elvircorhodzic LATE SPRING is a film that is perhaps overly praised for something that the audience acts as real. Name the movie is lucid and alludes to something that should not be delayed anymore. End of something and the beginning of a new. The film was made with a lot of taste. Focused on internal emotion and characterization.Description of the story that has not at some point be described as subjective. Only life middle-class family, irrespective of external changes retains inner warmth and feelings. Here we can talk about the connection and closeness people with outside influences.The essence is in the relationship between father and daughter. Middle-aged professor is afraid that his daughter to remain a spinster. The daughter wants to continue to live with his father. Everything after that is a compromise, not conflict of opinions. At a certain point in life one must accept and understand the change. In this case, happiness is relative. The tendency of the director is to reach out to the audience with the warmth of family relationships between the characters in the film.

Bruno Loff I found the film really bad, and in vengeance against those who hail it as a masterpiece, I thought I would write a long review explaining why it actually sucks. No matter how poorly I accomplish this task, I expect that reading this review will still be more interesting and entertaining than watching the film! Indeed, "boring" is the most apt adjective to describe this trite work of cinema.On the positive side, the film portrays a historically interesting social context, postwar japan, a time when the old clashes with the new, and the influence of the US is felt throughout. However, it lacks not only enough density of interesting information, but also depth. With regards to the story:The main plot tells us of a 27-year-old girl and how she becomes mildly sad because of the marriage her caretakers arrange for her. You will see the occasional coca-cola sign and baseball reference, signaling postwar USA presence, and some circumstantial evidence that times-are-changing in Japan (e.g. her uncle is divorced, her girlfriend works as a secretary for a living). And there will also be the occasional scene showing us how change comes slowly (such as a traditional Japanese theater, or the main plot theme). The two provide a nice old-vs-new theme to the whole movie, which might be really nice if it was well executed.Unfortunately, the events are presented in a sparse, disconnected whole. Most characters, particularly female characters, fluctuate between shallow and histrionic. Several of the characters (such as her cousin, or the professor's assistant) are disposable, and serve little purpose other than to fill the movie with distractions (I wouldn't write this if only the scenes in which these characters appear were significant, or even just beautiful, but they are not). It is not that the story is bad --- I think that the same story could possibly make a great movie --- it is simply that it is badly told.With regards to the shooting: There are some beautiful scenes. These are mostly indoor scenes, but also the theater scene and one or two outdoor scenes. But it is hard to make nature look pretty in black and white, and the cinematographer was no Yusov. However, the various dull, poorly chosen, poorly filmed outdoor scenes go on forever.The acting is not worth mentioning. The actors were not given difficult roles, but they were not up to playing even those. Occasionally I got the feeling that the actor was reciting his lines (esp. the father), or that the actor was overplaying them (esp. the girlfriend).Overall it makes for an extremely dull piece of cinema. Save yourself the time.

billzet2 I saw Late Spring a few days ago, ( May 2013).. very moving and supports what little I know about post war Japan; I was in Tokyo with MacArthur's GHQ in 1946-7.Two troublesome points.:One character attends a violin recital by Mori Iwamoto, who was a prodigy., born in1926.A bulletin board at the recital hall has the date 4-26-13,assuming the 13 refers to Showa(Hirohito), year 13 is our 1938. But the film is 1949.Next Noriko and her father visit a Temple in Kyoto, and her father remarks on how beautiful" Kodai-ji " is. But the film shows them at "Kiyomizu-dera", another Temple in Kyoto.How can mistakes like this be made? Can we blame the censors? or the editors ?

Ilpo Hirvonen As in the films of Bresson, to Ozu the purity of style always coincides with an uncompromising moral perspective. He never lets his characters nor his audience get away from a profound dilemma with an easy answer. Thus, Ozu's films are always veritably life-enhancing, exhaustive, in the word's most definitive meaning. In "Late Spring" Ozu's mature, extremely laconic style is at its most developed before his subsequent films in which he went to define it even further. The movement of the camera is precisely considered; it is often positioned approximately one meter from the ground, and often left to explore the space long after the action has taken place. The lingering narrative of "Late Spring" fits very well for Ozu's understated poetry which encapsulates his whole vision of humanity and the world. The impressionistic picking of details in the aesthetics triggers associations to various thematic contrasts, such as infinity and insularity, but in addition to such stylization the film bears a striking resemblance to Italian neo-realism with its documentary-like observations and dark visual tones. The quiet emptiness of the beginning shots -- the essence of Ozu's poetics -- and their atmosphere remain as an echo in all of the scenes of "Late Spring" where there are no superfluous images. In his unique style Ozu has set the rhythmic pace for the junctions of the scenes with brief shots of nature that seem to express the transience of life; the importance of moments; and their absolute beauty. Once again Ozu deals with the theme of collision of generations as people must ponder responsibility and freedom with regards to tradition and family. Not surprisingly, the film has no black and white solutions to offer. Ozu's honest pessimism, his Chekhovian wisdom of life; and Buddhist acceptance merge together in the beauty of his aesthetics. At its heart, "Late Spring" is one of his most profound meditations on happiness, its pursuit, limits, nature and impossibility.When it comes to the story or narrative of "Late Spring," it is vital to discuss inner drama. For this is truly a film about characters who cannot express themselves, their true desires and wishes. It is to them whom Ozu gives his silent and tender interpretation, understanding their deepest experience of existence. In this sense, "Late Spring" can be seen as a universal tragedy of the difficulty of expressing oneself; of revealing one's innermost emotions and dreams.