasy piece that easily entertains you for 90 minutes. There are some genuine moments of suspense and tension, but the excessiveness of the violence tends to lessen the impact of the entire film. Not a bad try.

Kazuhiko Hasegawa is a great film director.

Though I have been an enthusiastic fan of Kazuhiko Hasegawa's, in the beginning I've had no connection with him, and moreover, I am an ordinary office worker. One day I heard a sad news, "Kubrick is dead", which made me decide to establish Kazuhiko-Hasegawa's website. That's because I believe it is only Hasegawa that can make films like Kubrick's works. After a while, I got a connection with him through the cyberspace, and exchanged opinions each other with e-mails, which we called "e-sessions". One day I suddenly received his phone call. He just said to me, "I want to begin my project on your site"........ Thus I have built up the website to let people submit their scenarios for his new film.

Very well make... there are car chasing, gun shooting and even more... after watching this movie you may know how to make an atomic bomb!! Try to pick up this film in Video or Vcd.

A highschool science teacher decides to make an atomic bomb in his apartment. The opening half hour of this movie is erratic, making it difficult to predict where the story is going or what will ultimately happen. A nice blend of dark thrills and black humor is what makes this one special. It juxtaposes tonal shifts in convincing fashion. The protagonist is an unorthodox mad scientist who is very likable and charismatic. There are some very interesting sequences in this, like the lengthy plutonium experiments and bomb construction. Most of the film is realistic but even the more wildly, intentionally unrealistic moments are entertaining in their craziness. There are also some subtleties that one will miss if they are not paying close attention. Performances are great and the ending is ballsy.

Some of the criticisms that I've read for this film have annoyed me. It's like most of the negative reviews are coming from people who are demanding that every element of the film be easily categorized into tiny little boxes of familiarity and traditional filmmaking styles. Take the protagonist's philosophy as one example. We get a very good feel for his character throughout the film. He's an unhinged yet likable science teacher, but according to some critics he's apparently not "properly developed" because he doesn't come out and tell everyone exactly why he made the bomb. Well, why does he need a reason anyway? I thought one of the points of the film was that he didn't know what to do with the bomb after he made it. He even asks the radio DJ to poll her listeners so he can get some ideas! Come on, people. Did you really want him to make a long-winded nationalistic or philosophical speech at the end? I'm glad he didn't. In fact, I find it thought-provoking and refreshing that I have difficulty identifying exactly why he did it. And guess what? That was probably the WHOLE POINT OF THE MOVIE!

Another ridiculous criticism is one of those oft-parroted dumb ones that I'll never understand. Due to the black humor and unrealistic moments, there are tonal shifts throughout. Of course, viewers who need their movies carbon-copied in Hollywood fashion will have a problem with this because "the movie doesn't know what it wants to be." Yeesh! Okay, do you really want every movie to be easily categorized as a "comedy" or a "drama" or a "thriller"? Do you really want every movie to be easily categorized as "realistic" or "unrealistic"? Sure, let's just eliminate genre-benders all together and we'll be left with a bunch of boring, predictable films. But at least we can feel good about ourselves because then we can properly categorize them into tiny little boxes. Listen people, the tonal shifts are one reason this film is fun to watch. The same is true with the wild shifts between realism and unrealism. The final half-hour (that everyone complains about) gave me more surprises than the last three dozen "single genre" films I've seen recently.

This film refuses to limit itself, and that's why it's so entertaining and impressive.

It doesn't make the strongest impression from the outset, or at least, it comes across rather curious. Flavorful as Inoue Takayuki's music is, like Hasegawa Kazuhiko's direction it says "TV movie" or even "cheeky exploitation flick" at least as much as "70s drama or thriller." The lead character of Makoto suggests a B-movie with his mannerisms, further borne out in Sawada Kenji's spirited performance and other odds and ends. Promising as the premise is, for too long the actual brainchild of Hasegawa and Leonard Schrader is generally interesting more than it is specifically compelling. And while the pacing isn't altogether bad, the plot development takes its good time, such that the first hour passes kind of unremarkably. Add an initial and lingering playful edge that suggests satire, and of everything that 'The man who stole the sun' could have been, one way or another it's not completely what I expected.

None of this is specifically a mark against the film per se, though some animal cruelty does nothing to help earn my favor, nor fleeting, unnecessary touches of homophobia. And nitpick as we may, it's well made, including the production design and art direction, cinematography and editing, props and costume design, hair and makeup, absolutely the stunts and effects, and even Hasegawa's direction. The cast do give capable performances, including not just Sawada but also Sugawara Bunta and Ikegami Kimiko; I like Inoue's score, and the other songs we hear on the soundtrack. Even as tidbits raise a skeptical eyebrow, I think the writing notably gains some strength once Ikegami's character Zero enters the narrative, adding another interesting angle with her gleeful fascination - or maybe it's that a broad sense of escalation in the course of events provides some needed vitality for the picture.

But then, even still, in a runtime of nearly two and one-half hours, it's not until we're within about the last hour that this starts to be earnestly thrilling, and emotionally investing. There's a pretty clean line of demarcation as to where the greatest strength lies in 'The man who stole the sun,' where it is tightest in both writing and execution, and where it seems to best meet its potential. It's not that the preceding length is unworthy, but as it seems evident where Hasegawa, Schrader, and all others most focused their energy, it seems fair to wonder why they didn't do so up to that point. I think this is very enjoyable and deserving on its own merits, and I also think it would be far more so if the entirety were as carefully considered as the back end tends to be. One could even argue that all the title really needed was to trim some excess so that the plot - action and dialogue, thrills and drama alike - and the feelings it invites, could be lighter on its feet, and more impactful all told.

When all is said and done I think this is very good, and anyone with an appreciation for the violent thrillers that proliferated in the 70s will surely find it to be a solid viewing experience well worth their while. I wish only that the whole might have been crafted as shrewdly as much of the latter half, for if it had then I would be more enthusiastic. Don't go out of your way for 'The man who stole the sun,' but so long as you're amenable to features that may slightly miss the mark, this is quite excellent overall and earns a fair recommendation.