Takashi Miike interview

Takashi Miike has been described as Japan's Tarantino, which is slightly odd since he's made approximately ten times as many films as the American auteur in almost the exact same time frame. What this really comes down to is the 50-year-old director's propensity for splashy and extreme violence, most notoriously showcased in 2001's Ichi The Killer, a delirious Yakuza thriller trimmed of three minutes and 15 seconds by Britain's usually rather liberal censor. It's hard to discuss Miike's other work since there's simply so much of it; in over 80 movies, a lot of it made for video or DVD (V-Cinema as it is known), Miike has explored genres as diverse as horror, gangster, thriller and anime, but most surprising is his apparent ability to switch off from adult fare and make kids' films, albethey loaded with dark comedy and borderline-inappropriate flourishes.

This interview was conducted via Skype on 10 February 2011; the date is worth noting because of Miike's allusion to an earthquake, a mild one predating Japan's subsequent disaster by several weeks. I wondered about taking his remarks out, but I think it says a lot about the gallows humour that permeates his work. This is especially evident in 13 Assassins, the most, shall we say, current of his movies (it's hard to say it's his latest, since there are at least two more in the can). Produced by Britain's Jeremy Thomas, 13 Assassins is a smart, traditional, if overlong Samurai movie that I reviewed out of Venice 2010 here and may prove to be Miike's most respectable hit in the west to date, or at least the film with the broadest appeal. As you'll see from the transcript, Miike was a thoughtful interviewee (thanks to Christian Storm for translating), and the conversation offers an interesting perspective on his work in general...

What was the attraction of making a Samurai movie?
For some time, I'd always wanted to make a kind on orthodox, more traditional movie, and when I was given the chance to do, I took it. the attraction was to have lines in this kind of movie that would not appear in a modern-day film – the elaborate language that they use. And also the way the story develops is not something you would find in a modern-day film. And what's especially interesting is that there are no police, like you you would find in a modern-day movie. It's a world where power decides the law.

Is it true that it's a remake [of the 1963 film Jûsan-nin no shikaku, by Eiichi Kudo]?
Yes, it is.

How aware were you of the original 1963 movie? Is it a faithful remake?
I came to watch it on DVD as my first and only reference for the movie, and what I felt at the time is that Japanese filmmakers have lost so much – whether that's the energy to actually to make a movie or essentially the power that film has itself. But, yes, the original film was highly referenced, and the intention was to show respect to the original work. And to admit and acknowledge that this film is born from the original. It's not a completely new movie.

What kind of restrictions do you face when making a Samurai movie? Are there certain elements that the audience demands?
There are probably two groups, or two different sides, here. There are two sides to the expectation – you have older movies fans who are nostalgic about movies and love old movies as they are. And then you also have young people, and we sort of arranged the movie for them. In a lot of remakes of Samurai movies – for example, Kurosawa movies – all the remakes seem to fail in their drama. It was never a story that current audiences could understand now, so we put a lot of consideration into making a story that audiences now could understand. Lots of young people did see the movie [in Japan], but we understood ourselves that before we could make young audiences understand the movie, we needed to understand the story ourselves.

The structure is arguably similar to Audition, in that there is a very slow build before the very action-heavy climax. Would you agree?
Maybe it has to do with my tastes as far as story structure goes. Lots of people who make movies, and even lots of people who worked on 13 Assassins, say things like, “We need to bring up the tempo. We need more cuts, faster cuts, and this will help the story move along better and make it more interesting.” I didn't feel that way and I don't feel that way when it comes to story structure. Basically, in general, movies are something that none of us need to live our lives. I mean, people live and die without watching movies. But we have this constant tendency to cut away everything in a movie that we don't think is necessary. That seems to me to be the way we make movies these days. But for me it is necessary to have these things that people don't feel are necessary. I like the way the story flows, because it's a very natural progression. It's as if I were watching the movie with the audience. It's a structure that slowly builds, like life itself. It hasn't been faked. It hasn't been cut a certain way.

How long did the film take to shoot? Was it longer than usual, because of the action scenes?
I don't remember! (Laughs) But the shooting period was about two months. Unlike most American filmmakers, the Japanese don't need sleep, so we worked a lot harder. Well, a lot more, I should say. Actually, maybe it was longer than two months, because we shot on a studio lot and then we shot on an open set as well. So there was two months of actual filming, but in between there was some travel time. So it was a little longer than normal for me.

What is the average length of a Takashi Miike shoot?
In the old days, it was always two weeks. Audition was probably two or three weeks. Once the budgets got bigger, we were able to get more days to shoot. But I lost quite a bit of freedom, having more days to shoot with more money. I had to make stuff for people that everyone would like. (Laughs) Maybe I'm not suited to making those kinds of movies! But finally I think I became an adult and admitted that I needed to make these kinds of movies as well, for bigger audiences. I think maybe, though, I'll 'rebound', as they say, and I'll come back with more over-the-top low-budget stuff as well.

How much of the village did you actually build, and how many of the sequences were done for real and not computer-generated?
Normally, people use CG to create huge, elaborate castle scenes or fake backgrounds, but that just ends up making the whole movie look fake. So in our own movie, the only CG you see are... Well, there are certain animals that we couldn't hurt during filming, like some of the horses that fall down or the bulls. I mean, we couldn't set them on fire in real life, so those are CG. But other than that... (Pauses) There's also a little bit of CG work when it comes to the blood, during the fight scenes. It's in addition to the actual physical stage blood we used. But that's pretty much it for CG. Also, we didn't use any digital effects in post-production, like you'd normally see in an action movie. Normally, people use digital effects to slow down the motion, or they use high-speed cameras – that kind of thing. But everything was shot at 24 frames per second, with no changing of the speed in the edit. So the idea was to respect the old way of making these movies.

Considering that the film is largely about a sadistic psychopath, 13 Assassins is one of your more restrained films. Why is that?There wasn't any intention to tone down the violence in any way. It was more a case of honouring the original work – we had to respect the original. That's the purpose of remaking. It's the idea of bringing an old work back to life, for an audience that has no recollection of these kinds of movies and nothing to compare them to. Older audiences have some kind of memory of other, older works that they can compare it to, but young people don't have this kind of memory for films. So as to whether or nor the movie's violent or not, or whether this is me, my own personal taste, as a director... I tried, essentially, to throw all of that away and think about making a movie that as many people could enjoy as possible and not intentionally focus on the violence in any way.

Is it fair to say that the Samurai movie is to Japan what the western is to America?
Yes. Essentially, that's true. The format's pretty much fixed. And the POV, or the sense of order to the world in the minds of the characters, is pretty much the same. But not like modern-day stuff, of course.
How historically accurate is 13 Assassins? Is historical accuracy important to you?
Possibly the real history – because no one really knows – might be even more alarming than what we actually showed. It is true that there was a leader who was quite violent, and it's possible he was assassinated, but the idea of the period itself is very true. By this I mean the background, the way the characters live their lives, the way society is divided into hierarchies and the balance in the society – the fact that they finally achieved a long term of peace. But that peace had gone on for too long, and society itself was changing. So there actually was a real man, a real leader, named Naritsugu. But he wasn't the one who was the really violent person. It was the person after him that was quite... amazing. (Laughs) So it's not completely historically accurate.

Which character do you most identify with in the movie?
It's probably got to be Naritsugu, the crazy leader, because he really seems to understand the most of what humans are and what makes them up. He has his own way, and his own story about life and what everyone is after. And he himself seems to enjoy life. Most people don't understand this, but there's a scene where she's shooting arrows at a little kid. Essentially, Naritsugu knows so much about what makes up humans, he knows that if he doesn't kill that kid now, in ten or 20 years that kid's gonna come back to kill him, I mean, it makes him look cruel. But he's being very human and he realises what's gonna happen eventually.

What do you think the message of the film is, if it has a message? Is it relevant to today?
It's probably something that goes for all places, all countries, all times. We're faced with the same problems. In modern life we may have better tools and better things to live with, and life may appear to be easier, but we all seem to be not able to get what we want out of life. You could make this kind of movie a hundred years from now. The fact is, even though the times have changed, people seem to remain the same. And the message is not how the world should change or what the world should do, it's a question for you, as a person. How do you want to live your life as an individual? It's not what we all should do and how the whole world should be better – it's a really personal question to the audience, as an individual person. How do you want to live your life? What do you want to get out of life?

Before we move on to your career, is there anything else you'd like to say about 13 Assassins?
The main point is, it's not a movie for the audience to watch and learn something about Japan. I just want them to watch the movie and feel something. It might be a hard movie to understand for western audiences, because of some of the very Japanese concepts or the very Japanese relationships between the characters – the hierarchy and whatnot – but it could fit into any country's history. Or any struggle that any country has had. So I hope the audience can see the movie, imagine how it would relate to their own setting, the personal history of their own country, and feel something from that. So it's not a movie that's saying, “Let's watch Japanese history and learn from that,” It's saying, “Feel something and see how that relates to your own culture.”
When you made your first movie, did you have any idea that you would be so prolific? It seems you've made an average of four films a year for 20 years...
Rather than the number of films, I never thought that I would be a director. I tried to be director and didn't ever think I was talented enough to become a director. I was just sort of forced to become one.

