Zatoichi vs Ichi: FIGHT

In 2003 Zatoichi was the first major cinema release of the long-running blind swordsman character since 1989. Then in 2010, sort of sequel called Ichi was released, starring Ayase Haruka as the daughter of Zatoichi on a search for her father.

Although not a remake of the same story, it's worth comparing the two. The 2003 film was directed by and starred Kitano Takeshi. His version is as unique as you'd expect, giving Zatoichi blonde hair and a blood red cane where he keeps his sword. The 2010 film, directed by Sori Fukihiko (who also directed Ping Pong) is, in many ways, a more typical story of love, death and revenge.

Both films contain the scene set in a gambling den where Zatoichi/Ichi is able to tell which way up the dice have fallen simply by listening. In the 2003 film this is part of the story and begins a series of events leading to the climax, whereas in the 2010 version it doesn't seem to go anywhere. I suspect they put it in as an homage to the earlier films.

In terms of casting, both films are blessed with a very visual lead role. Takeshi is great as the blind swordsman and your eyes are naturally drawn to him when he's on screen. Haruka's striking beauty works surprisingly well as the blank face of a killer. Both films have strong supporting casts, too. Notably the 2010 version has Osawa Takao and Ayase Haruka together again, and the rapport they built up while making Jin means the chemistry between the two is very relaxed. Also worth mentioning is Kubozuka Yosuke (who worked with the director in Ping Pong) who impresses in his role.

The main difference between the two are in the attitude of the film. Ichi is quite a traditional movie, whereas Zatoichi is quite playfully shot. Takeshi often sets up the actions of the extras (carpenters or farmers) to syncronise with the music of the soundtrack. The background characters are village idiots or grumpy regulars at a sake bar. Plus, of course, the whole thing ends with a dance routine. Ichi looks nice and is well-made, but never really surprises.

Plus, Zatoichi tells a better story. There are few wasteful scenes and the finale is not a mass brawl between hordes of warriors, but a quick, tense stand-off between two people. This is far more low-key than Ichi's final battle against the overacted gang leader and his followers. So, although Ichi is a good movie that's worth a look, Zatoichi takes this battle quite easily. In fact, it wins with its eyes shut.

Ha ha. Do you see what I did there? Ha ha.

Memories of Matsuko vs Memories of Matsuko: FIGHT!

I’m used to there being two versions of each story in Japan (whether it’s anime, drama or film) but I did not expect to discover a TV drama version of Memories of Matsuko. Trying to find it on the internet is impossible since searching for it brings up results for the film version. I did, however, find one user on YouTube who had put up some parts of the early episodes.

The riverside is a recurring theme in both versions (film, left. TV right)

Both were made in 2006, with the film coming out several months before the drama. Watching the TV series is a bit like watching an amateur production of the film. Gone are the dazzling bright colours and cinematography. Instead, we have what is a very mundane retelling of the same story. According to Wikipedia, the TV drama is more faithful to the original novel’s story, and I suppose over eleven episodes, it’s able to go into more detail but at the same time it loses a lot in emotional impact.

The scenes introducing Matsuko as a school teacher (film, left. TV, right)

The big problem with the TV series is that you can’t watch it without comparing it to the film. Nakatani Miki is sorely missed, and there are no musical numbers to illustrate certain scenes. And I think the screengrabs I've posted demonstrate the difference between Nakashima Tetsuya’s directorial vision, and the flat, muted greys of an average television drama.

The same argument (film, left. TV, right)

I do wonder if I had never seen the movie would I like the TV series, and I think I would. But I found it difficult to sit through the drama version without wishing I was watching the film version instead.

Toki o Kakeru Shoujo vs. The Girl Who Leapt Through Time: FIGHT!

These two films are live-action adaptations of the original novel Toki o Kakeru Shojou written by Tsutsui Yasutaka in 1967. I’ve already reviewed the 2010 version starring Naka Riisa, and I was interested to see how the first film adaptation differed.

Well, I felt like it was me who leapt through time after I watched the 1983 version. All of the parts of Japanese culture that I’m used to have gone. This is an age where there are no mobile phones, no internet, no mp3 players, and everyone has black hair!

Also, the pace of the story is very slow. The story doesn’t really start to reveal itself until forty-five minutes and, although most of the early part of the film is important for setting up the story, it can be somewhat tiresome to sit through. I don't want to call it “old-fashioned”, because I can remember 1983, and if this film is old-fashioned then what does that make me? On the positive side, the slow pace means you can appreciate the slow dropping of clues along the way before the mystery really begins.

