The Last Samurai

[uminoken]

Just got back from seeing it....was pretty good, it does start out as a paint-by-the-numbers "Dances with Wovles" clone (old soldier reminisces WAY too much about killing Indian civilians, WE GET IT ALREADY), but it gets much better from his time in the village onward. The whole look of the film is well done - Japan lends itself to spectacular landscape shots and the battles are pretty impressive (ranks of soldiers vs a charging samurai army) so I think it's worth a matinee price, plus we get the Hellboy trailer

[JELEINEN]

I'm avoiding it. I hate Tom Cruise and any historical inaccuracies (and I'm sure there're plenty) would just distract me.

[Ladic]

one word: "Awesome"

[JsARCLIGHT]

(asking this question to those who have seen it)

I generally loathe Tom Cruise and dislike most of the movies he is in that I have seen, does this movie at least do a decent job of covering other characters than Cruise so if I were to go see it I would not get "over Cruised"?

I really want to see this movie... sort of... but my hatred of Tom Cruise is keeping me from walking out and seeing it. Let me know if it is a worthy flick.

[gnollman]

Japan lends itself to spectacular landscape shots

I was told that more of it was filmed in New Zealand than Japan..... which kind of makes sense, looking at the costs in Japan vs. New Zealand....

[Isamu Atreides 86]

this is about the Meiji restoration, right? the overthrow of the Tokugawa Shogunate? (hope i remember that right...) i took a class on that. pretty interesting stuff.

[gnollman]

Smacks more of the Satsuma rebellion to me.... Guess I should go watch it sometime....

[Mechamaniac]

this is about the Meiji restoration, right? the overthrow of the Tokugawa Shogunate? (hope i remember that right...) i took a class on that. pretty interesting stuff.

Yes, that's the time frame. When the xenophobic Japan of the latter 19th century opened its shores to the Gaijin, and the Bushii found themselves suddenly out of vogue in favor of a more modern, industrialized Japan.

I'm avoiding it. I hate Tom Cruise and any historical inaccuracies (and I'm sure there're plenty) would just distract me.

Hey, look on the bright side, at least they didn't have to UP size any of the armor to fit Cruise. Hell, as a matter of fact, they probably had to DOWN size the armor to fit that little waify bastard.

Edited December 6, 2003 by Mechamaniac

[NERV]

tom cruise is NOT a samurai

[Deadzone]

People tell me to be fair. They say I can't bad mouth something until I actually see it. So, I'm not going to

bad mouth Last Samurai, but I will bad mouth Tom Cruise. The guy is an ego maniac who seems to want

to make movies that try to promote him as a great actor. What's wrong with that you say? The problem is

he is more interested in trying to make himself look good as opposed to making the movie good. The results are

movies that lack any heart. Instead of rooting for his character naturally because the character is genuine

and a descent person, you find yourself feeling rather dettached because the movie is telling you to root for

his character usually through several contrived scenes where the hero faces phony baloney "hardships".

Of course, some people will say that I have to give him another chance. Maybe he has changed in his latest

picture. Sorry, at $9.00 a pop, I'm tired of giving him chances.

[MacBoy29]

Just saw the movie

I thought it was amazing

[UN Spacy]

tom cruise is NOT a samurai

You say.........

[StealthLurker]

Don't hate. Thought it was a good movie. The part where the ninjas attacked was awesome. Time to play samurai showdown 5.

[GobotFool]

Well for all the history nuts who have seen it, is it as glaringly inaccurate as Gladiator was? FYI I liked Gladiator but it still was pretty damn off in terms of historical accuracy. I learned about most of the inaccuracies after I saw the movie, and thus they really did not distract me from enjoying the film on the 1st viewing, but after I learned about them, they did distract me in my later viewings of the film.

I neither like or dislike Tom Cruise. So I won't go to see or avoid a movie on the merit that he is in it. I have liked a few films he has made. Top Gun, Risky Business, and Minority Report. If I have seen any others than I really don't remember them, and that goes to show you how much I liked them.

There is only one actor I despise enough to utterly avoid all the movies that person has been in (hint, it is another of the prettyboys of Hollywood.)