What do you mean by “forced” to become a director?
Well, the question is, “What does it take to become a film director? How do you become a film director?” There's no method to becoming one. Just because you learn about movies doesn't necessarily mean you're going to become a film director. And I always thought there were people that were more talented than me and they would be the ones to direct movies. It's kind of too hard to 'become' a film director. But essentially someone has to become a film director. For me, I got there through a certain process. But anyone can be a film director if they want to be. And what I find, and often think sometimes, is that people who don't know anything about movies tend to make really interesting movies.

How important is genre to you? You've made horror movies, Yakuza movies, a western and even a musical?
The actual concept of 'genre' is essentially created by people who are distributing or showing a movie. It's something they can sell to audiences. It's like, “Hey, if you like comedies, come see this movie.” But if you're making movies, it's not the same. If you're making a movie about the Yakuza, there might be some scary things involved in making it, but in the end, there are moments that might involve comedy. So if you're making movies, you don't really think much about the actual genre, and as a result it comes out as some kind of a genre. But as I said about 13 Assassins, times may change but people essentially are the same. Whether the story has laughs or tears, it all seems to me to be the same. The genre itself doesn't seem to matter.

Is there any genre left that you haven't yet explored but would like to?
Yeah. I've probably tried all the genres, but one genre I haven't tried has been porno. (Laughs) But rather than shooting porno, I'd rather be – quote, unquote – below the girl, rather than appearing in the movie.

Do you ever use genre as a disguise?
It's easier to get along with professional people, making a movie, to use genre as a term of reference. Because if you tell someone you want to make a film that has laughs and violence and this and that, unless it's in a certain format, nobody really seems to believe that it's something viable that can become a movie. You have to say it's some kind of a genre to get it made. But when you think about it, we're all born out of our mom's vagina, basically. So we're all born in a moment of violence. So life has all these moments. But it's hard to make a movie without saying it's some kind of genre. So I have to use it to get some kind of freedom.

Did you have any idea that Audition was going to be your breakout film in the west? Were you surprised when it attracted attention?
First of all, Japanese audiences... Well, hardly anyone has even seen Audition in Japan, they're not even really aware of the movie, which is kind of interesting. But to answer your question, I was quite surprised because, in general, the way Japanese films are made, my generation wasn't necessarily making movies to appeal to the world. They weren't these guys with their chests puffed out, saying, “I'm making this movie so a world audience can see it!!!” They'd lost that confidence as filmmakers and they were essentially shooting for tomorrow, for the next day... Well, shooting for now. They didn't necessarily see the potential of what their movie would eventually become. But thanks to the film festival people who invited me to their festivals, it gave me the sense that, for us people making movies, the movies themselves will take us to the next step. The movie themselves would grant us the dream, or fulfill some of our dreams for us. So the way I feel about Audition is the fact that, as long as I'm involved in film, I have to keep shooting films and just do that. And the film that I make, or the one after that, that's what will take me to the next point in my life. But in general, what surprised me is the power a certain movie can have, itself, on the filmmaker.

Which of your many movies do you feel most represents you?
In a sense, I guess they all seem to represent me in some way. Whether I failed at making a movie or it was a film I didn't want to make but had to make, they all represent a part of the past, and so I would call them all representative works. But if I had to point to one thing, I would say the most representative is a very low-budget film called Visitor Q. It begins with a guy buying a video camera in an electronics shop, and what I thought at the time was that, having to live in the Japanese filmmaking world, with all the difficulties associated with getting a movie made, there's a lot of joy in simply making a movie. So if I lost my job and couldn't do anything, I could still take a video camera, still find some friends who are actors, and go out and make... something. That's what I realised in that movie. That represents me. It's my representative work.

Would you say your humour is particularly Japanese, and is it something your critics tend to miss?
Sometimes I don't even know myself! Whether it's my sense of humour, whether it's funny or not, I try not to say that it's some kind of Japanese humour. It's a sense of humour that is naturally born from trying to do my hardest. If you work hard and try your hardest, you tend to forget yourself, forget who you are, and not impose your own judgement on other people. And essentially you make yourself laugh. You get away from your own influences. What you need to do is try to find your own sense of being and just enjoy the process. So as I start to forget myself, certain things inside naturally start to come out. Now, of course, the ultimate decision to like it, or judge it, or not like it, lies with the audience, and they have that freedom. That gives me a sense of happiness and puts me in a good position because I know that... I don't really care! (Laughs) I'm just trying to make myself laugh or enjoy the process of creating a movie. So to create humour to make other people laugh is not the ultimate goal.