The differences between the two versions are pretty vast. In the 1983 version, the leap in time is only twenty-four hours, where as in the 2010 version it is several decades. Both films have a man from the future manipulating time for research purposes, but the 2010 version has more fun with the idea of time travel. Also, because the girl has leapt further, the 2010 film is somehow more emotional and more involving. The 1983 is quiet and distant. Even the final scene between the girl and the boy she loves is just like an ordinary conversation. The film's style is just too conservative for such an original idea.

I’d say that the 2010 version wins. It’s a more interesting version of the story, with more laughs and more tears along the way.

One Missed Call vs One Missed Call: FIGHT!

The TV and film versions share the same premise (a message is left on a mobile phone, dated several days in the future and apparently from the person’s own mobile, and the message is a recording of their final seconds) and a scene or two, but other than that, there’s not much similarity.











The film can be split into two halves. The first half is full of jumps and brief scares, while the second half cranks up the tension as the heroin Nakamura Yumi searches through a deserted hospital for clues as to the source of the murders. Director Takashi Miike keeps the shocks coming fast, so there’s little space to recover before the next.

Meanwhile, the TV series had eleven episodes to fill, and so there are more deaths along the way to the ending. It changes the character of Nakamura Yuki from being a student to being a journalist, thus giving us a light-hearted side-story about how badly her career is going.

Comparing the two Yumis: the film version, played by Shibasaki Kou, wins hands down. While there’s nothing wrong with Kukakawa Rei’s performance, it lacks Shibasaki’s screen presence. As for the amount of blood on show, bearing in mind the restrictions of television, the TV version of One Missed Call can get pretty unpleasant. On the other hand, Takashi Miike keeps the gore down to a minimum in the cinematic version.

I enjoyed both, and found them different enough so that one didn’t feel like a pale copy of the other. Also, the two versions have similar endings which mean different things, which impressed me. The film has the performances and production standards to give it the edge. The TV version is more comedic, but not afraid to throw some scares into the mix too. I’m giving this battle to the film version but, perhaps surprisingly, not by much.

The Professor’s Beloved Equation: Book vs Film: FIGHT!

I don’t read many novels, so it’s still a peculiar experience when I see a film of a book I’ve previously read, not unlike deja vu: I can remember the events but I’ve never seen them before. Also, thinking things like "That house is bigger than I imagined it," is kind of distracting. As such, I tend to avoid watching films of books I already know.

But I was curious as to how the film version of "The Professor’s Beloved Equation" (or "The Housekeeper and the Professor", as the English translation is called) turned out. The story is about a mathematics professor who, through an accident in the 1970s, has a memory that only lasts eighty minutes. A housekeeper (played in the film by Fukatsu Eri) is hired to look after him during the day, and she has to get used to his curious observations about numbers and the fact that he always asks her the same questions each day since it is, for him, the first time they’ve met.

The novel has the luxury of talking about numbers at length. It covers far more topics than the film, and in more playful detail. The film struggles with the uncinematic nature of perfect and imaginary numbers, although the idea of cutting away to an adult version of Root (the housekeeper’s son) explaining some of the theories to a mathematics class was a clever way of getting around this to some extent.

The film is also shot in quite a flat style. The director, for the most part, seems happy to point the camera at the actors and let them tell the story. While there’s nothing wrong with that, I found it lacked the intimacy and emotions that the book had. And although the novel is not long, the film couldn’t fit all the story in, and the poignant last days of the professor are reduced to a single scene of him and the grown-up Root playing catch on the beach.

So the book defeats its well-meaning but distant cinematic version. It displays more love for the characters and the mathematics they discuss than the film does.

Keizoku vs Keizoku 2: REMATCH!

* spoilers *

Now that I’ve seen both series through to their conclusion, I thought I’d compare the two again to see how they match up. (For my review of Keizoku 2: SPEC on its own merits, you can read it on Yam Mag.)

The TV series of Keizoku ends on a bleak note, with Shibata apparently lying dead in the arms of fellow detective Mayama. This, by itself, is a sad but somehow satisfying ending to a series that had previously not been afraid to kill regular cast members, and so had a real sense of danger about it.

And to be honest, if it had ended there it would’ve been fine. But it was followed by two somewhat enigmatic specials (one for TV, one for cinema) which didn’t really add to the story. Indeed, after the movie’s lengthy dreamlike sequence at the end, and the line from Mayama to Shibata “You’ve been asleep too long”, I prefer to think that the last two stories never happened at all, and that Shibata is still in a hospital bed in a coma.

