Remaking Ichikawa

Agatha Christie aficionados and detective fiction fans take note: Behind the deceptively bland title The Inugami Family lies a superb pulp mystery of the highest order–a cinematic classic that won awards, influenced a generation, and remains as thrilling today as when it was made.  Those of you who are inspired by this blog to rush out and track down an import DVD of this gem for yourself will discover that in fact, two movies with the exact same title, the same cast and makers, and pretty much the same running time and content exist.  Which makes telling the two apart a rather challenging task, to the newbie.  As with Detour recently, we are here to discuss a slavishly literal remake, only this time it’s a remake, thirty years to the day later, from the same director.  And therein lies our tale…

Inugami Family

First, a few words on the subject of remakes.

I loves ‘em.

When I read “a remake of…”, those words alone are a mantra compelling me to watch.  Scarcely any other words function as a thoroughly effective come-on (although “… of the Apes” or “starring Ginger Rogers” are on the short list.  When I get my time machine, one of the first things I’m going to do is travel back to 1935 and produce “Dance of the Apes,” in which Ginger Rogers and Fred Astaire find love in a dystopian future).

But I know I’m in something of a minority when it comes to this.  The prevailing opinion on remakes these days falls somewhere into two camps: the “it’s good business to make movies with built-in name recognition” camp, which is fairly cynical attitude but one which has taken deep root in the studio mentality.  The other side is the “remakes are creatively bankrupt raiding of other people’s creativity” camp, which is also rather unfairly dogmatic.  I’d like to stake out my own third space, predicated on the idea that, ahem, what makes a movie tick is not limited to its story.

In fact, I don’t much care what a movie is about—Citizen Kane is a great movie for reasons that have nothing whatsoever to do with whether I want to watch a fictionalized biography of a media mogul (not much), and by the same token Penn and Teller Get Killed is a frustrating misfire for reasons that have nothing to do with how much I want to watch a movie about smart aleck magicians pulling elaborate pranks on each other (a lot).

When I ran All Day Entertainment, one of my policies was to avoid giving plot synopses in the back cover blurbs—I used that space to talk about historical relevance, artistic style, aesthetic issues, etc.  A good movie can be about any subject, and some excellent movies don’t have much in the way of story at all.

Remakes allow one to focus on those other issues—you can take your eyes off the plot, because its familiar, and savor the nuances of technique and approach.  And the great thing about approaching remakes in this way is that it makes the viewing experience rewarding regardless of whether you actually like both movies.  A crappy remake can enhance your appreciation of the original, and a great one can too.  It’s win-win.

Deour remake

We saw this last time, with Detour.  The 1992 Detour was so desperate to pay fealty to the original that it failed to establish its own identity, but in that failing it helped distinguish what an achievement Ulmer’s original really was, to spin such gold from such threadbare resources.

And this brings us to the Inugamis—a brace of well-appointed Japanese thrillers that are almost indistinguishable from each other in the details, but the more alike they are the more different they are in effect.

Let’s begin with the original:

The plot of this gloriously macabre detective thriller is far too complicated to summarize here without spoiling it, but suffice it to say it begins with a death and goes downhill from there.  Pharmaceutical tycoon and tyrannical womanizer Sahei Inugami dies after a life lived hard, leaving behind a brood of fractious, in-fighting daughters and grandsons all with a greedy eye on his sizable estate.  The reading of the will is an exercise in emotional manipulation from beyond the grave: the late Mr. Inugami has instructed his lawyer not to proceed until the entire family has been gathered, and only then will he reveal that the estate is in fact being left not to any of his bloodline but to an unrelated young woman named Tamayo.  Snap!

The bizarre convolutions and passive insults of the will provide ample motivation for just about anyone to go on a murder spree, so when indeed the bodies start piling up, (no surprise here) everyone’s a suspect.  Whoever the killer is, he’s been watching a lot of Dario Argento, and has decided that just plain killing isn’t nearly enough—why not stage the murders in the most outrageous and theatrical way possible?

