Paul Schrader's 1985 film tells the story of Yukio Mishima, one of most esteemed and successful writers of 20th century Japan -- who shocked the nation when he took an army general captive, and then committed seppuku (i.e. ritual suicide) after delivering an impassioned speech about the importance of tradition and nationalism to the soldiers under the general's command.
Mishima's life story is a potentially interesting one, with all the requisite trappings that produce a "tormented artist" -- a difficult upbringing, an overly-protective grandmother, an overbearing father (though oddly Mishima's father is not included in the film's narrative), difficulty impressing girls, and a dissatisfaction with life despite his artistic success.
However the film is ambiguous about what kind of character it is trying to depict. At times it would seem to promote the idea of its title character as a "visionary" -- a literary giant (his western equivalent would be someone on the level of Norman Mailer or Gore Vidal), but a tragically misunderstood one. At other times, the character comes off as a sociopathic narcissist -- a man insecure about his sexuality, vain about his looks, and desperate to be more "significant" than a mere writer. Mishima forms a private paramilitary organization (presumably tolerated by the government because of the writer's celebrity), whose young recruits idolize him. His grandly audacious publicity stunt -- carried out ostensibly to inspire the military to return to their warrior roots -- comes off as an act of presumptuous arrogance, and an attempt to go down in history as a "martyr".
Jeered and mocked by the soldiers, he disembowels himself in the samurai tradition. Clearly Mishima was insane (and colossally egotistical) if he actually believed anyone in Japan would embrace his plea to return to the archaic, militaristic traditions which all but destroyed the nation in World War II (especially when the country was in the midst of the most prosperous era in its history).
The film also neglects to show that the young acolyte who was supposed to decapitate Mishima after he stabbed himself (in accordance with samurai tradition, to quickly end the suffering of someone committing seppuku) actually botched the job, making several failed attempts to sever his master's head, and finally handing the sword to someone else. (Of course, this would be difficult to portray without coming off as utterly revolting, or conversely, funny -- though more likely some grotesque combination of the two.)
Apart from the fact the protagonist isn't especially sympathetic, Schrader's interpretation of the material is dense, and frequently confusing. Some scenes are shot in color, others in black and white, with still other scenes where it is not entirely clear whether one is watching a stylized flashback or a dramatization of one of Mishima's plays. In fairness, the scenes where Mishima prepares and carries out his "grand final gesture" have a level of suspense and dramatic tension, plus they are depicted in a more straightforward manner (unlike much of the rest of the movie). I think if Schrader had opted to be less "stylish" it might have resulted in a more effective picture.
Phillip Glass' score is comically inappropriate, its monotonous, endlessly repeating arpeggios and "loops" providing no dramatic support or interpretation of the drama, but just smearing over the whole thing like white sound. (Presumably Schrader felt such an "important" subject couldn't be left in the hands of a "Hollywood hack" -- a film of this stature required a "real" composer.
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)