Some stats

[Limedebois]

After this post

and I don't see a lot of asian users (very few votes for local films

Picking up on just one small part of your post.

I've noticed this a lot. Bollywood films get a lot of votes but when it comes to Japanese films (probably others too but I focus more on Japanese films) they often have very few. When films are released in Japan, months before they get a release abroad, they get very few votes. It doesn't seem like there are a lot of Japanese voters on IMBb The only films that ever get a lot of votes are ones that are more well known in the English-speaking countries. Even a lot of Ozu films have under 1000 votes or at least did until recently.

When I made Japanese lists on iCM I noticed how few votes there were in general. It seems like the votes are concentrated on the bigger films by Kurosawa and others. Mizoguchi, Ozu, Naruse etc. generally struggle for votes. Even the Ningen no Joken trilogy had only about 800 votes until the last few months.

I don't really have a big point here or a complaint. Just something I've noticed when I've been watching Japanese films. Compared to a lot of other big film countries, they have a very low number of votes.

I've found two imdb sites :

http://movie.goo.ne.jp/
and
http://cinema.pia.co.jp/

With some internet tools, it's easy to know who are the visitors for a specific site:
http://urlspy.co.uk/www.imdb.com#visitors
In Japan, imdb is ranked 471st. In the world, imdb is 39th. So these domestic sites are certainly well ranked.
movie.goo.ne.jp : Estimate Daily Visitors 3,889,947
http://urlspy.org/u/goo.ne.jp
pia.co.jp : Estimate Daily Visitors 55,231
http://urlspy.org/u/pia.co.jp

Imdb Estimate Daily Visitors 10,503,333
(so 10 millions worldwide for imdb, and 4m worldwide/japan for goo.ne.jp...)

It explains why there's no japaneses on imdb. Too bad for us.


In France, imdb is only 165th because of allocine.fr: 27th site in France (Estimate Daily Visitors 654,673).

The "palm" goes to Roumania where imdb is the 11th site.

It's true that India is well represented on imdb : the site is the 27th site.

---

Stats for icheckmovies :
http://urlspy.co.uk/www.icheckmovies.com#visitors
Venezuela 23.60% visitors?!
5100-10400 Daily Visitors
GEO Location: in Netherlands

[allisoncm]

I wonder about Turkey.

[Limedebois]

For imdb, it's the 41st site.
And icheckmovies, 7.70% of users are turkish (3rd in country rank).

Actually on goo.ne.jp, ranks seem to be on 100. Calculated on 5 categories : the story, the cast, production or directing (my translator is not sure), aspect, music. Interesting, but... Hiddek castle has two reviews, Rashomon, 2, Howl's Moving Castle 21 (and only 4 votes?!, Battle royale 6 (17 votes), The Bodyguard 9 (17votes)... 4 millions visitors and nobody ranks the films? I've looking for lists, found anything.

Well imdb still the place for japanese films...

[allisoncm]

The Turkish seem to rate Turkish films high, though. Hmm, who knows?

[Kasparius]

"And icheckmovies, 7.70% of users are turkish (3rd in country rank)."

This explains a lot...

[allisoncm]

Where 7% of the movies on the site are Turkish? It's amazing how these Turkish users don't really speak up though.

There was this Turkish lady in my French class in France. She was very nice and she was an artist. One time she cooked a Turkish delicacy for us. Me, being a starving student appreciated it.

[Limedebois]

I think there's a local popular culture in cinema, exactly as in France, japan, soviet union. You can like a bad movie because it's local culture (baseball film in USA, some french comedy with TV stars).

But there's some iranians who rank high Gaav for instance, some czechs who rank high Marketa Lazarová, Bulgarians with The Goat Horn, Indian with Rang de basanti. And here I don't think it's cultural. These movies are too bad.

But never seen a turkish film that high. 8-9. (And there's is also good movies there, also, I guess).

[PeacefulAnarchy]

For imdb, it's the 41st site.
And icheckmovies, 7.70% of users are turkish (3rd in country rank).

