Nichiren to moko daishurai

Well I am not the type of person that think men cannot cry, but here I nearly think the only one not crying was the deputy shogun. For me was the main problem with the movie not that it was not really telling the story about Nichiren. I had not expected a very deep story as Miyamoto Musashi's story took 3 and 5 movies to tell. Problem was for me was especially the acting of the storys main person. But most of the other actors were not really giving a convincing performance. Actually only highlight with me for acting was Raizô Ichikawa that shined like a bright light when he was on the screen.

I had also expected a movie that was not just showing the miracles of Nichiren instead of a guy that just cursed the other ways of buddhism. So for me a bit lackluster show. so my advice is see it if you are a Raizô fan. Otherwise read something about Nichiren instead.

Religious figures have always been tough to depict on film. Either you inadvertently insult followers or you create something to please the followers. There seems to be no middle ground. Look at the films created by Scorsese and Gibson about the same subject. Regardless Nichiren is an interesting film if just to see two future superstars of Japanese cinema at work.

During the 1200's, legendary Buddhist monk Nichiren (Shintaro Katsu) returns from his studies to lead Japan out of moral crisis and prepare to fight Mongol invaders by creating a new form of Buddhism. He runs afoul of the existing Buddhist sects and their government supporters and is persecuted. Can Nichiren persevere before the Mogol fleet reaches Japanese shores?

The first question for me was if the film was going to be stiff and stagey. The answer is yes, but in an enjoyable way. The production is excellent and typical of the 1950's Japanese cinema. Well directed. Katsu is ernest but very hammy in a thankless role. How do you portray a real man who is implied as having powers over lightening and typhoons? Raizo Ichikawa portrays a young deputy Shogun but he never really gets to act in anything but a sitting position. The film has a number of melodramatic moments and also departs from the historical record. While depicting Nichiren's unrelenting dismissal of all other Buddhist sects, the film skips some other controversial aspects of his beliefs. The special effects are excellent with some great ship miniatures.

Once again we have a religious film preaching peace but manages to include lots of bloodshed and death. An interesting film for many reasons but I can't recommend it to an average viewer.

Well, it was made in Japan in 1958 about a 13th century Religious leader, so....

bearing that in mind (and yes it is the only film ever about Nichiren Daishonin) .... but that's not why I wish to comment today ...

it is Kazuo Hasegawa ( 長谷川 一夫 ) 1908 to 1984 who is acting as "Nichiren" in the movie (His last film was in 1963 if I recall correctly).

It's just an interesting film for weird people like me hahaha, I wouldn't recommend it to the average viewer. I like old American movies too, like old Charlie Chaplin stuff and others I've long forgotten (for only having seen them online and only once at that).

The first and foremost flaw is the failure to project the persona of the protagonist. Instead, we see a teary, sentimental and overacted depiction which remains wooden and lifeless. We see none of the towering conviction or the humanism. Perhaps the greatest injustice to him is to have portrayed him as a mere nationalist, whose concerns do not extend beyond the Mongol threat. The truth is that he was propounding a universal teaching altogether different from anything that preceded it. The tampering with historical factuality is a lesser flaw which one can compensate for. It does give you an idea of the historic milieu in which the events took place, placing the biography in a coherent sequence, even somewhat inaccurate. Among the historical inaccuracies following may be mentioned: 1. Nichiren visited his mother in 1264 and not vice versa as shown 2. The Mongol invasion occurred after his return from Sado and not before as shown, nor was it the reason for his pardon from exile. The ending borders on the ridiculous. It is difficult to discern the POV of the film-maker. Most objectionably, he has made the protagonist, through his persistently grim teeth clenched lack of human expression, look more comic than anything else. He has completely missed out on the human persona of Nichiren, which is no doubt hard to portray. It is likely to prove painful and distressing to those who hold him in reverence as a great philosopher and leader of Buddhism.

Cinematic-ally large tracts resemble as a samurai story with hordes of warriors criss-crossing the screen at considerable speed with much sound and fury.

The best justification for seeing the film is because it is there, the only portrayal on the subject on the screen.