Blood!

The situation is further complicated by the fact that one of the Inugami clan is possibly not whom he claims—the eldest grandson Sukekiyo was evidently disfigured in WWII and has returned without his face, or much of his identity.  He skulks around like a zombie, hidden behind a Fantomas-like mask, and even though all the forensic science in the world affirms his identity, the family cannot shake the feeling there’s something wrong with the boy.

[wpvideo b0jUloHu]

(Recognize the clip?  I ran it a couple of months ago in a different blog entry.  Having mentioned The Inugami Family out loud, it was like a magical incantation that took hold of me, and I couldn’t shake it.  I’m giving in to the urge this week in hopes of exorcising this film’s hold on my imagination)

There are too many puzzles here for the beseiged Inugamis to sort out on their own—luckily there’s a down-on-his-luck detective staying at the local inn, and he’s been paying very close attention to the details everyone else is missing.

Kindaichi

Director Kon Ichikawa brings this material to life with a delicious blend of historical detail and 1970s-era trippy style, mixing giallo-like violence, gothic atmosphere, wacka-wacka music, New Age experimental editing techniques, and the quiet contemplation of a Japanese garden.  It is a cinematic bento box of seemingly contradictory elements brought together in perfect harmony.

The film is almost a mathematical puzzle—there are three sisters from three different mothers who raised three sons to protect three treasures, inspiring three murderous attacks on Inugami’s chosen heir.  At the same time there are two masked men, two secret offspring, and a pattern of murders committed and then subsequently restaged.  Every detail of this glorious film is carefully chosen and refined, a masterwork by one of cinema’s great artists.

That artist’s name is Kon Ichikawa.

Since The Inugami Family, one of his most popular and famous works, isn’t easy to see over here, I have to assume that you may not have heard of his other movies either.  During the heyday of Akira Kurosawa and other arthouse Japanese directors, Ichikawa made a name for himself as a visionary artist of catholic tastes, who could bring grand cinematic style to adaptations of great literature and adapt himself to almost any assignment.  He is on record as saying that he was perfectly content to make whatever movie his producers asked of him.  He was already a venerable figure by the mid-1970s, when the next character in our story appears.

To describe Haruki Kadokawa, imagine a blend of Donald Trump, Richard Branson, and Lex Luthor—and then imagine he ran a major media empire.  Kadokawa Publishing made the bestselling books, and Kodokawa Films turned ‘em into big budget crowd-pleasing blockbusters.  At least that was the idea—Kadokawa’s reach would exceed his grasp for many years, but he continued to throw money at the problem until he got the balance right.  Luckily he hit a home run on his first at-bat, and the enormous popular success of The Inugami Family kept his quixotic venture afloat through some tumultuous years as he dialed in his approach.

One of Kadokawa’s top-selling authors was detective novelist Seishi Yokozimo, especially Yokozimo’s series about private detective Kosuke Kindaichi—a Columbo-like guy whose rumpled, dandruff-addled appearance and social maladroitism lead others to underestimate his keen intellect and attention to detail.  The most popular Kindaichi tale, The Inugami Family, has since become regular fodder for TV adaptations, as much a go-to mystery title for the Japanese as Hound of the Baskervilles is here.

In 1976, the pieces came together: Kadokawa’s maiden venture into film production would be an adaptation of Yokozimo’s The Inugami Family, directed by the old master Kon Ichikawa.  Koji Ishizaka took the role of Kindaichi and made it his own—Ichikawa and Ishizaka collaborated on four additional Kindaichi mysteries over the years to come.  It won awards around the world, thrilled audiences, and was esteemed by the Kinema Jumpo critics as one of Japan’s greatest films.

