104 reviews
Possibly the spookiest movie I have ever seen.
The only time I can recall being as spooked by a film was when my parents took me to see "Hangover Square" - a gothic Jack the Ripper thriller - when I was 8 years old. I guess they couldn't find a baby-sitter. That took me about a year to get over, a low-key, all-too-realistic chiller about the banality of insanity.
"Cure" is such a perfect depiction of madness that just about every shot could be framed & hung in a gallery. You can't analyze this one, it doesn't follow a cartesian line of logic; nor does it blast you with halloweenish surprises in the style of Elm Street & its knock-offs. This has far deeper & subtler impact. I found as I relaxed into this film that images of recurring dreams & nightmares I've had since childhood arose & blended into what I was watching. Can't get much creepier than that.
That said, the images & emotions that this film evokes are on a very high level of poetic art. One of the most impressive elements of "Cure" is the director's ability to convey the magnetic manipulative appeal of Mamiya - surely one of the scariest things in real life & very difficult to convincingly convey on screen.
"Cure" is such a perfect depiction of madness that just about every shot could be framed & hung in a gallery. You can't analyze this one, it doesn't follow a cartesian line of logic; nor does it blast you with halloweenish surprises in the style of Elm Street & its knock-offs. This has far deeper & subtler impact. I found as I relaxed into this film that images of recurring dreams & nightmares I've had since childhood arose & blended into what I was watching. Can't get much creepier than that.
That said, the images & emotions that this film evokes are on a very high level of poetic art. One of the most impressive elements of "Cure" is the director's ability to convey the magnetic manipulative appeal of Mamiya - surely one of the scariest things in real life & very difficult to convincingly convey on screen.
wild and weird--but in a good way
- planktonrules
- Mar 3, 2006
- Permalink
Dark and Gloomy Horror Film of Obsession
The police detective Kenichi Takabe (Kôji Yakusho) is investigating bizarre murders where the victims are brutally murdered with an X carved on the neck. However, each killer is immediately arrested and confesses the murder, but cannot explain the motives to kill the victim. Takabe is working with the psychologist Makoto Sakuma (Tsuyoshi Ujiki) and they are intrigued since the all the killers had contact with a stranger immediately before the murder. Takabe is a troubled man since his mentally unstable wife Fumie (Anna Nakagawa) is a burden in his life. When a physician kills a man in a public restroom, Takabe discloses the identity of the stranger. He is the intern of the hospital Kunio Mamiya (Masato Hagiwara) that had consultation with the doctor. Mamiya is a dazed and confused man with apparent loss of memory and his behavior affects Takabe. His further investigation discovers that he has studied hypnotism and is capable to input suggestion to kill in the mind of his victims. Takabe becomes obsessed by the case affecting his personal life and indicating that he is losing his mind.
"Cure" is a dark and gloomy horror film with a story of obsession. The plot is a combination of thriller, crime and horror genres with an open conclusion. The direction and the performances are top notch and the murders are gruesome. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): 'Cura" ("Cure")
"Cure" is a dark and gloomy horror film with a story of obsession. The plot is a combination of thriller, crime and horror genres with an open conclusion. The direction and the performances are top notch and the murders are gruesome. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): 'Cura" ("Cure")
- claudio_carvalho
- Mar 21, 2017
- Permalink
Reading these comments is as interesting as watching the film
Remarkable Craft
This movie has a simple premise and a simple story that is nevertheless explored in an incredibly delicate and talented way. Kiyoshi Kurosawa is an extremely talented individual and perhaps the only writer/director who is able to simultaneously scare and mentally challenge me at the same time (note that very few are capable of doing one or the other). Although the writing is very good (story and dialogue), Kurosawa's real strength is his ability to represent visually the progressive denouement of his story. He rather subtly show you and let your imagination and intellect figure it out for you than to spell out bluntly what the straightforward storyline should be. It does not, however, get to the point of chaotic untidiness or pointlessness, for he is able to guide you slowly along the way (I would then say that he is slightly easier to follow than David Lynch is, but then again who is not). He uses here a strikingly effective technique where he shows you a room from one angle and later lets you discover that room more and more as the movie advances. His camera shots are always well planned and he is thus able to draw you in the movie bit by bit-quite an eerie sensation.
The acting is generally good and believable. The camera-work is a stand out.
There are many scenes where you will be able to appreciate this superior artistic and technical quality. The music is good and tenseful, but it is sparse and what is used instead is a contrast of minimalist and grossly amplified everyday sounds that vibrate through the movie. When there is no sound, you often find yourself holding your breath. This is not used strictly as a ploy, but rather creates a mood and further pulls you in the general atmosphere of the movie. Most of all, again, the directing is top notch. The pace which is slow enough for you to have the time to both think and be afraid is not slow enough that it gets boring, although you should not expect a North American expeditious run through the film. Everything is there, but it comes to you in slow, meticulously chosen dosage. Only, at the end can you truly see the masterpiece that has been drawn stroke by stroke in front of you.
