Film Review
The immutability of human nature, the idea that human beings will
always play out the same patterns of behaviour irrespective of their
social circumstances and historic context, is amply demonstrated across
the three decades of films made by the Japanese film director
Yasujirô Ozu. As a filmmaker, Ozu is fairly unique in that
throughout his career he devoted most of his time to making one kind of
film, the 'home drama' in which he explored such universal themes as
conflict between the generations and the decline of patriarchal
authority. The notion that human beings are incapable of changing
from one generation to the next is supported by a comparison of Ozu's
early films with his later masterworks. In the case of
I Was Born, But... (1932), this
is particularly easy as Ozu reworked it many years later as
Good Morning.
On the face of it, these two films could hardly be more
different. Made at the height of the Great Depression,
I Was Born, But... is one of Ozu's
bleaker films, dealing with a theme that was very dear to his heart: a
father's inability to live up to the expectations of his son. The
film has some lighter moments but it is a poignant and graphic account
of the generational divide that lies at the heart of many of Ozu's
films. Made 27 years later,
Good
Morning, is, by contrast, a fully fledged, commercially oriented
comedy, released at a time when Japan was coasting along on a consumer
boom. Ozu's second film to be made in colour, it is a
relentlessly cheerful romp that pokes fun at suburban living, in a way
that often resembles a parody of an American sitcom of this era.
Good Morning is often referred
to as a remake of
I Was Born, But...,
although the connection between the two films is tenuous and there are
more differences between them than similarities. What they have
in common is that they show us the world from the perspective of two
young boys who, having grown disgusted with adult behaviour, embark on
a bizarre act of rebellion. In the earlier film, two boys go on
hunger strike to protest against their father's willingness to kowtow
to his boss. In the later film, the boys take a vow of silence
when their parents refuse to buy them a television set, and also to
demonstrate their contempt for the kind of inane, meaningless
conversation that adults indulge in. By making the boys the focus
of the narrative and showing us things from their point of view, Ozu
compels us to take their side and see just how ridiculous adults are,
when examined from a child's perspective.
Although Ozu had been a late convert to both sound and colour, these
technical innovations made it much easier for him to present a child's
eye view of the world. Compared with the restrained palette of
his first colour film,
Equinox Flower
(1958),
Good Morning has the
look of a children's playroom, with vibrant primary colours liberally
used to comically depict Japan's submission to western-style
consumerism. The garish colour schemes of the living quarters,
interior and exterior, are more redolent of a child's storybook than
Tokyo suburbia, and any notion of traditional Japanese restraint when
it comes to clothing or home furnishings is conspicuous by its
absence. Now that poverty and wartime self-sacrifice have become
a thing of the past, the characters that inhabit this colourful toy
town have to invent new forms of crisis, such as the mystery of who
misappropriated the funds of a wives' club, a small drama that rapidly
escalates into an Agatha Christie-style whodunit.
The absurdity of the adult protagonists is emphasised by the way in
which Ozu forces us to side with the two main child characters, Minoru
and Isamu, admirably played by Kôji Shitara and Masahiko
Shimazu. Ozu's talent for getting superb performances from child
actors is well-known but here he surpasses himself. The
seven-year-old Shimazu comes dangerously close to stealing the film as
the younger brother who becomes a willing accomplice in his older
sibling's act of defiance. As in
I Was Born, But..., it is the close
rapport between the two brothers and their comical interaction that
provides the film with much of its humour and humanity. A
rational mind would judge them to be selfish, vulgar and ill-mannered;
Ozu portrays them as unfortunate victims of selfish, vulgar and
ill-mannered society. How can their parents be so heartless to
deny them that absolute necessity of modern life: television!
Ozu's portrayal of late 1950s suburban living is humorous but also
pretty damning. In this age of female empowerment, the men have
become almost invisible, quietly reflecting in the background on their
own private concerns, such as coping with job insecurity and how to
make provision for a bearable retirement. Meanwhile, their far
from demure wives gossip and bicker endlessly among themselves, a
never-ending chorus of affable petty-mindedness. A young couple
are ostracised for being overtly modern and daring to own a television
set. One fastidious housewife threatens to banish her elderly
mother to Mount Narayama to punish her for her
forgetfulness. And when one member of the community is suspected
of stealing money from the wives' club fund, recriminations start
flying like flame-tipped arrows. With their mothers preoccupied
with neighbourhood intrigue and their fathers reduced to impotent,
voiceless onlookers, the children of this happy little community (all
boys, bizarrely) do pretty much what they please, bunking off lessons
and measuring their worth by who can fart with the least effort.
(The unfortunate little boy who cannot break wind without soiling his
underpants becomes an object of ridicule.) These three worlds
(that of the wives, husbands and children) exist side-by-side,
seemingly unconnected and almost oblivious to one another.
Communication, or rather the lack of it, is at the heart of
Good Morning - a theme that is
central to much of Ozu's work. Not only do we have the familiar
intergenerational divide, with parents singularly incapable of
understanding their children, and vice versa, husbands and wives find
it just as hard to communicate with one another. Most tragic of
all is the case of a young man and woman (Minoru and Isamu's English
teacher and aunt) who, despite being obviously attracted to one
another, are incapable of finding the words to express the fact.
Instead of saying what they mean or anything of any tangible value, the
adult protagonists resort to a kind of verbal musac that says
absolutely nothing and obscures all true feeling (hence the film's
title).
It takes a child's mind to see the vacuity of such pointless exchanges,
but, as the child protagonists soon discover, the world simply cannot
function without meaningless banter. The adults are right to
mistrust the television, not because it might create a generation of
docile, pot-bellied idiots, but because it threatens to supplant the
one vital ingredient on which an ordered human society depends for its
very existence: idle chatter. In 1959, Ozu may have had a point,
but fifty years on it is obvious that such fears were ill-founded.
Television may have had its day, but thanks to Twitter and all the
other social media time-wasting innovations that came with the dawn of
the new millennium, we have been spared this terrifying prospect of a
world dominated by critical thought and meaningful conversation.
Like all those other bodily functions we'd rather not talk about, crass
verbal excretions are here to stay. Good morning!
© James Travers 2013
The above content is owned by frenchfilms.org and must not be copied.
Next Yasujirô Ozu film:
Late Autumn (1960)