Haruki Kadokawa himself fell into scandal and went to prison for drug trafficking; his empire was carved up into constituent companies.  A new generation of filmmakers revived the moribund Japanese industry, led in part by Taka Ichise, a producer with uncannily accurate commercial instincts.  On the occasion of the thirtieth anniversary of The Inugami Family, he asked Ichikawa how he felt about making a remake.

Ichikawa was at the time ninety years old.  He had earned a quiet life.  But after reviewing the 1976 classic on DVD, he decided to take Ichise’s offer.  Exactly why he did so, I cannot say.  Ichikawa himself said he was inspired by improvements in special effects techniques—and if you’ve got a movie about severed heads and faceless soldiers, the opportunity to upgrade to CGI realism could well seem tempting.  The thing of it is, though, that although this is what Ichikawa said, that is not what he then did—if anything, the crude and sloppy effects of the remake are pretty embarrassing.  Frankly, the effects were better in the 1976 original.

Boo!

What then was the point of the remake?  Ichikawa had every reason to believe that all of his creative choices had been spot-on the first time around, so he can be excused for choosing to keep pretty much all of them intact.  The 2006 remake is a respectful update, photocopying even the smallest details and camera angles.  None of the characterizations or plot developments have been dropped, and the remake shaves about ten minutes off the epic running time simply by speeding up transitions.  If the story calls for, let’s say, a crazed Inugami kid to drug Tamayo and try to date-rape her, then the remake skips over all the tedious shots of him dragging her to an abandoned hospital.

When you think of directors remaking their own films, the gold standard must be Alfred Hitchcock’s The Man Who Knew Too Much.  By contrast, Ichikawa’s 2006 Inugami is more along the lines of Gus Van Sant’s remake of Psycho—a remake that re-imagines nothing.  In fact, he’s even gone to the bother of bringing back some of the original cast, most of whom play the same roles as before—and more or less mimic their original performances.

Ishizaka returns as Kindaichi, and he is joined by other returning cast members: Takeshi Kato as the bumbling police chief and Hideji Otaki as a Shinto priest, while Mitsuko Kusabue and Miki Sanjo take new roles in the remake.  Behind the scenes, Chizuko Osada again serves as editor (but with a tamer style than he had in his youth), and some of Yuji Ono’s music from the original version has been reprised (although not enough—Ono’s soundtrack to the 1976 version is one of its strongest and most memorable attributes).

The new version is a fine film, but a bafflingly unnecessary one.  The whole experience is like an aging rock band obliged to cover their hits on tour, just going through the motions for appreciative fans decades later.

(But as I’ve said before–the movie rocks, and if all you can find is the remake, don’t skip over it in some fit of principle.  Prefer the 1976 original if you have a choice, but welcome this movie into your life one way or another).

0 Response Remaking Ichikawa
Posted By dukeroberts : March 31, 2012 9:08 am

Some remakes are good, especially ones made in the thirties and forties that were remakes of earlier talkies or silent films, but the art of making a good remake is apparently lost these days. The last good remakes that I can remember seeing were Dawn of the Dead and Ocean’s Eleven. Those both came out years ago. Oh wait! The Departed also.

Posted By dukeroberts : March 31, 2012 9:08 am

Some remakes are good, especially ones made in the thirties and forties that were remakes of earlier talkies or silent films, but the art of making a good remake is apparently lost these days. The last good remakes that I can remember seeing were Dawn of the Dead and Ocean’s Eleven. Those both came out years ago. Oh wait! The Departed also.

Posted By Juana Maria : March 31, 2012 6:49 pm

Duke Roberts: I seem to agree with you on most things! Amazing. Anyway,I have watche the original “Ocean’s Eleven” but haven’t really watched the remake and its sequels. I haven’t anything against the modern actors–it just the original is such a classic. I have say that Henry Siva is in the original movie and the remake, but not in the rest of the sequels to the remake. “The Departed” has Leo DeCaprio but I’ve pretty much quit watching him when he stopped looking like a little boy.(laugh)Yes, some remakes are great! More the exception than the rule. I am not too familar with the first “Man who Knew Too Much”,it’s got Peter Lorre that about all I know. I love the one with Jimmy Stewart & Doris Day. I sang the stuffing out of the song Que sera sera..well until my family got really annoyed.(laughing again..)

