I'm not one of those people who gets upset by minor goofs of the 'It's 1967 and they're driving a 68 Caddy!' sort. But it annoys me when plot points seemingly integral to the story are either far fetched or flat out impossible. Depending on the genre it is sometimes possible to persuade oneself that this is all happening in another universe where different rules apply. This works with Harry Potter and Star Wars; it's a bit harder to pull off when we are talking crime thrillers. And in the end should we have to? Why can't writers simply figure this stuff out properly before something gets committed to the screen?
I'm not going to labour the point with every detail that bothered me, but some of them are:
There's a lot more of this sort of stuff in the writing. Why introduce something that can't or isn't explained and doesn't move the plot or characters forward?
Other things that irked me include the unremarked upon pedophilia, the fetishising of Japanese culture (unintentionally ironic given there are at least three overt references to this sort of thing in the dialogue itself) and the bizarre dance routine near the end. On the latter point, this was good stuff when Dennis Potter was doing it 40 years ago. But in his hands it served very particular and coherent purposes. Here it is just a brain fart. It isn't clever and it isn't daring. It is pretentious and meaningless.
I suspect what was aimed at was some kind of manga inspired urban fairy tale. Somewhere along the line someone thought they could disguise it as a crime thriller, a sort of Japanese themed version of NordicNoir. The result is kind of ridiculous.
Having said all that I actually enjoyed most of this series. The acting is solid and the idiosyncratic filming/editing is interesting and amusing. The story in broad terms is also solid. I just wish it were written and thought out better.
Can't find a movie or TV show? Login to create it.
Want to rate or add this item to a list?
Not a member?
Reply by Benedict
on January 21, 2020 at 5:24 PM
I agree with almost everything you've written. Your questions are mostly fair, particularly on Sarah and the farm, but there are easy enough explanations for some of the others, or at least, the suspension of disbelief isn't taxing. The only unfair criticism is the detail about Roy. He's not turning into a gangster and murderer for £20k. Ostensibly that's the motivation, but the real motivation is the threat of corporal punishment. Plus, we know he doesn't actually pull the trigger on Fukuhara, and later when he does kill people, it's to defend three defenseless women, so again, not a cash motivation. That was an excellent and comedic twist anyway, so worth it!
I was also surprised how casually they treated the lesbian storyline given that it was clearly a stark age difference and Taki was so young and naive. Even just how casually she was allowed to roam London at all hours was pretty crazy. Disappointing that Rodney's plot also left unresolved, he was such a great character, but by the conclusion, you wonder what his plot actually added to the main story, other than as a distraction for Taki.
In general, I would say the story seemed to spiral out of control, the writers introduced too many strands to keep track of and tie up neatly. That said, I wasn't bothered by the dance scene, the dialogue writing was extremely smart (and often hilarious) and as an overall experience, I really really enjoyed it. It stands head and shoulders above most TV.
Reply by Jacinto Cupboard
on February 15, 2020 at 10:21 PM
To be clear, this is not like questioning how a character came to have coffee in his cupboard or similar immaterial things. Nor is it the same as querying how a character came to be in another city in routine circumstances. The things I mentioned were all material to the story and had varying degrees of implausibility. We all have our standards of credulity, to the extent that some people will readily believe Elvis is still alive.
None of the things I mentioned are deal breakers. They are problems; examples of bad writing. You might be happy to accept them, and credit to you for putting in so much effort to supply explanations, but a properly written piece would not have required you to do so. As I suggested in my earlier post, putting in 'reality challenging' material appears to be a stylistic choice. It doesn't work imo because it is at cross purposes to the genre. I would not, by way of example, object to these things in something like Sin City.
You might want to rethink your remarks on pedophilia. There is no grey area there and no opportunity to furnish apologia.
Reply by Jacinto Cupboard
on February 15, 2020 at 11:11 PM
Might help if you actually see something before you comment. The child was exploited not by a 'craven man' but by a woman. Not that pedophilia has anything to do with children exploiting adults. It has to do with an under aged person being unable, legally, to give informed consent.
Other than that, if your shrink can't set you right, what hope have I.
Reply by Benedict
on February 16, 2020 at 12:52 AM
100% agree with this.
