How the increase of graphic content effects samurai media and stories
The connection of mind - How the Sword relates to Soul
I believe Toshiro Mifune was right in the film Sword of Doom when he says, "Evil Mind; Evil Sword." What this essentially is an argument for is whether or not actions are the result of the person themselves or external circumstances. More importantly it becomes an argument on how violence is interpreted as a whole in the course of the story. Through this series of blogs and films, we've seen a myriad of different examples of Samurai media, yet the range of violence (and more specifically extreme graphic violence) is never consistent. What could this mean as a whole for the genre itself?
Its been argued that a sword is not only a weapon but an extension of ones own self, thus if the person is evil, the actions will be evil as a result. With this aspect in mind, one could make the tentative argument that the act of violence reacts this way toward the elements of the story. It accents and brings to the forefront ideas that were already present in the narrative. Thus if a film like Seven Samurai is more focused on the people of the story, there will probably be considerably less blood and gore than in a film like Sword of Doom, which aims to show the brutality of its main character.
Severance - The art of loosing limbs
With the prior notions of what the sword and violence can mean to the story, we can now analyze whether or not it actually adds to the narrative. Essentially, should every samurai film aim for Kill Bill Vol.1 levels or gore, or for something more subdued and calculating with its bloodier elements such as a film like Sanjuro. As Yamamoto says in his work, "if someone were to ask, 'What is the true meaning of the Way of the Samurai?' the person who would be able to answer promptly is rare. This is because it has not been established in one’s mind beforehand. From this, one’s un-mindfulness of the Way can be known."
Essentially what this is getting at is there's not one clear answer. Whether or not the archetype of the samurai is inherently good or bad is its own debate entirely. What it can mean for the sake of the story however, is a strategically placed accent to the films violent elements. Its been stated by some that the deaths of characters in earlier samurai films were not impactful enough due to the lack of any kind of special effect. A sword would hit somebody and they would fall over. Yet in a film like Sword of Doom, now we see the inclusion of severed limbs, screaming faces of agony, and blood coming from every conceivable angle. One could use this to say that now with the inclusion of graphic violence, every death is impactful in a way. Each death stays with you. The horrors of the main character [some would even say villain] are felt and linger with the audience. This alone possibly becoming one of the main reasons for violence as a main stay in the modern samurai film.
Special effects improved too. That could also be a reason.
Critical Questions to Consider:
>We’ve seen several Samurai films now where the use of extreme graphic violence was not exactly necessary to tell the typical warrior story. Does the inclusion of extreme graphic violence (such as in several scenes in Sword of Doom) add or subtracts from this typical kind of story?
>Films such as Seven Samurai, or Sanjuro depict samurai as standard hero types, While films like Humanity and Paper Balloons, or Ugetsu portray samurai as crass, aristocratic types only concerned with the reservation of their own honor. Do you feel the role of the samurai is more inherently good or evil?
> Does the main character in Sword of Doom represent the typical aspects of the shadow warrior archetype or is he far more diverged. Does he represent something else in the story?
> What narrative reasons do you believe explain why Sword of Doom ended mid climax?