The last episode of Keizoku 2 began with a very clever way of catching someone with the power to stop time, but ended with a final showdown that didn't make much sense. By then, however, I was happy to see it through to its conclusion, and the final shot of Toma standing triumphant was enigmatic and yet made a perfect end to the story.

Trying to pick between the two is hard since they don’t have a great deal in common. Keizoku started with normal explanations for the crimes before ending on a supernatural note, while Keizoku 2 took the supernatural to be real from the outset and worked from there. Both Toda Erika and Nakatani Miki are great as the lead roles in the two series. If it were a case of comparing the two TV series, then I think the original Keizoku just wins, but the two specials just confuse things which brings it down a bit. In the end, they're about even.

Having said that, perhaps Keizoku 2 will have its own specials. We shall see.

Densha Otoko vs Densha Otoko: FIGHT!

I watched the TV adaptation of this novel about a year ago and although I enjoyed it, by the end I was so tired of the main character's chronic shyness that I needed a break. It's only recently that I decided to try the film version. The story is the same in both: an emotionally-stunted anime freak stops a man on a train from harassing a woman and over time, with the advice of some people who write on an internet message board, he begins a romantic relationship with her.

Since the TV series is longer, it can spend more time on minor characters and sub-plots. In the film, Hermes (the female lead) has no brother and we never see her parents. Also, Densha Otoko's work life is barely explored at all, he lives alone and he doesn't try to learn to surf to impress her.

This leaves the film with the bare bones of the story, and it is just as entertaining. On the down side, it does mean that when their relationship has difficulties, it is just due to his misunderstanding rather than an event that causes a rift between them. Also, the TV series has the luxury of tear-jerking scenes like the closing of the thread as it approaches its one thousandth post.

The acting is somewhat better in the film, though, and it's played more low-key, with fewer comedic outbursts from the message board people. Nakatani Miki (Keizoku) is a better Hermes than Misaki Ito (Tiger & Dragon) perhaps because her character took a more positive role in the relationship and also because I thought she and Takayuki Yamada (who played Densha Otoko) were a more believable couple. Also there were some nice cameos in amongst the internet people, including Eita as a hikikomori.

There was a neat touch after the credits roll on the film, when we see the actors from the TV series recreate the scene with the drunkard on the train, and the person who helps hold him back is Densha Otoko from the film! Of course, I went to check the first episode, and there he was – the big screen version of Densha Otoko appearing in the TV series. I liked that.

All in all, both are good. The film is better for those in a hurry, while if you want to immerse yourself in Otaku culture, go for the TV series.

Keizoku vs. Keizoku 2: FIGHT!

Before the recent drama Keizoku 2: SPEC was broadcast, I read a few comments by people who were doubtful that it could possibly do the first series any justice. I decided to investigate and found to my surprise that the first series came out some eleven years ago!

Both series are set in the same police department: a section that handles “unsolvable” cases. These tend to have a vaguely supernatural air to them, while the solution is usually ingenious but non-paranormal. The officers investigating are a socially inadequate genius female detective, and her cynical male colleague. So far, so similar, and the only regular cast member in both series is the head of the department, played by Ryu Raita.











The stylistic differences are quite marked. The original is played a lot straighter. In Keizoku, the female detective (Nakatani Miki) is socially inept, but she tries to do the right thing. In the sequel, the detective (Toda Erika) also has problems dealing with people, but this time cares little for the consequences of her rudeness. The second series has a broader sense of humour, with a fair amount of physical comedy which the first series lacks.

The other main difference is that the sequel keeps dropping hints about geniune psychic abilities, with the opening episode involving two scenes in which a criminal is shot by his own bullets. This is, of course, impossible and it remains to be seen if there’s an explanation by the end.

Episode two of Keizoku 2 had a brief appearance from another member of the original cast, which makes me hope that they’ll bring back Nakatani Miki, at least for one case. I hope so. Having the two detectives working side by side would be like one of those episodes when all the actors who played Doctor Who come back for one adventure.

So far, both are enjoyable but the first series definitely has the better stories and more believable characters. Mind you, I've not finished watching either series and there's still time for Keizoku 2: SPEC to improve.

Akihabara@DEEP vs. Akihabara@DEEP: FIGHT!

I'll be honest, I didn't want to really like the film version. I have a king-sized soft spot for the ramshackle silliness of the TV drama, and wasn't keen on a flash big-budget version strutting around the place, giving it all that, and ruining my memories of the TV show.

