Grave Of The Fireflies...Wow - Page 3

Actually I believe the answers are in the film, but I'm not going to watch it right now to dig up all the facts. It's simply too emotional of a movie and I have to be in the mood to view it.

It is semi-autobiographical - the author did lose his young sister to starvation during the war, but obviously he himself survived. But feeling the guilt and loss, I'm sure he felt like he died (or a big part of him died) along with his sister, hence the book (and movie's) main character also dies.

I don't think the boy merely dies, I think he may have killed himself via self-starvation to atone for his guilt over his sister's death. The first time we see him, he is starving in a subway, and a woman offers him food and he doesn't even try for it. Too weak to eat, perhaps. Or no will to live. There may be no difinitve answers in many of the great movies - and in a way, that's one of the things that makes them great.

Am browsing some books in Yale Bookstore / Barnes & Noble in New Haven, CT besides an old theater which is screening Melinda and Melinda and Don't Move when I read this in Roger Ebert's review/section of Grave of the Fireflies in his latest book, The Great Movies II ... "... Grave of the Fireflies is the most profoundly human animated film I've ever seen." [I bought the copy of the first one when it just came out but am not still sure if I will buy this one]

Ernest,

Which publication or internet site do you write your film reviews? Maybe you already know that Ebert quoted and credited you with that. Grave of the Fireflies made it in Ebert's 100 more great films. WOW x3! [Great call by Ebert! Plus, I did not know that a) you are famous and has been Ebert's movie buddy b) that Ebert is a lurker here? ]

I remember reading this review when you posted it in the Bambi discussion thread last year, and the astonishing power and passion in the review prompted me to buy the film as a blind-buy, which I almost never do.

The most astonishing movie experience I have ever had - and the only time a movie has moved me to tears. I loaned the film to my parents, and it was six months before I got it back as the DVD made its way around everyone my parents know, and I understand pretty much everyone loved the flm.

a) I'm hardly "famous"

b) Roger Ebert was not lurking the HTF and quoting a post...From 1998 - 2001, I wrote an industry e-zine analyzing classic and current films called The Outsider. At first it was just sent to 16 friends of mine in Los Angeles who worked in the entertainment industry, but the distribution list grew rapidly, until I had readers in Brazil, Japan, the Netherlands, the UK, Germany. Roger Ebert quotes my work three times during this period, in his reviews for Pinocchio, Fantasia, and Grave of the Fireflies. The Fireflies review ran in the December 9th edition of the Outsider, which also contained my analysis of Empire of the Sun. The thing started taking over my life, becoming a chore rather than a pleasure, and there was no way to make money and earn a living deconstructing Empire of the Sun and Clint Eastwood's True Crime, etc., so I decided to channel my energies elsewhere. I briefly planned to revive the newsletter in 2004, but then I remembered why I stopped doing it in the first place and left it alone.

Wow - what a fantastic review. Likewise, I have bumped this up to my must see list.

I don't watch a lot of animation (most recent was Triplets of Belleville which I loved to bits) and only one has moved me to tears: believe it or not it was 'Land Before Time'. The dying dinosaur explaining the circle of life to her baby Littlefoot still gets to me all these years later. What a wuss, huh?

Thanks again for the great review and for inspiring me to seek out the movie.

In Ebert's review he mentions that the author was filled with guilt over his sister's death. When he found food he would first eat and then bring what was left to his sister.

I can understand how some would blame Seita for bringing problems upon himself, but that doesn't change the horror of the situation. Also these are children, they react emotionally, not logically. We can't impose "well I would have just done this and everything would be ok" type behaviours on them. We are not living the situation they are living or seeing things as they are seeing them.

As for the comment on the money, perhaps you are unfamiliar the wartime economics. Runaway inflation caused by scarcity of supply would have used up their savings rapidly. As shown in the movie, at times, food could not be had at any price. Particularly in Japan, which was on a total war footing, there would have been relatively little a farmer could buy with the money anyway, and thus didn't have much incentive to sell. By the end of the war, with the American submarine blockade choking off all imports, including gasoline for transportation and mechanized farm equipment, all able-bodied men mobilized into the military, and a broken economy, farm production fell drastically and starvation was a problem all over Japan.

Akira Kurosawa writes in his autobiography ...Something Like An Autobiography about how little there was to eat, people would be reduced to eating grass, etc. If anything, the situation was probably worse than what was shown in GOTF.

Interesting story, Ernest.. I think any decent film-magazine editor would be a fool not to use your truly stunning writing talents as film critic and historian.

You are a credit to the HTF, and a continuing measure of it's high signal-to-noise ratio of writing worth reading.

Very nice review. I own the special edition. IMO, this one isn't a rental. It is truly a great film and I highly recommend it to anyone and everyone also.

For instance, why did Seita sit around all day and not go to work like everyone wanted him to?

