6 out of 10

Rating: Null/10 (11 December 2003)

To determine the popularity of a movie, answer a single question: are the characters and story sympathetic? By that yardstick, `The last Samurai' failed for me.
In `Saving Private Ryan' and `Band of Brothers', men fight to destroy Nazism. I understand that motivation. The 300 Spartans at Thermopylae and William Wallace (`Braveheart') fought to defend their countries from a foreign invader. I understand that motivation. But in the `Last Samurai', an elite hereditary class fights to maintain its privileges. Pardon me if I don't find that sympathetic.
In the late 19th Century, Japan was emerging from feudalism and its social system included a rigid hierarchical caste system. Samurai were near the top of that hierarchy; they had a lot of privileges that they didn't want to lose them. Did you notice the scenes in the movie where Samurai walk thru bowing crowds? The crowds weren't bowing because they wanted to; they bowed because if they didn't, the Samurai could lop off their heads for disrespect. The movie portrays Samurai as noble, dedicated to high pursuits like sword fighting, poetry, calligraphy and nature-worship. What about the peasants condemned by low-class birth to a life of feudal servitude, working like dogs so that Samurai like Katsumoto could agonize over poems and seek perfect cherry blossoms? How about a little screen time for them? Sure Katsumoto is dedicated, but to what? Bushido (the code of the Samurai) does not include compassion nor forgiveness nor love of neighbor. Bushido produced the rape of Nanking and the Greater Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere (the World War II Japanese euphemism for stealing anything that wasn't nailed down and raping any female that moved). Samurai hated modern weapons because one soldier with a rifle and an hours' training could defeat a Samurai with 20 years of skill in sword fighting. Samurai hated modernization because they had the most to lose by it. Yes, yes, I'm sure I'm generalizing; but not by much.
Additionally, beware the word `honor'. It's a word that has no universal meaning. A few weeks ago, the BBC had a story about men in Jordan who killed their sister because she dated a man they didn't approve of. By their standards, her death was necessary to redeem their `honor'. It was called an `honor' killing. Anytime you hear the word `honor', a bell should ring inside your head, impelling you to ask `what do they really mean'. `Honor' is to scoundrels what a magic wand is to a magician. It's used to distract the audience from the real action. Don't be fooled!
Also the movie inaccurately portrays Japan as a poor helpless little nation, under assault by the greedy, corrupt Western powers. Please! Does anyone really believe that Japan didn't have corruption, greed, brutality and racism before 1876, that it had to be imported from the West? Does anyone really believe that the Japanese had to be reminded to act in their own self-interest?
In short, the movie didn't work for me because it violated basic history and basic principles of human nature.