One of the reason this movie actually works is that it is designed to play with your mind and trigger fear and reaction based not only on emotion, but on reason. People are dying, but everything is calm, rational. The tone and story are pretty much realistic and, at the end of the experience, you may feel beyond your volitional control that you are actually convinced of the "strange" things in the movie. Hopefully this feeling will subside...
The acting is generally good and believable. The camera-work is a stand out.
There are many scenes where you will be able to appreciate this superior artistic and technical quality. The music is good and tenseful, but it is sparse and what is used instead is a contrast of minimalist and grossly amplified everyday sounds that vibrate through the movie. When there is no sound, you often find yourself holding your breath. This is not used strictly as a ploy, but rather creates a mood and further pulls you in the general atmosphere of the movie. Most of all, again, the directing is top notch. The pace which is slow enough for you to have the time to both think and be afraid is not slow enough that it gets boring, although you should not expect a North American expeditious run through the film. Everything is there, but it comes to you in slow, meticulously chosen dosage. Only, at the end can you truly see the masterpiece that has been drawn stroke by stroke in front of you.
One of the reason this movie actually works is that it is designed to play with your mind and trigger fear and reaction based not only on emotion, but on reason. People are dying, but everything is calm, rational. The tone and story are pretty much realistic and, at the end of the experience, you may feel beyond your volitional control that you are actually convinced of the "strange" things in the movie. Hopefully this feeling will subside...
- christian94
- Jan 14, 2002
- Permalink
A modern masterpiece
The serial killer movie has by now been done to death (so to speak), so it's especially rewarding to see this assured film that takes a truly ingenious approach. Kurosawa's protagonist is a seemingly dazed young man who, in spite of his aimless demeanor, is a master hypnotist. To reveal any more of what happens would be to give a bit too much away.
The subtlety and fluidity of this film is remarkable. The main character can be charming and simultaneously irritating when he speaks. He turns his speaking partner's question back on the speaker; he answers with vague phrases that nevertheless, over the course of the film, gradually bring out the complexity of his psyche. Pitting him against a cop whose wife seems to suffer from something like the hypnotist's 'brand' of mental wanderings underlines the thematic context of the film: what we know is almost certainly only what we think we know. And what we think we know is almost certainly based on someone else's 'knowledge', derived the same as ours.
That knowledge is a collective phenomenon, a shared and critical feature of the 'hive' is not a novel concept in film. But its presentation here is bold and original. To link that idea with a person who destroys life is a master stroke; it says that what we know vanishes in a suddenly extinguished flame, or a tiny stream of water that appears, runs, and then is seen no more.
This is a film that should definitely be added to the great films of the 90s. Since it was not released in the U.S. until 2001, I vote for it being one of the great films of that year here.
The subtlety and fluidity of this film is remarkable. The main character can be charming and simultaneously irritating when he speaks. He turns his speaking partner's question back on the speaker; he answers with vague phrases that nevertheless, over the course of the film, gradually bring out the complexity of his psyche. Pitting him against a cop whose wife seems to suffer from something like the hypnotist's 'brand' of mental wanderings underlines the thematic context of the film: what we know is almost certainly only what we think we know. And what we think we know is almost certainly based on someone else's 'knowledge', derived the same as ours.
That knowledge is a collective phenomenon, a shared and critical feature of the 'hive' is not a novel concept in film. But its presentation here is bold and original. To link that idea with a person who destroys life is a master stroke; it says that what we know vanishes in a suddenly extinguished flame, or a tiny stream of water that appears, runs, and then is seen no more.
This is a film that should definitely be added to the great films of the 90s. Since it was not released in the U.S. until 2001, I vote for it being one of the great films of that year here.
- LGwriter49
- Feb 3, 2002
- Permalink
An interesting and gripping film
A wave of murders has recently hit Tokyo, each victim having a large 'X' cut deeply into their chests. The interesting this is, each culprit is a different person. The case goes to a detective named Takabe (played by the brilliant Koji Yakusho), and he must investigate. During his investigation, he finds Mamiya, a man who seemingly has no memory of his life. Takabe realizes there's something strange about Mamiya...
"Cure" was Kiyoshi Kurosawa's first major success. It's a complex and dark film about hypnosis, which is at times, pretty unsettling and chilling. This is a little different than Kurosawa's later works, but all his signature methods are here: the unsettling atmosphere, the suspense, the unusual complexity of the characters, and slow pacing. Still, if you liked any of this director's other movies, this is highly recommended.
My rating: 8/10.
"Cure" was Kiyoshi Kurosawa's first major success. It's a complex and dark film about hypnosis, which is at times, pretty unsettling and chilling. This is a little different than Kurosawa's later works, but all his signature methods are here: the unsettling atmosphere, the suspense, the unusual complexity of the characters, and slow pacing. Still, if you liked any of this director's other movies, this is highly recommended.
My rating: 8/10.
- artemis0302
- Nov 18, 2005
- Permalink
This film reminds me of...
Creepy.
