User reviews

I Live in Fear, more accurately translated from the Japanese as Record of a Living Being, marks a move towards gloomier, more pessimistic works from Kurosawa. It is, as far as I know, the earliest film to deal head-on with the issue of nuclear weapons. While Japan's own Godzilla (1954) and US films like Kiss Me Deadly (1955) made metaphors for the destructive capabilities of the bomb, I Live in Fear looks directly at the unspoken social terror by which those other allegorical films were inspired.

But this is not a one-issue film. Kurosawa also rails against the problems in a typical patriarchal Japanese family – both with the family elder's demanding control over his children and also the younger generation's disrespect for the old man. However, an overarching theme seems to be an attack on individualism. Niide, the patriarch seeks only to save himself and his family. Throughout the picture we are reminded that there is a wider society out there, beginning with the opening shots of crowded streets scenes (which remind me of the beginning of The Public Enemy). So Kurosawa puts several of his political eggs in I Live in Fear's basket, but the points are skilfully woven together around the theme of the nuclear threat.

While we aren't confronted with an actual demonstration of the effects of nuclear war, the imagery of total destruction is there in subtle ways. The iron foundry which Niide owns resembles a ruined, burnt out city. At one point, Niide is startled by the beginning of a thunderstorm – the perfect metaphor for a nuclear strike; a flash, a boom and rainfall (in other words, the radioactive fallout after the explosion). It's a slightly obvious device, but the timing is perfect. One of the most haunting images comes towards the end, in a scene where a dusty wind is blowing through Niide's house, flapping through the pages of a book he has left open on the floor.

Kurosawa's regular leading man Toshiro Mifune is daringly cast as the elderly Niide. With makeup ageing his features, the thirty-five year old is in a role unlike any he had played before. He's perhaps a little too lively to convince as an old man, but what counts is that he brings as much power to the performance as he did to his role as Kikuchiyo in Seven Samurai the previous year. His standout scene is the one in which he confronts Dr Harada after getting off the bus, and confesses that he is now terrified. Kurosawa cleverly amplifies his speech by having it take place under a road bridge. Kurosawa's favourite supporting actor, Takashi Shimura, plays Dr Harada, and turns in a strong performance as a kind of consistent voice of reason throughout the picture.

One criticism I sometimes have of Kurosawa is that in his effort to make a point, he occasionally forgets to make a film enjoyable for the audience, and this is somewhat the case here. I Live in Fear is not the most entertaining of Kurosawa's pictures. On the other hand, it's not all that long, and there's a slightly hysterical tone to it that occasionally makes it spellbinding. Kurosawa said this was the picture that he was most proud of, and you can see why. It was a flop at the Japanese box office, and has never been all that popular, but as a record of the atmosphere of the times, it really deserves more recognition.

I felt I had to post because this film, not one of my favorites by Kurosawa but still a one of quality and intelligence, keeps getting bashed by reviewers. The low score (compared to other Kurosawa films) shouldn't discourage potential viewers. Granted, this film takes more patience than some of his other films. However, the subject matter of the atomic bomb and how Japanese society and individuals deal I thought was very seminal. The whole concept of fear is deeply imbued into the film and it questions the sanity of the viewer and the world who live under the constant threat of universal destruction with ignorant self-assurance. The ideas are intelligent and presented with clarity. This film is complete and good in itself and doesn't need to rely on the name of Kurosawa to justify itself. Not a good Kurosawa film to start off with if one is trying to nurse an interest in his fecund movies but a good movie to watch nonetheless particularly if one is at all curious about how Japanese people feel about the horror of the atomic bomb.

Based on reviews I had read, I was expecting either a facile ban-the-bomb message film, or a story about greedy relatives trying to have an old man committed so they can get his money.

I should have known better. Part of Kurosawa's genius in his great middle period (1950-1965) is that he refuses to insist on anything. He fairly presents a series of events and invites us to decide what, if anything, they mean.