Posted By Juana Maria : March 31, 2012 6:49 pm

Duke Roberts: I seem to agree with you on most things! Amazing. Anyway,I have watche the original “Ocean’s Eleven” but haven’t really watched the remake and its sequels. I haven’t anything against the modern actors–it just the original is such a classic. I have say that Henry Siva is in the original movie and the remake, but not in the rest of the sequels to the remake. “The Departed” has Leo DeCaprio but I’ve pretty much quit watching him when he stopped looking like a little boy.(laugh)Yes, some remakes are great! More the exception than the rule. I am not too familar with the first “Man who Knew Too Much”,it’s got Peter Lorre that about all I know. I love the one with Jimmy Stewart & Doris Day. I sang the stuffing out of the song Que sera sera..well until my family got really annoyed.(laughing again..)

Posted By Juana Maria : March 31, 2012 6:53 pm

OOH..I do like certain remakes:Shop around the corner,remake:In the Good Old Summertime & You’ve got Mail. My Favorite Wife,Remake:Move over Darling. The Paleface,remake:The shakiest gun in the West.Shane,remake:Pale Rider.High Noon,Howard Hawks answer:Rio Bravo,El Dorado,& Rio Lobo, really trying to get his point across wasn’t he? I’ll write of other favorite remakes if I can think of them later…

Posted By Juana Maria : March 31, 2012 6:53 pm

OOH..I do like certain remakes:Shop around the corner,remake:In the Good Old Summertime & You’ve got Mail. My Favorite Wife,Remake:Move over Darling. The Paleface,remake:The shakiest gun in the West.Shane,remake:Pale Rider.High Noon,Howard Hawks answer:Rio Bravo,El Dorado,& Rio Lobo, really trying to get his point across wasn’t he? I’ll write of other favorite remakes if I can think of them later…

Posted By Tom S : April 1, 2012 12:32 am

There’s a fair number of Ichikawa movies that are available in the US, mostly through Criterion- Fires on the Plain, the Burmese Harp, Tokyo Olympiad, and The Makioka Sisters, of which all but the last are pretty great, and his version of the 47 Ronin (speaking of remakes) is out in R1 as well. I’ve only actually seen Tokyo Olympiad, but it’s enough to convince me that Ichikawa’s a really interesting movie maker, since I’d happily take that over Reifenstahl’s Olympia for reasons that have nothing to do with fascism.

In general, I feel like it’s worth distinguishing between a remake that specifically reimagines a movie and a remake that’s just an adaptation of something that’s already been adapted- with the latter, everything from the Wizard of Oz to Lord of the Rings to The Maltese Falcon is technically a remake, but the interesting interrelationship between like the two versions of The Fly doesn’t apply to them. I think in general any remake that has a real creative spark, a reason to exist other than ‘this is a name people know’ has enormous potential to be interesting- the reason the sequel and remake plague that seems to be taking over Hollywood is so depressing is that so many of them are like the Platinum Dunes horror remakes, mindless retreads that have no interest in thinking about the original or what made it work or what to change. Though honestly, sometimes doing basically the same movie with a different cast is enough to make something interesting.

Posted By Tom S : April 1, 2012 12:32 am

There’s a fair number of Ichikawa movies that are available in the US, mostly through Criterion- Fires on the Plain, the Burmese Harp, Tokyo Olympiad, and The Makioka Sisters, of which all but the last are pretty great, and his version of the 47 Ronin (speaking of remakes) is out in R1 as well. I’ve only actually seen Tokyo Olympiad, but it’s enough to convince me that Ichikawa’s a really interesting movie maker, since I’d happily take that over Reifenstahl’s Olympia for reasons that have nothing to do with fascism.