This enigmatic, slow-burning horror focuses on a series of grisly, almost identical murders committed by people who can't remember why or how they did them. The mystery of 'Cure (1997)' shifts from uncovering the link between the killings to deciphering the true nature of a strange amnesiac who pops up near each crime scene. The movie never gives you an overt answer, remaining decidedly ambiguous even as it enters its final moments, but it's consistently compelling nevertheless. It pulls you into its beguiling world and doesn't let you go. It isn't overtly scary; its horrors creep up on you, sending shivers down your spine before you even know they're there. Its themes are fairly frightening and its cold, somewhat uncaring atmosphere doesn't afford much in the way of comfort. There are some sequences that are almost hypnotic, too. Though almost every aspect of the piece is relatively subdued, it has a rather strong overall effect. It's the sort of thing that has the potential to keep you up at night. 7/10
- Pjtaylor-96-138044
- Dec 6, 2020
- Permalink
weird, confusing, BUT very fulfilling
Great mood, but a little slow
A wave of gruesome murders confuses the police; the perpetrators all readily admit to their crime, but can't recall why they did it. The events are undoubtedly connected though, as each victim has a giant X carved into their neck. Two detectives begin questioning a drifter who seems connected to the murders, but run the risk of falling under whatever power he wields themselves.
The premise is interesting enough and director Kiyoshi Kurosawa certainly creates a dark mood, helped considerably by the eerie soundtrack and dilapidated set designs. Maybe on another night I would have clicked with this one more, but on the night I did see it, it was too slow and ponderous for me to truly enjoy. The link to the work of Franz Mesmer seemed like it was out of a comic book, and even in just rolling with that, I wish the drifter's role had remained a mystery for longer. The tension just wasn't there for me, making me think about holes in the story and how little these characters were developed. One that I wish I would have liked more, maybe next time.
The premise is interesting enough and director Kiyoshi Kurosawa certainly creates a dark mood, helped considerably by the eerie soundtrack and dilapidated set designs. Maybe on another night I would have clicked with this one more, but on the night I did see it, it was too slow and ponderous for me to truly enjoy. The link to the work of Franz Mesmer seemed like it was out of a comic book, and even in just rolling with that, I wish the drifter's role had remained a mystery for longer. The tension just wasn't there for me, making me think about holes in the story and how little these characters were developed. One that I wish I would have liked more, maybe next time.
- gbill-74877
- Jul 13, 2021
- Permalink
This is one HELL of a movie...Kiyoshi Kurosawa is a master filmmaker who needs to be noticed around the world
WOW!!!! Now THAT was an EXCELLENT ending to a GREAT movie. It stuck with me for several hours after first watching it and the second time was no different. It had slow methodical pacing, but it was never boring. I, for one, appreciated the elliptical editing as it's just a filmmaker doing something different and being creative. Actually, it added to the hypnotic arc of the story. It didn't bother me whatsoever, although it wasn't nearly as effective in Kiyoshi's other great movie, "Kairo." Koji Yakusho was brilliant as troubled Detective Takabe and the mysterious drifter with hypnotic powers was very convincing as well. The use of hypnotism to get others to kill and rendering themselves soulless, was a refreshing take on the serial-killer subgenre, of which I love. Someone commented here that only people who "buy the mumbo jumbo" hypnotism storyline would like this film, and comments like those always bother me. Narrative films are not REAL LIFE, even the ones based on true stories. They are works of art, and try to tell us entertaining, comedic, frightning, and dramatic stories to keep the audience interested. I don't have to believe in the subjects their stories are telling me, nor do I believe they need to solve the world's problems. All I care is that they give me an interesting idea, an interesting story, with well-written dialogue, and if it ends with a bang. These, blended with great acting (now that's an area that needs convincing in film), great camera work, and an engaging score. Those are what make films interesting and "Kyua" aka "Cure" has all those qualities. Highly recommended.
- LatinoNoir
- Feb 21, 2003
- Permalink
Somewhat boring, somewhat philosophical, somewhat naive
This movie is not all bad. It has a Japanese version of Charles Manson doing some influencing, without drugs, and shows effectively that Japanese justice system was far more reasonable than that of California, citing inciting to murder and actually INVESTIGATING what really happens. The plot is somewhat fanciful, and is inspired by a real cult and Sarin gas attacks, the atmosphere and film-making techniques are on par with anything from the era, but the movie does come off as somewhat pedestrian, boring and not really a master peace. Still, not too shabby.
- perica-43151
- Aug 28, 2019
- Permalink
I guess I am one of the very few that were disappointed with this crime/horror film
Sometimes I just cannot get aboard the "Loved It" train and this film (1997) Cure happens to be one of those times. In my humble opinion I found the film to drag on, murder after murder, and one story line after the other. The lead actor who plays Homicide Detective Kenichi Takabe (Kôji Yakusho) plays an impressive part, struggling between solving this series of murders that are all quite different murders, and dealing with his mentally disturbed wife on his homefront.
The adversary in the film is first identified solely as a witness named Kunio Mamiya (played by Masato Hagiwara) who is somewhat slovenly dressed and appears to have lost his memory. For every question the various people who come into Kunio Mamiya's presence ask him to help him discover who he is, Kuno retorts back with questions of his own and appears to be playing mind games with them by which they subsequently commit a murder that they have no memory of committing.