Everyone in this film has a point. No one here is really a villain. Even those who are jerks (notably the second son, Jiro) are really trying to do the right thing. And the film reminds me a little of THE CAINE MUTINY in that it very artfully moves our sympathies in one direction for most of the film before presenting us with events that make us wonder if we were wrong.

Toshiro Mifune gives a fine performance as Nakajima, but to tell the truth, I wish Kurosawa had given the role to Takashi Shimura, not only because I think Shimura would have played the role even better, but because it would have given him one more tour-de-force leading role in a Kurosawa film, coming directly after IKIRU and SEVEN SAMURAI. Granted, though, that such a move probably would have caused problems with both Toho and Mifune.

Toshiro Mifune's brilliant performance as an embittered factory owner at war with his family owes much to traditional Japanese theatre. The family want him committed to a lunatic asylum in what at first appears a dispute over succession and family wealth. But it emerges that the old man's crankiness and ill-temper is not simply based on a dislike of his mostly lazy and grasping offspring. He is driven by a fear of nuclear bombs (remember this was made less than 10 years after Hiroshima) and his plan to dispose of the business (a foundry, symbol of post-war reconstruction) and move to a farm in Brazil seems more like the action of someone who wants to spare the family, including his illegitimate children, and escape the horror. He is prepared to go to any length, even sacrificing himself and the business in the process. It is a film about a family blown apart by insecurity and fear, made into a gripping tale by a top director and an accomplished cast, as well as giving another twist to one of Kurosawa's constant themes - how the impact of outside forces on traditional values pushes Japan closer to chaos and madness.

"I Live in Fear" is a thought-provoking, moving film about love, greed and fear, framed as only Kurosawa could. If you're a fan it's a must see, as it explores new and old themes in a stark, interesting manner. Excellent acting through-out, and please look carefully--Mifune wears no make-up, just huge glasses and a perpetual scowl; his talent and intensity were all he needed. This film also gives us an interesting look at Japan after the bomb, and the different ways people chose to deal with the fear they all in fact felt. The film does not judge, sympathizing with the children even as it highlights their selfishness. A good movie to make you think about where we've been, and where we might be headed.

This is a far cry from the usual Kurosawa/Mifune effort; indeed in this, Toshirô Mifune is almost unrecognisable. No brave, honourable Samurai this time, but an elderly foundry-owner who is paranoid about the potential impact of nuclear war on his family. To this end, he is determined to sell up and relocate his family to Brazil. The family don't fancy this idea much and try to have him certified. What ensues is a battle of wills, priorities and personalities set against a traditional set of Japanese family structures and values. Viewed, largely, from the perspective of independent arbiter "Dr. Harada" (Takashi Shimura) who has been drafted in to help settle the matter amicably; we visit the perfectly valid (though frequently selfish) approaches taken by both Mifune and his family - who have plenty of scores to settle amongst themselves - as the film tries to establish the best course of action to satisfy both parties. There is quite an interesting scene mid-way through when at the height of their dispute, the old man returns to the court armed with bottles of pop which he has bought for his family to help combat the unrelenting heat, indicating that he clearly still cares greatly for his family, even though they are at loggerheads... and for me, that rather sums the whole thing up - there isn't necessarily a right or wrong solution; it's about individuality and choice but ultimately the happiness of others; and Mifune is great. I found the last fifteen minutes quite sad, perhaps building on the old adage about families and money. Japan, for a good while, struggled to reconcile itself to the realities of a post-Hiroshima threat, so from an observer some 6,000 miles away it can be hard to understand just how viscerally the danger of repetition was taken by many - this film is a thought provoking, emotional - and, at times humorous, glimpse into that fear.

From the very very beginning during the opening credits sequence, we are given the ominous feeling of paranoia, the feeling with which it's vital to sympathize with Toshiro Mifune's character, an old foundry owner convinced that Japan is on the brink of nuclear obliteration, trying to force his reluctant and resentful family to safety in Brazil.