Actually on goo.ne.jp, ranks seem to be on 100. Calculated on 5 categories : the story, the cast, production or directing (my translator is not sure), aspect, music. Interesting, but... Hiddek castle has two reviews, Rashomon, 2, Howl's Moving Castle 21 (and only 4 votes?!, Battle royale 6 (17 votes), The Bodyguard 9 (17votes)... 4 millions visitors and nobody ranks the films? I've looking for lists, found anything.

Well imdb still the place for japanese films...

I'm pretty sure goo.ne.jp is a web portal site like yahoo or google, not a movie website.

[mjf314]

In France, imdb is only 165th because of allocine.fr: 27th site in France (Estimate Daily Visitors 654,673).

Apparently Intouchables (2011) is the best film of all time according to allocine.fr users.

http://www.allocine.fr/film/meilleurs_g ... ublic.html

If you look at the vote distributions for Intouchables and The Godfather, it looks like The Godfather should have a higher rating, so I guess they must use some sort of strange weighting formula.

[PeacefulAnarchy]

If you look at the vote distributions for Intouchables and The Godfather, it looks like The Godfather should have a higher rating, so I guess they must use some sort of strange weighting formula.

Where are you looking? Intouchables has 4.5 while The Godfather has 4.3?
Unless you're looking at the breakdown, but that's only for reviews not all votes.

[tourdesb]

In France, imdb is only 165th because of allocine.fr: 27th site in France (Estimate Daily Visitors 654,673).

Apparently Intouchables (2011) is the best film of all time according to allocine.fr users.

http://www.allocine.fr/film/meilleurs_g ... ublic.html

If you look at the vote distributions for Intouchables and The Godfather, it looks like The Godfather should have a higher rating, so I guess they must use some sort of strange weighting formula.

There is no strange weighting formula.

The vote distributions does not show every votes, but only the people who commented their vote. But you can rate without giving a comment.

A lot of people gave 5 stars to Intouchables and did not comment their vote, that's it

[St. Gloede]

I think there's a local popular culture in cinema, exactly as in France, japan, soviet union. You can like a bad movie because it's local culture (baseball film in USA, some french comedy with TV stars).

Are you saying they just pretend to like these movies as a duty to their culture/country though they know within themselves that these movies are bad? Are you sure they don't genuinly like these film, and don't consider them bad at all?

But there's some iranians who rank high Gaav for instance, some czechs who rank high Marketa Lazarová, Bulgarians with The Goat Horn, Indian with Rang de basanti. And here I don't think it's cultural. These movies are too bad.

But never seen a turkish film that high. 8-9. (And there's is also good movies there, also, I guess).

Gaav
US users - 178 - 7.2
Non-US users - 1,114 - 7.9

Marketa Lazarová:
US users - 184 - 8.1
Non-US users - 688 - 8.1

The Goat Horn
US users - 122 - 7.9
Non-US users - 884 - 8.1

Rang de basanti
US users - 2,625 - 7.6
Non-US users - 12,271 - 8.5

I haven't seen any of these, so I can't offer my own opinions, but the consensus does not appear to be too far off on any of them. Sadly these categories are a bit deffect as you can't tell their country of origin's average rating, but their averages are still all incredibly high from both non-US users and US users.

[allisoncm]

Sometimes it's not as simple as US-user/non US-user and country of origin - some people identify with different cultures. But I see what you're saying.

[AdamH]

I don't think you can read too much into the US ratings for those films. Look at the number of votes they have compared to non-US. It's tiny. Also, the Americans that see the films are more likely to be people interested in the films and they're more likely to give them a high rating. They aren't necessarily Americans either; just people living in America.

Anyway, the US/non-US voter breakdown is pretty useless. Do Italian voters have anything in common with Japanese or Turkish or Brazilian voters? Are they likely to vote the same way? It's only helpful if the breakdown is by continent at the very least.

[allisoncm]

Also, the Americans that see the films are more likely to be people interested in the films and they're more likely to give them a high rating.

