What do you think?
Rate this book
日本电影110年
《日本电影110年》将日本的文化传统、电影技术的发展、日本与东亚乃至世界的关系史、日本社会意识的演变等多维度交织在一起，围绕日本电影的兴起与发展，娓娓道来。
本书补写了21世纪头十年以来日本电影的最新进展，进一步丰富了该书的内容，特别是将平成时代日本电影的新动向更加完整地勾勒出来，使得电影产业在日本几个不同的重要历史阶段的发展得到更加均衡的、面目清晰的展现，有助于人们从更为广阔的社会史视野审视日本电影110年来的发展，思考电影对一个国家和人民的意义。
这本书不仅可以帮助我们了解日本电影的新进展，从方法论的意义上，它也有助于我们了解日本文化与日本社会近来呈现出的各种新特征。比如对后殖民主义、女性主义、民族主义、环保主义、东方主义、全球化、日本社会的保守化与内向化等问题的关注视角就拓宽了对电影本身考察的视野。一部日本电影发展简史也给我们提供了一面镜子。日本电影经历过的故事，扮演过的角色以及所面临的问题，对我们难道不是很好的参照吗?
本书补写了21世纪头十年以来日本电影的最新进展，进一步丰富了该书的内容，特别是将平成时代日本电影的新动向更加完整地勾勒出来，使得电影产业在日本几个不同的重要历史阶段的发展得到更加均衡的、面目清晰的展现，有助于人们从更为广阔的社会史视野审视日本电影110年来的发展，思考电影对一个国家和人民的意义。
这本书不仅可以帮助我们了解日本电影的新进展，从方法论的意义上，它也有助于我们了解日本文化与日本社会近来呈现出的各种新特征。比如对后殖民主义、女性主义、民族主义、环保主义、东方主义、全球化、日本社会的保守化与内向化等问题的关注视角就拓宽了对电影本身考察的视野。一部日本电影发展简史也给我们提供了一面镜子。日本电影经历过的故事，扮演过的角色以及所面临的问题，对我们难道不是很好的参照吗?
360 pages, Hardcover
First published March 1, 2000
16 people are currently reading
209 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews
October 15, 2023
For many Americans, Japanese cinema is defined by a mere handful of films, most of which tend to feature as their subjects either samurai, kaiju, or anime. Yet this is only a superficial representation of a rich cinematic history, one that includes an impressively diverse range of films. That Japan’s cinematic history reaches back 125 years and includes thousands of movies means that Yomota Inuhiko’s short study of the history of moviemaking in Japan can provide only an introduction to his subject. Given that, it is a tribute to the author that be manages to provide such an informative work, one that traces the history of Japanese cinema from the introduction of the Western technology of the kinetoscope in Japan in 1896 through to the disrupted film industry of the early 21st century.
To accomplish this in the limited space available to him, Yomota adopts a broad framing. Eschewing detailed examinations of key films and the people who made them, he concentrates instead on explaining the trends and genres that defined cinema over the course of its history. Though individual films are cited and the relevant actors and directors referenced, these are used mainly to illustrate the points Yomota makes about the larger developments taking place. This allows him to delineate two major “golden age” eras in Japanese film, the first of which lasted from the late 1920s to the end of the 1930s, and the second from the early 1950s through much of the 1960s. These periods were distinguished by growth and innovation, during which Japan’s cinematic achievements received international acclaim. Their influence was magnified by Japan’s imperial expansion in East Asia, during which Japanese filmmakers shaped the emergence of cinema in Taiwan, Korea, and China up to the end of the Second World War.
Yomota’s coverage of these developments points to the inclusiveness of his approach. Instead of examining filmmaking in isolation, he considers events within the context of the larger political and socioeconomic trends in contemporary Japan. As he demonstrates, these exercised considerable influence on the evolution of Japanese cinema, as filmmakers struggled at first to win acceptance for what was perceived initially as a “low” art form, then to navigate the cultural nationalism of an increasingly militarized state. Defeat in 1945 brought about new conditions, as American control restricted some genres while encouraging the development of others. One of the most remarkable aspects of this in Yomoda’s account is how filmmakers adapted to such wildly varying regimes while continuing to produce works of artistic merit and popular appeal.