As the chess match between Detective Kenichi Takabe and his only witness to a crime Kunio Mamiya boils over Detective Takabe relies on the knowledge of Psychatrist Dr. Makoto Sakuma. (played byTsuyoshi Ujiki) to understand the inner workings of this witness who has more questions than answers to who he really is.
Yes, it is a horror/crime film but I did find it dragged on and the ambiguous ending did not impress me whatsoever. I can only give the film a low 4 out of 10 IMDb rating.
The adversary in the film is first identified solely as a witness named Kunio Mamiya (played by Masato Hagiwara) who is somewhat slovenly dressed and appears to have lost his memory. For every question the various people who come into Kunio Mamiya's presence ask him to help him discover who he is, Kuno retorts back with questions of his own and appears to be playing mind games with them by which they subsequently commit a murder that they have no memory of committing.
As the chess match between Detective Kenichi Takabe and his only witness to a crime Kunio Mamiya boils over Detective Takabe relies on the knowledge of Psychatrist Dr. Makoto Sakuma. (played byTsuyoshi Ujiki) to understand the inner workings of this witness who has more questions than answers to who he really is.
Yes, it is a horror/crime film but I did find it dragged on and the ambiguous ending did not impress me whatsoever. I can only give the film a low 4 out of 10 IMDb rating.
- Ed-Shullivan
- Nov 1, 2023
- Permalink
Cure - a great movie, but with qualification
I saw CURE at the San Francisco Film Festival in around 1998, and like many, I found the concept and craftsmanship arresting. A number of audience members stayed around afterwards to discuss it - it's a psychologically complex tale of hypnotism and the seductions of altered consciousness. Koji Yakusho (DORA HEITA, 13 ASSSASSINS, etc.) is at his acting peak as a detective who tries to solve a series of murders that don't seem to relate to common logic.
Recently, I saw the DVD version of the film - and it's clear that the film had been cut severely. Most viewers have only seen the US DVD version, so they're not even aware of the problem. A few of the more graphic sequences were cut, important portions of the narrative set in an old sanatorium were excised, and the violent finish was excised entirely. (The US DVD concludes with the suggestion of a further killing; the theatrical Japanese version is more powerful and unambiguous.) In some cases, a later, recut version may be better than the original; however, that's not the case here.
There's scant online text relating to the differences between the two versions.
It speaks well for director Kiyoshi Kurosawa that he took a low-budget police procedural and made an innovative thriller out of it. Most of the scenes are under-edited and shot at a distance, to extract the most from the hypnotic storyline; the longer, hypnotic sequences are several minutes long, with no edits. Because the film uses medium-distance shots to give a sense of hypnotic disassociation, viewers with larger screens will gain an advantage.
I strongly recommend seeing it - but would suggest you seek out the original, uncut theatrical print if you can. The differences are striking. I'd rate the original print as 10/10; the cut/domestic DVD is maybe 7/10. This film would profit from a Criterion reissue, but that doesn't seem to be in the works.
Recently, I saw the DVD version of the film - and it's clear that the film had been cut severely. Most viewers have only seen the US DVD version, so they're not even aware of the problem. A few of the more graphic sequences were cut, important portions of the narrative set in an old sanatorium were excised, and the violent finish was excised entirely. (The US DVD concludes with the suggestion of a further killing; the theatrical Japanese version is more powerful and unambiguous.) In some cases, a later, recut version may be better than the original; however, that's not the case here.
There's scant online text relating to the differences between the two versions.
It speaks well for director Kiyoshi Kurosawa that he took a low-budget police procedural and made an innovative thriller out of it. Most of the scenes are under-edited and shot at a distance, to extract the most from the hypnotic storyline; the longer, hypnotic sequences are several minutes long, with no edits. Because the film uses medium-distance shots to give a sense of hypnotic disassociation, viewers with larger screens will gain an advantage.
I strongly recommend seeing it - but would suggest you seek out the original, uncut theatrical print if you can. The differences are striking. I'd rate the original print as 10/10; the cut/domestic DVD is maybe 7/10. This film would profit from a Criterion reissue, but that doesn't seem to be in the works.
Masterpiece
- Lucabrasisleeps
- Apr 18, 2015
- Permalink
Without a doubt the scariest horror film ever made.
- movies46078
- Mar 21, 2024
- Permalink
An unusual pattern of murder.
be prepared for more
Kurosawa has created a masterpiece here. This film is more than a horror thriller. It's a look at our modern society, and plays upon our innate fear that there is a monster hidden inside of us - even worse, we cannot control it.
It begins as a typical detective story, film noirish in its execution, and like typical film noir, the detective finds more to the story than originally anticipated. But this film, just like its storyline, begins to transcend the genre it purports to be a part of midway through.
More and more, we realize that it is telling the story of people today, boxed in, with our darkest desires oppressed. This theme of containment is heavy throughout, if one pays enough attention. For example, the usage of water as a symbol for the subconscious is useful for understanding many key parts of the film.
Everything is superbly framed and shot, with more than a few very long shots (a testament to the high caliber of the cast). Sound and music are used sparingly but effectively.
This film may not be very accessible to those who are only familiar with Hollywood-style film-making due to its slower pace and subtle conveyance.
