Misrepresentation Of The Film 47 Ronin

1648 Words4 Pages

Our team feels that the film, 47 ronin (2013), generally supports orientalist structures due to its misrepresentation of Japan and Samurai through its character portrayal and historical inaccuracies. This film has several inconsistencies with the actual history as it over glorifies the tale of forty-seven ronin and display certain orientalist stereotypes throughout the movie.
This film over glorifies bushido which leads to the misconception that bushido was the representation for all of Japan. At the start of the film, the narrator said, “and yet to know the story of 47 ronin is to know the story of all Japan.” (47 Ronin) Although the legend of forty-seven ronin was often used as an example to illustrate the samurai’s ethics and code of conduct, …show more content…

The book was taken as the truth and accurate portrayal of the samurai in the past. This misleads foreigners into thinking that bushido can explain all of Japan, portraying Japanese as self-sacrificial, courageous and honourable. In fact, the concept of bushido was “an idealized version” (Benesch 2) that was “formulated and popularized” (Benesch 2) by Inazo Nitobe. Since bushido is just an ideology, it cannot possibly be used to describe all Japanese. The film also emphasises the idea of bushido by showing the ronin’s blind loyalty towards their lord. Loyalty was definitely a factor that propelled them to avenge their lord but the film seems to ignore other possible factors and exaggerates their loyalty. In reality, the ronin were unwilling to die a “futile death” without achieving something (The Ako Incident: 1701-1703), which was what propelled them to take revenge rather than committing junshi. Hence, their motive was not purely to avenge their master but to achieve something in the last moments of their lives. In our opinion, there were also other factors that pressurized them to avenge Lord Asano like, their dependence on him. During the peaceful times in the Edo period …show more content…

Thus, it prejudicially portrayed the West to be more superior over the East in terms of intelligence and this misrepresentation of their intelligence supports orientalism. Firstly, Kai was the only one able to see through the witch’s disguise when they all first met her. As shown at the start of the film, the samurai was often seen relying on Kai to find traces of demons. This shows that Kai is more observant than the samurai. Secondly, Oishii used a wrong tactic when they were on the mission to get more swords to avenge their Lord, and it was only Kai who found fault in the plan and even helped the Samurai thought of a better solution to get more swords. It was again unsound to show that the Samurai, who have learnt war tactics for most of their lives, were worse at plotting a scheme than an outcast, who never had a proper education. The Eastern characters were wrongly portrayed as less intelligent so as to push Kai as the hero of the story. The director first emphasises that Kai is a half-breed and then depict him as the smarter one. Thus, we can infer that the director clearly wants to show that the West is more intelligent as compared to the East. Hence, this misrepresentation supports

Open Document