I have trouble accepting Kyoami, the Ichimonji fool, as OK ,into this beautiful movie. He seemed a weak point.
And not because he didn't act well, but because he felt .. unrealistic. First - there wasn't such a thing as a landlord's fool in feudal Japan. There were jokers, but usually associated with theater troups, festivals & other celebrations. Nobody could have spoken to the landlord like he did, only maybe old and trusty councilors, and even so, not beyond a limit - as is Kurogane with Jiro (when mocking Kaede or telling Jiro he's been hooked in a dangerous relationship, but doesn't push into stopping his master seeing Kaede before the battle)... Secondly - he has some awkward remarks when speaking with the mad Hidetora which don't look "Kyoami" style. Maybe Kurosawa should have tried to work the fool from King Lear into something else? what do you think?
Luckily, his horsing around was kept to minimum as he developed into a more serious, sorrowful figure later on. But yeah his annoying act did threaten to harm the picture in a major way at some point (Kurosawa was allegedly a big admirer of John Ford - thank god he did not follow the American´s suit as far as Ford´s disastrous penchant for populating his films with goofy caricatures is concerned).
well, he certainly was a wise-cracker, and had some very interesting remarks - a bit unusual, though, for his age, and maybe for the upbringing .
it's just, it seemed a bit odd as character, like, even Kurosawa sort of made of him a study, an experiment ... I remember the scene when Kyoami, the clown, pokes fun at Taro, the new Lord - comparing him with an empty gourd in the wind, if I'm not wrong - and one of Taro's guards is almost close to splitting him in half, if not for Lord Hidetora, who kills the soldier with an arrow .. well, that's actually what would have happened to Kyoami (being split in half) in the first place for daring to crack jokes & playing the smart guy in front of his master. Those times were very strict, in terms of etiquette and order.
And I don't think he's meant to be unimportant - Kurosawa needed somebody to fulfill the part of the Shakespearean fool, somebody that stresses the facts for the audience, in this case maybe to explain to the foreign audiences what a Japanese person would have understood without too many words(relationship between relatives, the importance of different objects for the lord of the castle, etc)... but it was odd to have a jester :-)
Thank you odinsdottir :-). ... now I came to think it was anachronistic with a reason - sort of oddity for the Japanese public (it wasn't after all a Japanese story) and an oddity for the westerner public (the extreme affection for a master); just wonder..
The fool was only a weakness because Kurosawa chose to set it in feudal Japan. The fool was common in the English court at the time of Shakespeare's writing and his function was to tell the truth in riddles. I found the fool ok and with, as usual, the best lines. How would those lines have been preserved if the fool had disappeared? The vassals could not have taken the role and they were the next closest thing to the fool. Kurosawa made the relationship between Kyoami and Hidetori more personal than in Shakespeare to presumably make his existence more credible.
yep, Kyoami is full of snappy lines and crazy enough to verge on losing his head - literally . He is so much English, yet heavy with oriental wisdom, and so much Japanese, but, as you put it, so close to Hidetora, as if he would have been part of the old ruler (then, who knows what exactly had happened many years ago behind those palace silent doors).
I came to like the fool a lot :o) but I see him as a sort of unreal, ghost-like (but not in the scary & invisible way) character . Somebody who knows, feels and understands a lot like you would.
I noticed that everybody here refers to the fool as 'he'. Im aware of the fact that the role was played by a transvestite but dont you think it is a female fool? Not sure why kurosawa chose a transvestite but im pretty sure its supposed to be a girl in the story.
I also wondered why he had so much screen time. But now i think his whole purpose was to develop the character of Lord Ichimonji. Many times he says things like "i have been making you laugh my whole life, now is your turn to entertain me". This demonstrates thar he may have hard feelings towards him, he may feel like an underestimated servant, he may feel mistreated or even like a slave. Whoever, he had the chance to abandon him to his luck in many occasions, there was no one around to punish him or reprimand him for doing so, and the fact that Ichimonji was at the border of insanity and was no longer the lord could have made his treason even easier, and yet, he takes care of him, helps him and even saves him from an "accidental suicide", because he is loyal to him, depite everything, he may have some sort of affection for the lord. He wants to return to the castle together. And this, i think, show that Ichimonji is, in fact, a character capable of good will and dirty deeds. The immoral characters harm him, while the characters with the most morals are still loyal to him.
Traditionally, the jester at court was expected to tell the truth when everybody else didn't. In an entertaining manner that is, to earn him the jester's license that freed him from repercussions. And that's pretty much what the guy did.
It's a fairly interesting dynamics between those two. Even though Hidetaro became angry pretty much each time he was reminded of his idiocies he seemed to be quite attached nevertheless. To the point of saving the jester's life even, much to the dismay of his son. An attachment that the jester appeared to feel likewise, suggesting that there were human qualities to be found in Hidetaro many of us probably weren't immediately aware of.
Well...guys... so long! Thanks for all the good ideas that you've shared here.
It looks like these Message Boards will be forever deleted by his majesty IMDb, without any regard to its mere users. Nice to be talking to you here, the most constructive part of a film page (the Review part was the worst, with all the too many ego-filled, pretentious "reviews") ...
This character and the whole movie was extremely powerful.
For this movie to be made in Japan with these Western Shakespeare
influences and less than cheery and heroic portrayal of Japanese
history ... brilliant, very individualistic and powerful. An amazing
movie.