EDITH KURZWEIL
185
said
to
be the reigning master of the gangster film (and hcre also plays
the cenrra I protagonist, Ya ma mow), has produced the blood iest, most
brutally violent film I have ever seen. The plot is simple: he has becn
banishcd from Tokyo in the aftcrmath of a gang war and travels
to
Los
Angeles
to
find his younger brother-who is cngagcd in low-level
cri mcs. Si ncc Ya ma moto dccms thesc activities un profcssiona I, he
decides to take over and
to
build up an organization, which is in com–
petition with the local mafia. Throughout the many ruthless murdcrs,
Yamamoto's eyes stay almost shut; exccpt for a very faint facial tic, he
remains inscrutable; uses few words and many high-caliber, blazing
guns. His startling cruelty knows no end.
In his director's statemcnt, Mr. Kitano said that although hc expected
problems, he "had a great timc shooting in the States, especially the
action sccnes, which Ihel couldn't possibly expect
to
do in Japan."] was
struck by this commcnt whcn rcading it on the day after I had watched
the congrcssiona I hca rings a bout mca ns of preventing ch iId ren's expo–
surc
to
violent television and films, that concluded that "parents raise
children, not governmcnt." Vcry truc. But politicians and the folks in
thc cntcrtainmcnt industry know that childrcn will always find ways of
doing and seeing what is forbiddcn. I kcpt waiting for someone to say
that thc bcst way
to
kccp such violencc at bay would be not
to
produce
it. After all, such protection used
to
exist-without particularly harm–
ing anyone-except a few movie moguls. Aftcr seeing
Brother
I thought
that our lawmakers ought
to
find thc time to define censorship precisely.
Instead they are in the avant-garde of permitting evil productions while
decrying its delcterious effects-not only on kids but on potential crim–
inals as well. Of course, evil sells. Still, if we do nothing, let us at least
admit that we allow the psychic well -being of "our children" to suffer
in order
to
allow the movie indusrry to flourish. During the press screen–
ings no one walked out; some people tittered or laughed. Was it because
they liked the film; because the audience already had become inured
to
violence; or because they concentrated on the wonderful photography
without sccing its gory contcnt? Thc rcviewer for
The New York Times
did suggest that it might have been bettcr to end
Brothers
a few scenes
before thc last onc. Hc failed
to
mcntion that that scenc shows
Yamamoto's end: he is shot down by at least a dozen sharp-shooting
mafiosi who stand shouldcr
to
shouldcr and kcep shooting long after he
is already dead. Did the produccr reproduce the Oklahoma killings, or
vice versa?