Yes, that is true. I'm an American and interested in French films, so I wil probably rate them high. Also, if more people watch movies on more lists, the ratings for the Indian and Turkish films would probably fall. However, how many people are going to watch films they're not interested in?

[AdamH]

What you quoted wasn't a great point tbh. I should have probably removed that part from my post. Many films would have a lower rating if far more people saw them because a lot of films appeal to a specific group of people and wouldn't interest most of the general public.

I think my point was that when it comes to films that aren't even available on DVD outwith their own country and only have about 100 votes from US voters then I don't think you can read an awful lot into the US rating. I'm still not making the greatest of points here but, basically, as long as the voter breakdown is US and non-US then I think it's almost worthless.

[St. Gloede]

I don't think you can read too much into the US ratings for those films. Look at the number of votes they have compared to non-US. It's tiny. Also, the Americans that see the films are more likely to be people interested in the films and they're more likely to give them a high rating.

This is true for essentially any non-mainstream film. Also, the US percentage is at least one 10th of the non-US average. I'll agree that the breakdown is relatively useless, but it does show that US users liked them a lot and that it's not neccesarily just a film for the local public.

Btw, I believe Marketa Lazarová is the best film Ormazd has seen all year (and he watches 5+ a day) so he'll probably join into the discussion soon.

[St. Gloede]

What you quoted wasn't a great point tbh. I should have probably removed that part from my post. Many films would have a lower rating if far more people saw them because a lot of films appeal to a specific group of people and wouldn't interest most of the general public.

Hell, Citizen Kane would probably land on 1.5 if enough teens got a hold of it.

[AdamH]

Here's what I mean about the US rating. Take this example: Sut Kardesler

Sut Kardesler. A Turkish films with no English subtitles available anywhere. It has a US rating of 7.0 with 269 votes. The US ratings really don't mean a lot with these types of films.

[brokenface]

some czechs who rank high Marketa Lazarová......And here I don't think it's cultural. These movies are too bad.

Say what? Marketa Lazarova is not a film that is just rated high by Czechs. e.g. in the UK there is an excellent DVD release of it & it got very good reviews - visually, it's a special film. The plot is a complete bafflement to me, mind ;)

[Kasparius]

I think there's a local popular culture in cinema, exactly as in France, japan, soviet union. You can like a bad movie because it's local culture (baseball film in USA, some french comedy with TV stars).

Are you saying they just pretend to like these movies as a duty to their culture/country though they know within themselves that these movies are bad? Are you sure they don't genuinly like these film, and don't consider them bad at all?

But there's some iranians who rank high Gaav for instance, some czechs who rank high Marketa Lazarová, Bulgarians with The Goat Horn, Indian with Rang de basanti. And here I don't think it's cultural. These movies are too bad.

But never seen a turkish film that high. 8-9. (And there's is also good movies there, also, I guess).

Gaav
US users - 178 - 7.2
Non-US users - 1,114 - 7.9

Marketa Lazarová:
US users - 184 - 8.1
Non-US users - 688 - 8.1

The Goat Horn
US users - 122 - 7.9
Non-US users - 884 - 8.1

Rang de basanti
US users - 2,625 - 7.6
Non-US users - 12,271 - 8.5

I haven't seen any of these, so I can't offer my own opinions, but the consensus does not appear to be too far off on any of them. Sadly these categories are a bit deffect as you can't tell their country of origin's average rating, but their averages are still all incredibly high from both non-US users and US users.

A lot of the U.S. users are probably Indians living in the U.S.

[mjf314]

In France, imdb is only 165th because of allocine.fr: 27th site in France (Estimate Daily Visitors 654,673).

Apparently Intouchables (2011) is the best film of all time according to allocine.fr users.

http://www.allocine.fr/film/meilleurs_g ... ublic.html

If you look at the vote distributions for Intouchables and The Godfather, it looks like The Godfather should have a higher rating, so I guess they must use some sort of strange weighting formula.

There is no strange weighting formula.