The end of the American occupation coincided with the second golden age, as Japanese filmmaking flourished with the end of official censorship. By the end of the 1950s, however, filmgoing entered a period of steady decline for the rest of the century, one that brought about the downfall of Japan’s studio system and a scramble for profitability. Though Yomota identifies a rebound in the 1990s with the expansion of independent production, this new approach struggled amidst Japan’s social and economic malaise caused by the popping of the “bubble economy” at the start of the decade, as well as the competition from other media and the diversification of the medium by which films could be viewed.
The challenges Yomota describes in this book are ones that make it all the more remarkable that Japanese filmmakers have made such profound and enduring works over the past century. Yet I describing the history of Japanese cinema Yomota finds a reflection of the larger Japanese effort to find its place in a field and a culture dominated by Western influences. Because of this, it offers insight not just on Japanese filmmaking, but on modern Japanese culture more generally from the perspective of one of the nation’s leading cultural critics. Concise and readable, it is a book that should be read not just by those who are passionate about the great works of Japanese cinema, but by anyone interested in modern Japanese history more generally.
To accomplish this in the limited space available to him, Yomota adopts a broad framing. Eschewing detailed examinations of key films and the people who made them, he concentrates instead on explaining the trends and genres that defined cinema over the course of its history. Though individual films are cited and the relevant actors and directors referenced, these are used mainly to illustrate the points Yomota makes about the larger developments taking place. This allows him to delineate two major “golden age” eras in Japanese film, the first of which lasted from the late 1920s to the end of the 1930s, and the second from the early 1950s through much of the 1960s. These periods were distinguished by growth and innovation, during which Japan’s cinematic achievements received international acclaim. Their influence was magnified by Japan’s imperial expansion in East Asia, during which Japanese filmmakers shaped the emergence of cinema in Taiwan, Korea, and China up to the end of the Second World War.
Yomota’s coverage of these developments points to the inclusiveness of his approach. Instead of examining filmmaking in isolation, he considers events within the context of the larger political and socioeconomic trends in contemporary Japan. As he demonstrates, these exercised considerable influence on the evolution of Japanese cinema, as filmmakers struggled at first to win acceptance for what was perceived initially as a “low” art form, then to navigate the cultural nationalism of an increasingly militarized state. Defeat in 1945 brought about new conditions, as American control restricted some genres while encouraging the development of others. One of the most remarkable aspects of this in Yomoda’s account is how filmmakers adapted to such wildly varying regimes while continuing to produce works of artistic merit and popular appeal.
The end of the American occupation coincided with the second golden age, as Japanese filmmaking flourished with the end of official censorship. By the end of the 1950s, however, filmgoing entered a period of steady decline for the rest of the century, one that brought about the downfall of Japan’s studio system and a scramble for profitability. Though Yomota identifies a rebound in the 1990s with the expansion of independent production, this new approach struggled amidst Japan’s social and economic malaise caused by the popping of the “bubble economy” at the start of the decade, as well as the competition from other media and the diversification of the medium by which films could be viewed.
The challenges Yomota describes in this book are ones that make it all the more remarkable that Japanese filmmakers have made such profound and enduring works over the past century. Yet I describing the history of Japanese cinema Yomota finds a reflection of the larger Japanese effort to find its place in a field and a culture dominated by Western influences. Because of this, it offers insight not just on Japanese filmmaking, but on modern Japanese culture more generally from the perspective of one of the nation’s leading cultural critics. Concise and readable, it is a book that should be read not just by those who are passionate about the great works of Japanese cinema, but by anyone interested in modern Japanese history more generally.
October 12, 2023
A broad stroke approach to 115 years of history but with concise distillations of each decade’s political and cultural backgrounds, shifting studio landscape, and remarkable filmmakers that goes beyond surface level objectivity. Perfect for someone who isn’t exactly rearing to go when it comes to the dry 600+ pg versions of this that can’t seem to understand the meaning of scope and brevity.
