The movie "The Man in the House on Fire" was released in Shochiku theaters across Japan on April 12, 1986. (Due to caching reasons, please visit the browser directly. \nCom website to watch the fastest chapter updates)
Shochiku Pictures provided great support in arranging the film for theaters, and the promotion was also done well.
By the end of May, the film had basically been released, and the box office had already accumulated about 1,130,000,000 yen.
In this era, the ratio of investment to recovery costs for Japanese films is roughly around 1:7.
In other words, if a movie produced with a cost of 100 million yen sells 170 million yen at the box office, the film's production company will be able to recoup its capital.
So to put it this way, Shochiku Pictures not only successfully recovered the cost of this movie, but also earned a box office share of 100 million.
It should be said that it has basically met expectations, and it is at least certain to make it into the top ten at the annual box office of Japanese local films.
As for the video tape market and overseas markets, they should be pure profits.
It is expected that the overall profit generated by this movie will reach three to four billion, no problem.
Moreover, this movie has generally received good reviews. Since its release, it has received good reviews from both critics and audiences.
If nothing else happens, it will be a popular movie to win awards this year.
So according to director Kinji Fukasaku's idea, since he has made a blockbuster movie for Shochiku Pictures and has lived up to President Omoto's respect, Shochiku Pictures should fully support him in winning the award.
What's more, his award will also help "The Man on Fire" further expand its profits in the video tape market and overseas copyrights, and President Omoto should also be happy to see this.
Although Shochiku will also release Yamada Yoji's "Movie World" this year, it will compete with his "The Man on Fire".
But he thinks the script of "Movie World" is very ordinary, a kind of semi-documentary movie.
Regardless of the story or theme, it only seeks to truly reflect the hard work of early Japanese filmmakers. In fact, many places overlap with his "March of Kamata".
Even in terms of character design and concept, it is basically a sequel to "March of Kamata", picking up his leftovers.
He believes that this kind of movie only has emotions, lacks innovation, and does not have much visual and plot impact.
No matter how Yamada Yoji shoots, he will never bring many refreshing surprises to the audience.
To put it bluntly, "Movie World" is inherently weak in competing for awards. At most, it can be regarded as a companion to "The Man in the House on Fire".
It is possible to win an award in awards such as the Film Festival Awards, but it is difficult to compete for the most important Academy Award in the Japanese film industry.
As long as Shochiku's President Omoto is not stupid, he should know who to focus his public relations resources on.
It is precisely because of this pride and self-confidence that even though Matsumoto Keiko cleared her name and was completely out of Fukasaku Kinji's control, which made him very unhappy, he still has certain expectations for the achievements of his personal career this year.
and sure.
He believes that with "The Man on Fire", he will definitely gain a double harvest of artistic reputation as a blockbuster director.
Best Director, Best Film, these shining trophies will undoubtedly help him shorten the distance from the throne of Japan's number one director.
Once he successfully wins an award, he will have more investment and greater freedom in the next movie he plans to film.
However, although Fukasaku Kinji had good intentions, sudden accidents often happen when people are most confident.
I think back then, when Takeo Fukuda and Tanaka Kakuei competed for the Prime Minister's seat, they were far ahead in votes, but at the last moment when they were full of confidence, Tanaka Kakuei gave him a backstab, and he became the loser overnight.
And Tanaka Kakuei's resignation happened precisely at the time when he was so powerful that he was carried away with his complacency.
Also without warning, Uncle Sam used a "Lockheed Eucalyptus" to slap him off the Prime Minister's throne.
So, what if history wants to teach us?
What if history wants us to remember?
The first thing to bear the brunt will definitely be the principle of "sail with caution".
No matter who wants to do something big, they should keep in mind that the more confident they are, the easier it is to be careless and cause problems.
Fukasaku Kinji just didn't understand this, and that's why he was so unlucky.
In fact, in order to relieve his depression of not being able to get Keiko Matsumoto, he took Michiko Harada to Hawaii for vacation.
An article by a well-known drama critic appeared in the Tokyo local "Sports Daily" and the nationwide industry magazine "Photography Art", quietly pointing the finger at him.
The commentary in "Sports Daily" was more tactful and the criticism was relatively mild.
It can be said that Kinji Fukasaku's "The Man in the House on Fire" appropriately expresses human nature and the writer's private life.