The vote distributions does not show every votes, but only the people who commented their vote. But you can rate without giving a comment.

A lot of people gave 5 stars to Intouchables and did not comment their vote, that's it

Is there any way to see a breakdown of all the votes (not just the ones with comments)?

[mightysparks]

I don't think you can read too much into the US ratings for those films. Look at the number of votes they have compared to non-US. It's tiny. Also, the Americans that see the films are more likely to be people interested in the films and they're more likely to give them a high rating.

This is true for essentially any non-mainstream film. Also, the US percentage is at least one 10th of the non-US average. I'll agree that the breakdown is relatively useless, but it does show that US users liked them a lot and that it's not neccesarily just a film for the local public.

Btw, I believe Marketa Lazarová is the best film Ormazd has seen all year (and he watches 5+ a day) so he'll probably join into the discussion soon.

In contrast, Marketa Lazarová is one of the worst films I've seen this year.

[allisoncm]

Not a big fan of Marketa Lazarova myself. But if everyone loves it, great.

[ormazd]

You can not ignore a staff member.
Error Code: 30006:2486033

Dammit

[Limedebois]

Well about allocine.fr, I tried yesterday how it works for rating, lists of "best films" and I understand nothing. At least with the imdb rating, us-users, non us-users, it's clear and not significate. With allocine, I think it's best films of the year. They don't care old movies. Imdb is clearly a cinephile site. If you're looking for a best horror films list, it won't be a list of the year... Or I'm stupid and I don't understand my own language in allocine site... (I really don't like the site so it's possible). allocine is a site to help people who want to go to movie theatre, originally. So it's not really an old school cinephile site.

I'm pretty sure goo.ne.jp is a web portal site like yahoo or google, not a movie website.

Thanks, I didn't think about that. These movie.goo site is part of goo site... ok If someone found a site similar in japan than imdb, it will be very helpfull.

Different site with Rashomon :
http://movie.walkerplus.com/mv28517/
10 votes
http://eiga.com/movie/54199/
http://www.allcinema.net/prog/show_c.php?num_c=86283
33 reviews, 26 votes
The site with google translation:
http://translate.google.fr/translate?hl ... _c%3D86283
It seems to be more interesting...
With Suzaki paradise, there is 44 votes and 1 review. With allcinema.net, 10 votes and 5 "reviews". But the rank is different: imdb it's an average 7.2/10 and on the japanese site it's a 8.4/10
With Godzilla 1954, imdb 7000 votes (?!), 136 reviews. With allcinema.net 12 votes, 27 reviews...

I waived. Why the Japanese don't use imdb still a mystery...

@crinderman: "Are you saying they just pretend to like these movies as a duty to their culture/country though they know within themselves that these movies are bad? Are you sure they don't genuinly like these film, and don't consider them bad at all?"
I am poorly expressed. I will say "bad" with films like Marketa Lazarová, Rang de basanti. "Bad" is just a way to express my own taste. I know some can love these films. But I talked about country with local industry of cinema. Japan, India, France and apparently Turkey. The term here should've been "interested" and not "bad". There's also a local culture in us, not exportable, like movies about baseball. In France, Intouchable is the perfect example of a local french film, or La Vérité si je mens, Le Père Noël est une ordure. These films will have a high ranking with french voters (I love the last one for instance), and foreign voters, when they watch them, most of time, they're not interested as much as we are (also I presume some countrymen hate these movies).

Perhaps it's the same with Marketa or Rang de basanti. I don't know, and if someone can explain why these movies are so high, it's ok.

[St. Gloede]

But I talked about country with local industry of cinema. Japan, India, France and apparently Turkey. The term here should've been "interested" and not "bad". There's also a local culture in us, not exportable, like movies about baseball. In France, Intouchable is the perfect example of a local french film, or La Vérité si je mens, Le Père Noël est une ordure. These films will have a high ranking with french voters (I love the last one for instance), and foreign voters, when they watch them, most of time, they're not interested as much as we are (also I presume some countrymen hate these movies).

