Pages

Wednesday, August 22, 2012

Film Review: Ju-on: The Grudge (2002)


Ju-on to watch this film. *ba-dum tish*

Ju-on: The Grudge (2002) is the third installment of Takashi Shimizu's Ju-on series, and the first to be released theatrically. The film depicts six interconnected stories all centering on a house in Japanese suburbia and the people associated with it. This is no ordinary house; it is plagued by the curse of a deceased man and his murdered wife and son, as when one dies "in the grip of a powerful rage," such a curse is created.


Figure 1
Like Hideo Nakata's Ring (1998) before it, Ju-on thrives as a film on its incredibly unsettling atmosphere. Shimizu creates this atmosphere using minimal score and snail-slow pacing but above all an uncomfortable degree of quietness -- nearly every scene in the film seems to be leading up to a big scare, be it via moving shadows, distorted photographs or TV images (Figure 1), pallid, shambling schoolgirls, or eerily drawn-out death rattles. Tension and unease build as the audience's imagination fills in the blanks initially left by the film; it is not until the near-end of the film that the true antagonist, the evil "big bad," is revealed.
Figure 4

Figure 2
Figure 3
The living characters in Ju-on are highly average and ordinary. Rika the social worker, Sachie the catatonic elderly woman, Toyama the ex-detective (Figure 2), Izumi the schoolgirl -- all are believable, well-cast characters. More significant in these respects, however, are the characters of Kayako and Toshio, the two ghosts who seemingly haunt those who enter the premises of the house. The portrayals of the two are a huge part of the fear caused by the film; Kayako creeps, inhumane, blood-soaked, and unnaturally contorted, down staircases (Figure 3), while her ghostly pale son Toshio appears out of thin air to stare unblinkingly and send tingles down spines (Figure 4).

The only true complaint to be made about the film is the potential for confusion caused by the arrangement of the six stories. The vignettes, much like Quentin Tarantino's Pulp Fiction (1994), are in non-chronological order, but not clearly so. If one does not pay close attention or make the right connections, it may appear as if there are clear contradictions in the plot; for example, Rika's death is mentioned prior to its being shown. Otherwise, there is not much to be said as far as detractors. Being a horror film, the intention of Ju-on is to entertain by inducing fright; ergo, there is no clear theme or underlying message intended to be communicated. The cinematography, in all aspects (color, lighting, framing) is decidedly average, with no real standout shots or even notable characteristics.

Figure 5
Overall, Ju-on is a film that serves its purpose -- it is very scary (Figure 5), the kind of scary that curls your toes and forces you to look over your shoulder every few seconds. The atmosphere dominates viewers' consciousnesses and drags them kicking and screaming into the dark. Just pay close attention to the small details (so as to recognize the order of the storyline) and Ju-on is a film well worth your time.

7 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This movie is great, what are your opinion/likes about horror? Gee, this review sure was swell but very vague at times with your reaction to a scene. This makes it hard for me the reader to determine your stance towards the movie, try to review the movie as a whole. The technical aspects were great

      Delete
  2. Overall, this is a well done review. I thought you incorporated a large majority of film language, especially since you mentioned score, something that I don't find commonly mentioned. Your analysis is good, and I thought your paragraph about possible distractors was well thought out, and something I hadn't thought to include before. You were also able to characterize and fill in archetypal roles for the characters. I suggest you talk more about the camera angles and shot selection, however.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I feel as if the analysis was vague but vague enough for me to still understand the points you were trying to get across (that might be because I have seen the film). I noticed that you included screen shots and that they don't have captions -- for future reference, include some captions and relate those screen shots to what you are analyzing.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think that you hit the major parts of the anlyis. How ever i feel like you could have mentioned more. You talk about score, lighting and camera angles but dont go into much depth. I like how you added the distractions. Over all nice job

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think that this is a well rounded review having major traits of a review. It has a brief and efficient plot summary then moves onto why you liked the film. I think that if you had more analysis on other aspects of the film, the review would have been much more effective. For example, you talked about how the characters were perfectly cast, but I would liked to possibly know some of the filmography. Overall, I think its a solid review, but next time, try to delve more into the pieces of the film that makes it different to highlight what you liked or didn't like.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I couldn't sleep last night... not joking at all

    ReplyDelete