March 2, 2020
A decent intro/overview for the subject, but there were some glaring omissions (the anime Akira, for example) and absolutely nothing about post-Fukushima cinema - the book doesn't even having a concluding chapter to sum up the author's thoughts on Japanese cinema as a whole. Overall it is simply too short to go in depth on any single aspect of Japanese film history - but if you are okay with that, then by all means check it out.
September 19, 2021
While the brief nature of the book makes the history of Japanese Cinema feel far more accessible and easily ingestible, it also acts as a curse as well as a blessing, feeling overly simplistic and rushed. Many areas which I would see as essential to japanese cinema are glossed over, and many fascinating directors seemingly left on the cutting room floor. A good beginning for a novice in the area but more of a starting point than anything else.
January 16, 2024
Over a hundred years of cinema in a 200 page book is never quite going to work. This is good for brushing up on the broad strokes and I like some of the approach. It’s a good book on early Japanese cinema, as the writer seems to care more and know more.
There’s even some good stuff in the 50s-70s section, though 70s is a touch neglected even there. Beyond this it’s more than rushed through and has some odd claims. There’s a weird bit where Riefenstahl is listed as one of the two go to inspirations for female directors. The other is Varda, makes sense. Riefenstahl is insulting.
It also claims that Gamera movies:
‘Brought innovation to Japan’s kaiju monster movie for the first time in forty years by not concentrating on those battle scenes between two monsters that look uncomfortably like pro-wrestling bouts and instead never wavering from the point of view of the terror of ordinary Japanese.’
I debate this.
There’s even some good stuff in the 50s-70s section, though 70s is a touch neglected even there. Beyond this it’s more than rushed through and has some odd claims. There’s a weird bit where Riefenstahl is listed as one of the two go to inspirations for female directors. The other is Varda, makes sense. Riefenstahl is insulting.
It also claims that Gamera movies:
‘Brought innovation to Japan’s kaiju monster movie for the first time in forty years by not concentrating on those battle scenes between two monsters that look uncomfortably like pro-wrestling bouts and instead never wavering from the point of view of the terror of ordinary Japanese.’
I debate this.
February 23, 2022
Gets less interesting as it goes.
October 6, 2022
Read this for a class it was a pretty good introduction to Japanese Cinema. But it felt a bit rambling in some parts.
October 12, 2022
Short, concise, and good as course literature.
June 14, 2023
Fascinating insight into the history of Japanese film!
February 21, 2024
I'm a yomota head now
October 25, 2025
I read this book for a class I am taking. Really enjoyed the history.
November 4, 2024
The author’s preface to the English translation was written for the 2019 translated version of the 2014 book. He states that we can look at Japanese Cinema as “Japanese”, with its cultural and historical context, or “Cinema”, i.e. a part of world cinema with this being part of a horizontal plane - as a part of the history of world cinema.
In truth, both perspectives are partially correct and are valid ways to take a deep reading of Japanese Cinema. However, similar to classical Japanese poetry, the reader must seek understanding of both the external and internal cultural influences to find deeper and deeper insights into the art.
This brief text is a launching pad for a larger investigation, a scaffold to build upon. The last chapter felt open ended, incomplete. What thoughts did the author/historian have about the further part of Japanese Cinema? Did they see the deep impact that Japanese cinematic pop culture has had on the world in the last twenty years through the extension of film art into animation and digital content?
My next pass through the text will be a slow walk as I explore the directors, producers and named works in more detail in hope to gain a deeper insight.
In truth, both perspectives are partially correct and are valid ways to take a deep reading of Japanese Cinema. However, similar to classical Japanese poetry, the reader must seek understanding of both the external and internal cultural influences to find deeper and deeper insights into the art.
This brief text is a launching pad for a larger investigation, a scaffold to build upon. The last chapter felt open ended, incomplete. What thoughts did the author/historian have about the further part of Japanese Cinema? Did they see the deep impact that Japanese cinematic pop culture has had on the world in the last twenty years through the extension of film art into animation and digital content?
My next pass through the text will be a slow walk as I explore the directors, producers and named works in more detail in hope to gain a deeper insight.
September 23, 2017
作者提供的視角很有意思，但可惜翻譯有時出現非常可怕的錯誤：如Bae Yong-Kyun（p.253）應為裴鏞均，而非裴勇俊！
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews