Emperor (2013)

Good start, but then it gets ruined

A lot of fun.

Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

As a military history buff, particularly of World War Two, and being familiar with excellent non-fiction and fiction works in print from great authors such as John Toland, Richard Franks, and William Manchester dealing with the end of the Pacific war, MacArthur, and the occupation, I really wanted to like this movie, just for its subject matter alone. But I was significantly disappointed with this film in several key respects.Warning - several of the following points will involve spoilers: 1) The fictional love interest involving General Fellers significantly detracted from the plot, the flow of action (with its constant flashbacks,) and the seriousness of the film. It added nothing but unnecessary and confusing drama, including the silly "Japanese lover" appellation given to Bonner by a competing staff MacArthur toady.2) I am sorry, but I was not impressed at all with Tommy Lee Jones's portrayal of MacArthur, which was actually just yet another portrayal of Tommy Lee Jones by Tommy Lee Jones ... as he does in nearly all of his film roles. The actual "American Caesar" MacArthur was nothing at all like TLJ's southern drawling cartoonish portrayal of the man, which transformed MacArthur into a two-dimensional caricature of the patrician American general. No American actor in a film yet, including the late Gregory Peck, has ever accurately captured the persona of one of the most accomplished, egotistical, intellectual, visionary, infuriating, devoted, yet enigmatic military leaders in our national history.3) Collapsing the entire investigation of Hirohito's role in starting the Pacific war into 10 days only served to add fake urgent drama to the setup ... it was both untrue (the actual timeline was about 5 months) and reflected a purely political viewpoint that was not matched by the facts or motivations of key players at the time.4) It was all well and good for General Fellers to conclude that nobody could determine with certainty after the fact what Emperor Hirohito's complicity was in the start of the Pacific war. That could have been a compelling finding ... but exploring that issue in at least some reasonable detail, instead of the airy dismissal given at the end of the film, as applied by the Fellers character (no doubt to make up for lost time from wasting most of the film's screen time on those silly flashbacks to the fake love affair with the Japanese teacher) completely detracted from the serious issues that the film was supposed to address. This matter deserved an in-depth investigation in late 1945, and an in-depth treatment in this film as well.5) The acting by the Japanese characters seemed fairly well done (in contrast to TLJ, and Matthew Fox's wooden portrayal of Fellers), but the Japanese characters themselves were far more deserving of exploration than this film provided. Particularly, the most telling insight was offered by the Lord Privy Seal Kido character ... i.e., his statement that the Emperor was really just a ceremonial religious figurehead before, and during the war, who only rose to the occasion in August 1945 to exert the Imperial Will. That is, his demand that his war cabinet agree with him to accept the Allied surrender terms. The drama with which this scenario was infused was almost completely ignored in the film. The film did in fact depict the attempted military coup just before the surrender, but it did not bother to describe who was actually conducting the coup and what they intended to accomplish, and exactly whom the plotters intended to assassinate.That the Emperor was not really in charge of Japanese imperial policy in the late 1930s and early 1940s was, of course, completely counter to the Western notion of an Emperor's role and authority. Yet that concept and fact, along with the fact that the Emperor finally forced his will upon the militarists in charge of the regime, was the lynch-pin of the film's reason for being, and for MacArthur's decision regarding the prosecution of Hirohito.All in all, this film disappoints almost entirely, including dramatically, factually, and thematically. Realistically, a proper treatment of what was involved even just in MacArthur's decision whether or not to prosecute Hirohito deserves at least a mini-series level of treatment, not a less-than-two-hour film.

After the Japanese surrender, General Bonner Fellers (Matthew Fox) is part of General Douglas MacArthur (Tommy Lee Jones)'s delegation. When Washington withdraws protected status from the emperor, they are given 10 days to investigate whether the emperor should be charged with war crimes. Before the war, Fellers had fallen for fellow student Aya Shimada (Eriko Hatsune). However family obligation forces her to return to Japan and he hasn't been back in Japan for 5 years.I am not usually tie down to history just because a movie says based on a true story. This is slightly different. The history is so unknowable that any definitive version is bound to be questionable. I don't care about Fellers fictional romance with the Japanese girl. It's the murky nature of not knowing what actually happened behind closed doors. This feels like a simple official story of what happened without any voice allowing for a different story. This movie needs a counter character to contradict Fellers. This movie needs a devil's advocate. If they could manufacture a romance for Fellers, they could manufacture a competing investigator for him. General Richter doesn't have the skills or the screen time.I do like the Japanese culture and the insights into this slice of history. The post war Japan looks compelling. Matthew Fox looks badly worn out. It fits him in the post-war Japan. However I think he needs to look a whole lot better in the pre-war flashbacks. It's a fascinating piece of history. I just think there is a better movie to be made for it.

Great acting from most of the cast, and well filmed. The sets of bombed Tokyo a shocking in their desolation and you really get a feel for "surviving".Despite the fact that the film is based on actual events, this is not a docudrama. Many liberties are taken with the facts so don't watch this film looking for education. It's a real shame that the script could not mirror the actual events better. This was a turbulent time, and important decision were still being made. The true story would probably have been every bit as good as what we saw, perhaps even better if it was told with care.Also, here are parts of the Japanese dialogue that just don't ring trueThe fictitious love interest of General Bonner Fellows, while somewhat intriguing, was a) not true, and b) very distracting to the main story. It's mystifying to me why this was inserted in the film except to show a one-star general being derelict in his duty. If it was to highlight the differences in culture, then it failed miserably as only hints were given.

Billed as a movie about General Douglas MacArthur and WWII, it's not. It's about a lower level general investigating if the emperor is a war criminal, but most of his time is spent looking for his Japanese girlfriend. They make a list of suspects and try to talk to them, but most of them aren't talking. So he goes around and looks and sobs and sobs some more. As far as scenery, many of the buildings are the same, even when they're supposed to be in different towns, so they didn't spend too much on area views.It's more of a love story, but it fails at that, too. If you can see it for free, you'll get your money's worth.