There is a dual layer, here, I think. The entire film is about how such a tragedy could happen. What I saw were adults so stressed that they abdicated their adult responsibility to assist and nurture the young by blaming Seita. The horrifying part is, I belive Seita took their words to heart, and after Setsuko dies, this is what drives him to his own suicide. Mr. Ebert writes about how the author of the book was plagued with guilt. The film shows where this guilt originated and what the cost was, when in fact the true blame lies directly at the feet of the aunt, the farmer, everyone who turned their back because they were overwhelmed with their own problems.

Also, there seemed to be concerned people in town that might have been willing to help them (policeman), yet they continued to hide out in the cave even after Setsuko's illness became serious.

Seita takes Setsuko to the doctor, and what is he told? That her only medicine is food. The girl needs food.

Seita rages...Food? WHERE DO I GET FOOD?

The doctor is overwhelmed. He has no answer, and offers no help or advice. Another hopeless case. He sends Seita out and sees the next person in line.

It is clear that the indifference of the society in the face of their own need is a primary cause of the tragedy of Fireflies.

You know, looking into our own hearts, can we in America say that such a tragedy could never happen here? I think, in a way, it happens every day, all over the world, every time someone turns their back on someone's suffering, thinking "Well, they brought it on themselves, I have my own problems."

That's the central damning point of Grave of the Fireflies, how human beings are able to rationalize human suffering in light of their own self-preservation. Few animated films have such insight into the human character, and even fewer are able to dramatize these observations in so devastating a fashion.

I have always felt that the movie could be interpreted a different way. The interpretation being that by not going to work, thereby fulfilling his "duty to his country", Seita assures the destruction of himself and his sister. Sometimes I got the distinct feeling that the subliminal message was, "perform your duty to your country or die".

A person had to feel sorry for the girl. Her demise was the direct consequence of pride and foolishness. This thread should be renamed as a discussion thread. Someone who hasn't seen the film may pop in thinking this is a review thread and end up having the movie spoiled for them.

Bout time you reposted this thing somewhere, man

Like others here--the first time I read this review (Some other website had reprinted it a couple years ago) I was like "Well..guess I gotta check that out."

So I thank you for turning me on to this masterpiece. And the point about "humans rationalizing in the face of self-preservation" is exactly WHY I felt the movie was so powerful. I didn't have the questions as to why Seita didn't go get that job as fast as he was told--I understood. It might have even been the same choice I would have made as a kid, when the concept of real responsibility is still sort of vague and unreachable. And that made the tragedy all the greater. Because it seemed so honest and real.

I skimmed your review. It is very well written. One thing I disagree with is that The Plague Dogs is a propaganda film.

There is nothing in that film that could not have occurred in an animal testing laboratory. Ever hear of the LD50 test? The scientists in the film are not portrayed as evil: just cold, calculated and uncaring. Frankly, a person would have to become unemotionally affected by what goes on in an animal testing facility; otherwise, the person would not be able to function in that environment.

The Plague Dogs is one of my favorite animated films. I absolutely adore it. I do not, however, turn a blind eye to the fact that - however noble and true - it is a one-sided screed against animal experimentation, with the research laboratory painted in the most unflattering light possible (spreading false rumours about the animals, performing illegal tests, stating the animals carry the plague to insure they are killed rather than captured and studied, lest the populace find out what's been going on, etc.) -- that's not a balanced portrayal of the issue, that's a pamphlet by PETA.

Because it is such a propaganda work, it is really no different than Walt Disney's Education for Death -- and because I believe there are Americans out there who might be on the fence about watching Grave of the Fireflies, but are hesitating because they think it might be a "Americans killed little Japanese kids in WWII" story, I thought it necessary and important to point out how the film is not a propaganda work in the slightest, but how it is a unviersal tale, one that could really happen anywhere. The tale could be relocated to the American Great Depression, and still prove just as devastating.

I adore Richard Adams, but we're going to have to agree to disagree about The Plague Dogs as a work of propaganda.

Bout time you reposted this thing somewhere, man

Fatboy, I posted this thing - by request - over a year ago. Someone just recently bumped it. A year ago, everyone was consumed by Return of the King and the Oscars, and it got lost. Now were bored off our ass, and this thing becomes a hot topic.

I guess we are going to have to. The research station was a top secret defense laboratory in the middle of a national park. IIRC nobody knew what work it was engaged in. The activities of the station only began to come to light when the dogs escaped. It made perfect sense that the station personnel would concoct a cover story and attempt to have the dogs killed, in order to head off deeper inquiries into the station's activities.

Anyways, 2/3 of the movie was about the dogs learning to survive on the open moor with the plague story and dog hunt as a backdrop.

I am not going to deny that it doesn't contain propaganda elements. I just think calling it a propaganda film is too harsh. I watched Education for Death which, as you pointed out, is a propaganda film with a strident, simplistic message about Nazi brainwashing.

The Plague Dogs is a lot more complicated and subtle than Education for Death. There is real characterization going on in TPD. The viewer identifies with and feels empathy for the dogs. No such thing occurs when you watch Education for Death. I think it is a real stretch to say that TPD is no different than EfD; however, I guess it boils down to a difference in opinion.

oh.

whoops. My bad.