It begins as a typical detective story, film noirish in its execution, and like typical film noir, the detective finds more to the story than originally anticipated. But this film, just like its storyline, begins to transcend the genre it purports to be a part of midway through.
More and more, we realize that it is telling the story of people today, boxed in, with our darkest desires oppressed. This theme of containment is heavy throughout, if one pays enough attention. For example, the usage of water as a symbol for the subconscious is useful for understanding many key parts of the film.
Everything is superbly framed and shot, with more than a few very long shots (a testament to the high caliber of the cast). Sound and music are used sparingly but effectively.
This film may not be very accessible to those who are only familiar with Hollywood-style film-making due to its slower pace and subtle conveyance.
Split Feelings
I have very split feelings when it comes to this film:
First, the film is full of long, dead moments of film that I did not find incredibly entertaining or even vital to the story of the film, and I found this to be annoying. Second, I felt as if the parts of the story that were truly interesting they did not delve into -- so much more could have been done if the focus of the story would have been centered in different aspects of it. Third, character development seems to be weak; other than sharp interest we have in the villain, I felt that the hero of the film was not sufficiently developed to cause me to sympathize on major levels; in fact, a lot of the essentials pertinent to the hero only came out when it was far too late in the story.
However, with that being said, it is a decent watch simply for the fabulous bits thrown into it; the content of the story is interesting, and it is certainly the basis for a film. I enjoyed the way the film began and ended, but the middle portions could have been done much better, and the focus of the film could have been more precise. A lot of the cinematography and story was very good, and enough to make up for the aforementioned flaws, but still I walk away with split feelings.
Overall, worth watching, but far from flawless.
First, the film is full of long, dead moments of film that I did not find incredibly entertaining or even vital to the story of the film, and I found this to be annoying. Second, I felt as if the parts of the story that were truly interesting they did not delve into -- so much more could have been done if the focus of the story would have been centered in different aspects of it. Third, character development seems to be weak; other than sharp interest we have in the villain, I felt that the hero of the film was not sufficiently developed to cause me to sympathize on major levels; in fact, a lot of the essentials pertinent to the hero only came out when it was far too late in the story.
However, with that being said, it is a decent watch simply for the fabulous bits thrown into it; the content of the story is interesting, and it is certainly the basis for a film. I enjoyed the way the film began and ended, but the middle portions could have been done much better, and the focus of the film could have been more precise. A lot of the cinematography and story was very good, and enough to make up for the aforementioned flaws, but still I walk away with split feelings.
Overall, worth watching, but far from flawless.
- jmverville
- Oct 25, 2004
- Permalink
The Single Greatest Film in the History of Japanese Cinema
Director Kiyoshi Kurosawa perfects the concept of hypnotic villainy in this film, which features a battle of wills between a detective and a genius who uses the power of suggestion to set in motion a series of killings throughout a city. Showcasing innovative suspense sequences, plot twists, and rich psychological/philosophical concepts, this film will have viewers pondering well after it ends. Kiyoshi again manages to elude the pitfalls of popular cinema to contribute not only a chilling masterpiece, but arguably one of the most awesome villains to ever grace the big screen.
Of the thousands of films I've seen, few have floored me to the point where I've wanted to grant them the honor of being the "Best Movie Ever." The only other film that comes to mind is "A Tale of Two Sisters" (2003), which is easily the most impressive motion picture of all time. Since that distinction is taken, that leaves "Cure" (1997) with the runner-up spot in terms of world cinema, but the medal for "Best Japanese Movie Ever" is still for the taking. This film takes it. I've seen 1,328 films from that country, and I can tell you that even Yasujiro Ozu and Shinya Tsukamoto have failed to match the brilliance of "Cure."
This is quite possibly the most engaging slow-paced film in existence. The tempo moves slower than molasses in January, but the introduction of the lead antagonist a mere 8 minutes into the film sets the seemingly endless array of intriguing moments into motion from the get go. Masato Hagiwara's character of Kunio Mamiya is spellbinding with his hypnotic technique that starts off with seemingly trivial dialogue but slowly progresses into an ingenious psychological trap. This provides for a number of memorable moments, my favorite of which is the mesmerizing water enchantment of the hospital nurse. In addition, the identity of this character is expertly crafted as a sort of ambiguous soul/personality whose essence is only truly revealed during the very last frame. No other film has created an antagonist so uniformly dangerous, sublime, and interesting as Kunio Mamiya.
Kiyoshi Kurosawa is easily one of the top five directors of all time. This guy made three perfect films that no one talks about – "Cure" (1997), "Kairo" (2001), and "Charisma" (1999). What's really interesting is that he follows a rather unique art-house style that's almost never applied to the horror/thriller genres. Kiyoshi uses long shots, deliberate pacing, and ambiguity in moderation, which is unlike most art-house directors who have no sense of discretion. Despite the mindless ramblings of mainstream cinemaphiles, Kiyoshi rarely (if ever) indulges in pompous, self-congratulatory filming techniques because his choice of lean running times (under two hours in almost every instance) helps him to avoid the bloated, masturbatory pretentiousness that rears its ugly head in other art-house style films. Think Andrei Tarkovsky with more interesting and refined philosophical content and you'll have an idea of just how special Kiyoshi Kurosawa is as a director.
