Kurosawa Akira’s Rashōmon (1950) is hailed by many as a film of innovation in both technical and narrative aspects. The film’s stunning use of light and shadows, contained sets, and flashback narrative are some of these aspects. What is particularly interesting is how they work together to reflect the complexity of memory or act of trying to unveil an absolute truth.
Like a mystery or detective story, a murder that occurred in the forest is told from the perceptive of four different witnesses, including the dead Samurai himself, who tells his version of the story as a spirit. Rashōmon begins with three men; the Woodcutter, the Priest and a Commoner, taking refuge from a rainstorm beneath the Rashōmon gate. The Woodcutter and Priest, who were present at the trial for the Samurai’s murder, begin to recount the contradicting versions of the incident as heard at the trial. The first three stories are from the perspective of a notorious bandit named Tajōmaru (Mifune Toshiro), the wife Masako (Machiko Kyo), and her dead husband, the Samurai (Masayuki Mori). The final recount of the murder is told by the Woodcutter (Takashi Shimura) who confesses that he witnessed the entire incident, but did not mention it during the trail because he did not want to get involved. Throughout, the film cuts between these three locations: the three men taking refuge at the Rashōmon gate, the court, and the forest where the murder takes place.
The different characters have conflicting interpretations of what happened, reflecting this notion, that when people retell a story, it will always be different because memory is subjective. Rather than trying to determine which of the four stories is correct, the viewer should observe how the stories correlate with each other and how Kurosawa carefully uses repetition or contrasting shots in order to reflect the complications of memory and retelling.
The first story told is by Tajōmaru, the bandit. Initially the viewer barely questions his story. However, as the film progresses and the other versions are presented, the viewer becomes less and less sure of what is true. One particular reason why the viewer is able to identify the falsity in each story is how there are several contrasting shots and events that seem to change in order to make the person who is recounting the murder appear more sympathetic. For instance, in the bandit’s story he and the Samurai have an epic duel in order to win Masako. The bandit gloriously kills the Samurai and is presented as a skillful fighter. However, in the Woodcutter’s account, the duel is clumsy and pathetic. According to the Woodcutter, the bandit is able to kill the Samurai based on sheer luck. What is most interesting about the Woodcutter’s account of the stumbling duel is how it is reminiscent of the pathetic struggle between Masako and the bandit earlier in the film. The way in which Masako stumbles and falls while failing to stab the bandit is repeated in the way in which the bandit and the Samurai duel. In this instance, the viewer sees where the bandit takes aspects of what really happened but recalls it differently. The bandit applies what can be assumed to be truthful details to different parts of the story, making him appear more dignified. The contrasting and repeated imagery/actions tell the viewer that something in the story has been distorted and therefore is questioned.
Another example of repeated actions or contrasting images is in the scenes where the Bandit and Masako laugh hysterically. The conniving cackling occurs in separate accounts of the murder. In Masako’s interpretation of the events, she is ashamed and then disturbed by the lack of remorse from her husband. She cries and begs her husband to kill her. However, in the Woodcutter’s story, Masako is a less sympathetic character. She laughs madly like the bandit did previously and forces the men to duel. The bandit and Masako’s mannerisms and exaggerated laughter are definite parallels. According to Donald Richie the length of each shot is also similar within the two scenes (Richie 124). Again, the repeated imagery or camera work draws the viewer’s attention to the way in which truth is convoluted and altered through the process of memory.
Concealed or obscured truth is a prominent theme within the film and is further supported by the film’s setting. As Robert Altman notes in his “Special Introductory to Rashōmon,” the use of rain creates an atmosphere that feels “blanketed” or covered up. The three men at the Rashōmon gate are additionally “blanketed,” because they are hiding undercover from the rain, while they try to figure out the events of the murder. In the end of the film, where there is a glimmer of truth to the events of the murder, the rain has stopped and the Woodcutter walks away and out into the open scenery. It’s as though one of these “layers” has been peeled away, allowing for a less claustrophobic vibe.
The actual murder of the Samurai takes place within the forest which again, exudes an atmosphere that is layered or hidden. There is the famous shot of the sun where its rays of light spew through the branches of the tall trees. The contrast between the luminous shining light and dark gloomy trees creates an image of something bright and true trying to break through obstruction.
Rashōmon is a remarkable film, not only for its careful narrative and beautiful cinematography but because it is captivating in the way in which repeated/contrasting events and particular setting echo this underlying theme of memory and hidden truth. The film forces the viewer to examine the character’s stories and observe how events get skewed when memory is all there is to rely on.
Works Cited
Richie, Donald. Rashōmon, Akira Kurosawa, Director. (Rutgers University Press, 1987)