I retract my thanks then. SCREW YOU ERNEST RISTER, YOU COLD COLD MAN!!!

Ooh, ooh, ooh, cold as, cold as ice
You're as cold as ice
You're as cold as ice, cold as ice, I know
-- Foreigner

E-S:

A film does not have to be presented with the trappings of a WWII propaganda film in order to qualify as a one-sided, didactic political statement. Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan is all about one simple idea -- that modern Americans should earn the sacrifice of their fallen soldiers. In a sense, it too is a propaganda work, though its message is surely no less heartfelt and compelling as The Plague Dogs.

While I certainly recomend everyone to see it, to be honest, I couldn't imagine owning it. It is such a painful experience to watch, that I don't see myself watching this multiple times. Great movie, but I wouldn't own it.

Jason

Grave of the Fireflies is a magnificent film. I'm bewildered though by the criticism that Seita should have worked to provide for himself and his sister. I'm a pediatrician and let me tell you, these are CHILDREN. They will not think or act in the cooly efficient manner of adults. They rightfully expected to be cared for by adults. Money was worthless and most adults and the children's caretakers made sure the children felt like burdens. Finding a refuge in a cave is a very accurate childlike solution.

I can understand that. I don't often get the urge to pop this movie in just for kicks either; it is by no means a light hearted film. After seeing it, I felt it was worthy of owning because there is a good chance that I will view it again in the future. Even my 16yr old daughter was very moved by this movie, and she's a tough cookie to crack. MTV generation and all, I figured she would lose interest quickly with the somewhat slow progress, but she immediately became involved with the story and characters.

Along the lines of what Stephen_L and others have said, first you have the incredible weight of the situation, and then being at an age where you haven't yet been in a position where you must take care of yourself, I don't think the actions portrayed are out of line at all. Seita wouldn't have it in his head "OK, now it's time to go get a job and provide and care for my little sister." That may be his desire, but at his age, I wouldn't expect most children to be able to take action on that or even know how or where to start. I feel this is a key aspect of what the film was trying to depict.

Re: Grave Of The Fireflies...Wow

I saw two copies at my local Best Buy last week and they were both priced $49.99. Is this because it's out of print?

Re: Grave Of The Fireflies...Wow

One of my favorite movies...even though it's really depressing. Sometimes it can make you feel like "Hey, what am I complaining about? My life rocks compared to these poor little kids" - thus oddly cheering you up a little bit even though it leaves you depressed.

Too bad a lot of folks turn their nose up at a "Japanese cartoon" and miss such a great and moving work

Re: Grave Of The Fireflies...Wow

Good review Ernest, but I think you're confusing Plague Dogs the book with Plague Dogs the movie. The book demonized the doctors to the point of making them unrealistic, but the movie did not do the same thing. Michael Rosen has said that the film was not intended as an anti-vivisection piece, but an adventure story. I feel it's neither, it's more of docudrama about what would happen if two dogs did escape a research lab. It doesn't show anything that couldn't really have happened to the animals, and even eliminates the happy ending. It doesn't have the book's overlong scenes of an ex-Nazi doctor delighting in torturing little animals, and it doesn't have a reporter who tells lies in his newspaper articles to make things even worse for the dogs. In the film the humans are all portrayed as average people. Any anti-vivisection message that comes out is a result of the viewer being confronted with the film's honesty, but the it doesn't promote any particular viewpoint. The Plague Dogs doesn't attempt to change the way you think about vivisection, it tries to make you think about it and come to your own conclusions. It is a propaganda film, but it promotes thinking about world issues such as vivisection, it doesn't promote disapproving of them.

You also seem to be using the term propaganda like it's a negative thing. I don't think that's true, virtually anything that tries to be more than just mere entertainment is propaganda. Propaganda is the promotion of a message, and I think that can be a good thing. In "Comic Book Confidential" Sue Cole says that her comics have been critiqued as propaganda. She responds by saying that she does not consider this criticism and that "when bad propaganda is spread, it must be fought with good propaganda.

To get back to Grave of the Fireflies, it may not be an anti-war propaganda film but it is nonetheless a propaganda film. It tries to show that pride can be destructive. If the children had just done what they were told and pulled their own weight they would have lived. But no, they had to remain stubborn to the bitter end and they died for it. They had countless opportunities to go back to live with their aunt, but they were too proud to do so. The boy would rather watch his sister die than admit he was wrong.

If Grave of the Fireflies is not propaganda, then it's just cheap entertainment. If it has no message, than it manipulates the viewer's emotions for no purpose, and I think that's wrong. Films like the Plague Dogs, Grave of the Fireflies and When the Wind Blows don't just make us cry, they teach us. And in the end, that's what makes them great films. If you want to cry, you can just stub your toe or something. If you want to learn, you can watch a propaganda film.