This film has a lot in common with movies that turn out to be a dream in which the main character wakes up to realize that what just happened never occurred. I find those kinds of pictures less than satisfying because they seem to cop out of a final resolution to the story. "Rashomon" takes a somewhat similar approach, but instead of setting up a dream narrative, Kurosawa has his characters relate the circumstances of a murder from the perspective of four different observers. I can't say that that isn't a valid approach, but the problem I have is that the characters relating their stories don't seem to have credibility on their side. If I had to make a personal judgment, I'd say the woodcutter's appraisal of events seemed most valid because he didn't have a personal stake in the outcome of a murder investigation.
Looking individually at each of the players - the bandit Tajomaru (Toshiro Mifune) relates a tale that builds up his own self esteem - he valiantly fights the husband (Masayuki Mori), crossing swords with him twenty three times. The wife (Machiko Kyo) relating her version of events seems to be seeking atonement for her shame in being victimized by Tajomaru. The husband, telling his story through a medium after his death, seems willing to spare his wife the agony of betrayal and for suffering the shame of her rape. Finally, the woodcutter, who has nothing to gain by telling what he saw, except for the possible humiliation for not intervening because he was cowardly, was probably the closest to the truth about what happened. But we'll never know because the truth, which lies in the eye of the beholder, can potentially shift and change with each viewing of the film.
It will probably take some more viewings of the movie for me to gain a greater appreciation of it. As with "Seven Samurai", I find Kurosawa's pacing to be drawn out more than necessary; note the long time it took for the woodcutter to make his way to the scene of the crime in his version of the story. I'm also put off by the histrionics of a character like Tojomaru, who's over the top and manic delivery make him seem out of control. Granted, these are matters of preference with me, so I look at them somewhat like the players in the film who have their own biases in telling their story.
Looking individually at each of the players - the bandit Tajomaru (Toshiro Mifune) relates a tale that builds up his own self esteem - he valiantly fights the husband (Masayuki Mori), crossing swords with him twenty three times. The wife (Machiko Kyo) relating her version of events seems to be seeking atonement for her shame in being victimized by Tajomaru. The husband, telling his story through a medium after his death, seems willing to spare his wife the agony of betrayal and for suffering the shame of her rape. Finally, the woodcutter, who has nothing to gain by telling what he saw, except for the possible humiliation for not intervening because he was cowardly, was probably the closest to the truth about what happened. But we'll never know because the truth, which lies in the eye of the beholder, can potentially shift and change with each viewing of the film.
It will probably take some more viewings of the movie for me to gain a greater appreciation of it. As with "Seven Samurai", I find Kurosawa's pacing to be drawn out more than necessary; note the long time it took for the woodcutter to make his way to the scene of the crime in his version of the story. I'm also put off by the histrionics of a character like Tojomaru, who's over the top and manic delivery make him seem out of control. Granted, these are matters of preference with me, so I look at them somewhat like the players in the film who have their own biases in telling their story.