Though I will say this. Tom Cruise you ain't no Kenshin and you never will be

Edited December 6, 2003 by GobotFool

[Bad Mother Focker]

Three words.... DAMN GOOD MOVIE

Of all the movies I've seen this year, this is one of the best, along with Kill Bill.

The part that really put this movie over the top was when the NINJAS attacked and flipped out and started killing people!

The Samurai vs. Infantry battle was awesome.

This flick has it all. Samurai, Ninjas, Infantry, Gatling Guns, and a Jap bodycount higher than Kill Bill!

[EXO]

Great movie!!! I almost creamed when the "men in black" showed up.

Gobotfool, why ruin a movie you enjoyed while you were watching it? Did it claim to be a factual historical account? Should every period movie be a documentary now?

I agree that I would love to see a movie with this type of production without western actors or language, but that fact doesn't make this less than a beautiful film.

After all that, I would just like to say one thing...

GO BOB!!!

[GobotFool]

Great movie!!!  I almost creamed when the "men in black" showed up.

Gobotfool, why ruin a movie you enjoyed while you were watching it?  Did it claim to be a factual historical account?  Should every period movie be a documentary now?

I agree that I would love to see a movie with this type of production without western actors or language, but that fact doesn't make this less than a beautiful film.

After all that, I would just like to say one thing...

GO BOB!!!

Very true exo. I still enjoy Gladiator for what it was, a movie loosely based on a historical time period. I think what peeved me was just about every other person I knew decided the heckle the movie while I was watching it about the innacuracies. That can be very distracting <_<

I know the history nuts will probably be doing the same thing to Last Samurai as they did with Gladiator.

Edited December 6, 2003 by GobotFool

[myk]

My local newspaper claims that the people responsible for the film had embarked on a painstaking pursuit in the name of accuracy for that particular period of Japan's history; except for the part of the white samurai, of course. I'm hoping however, that Forum members here who have studied that particular time of Japan's history will post any inaccuracies...

The guy is an ego maniac who seems to want

to make movies that try to promote him as a great actor. What's wrong with that you say? The problem is

he is more interested in trying to make himself look good as opposed to making the movie good. The results are

movies that lack any heart. Instead of rooting for his character naturally because the character is genuine

and a descent person, you find yourself feeling rather dettached because the movie is telling you to root for

his character usually through several contrived scenes where the hero faces phony baloney "hardships".

Well, your opinion of Tom Cruise is your right of course, but could you site some examples of how his character and ego exceeds the sum or worth of the movie itself?

Also, how can a movie character be "genuine" and "decent" when a movie is usually a fictional work? The key is to suspend your disbelief and convince yourself that you are watching fiction. Failing to do that, all of DYRL could be seen as phony balony hardships and contrivances, for example.

And finally, what's wrong with being an egomaniac? That's what being an A-list, high dollar celebrity is all about. It's not as if someone acts for the sake of artistic expression....

Edited December 6, 2003 by myk

[Omni Existence]

ah...you guys have forgotten the simple joy of just sitting back and enjoying a good flick.

actor/actress sucks, historical inaccuracies, this, that..you guys think too much.

[Ladic]

Great movie!!! I almost creamed when the "men in black" showed up.

Gobotfool, why ruin a movie you enjoyed while you were watching it? Did it claim to be a factual historical account? Should every period movie be a documentary now?

I agree that I would love to see a movie with this type of production without western actors or language, but that fact doesn't make this less than a beautiful film.

After all that, I would just like to say one thing...

GO BOB!!!

excatly

[Effect]

Honestly I've been looking forward to seeing this for a while. Damn, now if only I can find a ride to the movies between now and finals or at least download it. I'm hitting the theaters for sure once I get back home.

[KingNor]

its ok, the japanise actors are the real stars, in my opinion, its a little heavy handed on the tom cruiz stuff though. i would say, its worth while to see it for the samuri gear, battles, and fighting. the story is beliveable from a very sad time in japanise history that will probably leave anyone regretting the loss of a lifestyle that had to be destroyed in the name of progress.

to all the cruiz haters out there, remember there are hundreds of people who work on these films that don't get paid the big bucks who feel it hard when their movie tanks (unlike the stars who usually get their money anyway) so if you think you could enjoy a film on atleast a few levels, give it a chance.

[JsARCLIGHT]

to all the cruiz haters out there, remember there are hundreds of people who work on these films that don't get paid the big bucks who feel it hard when their movie tanks (unlike the stars who usually get their money anyway) so if you think you could enjoy a film on atleast a few levels, give it a chance.

Being someone who works in a production environment I know the point you are making, but movies (games/books/tv shows/plays/music/etc.) always revolve around the lead character's actor, no matter who they are. If the lead is weak, or in the case of Tom Cruise not liked by some people, then the movie will suffer on some levels with those particular people no matter how good the crew/supporting cast/production team is. You can produce the hell out of something but if it has flaws in the main elements it will be a flawed endevor.

I have no issues with historical accuracy (as most hollywood movies are about as historically accurate as a puppet show rendition) or the visuals or the crew or the script... my issue (as I said before) is with that half-wit sawed-off terrible actor that for some reason people like named Tom Cruise. And when he is the crux of the movie I don't want to waste my money on yet another "Tom Cruise movie" in which I will be subject to the same lame-ass Cruise acting style and manerisms. The man has two acting levels: fake shock and fake anger with the same deer in the headlights look on his face... second only to the George Clooney "bob head, smirk and deliver your lines in a monotone smart-ass fashion" acting style.

If this movie had starred anyone else but Cruise I would not be having this problem... well, anyone but him or Clooney.

[JRock]

There is only one actor I despise enough to utterly avoid all the that person has been in (hint, it is another of the prettyboys of Hollywood.)

Though I will say this. Tom Cruise you ain't no Kenshin and you never will be

Would that be Keanu Reeves?? Mark Walberg?? Paul Walker?? Lemme know if I'm gettin warm!

I understand if yall hate the actors (Can't stand Angelina Jolie, Myself) but to hate a fictional period movie of its inaccuracies is pretty moot in this MacrossWorld board. Especially one that's not claiming to be the most accurate portrayal of Medieval Japan ever caught on film.

I'll watch it on DVD. So no one will bother me with their pitiful critiques (Like when I watched Kill Bill).

[JRock]

ah...you guys have forgotten the simple joy of just sitting back and enjoying a good flick.

actor/actress sucks, historical inaccuracies, this, that..you guys think too much.

If I've seen this post first, I wouldn't have posted my say on it

[KingNor]

Go rent Seventh Samuri.

[KingNor]

If the lead is weak, or in the case of Tom Cruise not liked by some people, then the movie will suffer on some levels with those particular people no matter how good the crew/supporting cast/production team is. You can produce the hell out of something but if it has flaws in the main elements it will be a flawed endevor.

I agree completely, i just think that a movie that is shot as well as Last Samuri and with set design, costume design and a full cast of unknown, yet tallented japanise actors, i think it would be a shame to not see it simply because Cruise is an idiot. i just feel bad for the rest of the cast and crew when they did a fantastic job but wont get the credit they diserve because the guy on the poster is a hack. ah well.

[GobotFool]

There is only one actor I despise enough to utterly avoid all the        that person has been in (hint, it is another of the prettyboys of Hollywood.)

Though I will say this. Tom Cruise you ain't no Kenshin and you never will be   

Would that be Keanu Reeves?? Mark Walberg?? Paul Walker?? Lemme know if I'm gettin warm!

I understand if yall hate the actors (Can't stand Angelina Jolie, Myself) but to hate a fictional period movie of its inaccuracies is pretty moot in this MacrossWorld board. Especially one that's not claiming to be the most accurate portrayal of Medieval Japan ever caught on film.

I'll watch it on DVD. So no one will bother me with their pitiful critiques (Like when I watched Kill Bill).