As it was, I did enjoy it. It's a darker version of the story, with the film leaving out the whole crime busting plot line (and the zombies) and instead focusing on the battle against DigiCap and the search engine they'd designed. The characters are more sharply defined in the film version, too. Box's fear of women is more overt, and Page's stutter is so bad he can barely complete a sentence.

Trying to decide which is best is difficult. Akira is better acted in the film, by some margin, with Yamada Yu easily outclassing Kosaka Yuka. Then again, the head of DigiCap seems more malevolent and interesting in the TV series, despite the comedy trappings. Kitamura Kazuki gives the role a slightly deranged edge that the film lacks.

They're different enough that they don't tread on each others' toes and I think that disliking one won't effect how you feel about the other. The TV show is energetic and keen to be loved, while the film is a cool, distant, good looking version of the same story. But the televised version has the Daruma character, a better ending and a slightly more genuine otaku feel to it. So, on balance, the series takes the victory.

Hmm, you'd think they'd be happier about it...

Electric Town versus Electric Town: FIGHT!

Okay, so this isn't about two seperate dramatisations of the same story, but is instead about two parts of Japan with the same name. Well, nearly. Akihabara apparently has the nickname "Electric Town", while Den Den Town in Osaka could be called "Electric Town", since Den means Electric... see? Okay, so it's a bit tenuous. Never mind.

Akihabara is the shiny home of everything new and geeky, with every item of software and hardware stack as high as you look. Clusters of people stare at posters advertising the latest... well, I'm not sure was it was. But whatever it was, the woman on the poster seemed delighted about it. Meanwhile, cosplaying women had out leaflets for nearby themed cafes, and the thrum of the latest arcade game bleeds across the street, competing with the tinny SNES music from the retro shop a few doors along. It's quite an experience just walking through the streets, and you can't help but be caught up in its endless rush towards tomorrow.

Den Den Town, meanwhile, is like the Bizarro Akihabara. It feels like when it was built it was probably the pinnacle of modern leisure but nobody has bothered to update it since. This covered network of arcades offers up enka karaoke bars, street vendors offering faded VHS cassettes, cheap bento lunches (200 yen, if you can ignore the hygeine risks), and a rather seedy unwelcoming air. Compared to Japan's usual immaculate image, it's something of a relief to find somewhere which has escaped any attempt at being nice for visitors.

Walking past an old man asleep on the floor, sitting beside a cardboard box with two video tapes on them, surrounded by crisps, it made me regret how timid I was with a camera. This area offers more photo opportunities than the rest of Osaka put together - one bar had two rows of tables, one entirely occupied by old men playing Shoji and the other by old men playing Go, while displays of garish t-shirts with nonsensical English slogans featured at one particular crossroads. It's a beautiful and oddly optimistic place. The nearby Shinsekai Tower epitomises this "once upon a time in the future" air, as its grimy husk is the most geniune piece of steampunk architecture you're ever likely to see. Certainly a contrast to the black monolithic office block that looms over Akihabara.

Death Note versus Death Note: FIGHT!

Minor spoilers ahead...

This is the first in a (very) occasional series in which I compare the same story as told by different media. This one compares the anime and the film versions of Death Note.

First, the good news. Both are excellent. Or, at least, the original story is excellent. The son of a police officer finds a note book in which he can write people’s names and they will die. He anonymously begins to kill criminals, becoming a folk hero and causing problems for the police. And sometimes killing them, too. Cue genius detective L who unwittingly asks the killer to help him, and the battle of wits begins.

The anime, being by far the longer, has more time to tell the story and fill in the details of the characters. This, it turns out, is to its disadvantage. The film version, even though it is split into two, has less time on its hands and therefore cuts out a lot of unnecessary filler.

The film's bravest move, and this is what puts it ahead of the anime, was the removal of the orphanage bit towards the end, with the arrival of another detective genius kid. While it kind of works as a plot line in the anime, the fact that the film keeps the two main protagonists against each other until the end with fewer distractions makes it more interesting.

The film faithfully represents the gods according to the original manga designs, and the actors too fill their roles well. Matsuyama Kenichi is a convincing L, but Fujiwara Tatsuya seems a little too nice to be a killer.

In the end, I think the live action version wins over the anime, simply thanks to leaving out that entire second detective genius from the orphanage. Actually now I think about it, in the anime there's a third too. The film is more focused and coherent than the anime and while I recommend both, when put side by side, the film tells a better story.