In general, I feel like it’s worth distinguishing between a remake that specifically reimagines a movie and a remake that’s just an adaptation of something that’s already been adapted- with the latter, everything from the Wizard of Oz to Lord of the Rings to The Maltese Falcon is technically a remake, but the interesting interrelationship between like the two versions of The Fly doesn’t apply to them. I think in general any remake that has a real creative spark, a reason to exist other than ‘this is a name people know’ has enormous potential to be interesting- the reason the sequel and remake plague that seems to be taking over Hollywood is so depressing is that so many of them are like the Platinum Dunes horror remakes, mindless retreads that have no interest in thinking about the original or what made it work or what to change. Though honestly, sometimes doing basically the same movie with a different cast is enough to make something interesting.

Posted By Juana Maria : April 1, 2012 9:01 am

A million pardons please! I misspelled my favorite actor name! It is Henry Silva in Ocean’s Eleven. Sorry. I hate my typos.

Posted By Juana Maria : April 1, 2012 9:01 am

A million pardons please! I misspelled my favorite actor name! It is Henry Silva in Ocean’s Eleven. Sorry. I hate my typos.

Leave a Reply

Current ye@r *

MovieMorlocks.com is the official blog for TCM. No topic is too obscure or niche to be excluded from our film discussions. And we welcome your comments on our blogs and bloggers.
See more: facebook.com/tcmtv
See more: twitter.com/tcm
3-D  Action Films  Actors  Actors' Endorsements  Actresses  animal stars  Animation  Anime  Anthology Films  Art in Movies  Australian CInema  Autobiography  Avant-Garde  Aviation  Awards  B-movies  Beer in Film  Behind the Scenes  Best of the Year lists  Biography  Biopics  Black Film  Blu-Ray  Books on Film  Boxing films  British Cinema  Canadian Cinema  Character Actors  Chicago Film History  Cinematography  Classic Films  College Life on Film  Comedy  Comic Book Movies  Crime  Czech Film  Dance on Film  Digital Cinema  Directors  Disaster Films  Documentary  Drama  DVD  Early Talkies  Editing  Educational Films  European Influence on American Cinema  Experimental  Exploitation  Fairy Tales on Film  Faith or Christian-based Films  Family Films  Film Composers  Film Criticism  film festivals  Film History in Florida  Film Noir  Film Scholars  Film titles  Filmmaking Techniques  Films About Gambling  Films of the 1960s  Films of the 1980s  Food in Film  Foreign Film  French Film  Gangster films  Genre  Genre spoofs  HD & Blu-Ray  Holiday Movies  Hollywood history  Hollywood lifestyles  Horror  Horror Movies  Icons  independent film  Italian Film  Japanese Film  Korean Film  Literary Adaptations  Martial Arts  Melodramas  Method Acting  Mexican Cinema  Moguls  Monster Movies  Movie Books  Movie Costumes  movie flops  Movie locations  Movie lovers  Movie Reviewers  Movie settings  Movie Stars  Movie titles  Movies about movies  Music in Film  Musicals  Outdoor Cinema  Paranoid Thrillers  Parenting on film  Pirate movies  Polish film industry  political thrillers  Politics in Film  Pornography  Pre-Code  Producers  Race in American Film  Remakes  Revenge  Road Movies  Romance  Romantic Comedies  Satire  Scandals  Science Fiction  Screenwriters  Semi-documentaries  Serials  Short Films  Silent Film  silent films  Social Problem Film  Sports  Sports on Film  Stereotypes  Straight-to-DVD  Studio Politics  Stunts and stuntmen  Suspense thriller  Swashbucklers  TCM Classic Film Festival  TCM Underground  Television  The British in Hollywood  The Germans in Hollywood  The Hungarians in Hollywood  The Irish in Hollywood  Theaters  Thriller  Trains in movies  Underground Cinema  VOD  War film  Westerns  Women in the Film Industry  Women's Weepies