Yay. That kind of ending would seem out of place in an Ozu film in my opinion, and it doesn't make sense to keep it 10 years later because the war's long passed and there are references to the war; maaaybe Mizoguchi or Kinoshita would've kept this had they made it in '42, but even then, I don't know, because as you reasonably argue, you need the juxtaposition between the niece's budding relationship and the reconciliation between these two people who have been brought together by an arranged marriage for along time for the subplot to really work/justify its presence in the film.

@WanliTan said:

Yay. That kind of ending would seem out of place in an Ozu film in my opinion, and it doesn't make sense to keep it 10 years later because the war's long passed and there are references to the war; maaaybe Mizoguchi or Kinoshita would've kept this had they made it in '42, but even then, I don't know, because as you reasonably argue, you need the juxtaposition between the niece's budding relationship and the reconciliation between these two people who have been brought together by an arranged marriage for along time for the subplot to really work/justify its presence in the film.

I totally agree. Great point you made about the war (ongoing) not being as topical 10 years later. Like you said, war references are there but in context of its passing, like the young man’s army surplus suit, the pachinko arcade owner and the excellent singing scene. I think this film works much better by presenting the war as a ghostly presence from the past rather than a current event. In one of the documentaries I’ve seen about Ozu the narrator points out that all of Ozu’s films are snapshots of the present—the year the film was made. He never set his films in the past or future, and that’s why they have such a powerful documentary feel. Ozu (and Japan) had moved on from the war, and the film reflects it.

This suddenly makes me think of something I noticed about Japanese culture broadly: people don’t dwell on the past, at least not in a resentful or regressive way. Years ago on an architecture tour of historic churches I met a couple from Hiroshima, and I (an American) asked the dumb question ‘What’s the historic architecture like in your city?’ They could’ve slammed me by saying ‘There is no architecture, you moron, you guys flattened it all.’ But instead they politely answered that there isn’t much to speak of, but in nearby areas there are some impressive sights. (Me = 😬🦶)

@rooprect said:

I totally agree. Great point you made about the war (ongoing) not being as topical 10 years later. Like you said, war references are there but in context of its passing, like the young man’s army surplus suit, the pachinko arcade owner and the excellent singing scene. I think this film works much better by presenting the war as a ghostly presence from the past rather than a current event. In one of the documentaries I’ve seen about Ozu the narrator points out that all of Ozu’s films are snapshots of the present—the year the film was made. He never set his films in the past or future, and that’s why they have such a powerful documentary feel. Ozu (and Japan) had moved on from the war, and the film reflects it.

I don't think that then in the 1950s anyone had moved on. After their defeat, Japan was under American military occupation. The Americans were restructuring the culture, economy and politics of Japanese society, including censorship of films.

This suddenly makes me think of something I noticed about Japanese culture broadly: people don’t dwell on the past, at least not in a resentful or regressive way. Years ago on an architecture tour of historic churches I met a couple from Hiroshima, and I (an American) asked the dumb question ‘What’s the historic architecture like in your city?’ They could’ve slammed me by saying ‘There is no architecture, you moron, you guys flattened it all.’ But instead they politely answered that there isn’t much to speak of, but in nearby areas there are some impressive sights. (Me = 😬🦶)

Everyone dwells on their past. Are they resentful? That is up to the individual. Respect, honour and learn from the past, but do not let the past stop the flow from present to future. The Japanese couple understood this and as a host and a guest they gave a polite answer on that sensitive subject.

@wonder2wonder said:

@rooprect said:

I totally agree. Great point you made about the war (ongoing) not being as topical 10 years later. Like you said, war references are there but in context of its passing, like the young man’s army surplus suit, the pachinko arcade owner and the excellent singing scene. I think this film works much better by presenting the war as a ghostly presence from the past rather than a current event. In one of the documentaries I’ve seen about Ozu the narrator points out that all of Ozu’s films are snapshots of the present—the year the film was made. He never set his films in the past or future, and that’s why they have such a powerful documentary feel. Ozu (and Japan) had moved on from the war, and the film reflects it.