Keep guessing JRock

[EXO]

This movie is that good despite Tom Cruise. He doesn't even distract me from enjoying this film. Hell, there was a baby a couple of seats down and these two guys who wouldn't shut the hell up in the beginning of the movie. I don't remember if they got quiet because of the movie or if I was totally immersed that I forgot about them. (I just know never to go back to those theatres again.)

But I think there's no saving a movie once your mind is made up that it won't be enjoyable.

[GobotFool]

. And when he is the crux of the movie I don't want to waste my money on yet another "Tom Cruise movie" in which I will be subject to the same lame-ass Cruise acting style and manerisms. The man has two acting levels: fake shock and fake anger with the same deer in the headlights look on his face... second only to the George Clooney "bob head, smirk and deliver your lines in a monotone smart-ass fashion" acting style.

If this movie had starred anyone else but Cruise I would not be having this problem... well, anyone but him or Clooney.

What about Reeve's, I'm stoned to hell style?

Edited December 6, 2003 by GobotFool

[GobotFool]

But I think there's no saving a movie once your mind is made up that it won't be enjoyable.

Pretty true Exo.

Edited December 6, 2003 by GobotFool

[Isamu Atreides 86]

What about Reeve's, I'm stoned to hell style?

i can't believe some dumbass cast him as John Constantine in the upcoming hellblazer movie. <_<

[JELEINEN]

i would say, its worth while to see it for the samuri gear, battles, and fighting. the story is beliveable from a very sad time in japanise history that will probably leave anyone regretting the loss of a lifestyle that had to be destroyed in the name of progress.

See, that to me sounds hilarious. By the time period of the film, the samurai were little more than a joke. There hadn't been a war in over 200 years. These guys had no real fighting experience (duels were even illegal by this point). The ones who hadn't found jobs in the beurocracy were little more than societal leeches who couldn't be productive even when they wanted to be. They're only usefulness was in putting down the occasional peasant uprising. Against a real military they'd be completely ineffective, as history proves. Sad my ass.

[the white drew carey]

There is only one actor I despise enough to utterly avoid all the        that person has been in (hint, it is another of the prettyboys of Hollywood.)

Though I will say this. Tom Cruise you ain't no Kenshin and you never will be   

Would that be Keanu Reeves?? Mark Walberg?? Paul Walker?? Lemme know if I'm gettin warm!

I understand if yall hate the actors (Can't stand Angelina Jolie, Myself) but to hate a fictional period movie of its inaccuracies is pretty moot in this MacrossWorld board. Especially one that's not claiming to be the most accurate portrayal of Medieval Japan ever caught on film.

I'll watch it on DVD. So no one will bother me with their pitiful critiques (Like when I watched Kill Bill).

Keep guessing JRock

Afleck?

The wife and I are going to see it tonight. I'm kind of unsure about it because while I'm able to get past Cruise not being a great actor (he's not as bad as some people try to make out... there are a lot worse who make the big bucks, too), I'm afraid I might get a tad too emotional with the plight of the Samurai... especially when they go up against a modern army.

[KingNor]

i would say, its worth while to see it for the samuri gear, battles, and fighting.  the story is beliveable from a very sad time in japanise history that will probably leave anyone regretting the loss of a lifestyle that had to be destroyed in the name of progress.

See, that to me sounds hilarious. By the time period of the film, the samurai were little more than a joke. There hadn't been a war in over 200 years. These guys had no real fighting experience (duels were even illegal by this point). The ones who hadn't found jobs in the beurocracy were little more than societal leeches who couldn't be productive even when they wanted to be. They're only usefulness was in putting down the occasional peasant uprising. Against a real military they'd be completely ineffective, as history proves. Sad my ass.

There is alot more to being a Samurai than just being able to fight good. It's an entire lifestyle and beleif system and culture that had lasted for hundreds of years that was "phased out" in a decade.

calling them a joke simply because there hadn't been any wars in the recent history is rather unjustified, like telling a black belt he's wasted his time by learning to fight when its unlikely he'll ever really need it.

sure they wern't a viable military option anymore, but that doesn't make it a good thing that a man whos devoted his whole life to a dicipline should be gunned down on the battle feild buy a guy with a few months of fire arm training.