The actresses are also chosen with great temperament, and the box office proves that this is a quality movie.
But compared with his previous works, this film has obvious shortcomings because it reflects the unhappiness in people's hearts.
Throughout the movie, the male protagonist has been swaying between family and personal life, wandering around.
What makes the hero make the choice is human instinct and desire.
But it never showed the hero's qualities as a writer, nor did he have the brains to write a masterpiece.
From this point of view, having only emotions without reason is also untrue, and it is untrue from the perspective of the writer's identity.
At the same time, people can't help but feel that the format of this ethics movie is small and the theme it wants to express is slightly inferior.
And the article in "The Art of Cinema" is even more unkind, and it's just an open fire criticism.
It is claimed that director Fukasaku Kinji has obviously begun to degenerate in his literary and artistic creation.
Although this film has some advantages, it is enough to attract attention as an emotional and ethical film, and the images and plot are also very expressive.
But this is obviously a movie that uses the privacy of the writer and the affairs between men and women as selling points. It is erotic for the sake of eroticism and pursues sensory stimulation.
In particular, there are some bold and arrogant exposure scenes, which are already very vulgar.
If you peel off the artistic pretense of exploring reason and human nature, it's no different from Nikkatsu's pink movie.
This is enough to prove that Fukasaku Kinji's creation has encountered a bottleneck period and he has to use such inferior tricks to attract the audience.
As for the only thing wrong with this movie, it is that the selection of several main characters meets the audience's expectations.
In addition to the male protagonist of Ogata Fist, there are also two eye-catching actresses, Ayumi Ishida and Keiko Matsumoto.
Especially for Matsumoto Keiko, there was almost no nudity, but she conquered the audience with her deeply rooted and convincing acting skills.
On the contrary, it enhances the style of the movie. Isn't this what makes an actor successful?
As soon as these two articles were published, they immediately caused an uproar in the film industry.
You know, for a director as successful as Fukasaku Kinji, there are no drama critics in the Japanese film industry who dare to directly criticize him.
Because he is in the limelight, it is useless to offend him. If not, it will anger his fans and affect his reputation.
In particular, the movie "The Man on Fire" has basically been released. It is even more strange that two people suddenly issued negative reviews even though it was obviously a success at the box office.
Not to mention that the audience's willingness to spend money to buy tickets is enough to prove the success of this movie.
The point is, what’s the point of criticizing the movie at this time?
Even Shochiku's competitors and several other major film companies will not spend this unjust money to hire gunmen to snipe their opponents at this time.
No matter how harshly you scold me at this time, what will happen? It will not affect the box office at all. Are you out of your mind?
Therefore, most people in the industry regard the behavior of these two people as sensational and lunatic behavior.
Many movie fans were dissatisfied after reading the article.
I think these two vocal drama critics really don't understand the needs of the people, they are just full of food and talking nonsense.
Don’t watch explicit scenes? Then who would go to the cinema to watch such a soft emotional and ethical movie?
Two fools!
Because of this, although someone soon informed Fukasaku Kinji that someone had written an article to criticize him, Fukasaku Kinji didn't take it seriously.
He only regarded these two slightly famous drama critics as people who wanted to increase his reputation by scolding him, and continued to spend his vacation without paying any attention to them.
So this contempt became the fatal mistake he made.
Because soon, two drama critics published another article explaining their reasons for criticizing "The Man on Fire".
One person said that it was because he liked the movie "The Man on Fire" that he had to watch it many times before he understood it.
Are you aware of the shortcomings of the film and still unable to write about it?
I also write these comments in the hope that director Fukasaku can produce better films, so that the quality of his future films will not decline and he will not disappoint his fans.
I think Director Fukasaku himself will definitely understand my original intention.
It is certainly not like some people who cannot tolerate any criticism or accept doubts. In fact, this is the difference between ordinary people and successful people.
The more accomplished a person is, the broader his mind is.
I'm curious, did those people who were dissatisfied with me really watch this movie seriously and realize its spiritual connotation?
Another said that there is a bad trend in various industries in Japan, which is to regard authority as a god.
It seems that once a person achieves success, he can no longer be questioned. Is this trend conducive to the healthy development of Japanese movies?
The only reason why I want to criticize Kinji Fukasaku's works is because he is a famous director.
I think this is the only way to allow this famous director to create with a more rigorous attitude.
If you don’t believe it, just take a look. The quality and budget of his works are completely inversely proportional to his fame and honor.
The more we go forward, the higher the quality of the movies we make. I don’t know if the directors are regressing, or if they are becoming less and less careful, not cherishing their own reputations at all, and not cherishing the audiences who spend money to buy tickets to go to the cinema.
Isn’t it the responsibility of the drama critic to evaluate the merits and demerits of each film and television work for the audience with a fair and impartial attitude and a professional perspective?
If I kept telling you that director Fukasaku's works are flawless, would you believe me?
On the contrary, as a drama critic, being able to find mistakes and shortcomings in the works of a famous director like Fukasaku Kinji proves that he is a truly courageous and impartial professional.
As for those who only have good things to say about famous directors, I doubt they can see the obvious problems in "The Man on Fire."
I can't say that they follow the trend and can only "read the air". What I worry about is that they are not capable enough.
In any industry, there are people who are not good enough and fish in troubled waters.
If you are not convinced, argue.
Well, just these two drama critics.
One plays a red face, and the other plays a bad face.
One has good words and the other has sharp words.
Not only did the people who accused them become speechless, but on the contrary, it provoked the stupid young people in the drama critic industry.
Peer-to-peer disapproval exists in the drama critic industry as well.
Some people can't stand this, provocation? Then let me judge.
Ever since, several drama critics have carefully watched "The Man on Fire" and each published a review.
refuted the provocateur's views.
They all pointed out that what you said was wrong. Do you understand movies?
Director Fukasaku's mistake in this movie is not about what you said, but something else.
From my point of view, it would be fine if he takes pictures however he wants.
And his last work also had similar problems everywhere.
Are you blind? Go take a closer look.
So a debate began.
The new theater critics want to prove that they are professional critics and are not afraid to criticize famous directors.
And the person who caused the commotion was someone who didn't know how to pretend to understand and was really fishing in troubled waters.
It just needs to be pointed out that no matter which side is trying to find different faults with Kinji Fukasaku's film.
In addition, in variety shows and radio programs, amateur guests continue to fan the flames.
The comments made by a certain drama critic are really accurate. I admire him so much. He is the guiding light for us movie fans.
How come this person has never been famous? I think his comments are more objective and professional than many more famous people.
Well, just like that, public opinion gradually became distorted.
What started as drama critics' motivation to criticize Fukasaku evolved into a "find fault" game centered on Fukasaku Kinji, and became a competition for drama critics to compete for victory.
Think about it, no matter how healthy a person is, he cannot withstand the examination of a dozen doctors with microscopes.
What's more, it's not like Fukasaku Kinji has never offended others. Now that he has the opportunity to add insult to injury, those people won't talk to him and they will quickly seize the opportunity to scold him.
So "The Man on Fire", which was originally of decent quality, was analyzed by a bunch of drama critics and found numerous mistakes that the director should bear.
Although many of them are personal opinions and cannot be specifically judged as right or wrong, it has invisibly reduced the fans' admiration and affirmation of Fukasaku Kinji.
I feel like he is not that powerful anymore, he is just an ordinary person.
So when Fukasaku Kinji returned to Tokyo after his vacation, he was almost dumbfounded. Suddenly he found that countless people were picking on his "Hothouse Man" on the home version to find faults.
Although this increased the popularity of the movie, it actually gave the movie a slight resurgence, earning tens of millions more yen.
But it's obviously too detrimental to his participation in the award chase.
However, there was someone who was more angry than him, and that was Michiko Harada, because she discovered so many media comment articles.
The names of Ayumi Ishida and Keiko Matsumoto are everywhere, but there are actually very few mentions of her.
And the general opinion is that she has no acting skills and will only expose herself.
Some people even lamented that she was the only wrongly chosen actor in this movie, and that she should have chosen someone who matched the roles that Ayumi Ishida and Keiko Matsumoto wanted to play.
Even if the "Queen of Pink Movies" Junko Miyashita is cast, it will be more credible.
How can she survive this?
Michiko Harada, who thought she could almost become a movie queen of tomorrow, couldn't help but burst into tears!