kaimono2001

I've never read the manga, but since Death Note was so hyped in Japan I thought I'd give it a chance. After all the concept of the movie is quite interesting. However, I was completely disappointed. Maybe I should have read the manga after all, because after reading other reviews I think a lot of blame for this poor film goes to the director and screen writer of the film. There is lack of character development in many of the minor yet important characters. The main characters don't provoke much feeling as well. Luke (aka death) is an annoying character created to be comic relief (doesn't work) and an excuse for adding computer graphics, but instead becomes an eye sore. After having read that the girlfriend doesn't exist in the manga I don't really see the need to have added her to the movie since her character is completely insipid. The climax scene in which she is in would have been more engaging if I actually cared for her character. Furthermore, the scenes are predictable and cliché as well, which is frustrating. The acting was mediocre, but I place blame on the director for that since the directing is just plain bad. There is a lot that happens in this movie that has little or poorly thought out explanation (like the climax), making most of it unbelievable. The biggest disappointment is that there was so much potential for this movie. However, just wanting to make a quick buck off the manga is the obvious purpose for making the film.

I have mixed feelings about this film. First, I'll start by saying that Ken Wantanabe is a very talented actor and he is equally talented in this film. However, like many Japanese feature films recently, I feel this film was a bit too contrived.

First I thought it was too long and there were a few unnecessary scenes, but I may have watched the unedited version on DVD. It does hit you at some points emotionally,however, I can't find myself really empathizing with either Saeki or Emiko. Also, I feel that it's not completely realistic of what Alzheimer's is like or any damage to the brain (having brief experience myself), but shows it in a more fantastical way. The film only briefly touches upon things like violence and other complete losses of control.The director did do a good job with the only real violent scene, when Emiko is hit in the head with a dish, by actually depicting it with out showing any real physical violence. However, there were many scenes I watched in disbelief like that the main character could still read a newspaper or post it notes, especially in kanji, with advance stages of Alzheimer's, or he could arrive at the care facility alone by train with no problem, or that his wife could find him in the middle of a forest away from their home with no explanation as to how. Also, the entire scene with Saeki's old pottery teacher is very abstract and has no real purpose in the film. On a positive note this film depicts Emiko's strength and patience and she almost takes over the film as a character.

In the end I think the director's attempt was more to provoke the viewer's feelings, rather than to show the honest devastation of such a disease. I will give it a decent rating because of the acting and the cinematography was beautiful. This film does have an emotional impact, but in a contrived way. In the end I felt sad, but I didn't really learn anything from this film. It's a shame to also have no sense of hope, closure, or understanding when touching upon such a serious topic.

I think I need to stop reading books which movies are based on prior to seeing them, because I am almost always disappointed. In this case I read the classic "In Cold Blood" not Capote's biography, so I don't have an exact comparison. However, while In Cold Blood is engaging and very creepy and disturbing, I didn't feel quite the same about this movie. Again lack of character development and detail weaken this movie. It is so much easier to empathize with the criminals, clutter family, friends and locals in Halcomb in In Cold Blood, which is why it is a classic. Since this movie focuses on that time period in Capote's life, I feel many of those involved in the writing of his novel were left out. Also, Perry as described in the novel (having a personality disorder) and Perry depicted in the movie(somewhat sane) seem like two different people. Ironically, Dick who is described as sane yet malicious in the novel seems crazy. I left this movie not really feeling much about anyone. Although Huffman's acting was exceptional, as well as the acting of the supporting actors, I didn't really feel I understood Capote. When comparing it to the book, it doesn't quite answer what the process of writing the book was like. By this I mean mentally. For example, why does he continually lie to Perry about the book? Why is In Cold Blood written differently than what is depicted in this movie?? In a sense, is the movie saying that Capote lied not only to Perry and those he loved, but also his audience? More detail about that would be quite interesting, and maybe show the magnitude of his self absorbency and greed. So I feel if I hadn't read In Cold Blood I probably would have really enjoyed this movie (since I don't know much about Truman Capote himself). Therefore, the best advice is to enter the movie completely ignorant and it's good. However, now I'm only left with questions. So 5 stars for acting -5 stars for depth.