Mifune's performance is so very masculine and real, as are nearly all of them. In this film, he displays a self-assurance that allows him to descend into pathetic helplessness. Of all the post-war Kurosawa films that I've seen so far, I Live In Fear is the most direct and informative. America may feed off of the dread showcased by the Japanese culture in this film and some may feel terribly sad for the individualistic portrayal of the debilitating fear stricken into the immovable hearts of stubborn old men like Mifune's character.

Even as early as WWII, I learned, America's most powerful weapon has been fear. However, in those times, it was a much purer, less vain utility. But what about the people it destroys for the sake of its own feeling of security?

This is one of Akira Kurosawa's lesser known films. I find I get more enjoyment out of rewatching his classics than I do with delving into his deep cuts, but even when I'm not crazy about one of his films, I never feel like time was wasted watching them. I think every Kurosawa film has something to offer, and I Live of Fear is no exception.

Given the premise about one man's life being ruined because of his fear of atomic weapons, I was expecting this to be more of a psychological drama. Really, it's more of a family drama, with some scenes delving into the man's state of mind, but most of the movie seeming like it was about how it impacted his family. It's a worthwhile approach, but not one that I found as interesting (it's also a bit of a courtroom drama, especially early on).

All the acting is great at least. I don't think I would've realised Toshiro Mifune was the main character if his name hadn't been in the opening credits. He completely disappears into the role of a man twice his age, with his physicality and the mostly good makeup making his performance believable. While the supporting performances are good, I think there's too many side characters, and it gave the otherwise simple narrative a slightly messy feel.

It's also an interesting look at the way Cold War/atomic warfare paranoia hurts people on an individual level, but I just wasn't quite as into the film as I'd hoped. It's decent overall, and certainly has some strong elements, but not one I can say I loved, unfortunately.

In 1955 millions of Japanese signed petitions against American atomic testing in the Pacific. Needless to say their concerns were totally ignored and there were reports of people moving to Brazil, although the numbers are not known.

Here we have seventy-year old foundry owner Nakajima played by thirty-five year old Toshiro Mifune, who is so obsessed with the threat of a nuclear holocaust that he plans to sell up and move his extended family, including two mistresses and their offspring, to South America. His family's attempts to have him declared mentally incompetent have the most dire and tragic consequences for them all.

Apart from his ill-conceived and interminable version of Gorky's 'Lower Depths', the consistent quality of Kurosawa's work throughout the fifties and sixties is both staggering and unparalleled.

Unsurprisingly this gloomy opus was a commercial failure and had to wait six years before being shown at the Berlin Film Festival. A further six years were to elapse before its theatrical release in America. It still remains mystifyingly underrated.

All of the acting kudos has been reserved of course for Mifune who is mesmerising in the role. It is such a pity that he and Kurosawa parted company in the late sixties as theirs was a partnership made in heaven.

Every character in this is beautifully drawn and one cannot fail to mention Kurosawa regular Takashi Shimura as domestic mediator Harada who is consumed with guilt and remorse over Nakajima's fate. This comes three years after his own stunning performance in 'Ikiru' for the same director. Ironically he appeared a year earlier in another film dealing with fear of a nuclear holocaust, 'Godzilla', which naturally cleaned up at the box office.

The touches of a master film maker are here in terms of sound effects, editing and grouping of actors. The constant mopping of brows and waving of fans captures perfectly the unbearable heat and of course a Kurosawa film would not be complete without a torrential downpour or two.

This is an immensely powerful work which raises so many issues not least of which is the thin dividing line between rational/irrational behaviour. Does Nakajima 'go too far'? Many would say 'yes'.

It is Nobuo Nakamura as the psychologist who has the most telling speech when asking: "Is he crazy or are those who are unperturbed in an insane world the crazy ones?"

The final shot of the disconsolate Harada trudging down the stairs of the asylum whilst one of Nakajima's daughters, with child on back, walks up to visit her deranged father, is one of cinema's most devastating endings.

In a world presently paralysed by fear and paranoia this timeless film is ripe for rediscovery.

Nervously fanning his face, bending his back and frowning his eyes, Kiichi Nakajima doesn't live in fear as much as he let fear live inside his body until it took a toll on his mind and on his family. The chronicles an inevitable tragedy, of a man who was too scared to live in peace, too proud to let his mind in peace, too stubborn to avoid an internal war with his family.

