the nature of violence, Reivew on The Sword of Doom

Excellent violence is a colorless sword. In fact, the overall structure of the film is both influenced and bound by the adaptation of the novel. Although Hashimoto is worthy of being an experienced screenwriter, the comprehensive adaptation, especially the deep consciousness conveyed by borrowing the background of the times, has made this pure violence restricted. It's definitely a pity that Sword of Destruction ended up being a period drama - which is why the finale is logically questionable - although the ending "cleverly" avoids the narrative thread to lead to an "open nature" scene, but in fact It is the superb skills of the screenwriter that blurs the integrity of the film (not only the complexity and anticlimactic character relationships make no sense here, but more importantly, the script's attempt is to capture the complexity of the entire era, and finally achieve a small view. large effect).

However, the actual effect has not been achieved. First, the adaptation of a novel itself is meaningless. No matter how condensed it is, it is actually a new creation. Therefore, it is impossible and unnecessary to take care of every aspect of the novel. Characters such as Shimada and Shinsengumi are superfluous (not essential). Second, the overly complex character relationship weakens the irrepressible and unruly violence itself, and finally cancels the method of brotherly revenge, which may be meaningful for the adaptation of the original book, but it is self-defeating for a film independent of the novel.

However, this movie is different from Heroes of the Five Shrines or Akira Kurosawa after all. It's based entirely on violence, not drama or halberds—that is, liberating the samurai from the "Bushido" package. This is a monster. This is what it really is; a bloodthirsty beast that licks the knife and advocates force. The film, at least in part, uncovers the true nature of the samurai.

View more about The Sword of Doom reviews

The Sword of Doom pictures