Perhaps it's the same with Marketa or Rang de basanti. I don't know, and if someone can explain why these movies are so high, it's ok.

Why wouldn't movies about baseball be exportable? Are you saying that people can't like anything they are not familiar with from their own culture? Norway doesn't have baseball, yet Moneyball is coming to the cinemas here, perhaps not the best example since it's not a particularly good film IMO, but there are plenty of baseball movies I find great/good. First of all are sports movies are relatively relatable even if you don't know a thing about the sport. It's all about winning or losing. It's easy to get people interested in such a simple consept, and sports movies also throw in narratives and characters with lives outside the arena, so there's always something to pick up on. Just because a culture is different and makes movies like no others does not mean that they can't affect people outside this culture. Of course I won't deny that a movie can be about something quite important to a certain culture and be more important to these people in return, but there should still be a lot to gather for the rest of us.

[Limedebois]

Are you saying that people can't like anything they are not familiar with from their own culture?

Replace "like" by "interested" and "can't" by something else... yes that's what I'm saying. Have you seen the french movies in my post? All the best entries in France are not exportable. If it is to much "local" nobody will take the risk to buy the movies. Popular movies, with entries, are not the "art movies" or "dramas". It's more often comedy with local actors, local humor; it's action/thriller movies, anything else but drama. There is a public for festival films, there are international and it's more often dramas. Of course it's not a rule. Almodovar makes comedy, but for instance, Nanni Moreti is known because of his festival films, I can't say if it is local culture or what, it's personnal, but when you are in a festival, it's a new world. There's certainly a lot of comedies in Italy, and I don't know them. I can't unlike what I don't know, but because it is not in festivals, it's not exportable. Local films are not local if somebody outside the country it's interesting. It's a festival most of time. Kitano is known for his serious work in occident, and I think he's known in Japan for his comedian work.

So yes, you like generally what you know. More you watch japanese films, more you like it. I saw some Mizogushi 15 years ago, and I didn't like it. Because it's very "local culture". Of course all good stories are universal, but when the context is too exotic, it could be difficult to follow it. Kurosawa is more known because his work are very inspired by occidental culture (Shakespeare, Western, opera with the manner to alternate different tempo, russian culture). So a foreign cinephile will have less trouble to follow the story. Sergio Leone did the same. Why italian cinema was exportable at that time? because they made a lot of co-production. Even in dramas, we can see a lot of french actor, even us actor, Rod Steiger in Hands Over the City! And of course the western spaghetti: italian production with western context, us, euros actors. Same with peplum. The genre was popular in hollywood, so making peplums in cinecitta wasn't "local culture".

When Slumdog millianaire is made by Boyle, it's a door open on the boolywood films. It's a local context, if it wasn't Peter Boyle it wouldn't be the same.

So yes a film with baseball context, it's very local culture. If the film is not somehting else, a masterpiece or something to achieve to expose a more universal context, of course it's less interesting. It's the same in sport. There's local sports. The American don't understand what it is so interesting in football. That's not because the rest of the world is stupid or like boring sports, it's because they don't know it. But when you learn to know about something you start to found it intersting. You start with Akira Kurosawa films, then samourai films, then perhaps Kobayashi, then Ozu, Mizoguchi. If you start with Ozu or Mizo, you will be certainly lost.

Most of time people like to watch same kind of genre, movies. It's all a process to looking for new type of films, cultures. I think a like a lot of type films, but I don't see the problem if someone is a fanatic of one genre, one culture. It's a choice or a taste. We have to understand that when we say "this movie is bad", it could be a bad movie, but it could be also a decent movie I'm not interested in. Saying "bad" is not an injure. It's an easy way to say something.

[St. Gloede]

Are you saying that people can't like anything they are not familiar with from their own culture?

Replace "like" by "interested" and "can't" by something else... yes that's what I'm saying. Have you seen the french movies in my post? All the best entries in France are not exportable. If it is to much "local" nobody will take the risk to buy the movies. Popular movies, with entries, are not the "art movies" or "dramas". It's more often comedy with local actors, local humor; it's action/thriller movies, anything else but drama. There is a public for festival films, there are international and it's more often dramas. Of course it's not a rule. Almodovar makes comedy, but for instance, Nanni Moreti is known because of his festival films, I can't say if it is local culture or what, it's personnal, but when you are in a festival, it's a new world. There's certainly a lot of comedies in Italy, and I don't know them. I can't unlike what I don't know, but because it is not in festivals, it's not exportable. Local films are not local if somebody outside the country it's interesting. It's a festival most of time. Kitano is known for his serious work in occident, and I think he's known in Japan for his comedian work.

So yes, you like generally what you know. More you watch japanese films, more you like it. I saw some Mizogushi 15 years ago, and I didn't like it. Because it's very "local culture". Of course all good stories are universal, but when the context is too exotic, it could be difficult to follow it. Kurosawa is more known because his work are very inspired by occidental culture (Shakespeare, Western, opera with the manner to alternate different tempo, russian culture). So a foreign cinephile will have less trouble to follow the story. Sergio Leone did the same. Why italian cinema was exportable at that time? because they made a lot of co-production. Even in dramas, we can see a lot of french actor, even us actor, Rod Steiger in Hands Over the City! And of course the western spaghetti: italian production with western context, us, euros actors. Same with peplum. The genre was popular in hollywood, so making peplums in cinecitta wasn't "local culture".

When Slumdog millianaire is made by Boyle, it's a door open on the boolywood films. It's a local context, if it wasn't Peter Boyle it wouldn't be the same.

So yes a film with baseball context, it's very local culture. If the film is not somehting else, a masterpiece or something to achieve to expose a more universal context, of course it's less interesting. It's the same in sport. There's local sports. The American don't understand what it is so interesting in football. That's not because the rest of the world is stupid or like boring sports, it's because they don't know it. But when you learn to know about something you start to found it intersting. You start with Akira Kurosawa films, then samourai films, then perhaps Kobayashi, then Ozu, Mizoguchi. If you start with Ozu or Mizo, you will be certainly lost.

Most of time people like to watch same kind of genre, movies. It's all a process to looking for new type of films, cultures. I think a like a lot of type films, but I don't see the problem if someone is a fanatic of one genre, one culture. It's a choice or a taste. We have to understand that when we say "this movie is bad", it could be a bad movie, but it could be also a decent movie I'm not interested in. Saying "bad" is not an injure. It's an easy way to say something.

Couldn't disagree more.

If you are just talking about the masses and distribution of film, sure, the masses are really not interested in much outside blockbusters and genre movies from America+their native country. But the masses are irrelevant to film buffs.

[Limedebois]

But the masses are irrelevant to film buffs.

Sure but nobody escapes from the prejudices and lack of knowledge. You can't be interested on something you don't know yet.

[St. Gloede]

But the masses are irrelevant to film buffs.

Sure but nobody escapes from the prejudices and lack of knowledge. You can't be interested on something you don't know yet.

But the movie exposes you to it ...

[Kasparius]

:troll:

[Limedebois]

Yes, as life do.

With people we don't know we have prejudices. "Well I'm coming to you because you seem interesting". Same with women... We don't say "well, you're very ugly, so you must be very smart, and if you're not smart, you're must be nice..." Generally we are interested, first, to beauty. We follow our prejudices. It's natural. But after that, of course we can be more "open minded" and look for something else. If we were so open minded we would stop every stranger in the street to know them, we would watch films ranked 4 on imdb just because... it's not fair, we need to be open minded, i'm interested in a lot of thing, even the worst... And if you were so open minded, you would watch Le Père noel est une ordure^. Don't like a type of genre, of culture, it's already a prejudice to all other films of this genre or culture that we don't want to watch because we have decided to don't like them a priori. We can't like every thing and we can't be a priori open minded with all type of genres or cultures we don't know. First step is "oh, I don't even know there was Brazilian cinema". Next step : "ok I've seen some brazilian films, I'm not fan. What a crime brazilian film? It is a joke? No not for me. I don't like crime films, and I don't like brazilian films. It's certainly very interested but I've a lot of films more interested to watch before that." Next step: "Why do you want me to watch this City of god? It's with children? What is this movie?! Ok now you won. I'm interested." Next step: "Well, ok it's a nice film. Not so good, but a good won. But you know what? I think I will watch some brazilian films. I didn't like all the crime aspect of the film, but, all the context in the favellas was interesting." It's all about prejudices. To follow them, then to fight against them.

