No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 May 2025
It comes as no surprise that the recent resurgence of neo-nationalist thought in Japan would find expression in cinema.[1] With the issue of the nation and its ability to fight war, currently prohibited by Article 9 of the Japanese constitution, being vigorously challenged by the ruling party and the right, in part through actual deployment of Self-Defense Forces in Iraq and other danger zones, it is significant that the year 2005 saw the release of four big budget spectaculars offering particular visions of Japanese fighting wars. Two, Lorelei (“Rorerai,” director: Higuchi Shinji) and Samurai Commando: Mission 1549 (“Sengoku Jieitai 1549,” director: Tezuka Masaaki), are outright fantasies, albeit ones that offer alternative narratives of historical wars (World War II in the former, the sixteenth century civil wars in the latter).
[1] This article is a reworking of two earlier versions: first, my response to the “Hiroshima as a favor to Japan?” thread on the H-JAPAN mailing list on 17 June 2005, and my article “Nihon eiga no tame ni tatakau koto” published in the summer 2005 issue of Eiga geijutsu. I would like to thank readers of previous drafts for their suggestions.
[2] According to statistics released by the Motion Picture Producers Association of Japan (Nihon Eiga Seisakusha Renmei, or “Eiren”). Aegis finished twelfth on the list, and Samurai Commando fourteenth. Lorelei made ¥2.4 billion, Aegis ¥2.06 billion, and Samurai Commando ¥1.76 billion at the box office, all very good figures, but nowhere near those of the top grossing film, Howl's Moving Castle (“Hauru no ugoku shiro,” director Miyazaki Hayao) at ¥19.6 billion. All probably made a profit, especially if one factors in DVD sales, but because of their relatively high budgets by Japanese film standards (Aegis cost about ¥1.2 billion), and the relatively high take Japanese exhibitors and distributors extract from the box office gross, their producers may not have earned that much money. Yamato was released too late in the year to appear in the top 20 list, but seemed to be well on its way to becoming one of the top grossing films of 2006.
[3] According to Eiren statistics, the market share for Japanese films has risen steadily since 2002, when a share of 27.1% was the lowest in over 50 years. Box office for foreign films has declined each year since then in absolute numbers, although the market as a whole has not shown the steady growth the industry hoped for.
[4] For more on these films, see Isolde Standish, Myth and Masculinity in the Japanese Cinema (Richmond: Curzon, 2000).
[5] See the official pamphlet for Lorelei, sold in the theaters where the film was shown.
[6] Nishibe Susumu, “‘Sengo’ no kanreki ni shutsugenshita hatsu no gunji shiso eizo,” Eiga geijutsu 412 (Summer 2005), 12-13.
[7] Nishibe's voluble critiques of post-9.11 America are one reason why he left the Japan Society for History Textbook Reform, which has generally been pro-American.
[8] See, for instance, Watanabe Takenobu, “Rorerai,” Kinema junpo 1426 (first half April 2005), 100.
[9] The Maritime Self-Defense Force in fact fully cooperaed with the producers of Aegis in shooting of the film.
[10] Yong Fa's plan is a rather roundabout way to topple the government. By destroying Tokyo, he assumes his country will be blamed for the atrocity and the Americans will attack and topple the Kim regime.
[11] Hasegawa Yasuo, one of the screenwriters for Aegis, says the producers asked him to rework the Emergency Law Study Group's manifesto, which is described in some detail in the novel, so as to avoid a “bothersome negative response” (tsumaranai kyohikan). See the interview with Hasegawa, “Shujinko o dare ni suru ka, dare no eiga ni suru ka,” Shinario 686 (September 2005), 23.
[12] The narrative device of creating military free agents can also be found in such works as Silent Service.
[13] Hasegawa speaks of trying to avoid a single interpretation of the film's stance toward the nation: Hasegawa 23. That, presumably, would also enable multiple, yet not always exclusive, attachments to the nation.
[14] Viewer reaction on the web was mixed toward these visual effects. Some remarked that the somewhat artificial look helped support the fantasy narrative, while others criticized their lack of convincing realism, concluding that cheap Japanese movies could still not compare to the vastly superior Hollywood product.
[15] A quote from the press pamphlet for Aegis.
[16] The official pamphlets and press books for the films devoted most of their pages to describing the technology, and not the issues involved in the films.
[17] See, for instance, Tsuruta Koji, “Naze, ima, senso eiga na no ka,” Kinema junpo 1425 (second half of March 2005), 39.
You have
Access
Open access