The old man, played by a 35-year old Toshiro Mifune, is the kind of aging patriarch who should inspire respect and obedience in a Japanese society resurrecting from the ashes of war and only starting to embrace modernity. But Nakajima is incapable to envision any future in this Japan, and neither the present nor the past can be of any help. Nakajima is scared of the Atomic age and is convinced that a Nuclear War is going to annihilate Japan, his fear resonates like an eschatological obsession, he doesn't fear the scenario, he's convinced of his imminence. I guess it's as if the graphic meltdown sequence of "Barefoot Gen" was playing in his mind like a broken record.

Fear is said to be a feeling anchored in the future and directly or indirectly connected with the fear of death, and it is true, the catch is that Nakajima is an old foundry owner, which means he's resourceful enough to look for a solution. Indeed, within his not-so irrational obsession, he found a 'rational' idea, which is to move all the family to Brazil, a country that would escape the Nuclear Holocaust. It's all a matter of convincing his family and the scope of his plan is too big and the stakes are so high that he doesn't care about exposing his mistresses and illegitimate children to the rest of the family. That's how desperate he is to save those he loves.

His sanity is inevitably questioned and the film opens with the convocation of a voluntary Domestic Court Counselor to arbitrate the case, Dr. Harada, a dentist, is played by Takashi Shimura, and watching him playing a younger person that Mifune gives the film an touch of cinematic weirdness despite the gravity of its theme. Anyway, Harada is a sane man who seems to take up the cudgels of Nakajima, he is aware that his obsessional fear might cloud his judgment but he believes the old man has a point, who would have thought two cities could be vaporized in one minute before August 1945? Who can tell such things couldn't happen again?

The family drama is so heavy-loaded that I found myself digressing from my reading of the film, as I was watching it, I was wondering whether it was an existential or political statement from Kurosawa. I was thinking, how would Nakajima or his family react to the Cuba Crisis of 62? Kennedy and Khrushchev handled it like civilized men, but what if it was Trump and Putin instead? To what degree should we trust democracy and remain confident that the leaders will do exactly as reason commands. I'm glad Trump didn't start any war yet after three years but I'm not sure I like the way he's constantly eyeing on Iran, not that I trust Iran's regime either.

Kurosawa was probably recovering from the WW2 demons and the relevance of Nakajima's fear is relayed by Harada. But the man is still an outsider, and the film mostly deals with the way Nakajima's shenanigans interferes with his family's interest and blurs all the cards of social conventions. The man who should be respected and trusted has forced his son (Minoru Chiaki) to sue him and force his mother, a traditional woman, to testify against her own husband, one of the collateral damages is to see that woman breaking marital duties for her children's sake. Brothers and sisters argue over their father's decisions, forcing the latter to resort to threats and even beatings. The scenes are depressing and doesn't leave much for optimism.

Indeed, what is going is a dialogue of the deaf, one that can only push the old man to take extreme measures to get money and buy the property in Brazil. He asks his mistresses for money, asks another one to mortgage her bar, the story reminded me of "Requiem for a Dream" where we follow the descent into madness of a woman driven by obsession and the climax of Nakajima' desperate maneuvers is simply devastating, because it doesn't make one person or one family unhappy, it destroys lives far beyond the intentions of Nakajima, confronting him to his own contradictions: how about his workers? How about the man from Brazil who'll live in Japan? How about the world?

"I Live in Fear" is a powerful anti-Nuclear movie in the way it depicted it through its most mundane form a fear rooted in everyone's mind, a mind so obsessed that any lightning would make him crawl on the floor and cover a little baby... maybe this says a lot about the way the world was going crazy after the war, the problem is that the family only wished to live in peace and ignore the risks because they couldn't do nothing, the gap was so blatant from the start the project was doomed to fail and the ending was inevitable. As an intelligent movie, it's a nice work, but it's rather depressing movie.