How do you feel now about Ichi The Killer? It was very controversial here in the west..(Deadpan) I don't think Ichi was very violent in any way at all. It was actually the other one, the Tadanobu Asano character, that was the violent one. He was always trying be too violent on set. We were always trying to stop him and tell him, “Bring down the violence!” But I was kind enough to let them be violent and let them be what they wanted to be.

So it's the characters' fault, not the director's?
(Laughs) Yeah, exactly.

Is it easy for you to switch to more family-orientated movies, such as Yatterman and Zebraman?
I think probably everyone has those channels, or those kinds of switches, that enable them to go from one thing to another. It's harder for me to keep shooting the same kind of stuff. Obviously, I was a kid once, and I have a family, so maybe, on the contrary, kids' movies are easier for me to make, essentially because I don't have to worry about trying to be a proper adult, trying to look good around everyone else. I don't have to worry about being respected or showing respect to somebody else. Of course, with a kids' movie there are different demands that have to be met. But, essentially, it's easy for me.

Have you been approached by Hollywood? Did you enjoy being one of the Masters Of Horror?
With Masters Of Horror it was an indie project, and it was for America, and when they said, “We're America, we're the land of the free,” I kind of thought I could do whatever I wanted. But when I did whatever I wanted [the film Imprint], my work ended up being unable to be broadcast. So I was a little let down by the so-called freedom that America seems to possess! But as far as offers from Hollywood, yeah, there have been several, but somewhere during the talks... It's not that things don't go well, it's not that trouble arises, it's just about how they view a director. It's not as though they're trying to buy the ability or the talent of that director, they're actually trying to buy a part of that director's life and trying to restrict him to a certain time period. Essentially, they're buying and selling your own time. So, yes, I could get lots of money – the kind of money I could never make in Japan – but the problem is the restrictions they put on you, the time periods... Oh, we're having an earthquake right now! Just so you know. (Laughs) ...So I always say to them, “OK, so while you've got me on hold in LA and I've got a couple of weeks in between filming, can I come back home to Japan and make a little V-Cinema movie?” And they won't allow me to do that, so I always turn them down. Because they try to restrict my life and the time period of what I can do.

What kind of offers do you get?
I've been involved all kinds of levels of meetings, whether it's about casting, or scripts, or projects, but I don't ever get aggressive enough to say that I wanna make the movie. They probably think, “Gee, why doesn't he wanna make this movie? He doesn't seem interested!” (Laughs) I've had some pretty big offers for several-picture deals, but it's just too much of a pain in the ass to have my life restricted for that long period of time, and that's the reason I've never wanted to make a movie in Hollywood.

What are you working on right now?
There are two that I'm working on. One [called Nintama Rantaro] is a children's ninja action movie, about a ninja school where kids learn to be ninjas. The other [called Hara-Kiri: Death Of A Samurai, a remake of Masaki Kobayashi’s 1962 film Harakiri (Seppuku) to be released in 3D] is a very orthodox movie, a lot like 13 Assassins. And both those films are being edited right now. (Laughs) Yes, I've already made two movies since 13 Assassins.

Are you ever confused with Takeshi Kitano?
That doesn't happen much. But what is interesting is that if you go to China and find my works on DVD, on the cover you'll see that it's directed by Takeshi Kitano. (Laughs) They think maybe people will buy more DVDs that way! Those Chinese, they're really great businessmen. I always buy them!

Do you ever think of slowing down? How many films do you think you will end up making in your lifetime?
We just had an earthquake here and I thought, “Oh my God, this is the end. 13 Assassins was the last movie I made, and here I am, dying during an interview about it – how cool is that!?” But now that I've come out alive, I'm forced to go back to living my life and making movies... (Laughs) But it's not about how many movie I make in my life. The pace tends to be determined by the group of people I'm around, but I don't feel that we're over-exerting ourselves, or trying to over-exert ourselves. If the pacing has slowed down on my movies, it's probably as a result of the people I'm working with, and also my own personal stamina as a man. But I don't feel that taking more time and shooting more slowly is better. I have my own doubts about that. I don't think that the more time you out on a movie means you can make a better movie. I don't believe that...