SFME

[bal3x]

You start with Akira Kurosawa films, then samourai films, then perhaps Kobayashi, then Ozu, Mizoguchi. If you start with Ozu or Mizo, you will be certainly lost.

Even though Limedebois does make some valid points in general I would need to disagree with the post and especially with this quote - I don't see any reason why people should be "certainly lost" starting with Human Condition, Late Spring or Sansho - I certainly was not. Granted I did see a couple of Kurosawas before that, but that has nothing to do with me being lost over Kobayashi, Ozu, or Mizoguchi.

[allisoncm]

I was lost with all those films. I usually am with Ozu with about two exceptions - Tokyo Story not included.

[St. Gloede]

I was lost with all those films. I usually am with Ozu with about two exceptions - Tokyo Story not included.

Lost how?

[allisoncm]

I was trying to figure out the story. For all I know there was none.

[Limedebois]

You're lost when you can't understand the local references, for instance the stakes. Japan has very specific culture. And of course it's not mode for occidental audiences, nothing is explain. For instance, in Naruse, sometimes it's not easy to understand where the character lives, what is his job, what is represent and then what are the stakes with it. There's a lot of niceties in this culture and it's part of the story to understand plenty the situation. Geishas are not prostitutes, nor escort girls, there's is many different type of job with no correspondence in occidental society. In occident a bar is a bar, a restaurant is a restaurant. In Japan, it's not so easy. In Kurosawa's films, the characters are samourais, doctors, kings, it's easy to understand. But in Naruse, Ozu or Mizoushi, not in all movies, for instance we have to know what represent a relationship between a sun and his mum, a father with his wife, a boss, a favorite "prostitute".

An other example of local culture, it's A christmas story. America has exported a lot of his culture since the rise of the cinema. Christmas for instance (santa clauss killed Saint Nicolas in Europe), even st valentin's day or Halloween. A lot in this film is not exportable: the bad words, the materialism, the teacher and the school, the turkey (I thought it was in thanksgiving...).

There is a collective unconscious in all culture, all generation. Anybody has is own identity throw personal references. Some books, songs, tv shows, comedians, local myths. If I talk to a "non-french" about "les inconnus", "les nuls", "le club dorothée" "casimir" "oui-oui" "lucky luke" "quick et fluck, le dahu, le carnaval de Bineau, le cahier de texte, le cahier de correspondance, un zéro pointé, etc. he won't understand it. So in a film, all the references, the little things vanish. But it could be a real pleasure to discover a local culture. But sometimes it's long and difficult

with Human Condition, Late Spring or Sansho

Kobayashi is easy to understand, that's why I put him just after kurosawa. Sansho is easy to understand, it's like a tale. In Late spring it starts to became complicated. It's not a "brutal conflict movie". There's never a explicit reason of the daughter's behavior. That's what I loved in the film, but perhaps a Japanese can understand some little details I can't understand. But you have to know a little bit about Japanese society: the difference between a daughter with her single father, and a daughter with her single mother (Late autumn). I think the stakes are not exactly the same and some behaviors continue to be mysterious.

[Kasparius]

The only thing I don't understand about A Christmas Story, is why do people like it? It's one of the shittiest film I've ever seen.

[mjf314]

The only thing I don't understand about A Christmas Story, is why do people like it? It's one of the shittiest film I've ever seen.

Maybe it's a Christmas mafia film.