Whenever possible, I like to point out the high content levels of Kiyoshi's films in an attempt to counter the nonsensical claims of some who feel that he practices a form of style over substance. Take the seemingly trivial dialogue that the Kunio Mimiya character engages in during his hypnotic acts of terrorism. The exchanges are an odd mix on a superficial level, but one comes to realize their importance when the victims are subjected to police interrogation. Only then does the viewer understand why Kunio fakes his amnesia (an attempt to elude his victims memories) and engages in circular question-begging. Also note the attention to details in other situations. Within the final 20 minutes we see Koji Yakusho in a quaint diner, but only upon further inspection do we realize that in one case his plate is filled with leftover food while in the other case it's licked clean, an important revelation of his essential change in character for the finale. And how about that final shot? This is just awesome cinema people. Magnificent.
In retrospect, "Cure" was the true beginning of the Japanese horror phenomenon that has followed it's release. While lacking in industry influence that has helped to establish Japanese horror in general (that nod goes to Nakata's "Ringu" of 1998), it provides a ground zero date for the turning of the tide so to speak. For all intents and purposes, Japanese horror has kicked everyone else's backside from 1997 onward. That said, I am truly unhappy that Kiyoshi chose to leave the genre for more dramatic fare because we're already inundated with enough art-house dramas to keep us busy. How many expertly crafted art-house horror films are there floating around today? Whatever the number, it's not nearly enough.
It's really too bad that good taste in film is practically extinct, because "Cure" should be one of those movies that everyone under the sun raves about until they're blue in the face. Kiyoshi isn't blessed with the lunatic fan base that follows guys like Akira Kurosawa or Andrei Tarkovsky. (Maybe I count as the first big fan of Kiyoshi.) It's a shame that he has established himself as an upper echelon filmmaker but somehow hasn't won over the majority of paid critics and film snobs who so easily drive the "emperor with no clothes" tide to coerce and guilt people into riding the bandwagons of lesser filmmakers.
In any case, "Cure" is the pinnacle of exceptional film-making. It's also Kiyoshi Kurosawa's best film, and that's saying something.
Of the thousands of films I've seen, few have floored me to the point where I've wanted to grant them the honor of being the "Best Movie Ever." The only other film that comes to mind is "A Tale of Two Sisters" (2003), which is easily the most impressive motion picture of all time. Since that distinction is taken, that leaves "Cure" (1997) with the runner-up spot in terms of world cinema, but the medal for "Best Japanese Movie Ever" is still for the taking. This film takes it. I've seen 1,328 films from that country, and I can tell you that even Yasujiro Ozu and Shinya Tsukamoto have failed to match the brilliance of "Cure."
This is quite possibly the most engaging slow-paced film in existence. The tempo moves slower than molasses in January, but the introduction of the lead antagonist a mere 8 minutes into the film sets the seemingly endless array of intriguing moments into motion from the get go. Masato Hagiwara's character of Kunio Mamiya is spellbinding with his hypnotic technique that starts off with seemingly trivial dialogue but slowly progresses into an ingenious psychological trap. This provides for a number of memorable moments, my favorite of which is the mesmerizing water enchantment of the hospital nurse. In addition, the identity of this character is expertly crafted as a sort of ambiguous soul/personality whose essence is only truly revealed during the very last frame. No other film has created an antagonist so uniformly dangerous, sublime, and interesting as Kunio Mamiya.
Kiyoshi Kurosawa is easily one of the top five directors of all time. This guy made three perfect films that no one talks about – "Cure" (1997), "Kairo" (2001), and "Charisma" (1999). What's really interesting is that he follows a rather unique art-house style that's almost never applied to the horror/thriller genres. Kiyoshi uses long shots, deliberate pacing, and ambiguity in moderation, which is unlike most art-house directors who have no sense of discretion. Despite the mindless ramblings of mainstream cinemaphiles, Kiyoshi rarely (if ever) indulges in pompous, self-congratulatory filming techniques because his choice of lean running times (under two hours in almost every instance) helps him to avoid the bloated, masturbatory pretentiousness that rears its ugly head in other art-house style films. Think Andrei Tarkovsky with more interesting and refined philosophical content and you'll have an idea of just how special Kiyoshi Kurosawa is as a director.
Whenever possible, I like to point out the high content levels of Kiyoshi's films in an attempt to counter the nonsensical claims of some who feel that he practices a form of style over substance. Take the seemingly trivial dialogue that the Kunio Mimiya character engages in during his hypnotic acts of terrorism. The exchanges are an odd mix on a superficial level, but one comes to realize their importance when the victims are subjected to police interrogation. Only then does the viewer understand why Kunio fakes his amnesia (an attempt to elude his victims memories) and engages in circular question-begging. Also note the attention to details in other situations. Within the final 20 minutes we see Koji Yakusho in a quaint diner, but only upon further inspection do we realize that in one case his plate is filled with leftover food while in the other case it's licked clean, an important revelation of his essential change in character for the finale. And how about that final shot? This is just awesome cinema people. Magnificent.