Reply by Jacinto Cupboard
on February 16, 2020 at 9:57 PM
I still do not accept that a 16 year old travelling alone would be allowed to enter the UK unchallenged. I don't dispute that it is possible. I am not convinced. And the cellphone thing was more than just about the ability to use a phone while abroad. Voice call is no longer the primary function of a phone. People use social media. People text. People use skype etc. I understand that it is a real problem for writers today to depict modern forms of communication, but having almost everyone use phones in ways few people do in real life was a bad choice imo.
It is not my intention to pick over the bones of this programme in forensic detail. Why should we put more effort into working out how the mechanics of plotting work than did the writer themselves? There is a lack of rigour, I might even venture a lack of intelligence, in the writing. As I have now said several times, this is not a matter of triviality like a wrong era car, it is a matter of the world not working as depicted. I think a writer is free to put in some things that are improbable, after all drama might be founded on the premise of someone doing something peculiar therefore setting in train a special set of events, but Giri/Haji is full of unlikely stuff. It feels like someone was writing about a society they hadn't actually lived in. Like someone in the 22nd Century was writing a period piece set in the early 21st.
I am not going to debate the 'grey areas' of pedophilia with you here. My initial comments on the matter concerned how that subject matter was inserted without any kind of commentary. While I don't expect the writer to sermonise within the story, it is a glaring omission that no one thought to give any of the characters a voice on the topic, particularly considering 2 of the central characters are police officers (one of them the girl's parent) and that what has happened was unlawful. This also touches on your final remarks asking about fetishising Japanese culture, in this case in a quite literal way. If you consider how those events were depicted there are some very creepy assumptions in play, not the least that east Asian children are sexual objects, and not just considered so by predatory Europeans, but by the parents themselves. Without commentary this plays into ideas about race, culture and value in a way that is, imo, offensive.
More generally my comments about fetishing Japanese culture refer to those old saws about inscrutable Japanese and their bushido honour and blah blah blah. I am not arguing that different cultures don't have their own approaches to life. But to obsess about points of distinction in a way that removes their shared fundamental humanity reduces the subjects to codified cliches. In other words, most of the Japanese characters are not real people but caricatures. I don't think it matters as you said earlier, that the Japanese themselves amplify these cultural tropes in their own dramas: when writing outside of our own culture we need to be careful about this sort of 'othering'. And not just for social and political reasons, but for the sake of good writing. Otherwise we end up with drama that is filled with tap dancing banjo playing black people, Onion Johnny Frenchmen or, surprise surprise, doe eyed ingenue Japanese schoolgirls who are sexually available to Westerners.
Reply by Jacinto Cupboard
on February 17, 2020 at 1:15 AM
Firstly, calm down. Your self worth is not hanging on a disagreement on a movie forum. Secondly, stop the insults. Thirdly, stop making assumptions about me.
The age of consent isn't to be confused with laws preventing sex with minors. Again, I will not be discussing this as a social issue beyond repeating that what was depicted is illegal. I don't have a problem with illegal acts being depicted in a crime show. The show also depicts murder and kidnap ffs. Child sex trafficking is a huge problem and here we have both a child moving across international borders and having sex with a woman of approx 30 years of age and this is depicted as somehow normal. It isn't, and to present it as such is remarkable.
Reducing my criticism to an accusation of yellowface or similar or suggesting I am 'harping' on the topic does you no credit. You asked me to elaborate and then say I am harping. I employed the principle of charitable assumption, despite warning signs to the contrary, and assumed that you simply did not understand and required me to discuss further. Well, I can explain it to you, but I cannot understand it for you.
I didn't want to be critical of your original 'explanations' of how my problems with the story might be resolved. I respected that you went to the effort even if I found them unconvincing. One does not need to live in Japan for example to understand the rotation of the Earth. The problem was not resolved by saying that there will sometimes be a crepuscular overlap. The scenes referred to took place well into day or night. Truly, I could have gone forensic on your explanations but it would have profited no one.
For the record, I currently live in the same time zone as Japan, have spent many a miserable hour in airports and on planes, and am well familiar with airport security and airline bureaucracy. Also, the claim that because you live in Japan therefore can vouch for the authenticity of the characters is as daft as someone from New York vouching for the authenticity of the Seinfeld characters. Get a grip. You are no more a 16 year old travelling overseas in the post 911 world than I am. You are no more personally familiar with life as a yakuza than anyone else here. No more argumentum ad verecundiam please. Feel free to share your insights into ordering a coffee at Maccas in Osaka or any other touristy thing tho.