I don't think that then in the 1950s anyone had moved on. After their defeat, Japan was under American military occupation. The Americans were restructuring the culture, economy and politics of Japanese society, including censorship of films.

This suddenly makes me think of something I noticed about Japanese culture broadly: people don’t dwell on the past, at least not in a resentful or regressive way. Years ago on an architecture tour of historic churches I met a couple from Hiroshima, and I (an American) asked the dumb question ‘What’s the historic architecture like in your city?’ They could’ve slammed me by saying ‘There is no architecture, you moron, you guys flattened it all.’ But instead they politely answered that there isn’t much to speak of, but in nearby areas there are some impressive sights. (Me = 😬🦶)

Everyone dwells on their past. Are they resentful? That is up to the individual. Respect, honour and learn from the past, but do not let the past stop the flow from present to future. The Japanese couple understood this and as a host and a guest they gave a polite answer on that sensitive subject.

What I meant by 'moved on' was that they were rebuilding, forging a new society already, even assimilating the traditions of their 'conquerors' America. This is a prominent theme in Ozu's films: not dwelling on the tragedy of war but showing how Japanese society had shifted and evolved as a result.

Contrast this against American culture, especially today's, where half the population is obsessed with rolling the clock back, stubbornly and often violently opposing any notion of evolving forward. To this day many Americans harbor overt grudges toward any nation or culture we've ever been at war with.

A great Ozu film that illustrates the way Japanese 'move on' is Late Spring which I've commented on at length so I won't repeat it here. In a nutshell, Ozu presents the shift between the pre-war generation (the girl's aunt) and the post-war generation (the girl's friend). The aunt's way is to arrange a marriage while the friend represents the 'moga' (modern girl), an independent woman who got a divorce, reads English books and bakes strawberry shortcake, as a metaphor for Japan adopting Western traditions and moving on.

@rooprect said:

What I meant by 'moved on' was that they were rebuilding, forging a new society already, even assimilating the traditions of their 'conquerors' America. This is a prominent theme in Ozu's films: not dwelling on the tragedy of war but showing how Japanese society had shifted and evolved as a result.

Contrast this against American culture, especially today's, where half the population is obsessed with rolling the clock back, stubbornly and often violently opposing any notion of evolving forward. To this day many Americans harbor overt grudges toward any nation or culture we've ever been at war with.

A great Ozu film that illustrates the way Japanese 'move on' is Late Spring which I've commented on at length so I won't repeat it here. In a nutshell, Ozu presents the shift between the pre-war generation (the girl's aunt) and the post-war generation (the girl's friend). The aunt's way is to arrange a marriage while the friend represents the 'moga' (modern girl), an independent woman who got a divorce, reads English books and bakes strawberry shortcake, as a metaphor for Japan adopting Western traditions and moving on.

I understand that. However Japanese society is well aware of what is happening in America and Europe. They have assimilated/adapted some Western traditions and values, but hopefully they won't do so with the contemporary divisive ones. For now there are only tiny signs noticeable of controversy between the push for 'progressiveness' and an adherence to their own cultural traditions.

Anyway, back to Ozu. Most of his films that I enjoy are those about family and every day life in Japan. A way of life that one day could be a thing of the past, as the population is decreasing due to the fall of the birth and fertility rate.

Although "お茶漬の味 (The Flavor of Green Tea over Rice) (1952)" is a rewrite of "彼氏南京へ行く(My Boyfriend Goes to Nanjing) (1939)", it is interesting that in Ozu's pre-war movie "淑女は何を忘れたか (What Did the Lady Forget?) (1937)" similar characters appear. Especially the girl Setsuko acts non-traditional and would have probably also been against an arranged marriage.

Many of Ozu's movies have a deeper meaning set against the pre- and postwar social changes, but there are also similarities with other dramas in a different era where family, social class and marriage is central. That theme is universal, of all times and cultures.