Maybe 'fear' is too ugly a condition to make for great entertainment, I could relate to Nakajima as someone who's afraid of flying to the point it created awkward situations with my family and made me miss great opportunities to travel in exotic places. That's one of the craziest things about fear, it's linked to the fear of death and yet it prevents you from living your life, more than any other thing, you move and act out of fear but at the end, your life was empty, static or wasted.

My own view of this movie, having just watched it, is that it's a typically moralistic piece from Kurosawa. His protagonist, wonderfully portrayed by Mifune, is a man who has made his life impossible by his philandering behaviour. He has three families altogether; none of whom really regard him with much affection.

I feel the "fear of the hydrogen bomb" is merely his ideation; a way to explain to himself, in his denial, why his life has gradually become impossible to live. As one of the other characters remarks: 'everyone is scared of the bomb, nowhere is safe.'

After he made Rashomon a Buddhist clergyman of high rank said to Kurosawa: "for the benefit of all mankind." I believe all of Kurosawa's movies are highly moral tales.

(1955) I Live In Fear (In Japanese with English subtitles) DRAMA/

Co-written and directed by Akira Kurosaw, with the story that involves elder man's already grown up children attempting to take complete control over the fathers factory and assets by accusing him to be mentally incompetent to the courts of Japan, along comes a mediator! The reason for the fathers radical demeanor is the fear of another H-Bomb after the Hiroshima, motivating him to selling the factory started by him, taking his whole family to move with him to Brazil, except that they don't really want to leave! Seeing the elder man in the center of this is like watching an older version of Toshiro Mifune where the character gets over excited over disagreements with the family! Instead of just letting his family go, he becomes obsessed in forcing his already grown up children to come with him! Although never boring, it sometimes feels rather pointless.

This is a surprisingly complex film that continues to build and grow right before your eyes. Some of the action and plot mechanism may need to be "accepted" to work, but once you realize that this is not merely an exercise on moral judgements, but a very sly re-working of familiar King Lear themes, the film's power and nuances become evident. For all those who see Kagemusha as a high point, and Ran as a huge failure, they may seek solace in this film, which pushes the trope of the rash old man, who has become so accustomed to getting and doing what he wants, that he cannot and will not accept his extended family's naysaying and interference. A really great film.

"Is he crazy? Or are we, who can remain unperturbed in an insane world, the crazy ones?"

Sometimes fear can motivate intelligent behavior, e.g. changing course to mitigate risk. Sometimes it can lead to irrational behavior, e.g. getting anxious or obsessive, and then overreacting. In the case of the father of a family worried about nuclear war and further radiation in Japan even if it was between other countries, he believes he's doing the right thing by seeking to move them all to Brazil, and his adult children disagree, going to court to stop him. While we never learn the man's backstory or see it directly related to personal trauma, his PTSD-like reaction to a thunderstorm speaks volumes about his state of mind. Toshiro Mifune, as always, is compelling.

The film provides an interesting though sad window into Japan a decade after WWII, and in a larger sense, into global fears of nuclear annihilation. I love how Kurosawa shows us real angst; the man is torn apart by what he sees in the world, and his family is openly fighting with one another over stress and what to do about it. I suppose in a minor key it asks when can a family turn against the elder who has provided everything for them. Overall it's a little one-dimensional, though almost certainly more relevant today in a world that faces even greater existential risks. Worth seeing.

I Live in Fear is yet another masterpiece by Akira Kurosawa. It tells the story of an aging patriarch who is terrified nuclear attack will destroy his family and the business he has worked to build up his entire life. His children do not wish to leave the comfortable life in Japan which his labours have provided. They believe he is mad and take him to family court for mediation. It becomes the difficult duty of a mediator to decide whether his fears are rational or not. The shadow of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are palpable in the feverish eyes of legendary actor Toshiro Mifune as the father. A thought-provoking time capsule of post-war Japan, the combination of Kurosawa and Mifune should never be missed.

Eikoh Hosoe collaborated with Tatsumi on a 1960 film called The Center of the Original Explosion, and it's clear that the '60s and '50s were a time when Japan heartily began to rethink the effects of the root causes of its post-war trauma.