In retrospect, "Cure" was the true beginning of the Japanese horror phenomenon that has followed it's release. While lacking in industry influence that has helped to establish Japanese horror in general (that nod goes to Nakata's "Ringu" of 1998), it provides a ground zero date for the turning of the tide so to speak. For all intents and purposes, Japanese horror has kicked everyone else's backside from 1997 onward. That said, I am truly unhappy that Kiyoshi chose to leave the genre for more dramatic fare because we're already inundated with enough art-house dramas to keep us busy. How many expertly crafted art-house horror films are there floating around today? Whatever the number, it's not nearly enough.
It's really too bad that good taste in film is practically extinct, because "Cure" should be one of those movies that everyone under the sun raves about until they're blue in the face. Kiyoshi isn't blessed with the lunatic fan base that follows guys like Akira Kurosawa or Andrei Tarkovsky. (Maybe I count as the first big fan of Kiyoshi.) It's a shame that he has established himself as an upper echelon filmmaker but somehow hasn't won over the majority of paid critics and film snobs who so easily drive the "emperor with no clothes" tide to coerce and guilt people into riding the bandwagons of lesser filmmakers.
In any case, "Cure" is the pinnacle of exceptional film-making. It's also Kiyoshi Kurosawa's best film, and that's saying something.
Slow burn that fizzles out
- Alwayssomething
- Apr 23, 2023
- Permalink
Loop
First time I saw this, thanks to an otherwise fine festival director obsessed with Eastern Europe to the exclusion of most neo-eiga, I'd seen nothing by Kiyoshi Kurosawa and, though I realize now I'd seen him in his 1979 debut for Gosha as well as in "Tampopo" and "Kamikaze Taxi," I was incognizant of Koji Yakusho's range or his stardom. "Shall We Dance," I'm pretty sure, played here after "Cure's" festival debut. The festival buzz on "Cure" was scream flick, not director matures, crowds Tarkovsky.
Early in "Cure" Kenichi (Yakusho) comes home to find the clothes washer spinning, stops it, looks inside, finds nothing. A little later his wife Fumie stops him doing some chore: "Let me do it. I feel good today" She means "I'm sane today," but we don't know this, we haven't quite understood her chat across a table with a bearded man in a previous scene. Those words, this line, "I feel good today," to the exclusion of other or even most days, are uttered in pretty much Fumie's tone, one time or another, by nearly any wife. My mother's spoken them countless times, far back as I can recall. Now she's 85, mobile, sane, with a couple of decades likely still in her. Though "Cure," a film of words as much as images, works linearly, it's really a circular film. Repeated viewings pay. You could start at any point within it and watch full round. It's not a suspense film, though it's full of suspense of the moment, of where the camera will go next, of where a gaze will fall, a hand will go, of where and whether a character will turn or pause or not pause.
Because both actors have Koizumi hair, when we first see, at distance, a trench-coated figure walking a beach, we can't be sure it's not Kenichi. The camera won't zoom in on the incessantly questioning amnesiac until after we've placed his voice as new to us. No-Name, later Mamiya, functions as a semantic, a near totally verbal catalyst. If you must, he's "Ringu's" tape, but I kept thinking of the "What Was It You Wanted?" track on Dylan's "Oh Mercy." It's no accident that No-Name's nothing but voice at first. The beach scene's school teacher later babbles introspectively, analytically, tangled up in words, amazed, "Yes. I killed her for no reason." Mesmer makes an okay MacGuffin, but as I say about rope and knots in my comment at "Undo," don't see hypnotism, spell, or trance. See (hear) just words, just questions. Even Mamiya's lighter needs to be named, spoken. The Aum weren't hypnotized. Suicide bombers aren't. Atta's Al Qaeda crew weren't. Zero pilots, willing and not (because it's an infinite world, there have to have been both as well as every gradient in-between), weren't. Whatever was done to any of these was words, language.
Later, in "Séance," Yakusho plays a sound man. Devoid of music, "Cure"s' ambient sound is sometimes so pumped it backgrounds the images. Try closing your eyes for a few film minutes, and only listen. (If you know no Japanese, all the better.) What's there? Rhythms? Randomness? Oddity? The mundane? Tradition? Modernity? I could go much longer than allowed here, but skip to the very last scene, for not a spoiler but an alert. Yakusho/Kenichi's seated in a cafeteria. You MUST see, small, backgrounded, in an obscure corner of the screen, a glint of metal, traveling. Seeing it completes the loop, thrusts you into the beginning of the film. Your instinctive struggle to leave the loop, to understand the glint or even not to have seen it, is Kurosawa's design. Your struggle, his design. That's why I say crowding Tarkovsky. At best they spiral. They turn back or turn in. Kurosawa's "Kairo" works a similar loop.