Kurosawa's Record of the Living, located in 1955 in the middle of Kurosawa's creative period, rather than following his already mature style, seems instead to retreat into a style of imagery of insight into localized social realities from the time of Ziz Sanjuro, which of course Kurosawa had been doing all along, except that the style of the rest of his work is closer to one of portraying society in a small way, through the subtle portrayal of characters, than to the earlier and this one. It's just that compared to his earlier works and this one Instead, we see a more fleshed out family (Kurosawa's family portrayals have been very bad in his previous works, but this one actually has some vividness, but it's still a "bad" family), and less fleshed out characters. All the characters in this family except the father are very soulless and have no authenticity, while the father is more like a typical King Lear-type in "Chaos" or a fire-setting and finally crazy character in Tarkovsky's "The Sacrifice".

This type of image often plays the role of Kurosawa's mouthpiece in Kurosawa's movies, and in this one, it is obviously the line "I'm not afraid of death, I'm only afraid of being killed by others". The heroism that unfolds in this way is also a style that Kurosawa has played badly. But it's interesting to see how clearly we can understand the anti-war sentiments of "I Have No Regrets About My Youth" without the subtle connotations of Kurosawa's previous works.

The visuals and audio are certainly excellent, but not as good as "Lust for Life," a film purely geared toward the atomic bomb in which the characters are downplayed.

Akira Kurosawa's I LIVE IN FEAR (1955) is one of his lesser-known and sadly underrated films, with a revelatory performance by Toshiro Mifune as a character nearly double his real age at the time. Mifune plays the old owner of an iron foundry who has become so paranoid about the possibility of another atomic attack that he first tried to build a bomb shelter and now is planning to move his entire family to a farm in Brazil.

Naturally his adult children and even his wife have no desire to move from their comfortable Tokyo home and try to get him declared mentally incompetent. Takashi Shimura is a dentist serving as conflicted judge on the court mediation panel. This excellent look into the personal psychology of 1950s nuclear paranoia is a huge step above the numerous propaganda films of the era and an ideal complement to the numerous allegorical sci-fi horror films from the same period (especially GODZILLA, from the year before and also starring Takashi Shimura), as well as some of the more interesting Cold War post-apocalyptic films like WORLD WITHOUT END (1956) and PANIC IN YEAR ZERO (1962).

In I Live in Fear a successful businessman with a lot of clingy family decides to pack them all up and transport them to Brazil to avoid the threat of nuclear war. The family doesn't care for the idea and files suit.

The result is very static, with the elderly businessman played by Tishoro Mifune, who plays old the way young people do, hunched and petulant (there's an old man from Brazil also played by a much younger man, and he looks ridiculous, and I can't think how Kurusawa thought this was a good idea).

For the most part the result is tedious, although there are a few genuinely good moments sprinkled in, as when one of the sons unconcernedly and tipsily describes the horrors of the bomb as he eats and drinks, and a moment where three women of the family make an uncomfortable connection.

In fact, in general the second half of this is better than the first half. But even then it's very low-grade Kurosawa - certainly one of his worst.

Recommended only for Kurasawa completionists.

I Live in Fear is not one of Akira Kurosawa's masterpieces to me, however it is not a bad movie, far from it. I actually found it a great film, true there are times when there is an uncertainty of tone but mostly it is focused and very movingly and intensely conveyed. The script is thought-provoking and there is as with all Kurosawas a successful effort to make the characters human. The pacing, even for a movie that is not all that long, may test the patience of some people but what's for sure I wasn't one of those. The acting is very good, Toshiro Mifune is as commanding as he always was, even if this is not quite up there with one of his best performances. Takashi Shimura has also been better but also delights. The best assets though were the production values and Kurosawa's direction. The combination of montage sequences and fluid long takes continue to fascinate and the direction is subtle and never slack or too muddled. In conclusion, one of Kurosawa's most underrated films, not one of his best but still great and deserving of more praise. 9/10 Bethany Cox