Early in "Cure" Kenichi (Yakusho) comes home to find the clothes washer spinning, stops it, looks inside, finds nothing. A little later his wife Fumie stops him doing some chore: "Let me do it. I feel good today" She means "I'm sane today," but we don't know this, we haven't quite understood her chat across a table with a bearded man in a previous scene. Those words, this line, "I feel good today," to the exclusion of other or even most days, are uttered in pretty much Fumie's tone, one time or another, by nearly any wife. My mother's spoken them countless times, far back as I can recall. Now she's 85, mobile, sane, with a couple of decades likely still in her. Though "Cure," a film of words as much as images, works linearly, it's really a circular film. Repeated viewings pay. You could start at any point within it and watch full round. It's not a suspense film, though it's full of suspense of the moment, of where the camera will go next, of where a gaze will fall, a hand will go, of where and whether a character will turn or pause or not pause.
Because both actors have Koizumi hair, when we first see, at distance, a trench-coated figure walking a beach, we can't be sure it's not Kenichi. The camera won't zoom in on the incessantly questioning amnesiac until after we've placed his voice as new to us. No-Name, later Mamiya, functions as a semantic, a near totally verbal catalyst. If you must, he's "Ringu's" tape, but I kept thinking of the "What Was It You Wanted?" track on Dylan's "Oh Mercy." It's no accident that No-Name's nothing but voice at first. The beach scene's school teacher later babbles introspectively, analytically, tangled up in words, amazed, "Yes. I killed her for no reason." Mesmer makes an okay MacGuffin, but as I say about rope and knots in my comment at "Undo," don't see hypnotism, spell, or trance. See (hear) just words, just questions. Even Mamiya's lighter needs to be named, spoken. The Aum weren't hypnotized. Suicide bombers aren't. Atta's Al Qaeda crew weren't. Zero pilots, willing and not (because it's an infinite world, there have to have been both as well as every gradient in-between), weren't. Whatever was done to any of these was words, language.
Later, in "Séance," Yakusho plays a sound man. Devoid of music, "Cure"s' ambient sound is sometimes so pumped it backgrounds the images. Try closing your eyes for a few film minutes, and only listen. (If you know no Japanese, all the better.) What's there? Rhythms? Randomness? Oddity? The mundane? Tradition? Modernity? I could go much longer than allowed here, but skip to the very last scene, for not a spoiler but an alert. Yakusho/Kenichi's seated in a cafeteria. You MUST see, small, backgrounded, in an obscure corner of the screen, a glint of metal, traveling. Seeing it completes the loop, thrusts you into the beginning of the film. Your instinctive struggle to leave the loop, to understand the glint or even not to have seen it, is Kurosawa's design. Your struggle, his design. That's why I say crowding Tarkovsky. At best they spiral. They turn back or turn in. Kurosawa's "Kairo" works a similar loop.
- frankgaipa
- Oct 23, 2002
- Permalink
Technically well made, but as a thriller failed to thrill
The acting, filmography, set design and music are good, but the plot becomes a tad too muddled and it is built too much on top of events the film never attempts to explain. Psychic/supernatural powers at work are strongly suggested particularly the way it depicts hypnosis in a not very plausible manner. I didn't buy into the world of this film and for that reason the scares and thrills lost their effect.
Perhaps I simply set the wrong expectations by thinking I was going to see a psychological thriller confined by natural laws instead of a supernatural psychological thriller.
Perhaps I simply set the wrong expectations by thinking I was going to see a psychological thriller confined by natural laws instead of a supernatural psychological thriller.
- anon32948539453954
- Aug 7, 2022
- Permalink
No Cure for Confusion?
I had high expectations for "Cure", partly because I'm intrigued by serial-killer stories and several people had claimed this one was even better than "Seven" and "Silence of the Lambs" (ahem!) but mostly because this movie was released shortly BEFORE the Asian horror/thriller hype forever broke loose with "Ringu". Maybe this still was an Asian thriller that is genuinely good and/or earned its cult reputation in an honest way, rather than because everyone praises it blindly? Well, the answer is yes...and no. The basic premise of "Cure" is truly compelling and Kiyoshi Kurosawa's filming style is definitely impressive, but eventually the exaggerated complexity ruins the whole lot. Just once, I'd like to see a Japanese occult-thriller that doesn't leave me scratching my head after the final denouement. Anyway, let's just focus on the first hour and the atmosphere! Fatigue copper Takabe is tormented by a mysterious series of killings in Tokyo. The culprits are always caught immediately at the scene of the crime and, even though they're seemly unrelated, they're all highly unlikely assassins and mysteriously marked their victims' bodies with a large "X". The one thing they all have in common turns out to be a brief encounter with Mr. Mamiya; an odd drifter with amnesia and a dubious past involving the study of hypnosis. "Cure" features a high tension level during the first hour (when the murders still are a giant riddle) and you also definitely sympathize with the main characters. Detective Takabe is a good man with noble ideals, the unfortunate "murderers" truly evoke feelings of compassion and Mr. Mamiya has a fascinating personality, despite his malicious (?) intentions. The acting performances are amazing and Kurosawa patiently gives his cast the opportunity to show their versatile talents. There's few explicit gore but several highly disturbing images of mutilated corpses and suicides that really aren't for the weak-hearted. The music is excellent and Kurosawa's directing is solid up until the last sequences, when he regretfully leaves too many questions unanswered and relies too much on the supernatural aspect.