One year after CODA: Signs of the heart got top recognition from Hollywood, another remake appears again in the main categories of the Oscar. Based on the Japanese movie ikirudirected by the legendary Akira Kurosawa, was conceived Live (Living room), a British production that set out to revisit the story of a government worker faced with his own mortality and determined to seize every moment he has left in this world, even though he has no idea how to do it.
Starring Bill Nighy, this drama will compete for the Best Actor and Best Adapted Screenplay statuettes at the upcoming 95th Academy Awards, with its solvent cast and the universality of its narrative (a warm hug to the heart) being its letters up his sleeve that may allow him to surprise us during the great ceremony. However, the remakes They are still a tricky subject when it comes to handing out awards. After all, depending on each particular case, how much do they enrich or reinvent the original cinematographic proposal, instead of simply hanging on to it?
In Live, it is obvious how much (plotwise) it sticks to the original film despite the obvious cultural divergence. To talk about the tiring, fruitless and enduring bureaucracy —in which the taciturn protagonist has been working for years— other filmmakers would have chosen to bring the story to the present time. However, director Oliver Hermanus and screenwriter Kazuo Ishiguro preferred that their remake was set in the 1950s, as is the case with ikiru. Only now, we don’t see a black and white Japan, but a colorful post-war London.
You might also be interested in: Akira Kurosawa, his best films
The charm of the period emerges from the opening credits. A montage of urban shots boast grainy imagery that, spiced up with eye-catching typography, evokes classic Hollywood cinema. Visually, the film Live it never loses a kind of brightness that takes us back to the past; regardless of the impeccable production design, the lighting plays into a nostalgic sense of flashback.
On the other hand, there are also plenty of shadows and contrasts that dialogue with the state of mind of Mr. Rodney Williams, this aging public servant who, after receiving a cancer diagnosis, will find himself surrounded by merciless darkness. One of many scenes taken from ikiru (although more stylized in the remake) shows the character literally emerging from the gloom; a trembling light that risks suddenly going out.
In the shoes of Mr. Williams, Bill Nighy delivers an endearing performance that with the simple utterance of “good morning” conveys the heaviness of a life that could never rise up and fly free. The septuagenarian actor also maintains an irresistible gentlemanly demeanor, so appropriate for his role, as well as a versatile gaze that ranges from deep sadness to the warm glow of optimism. With LiveThe less doubt there will be of the outstanding rank of Nighy, whose work here is as compelling as it was more than a decade ago in the multi-billion dollar franchise. Pirates of the Caribbeanto name two of his diametrically opposed projects.
Aimee Lou Wood also stands out in the film’s cast, playing the young and cheerful Margaret Harris so naturally; employee of the City Council, under the orders of Mr. Williams, who will later become a valued friend and confidant of hers. Simply put: those who became fans of Wood since her memorable and much-loved role in sex educationGet ready to adore her even more.
You might also be interested in: Oscar 2023: Where to see the nominated films?
The histrionic talent, added to such a neat and elegant manufacture, make Live an unmissable film, whether or not it’s part of awards season. The argument, however, does not take any deviation that contradicts or complements the course set by ikiru 70 years ago, and that’s the problem. As much as some accents in the narrative are different, the story and the way it is structured are essentially identical. It is very valid that a remake choose not to step out of the margin, but don’t you lose points in the quest to win the award for Best Adapted Screenplay? By relying on the same medium of expression as the original material, how much do you manage to “adapt” and not just paraphrase?
The occasional attention paid to Peter Wakeling (Alex Sharp), a new subordinate in the Department of Public Works, seems the greatest narrative contribution of Live, and still ends up being a completely expendable character. However, the different nuance that the film manages to impregnate certain key elements of Kurosawa’s version must be applauded; among them, a rabbit loaded with meaning, a song of longing (rather than melancholy) and a revealing conversation between Mr. Williams and Margaret, which is also a great moment on screen that their respective interpreters grant us.
In practical terms, “remaking” feature films from other eras or latitudes always has the virtue of inviting us to look at the original works that, in one way or another, left alive a flame ready to spread its fire; for example, what is possibly the most moving film in the filmography of a legendary Japanese director. And don’t get it wrong: Live is certainly a fitting tribute to ikiruto solidarity, to Carpe Diem and small acts in pursuit of a better world.
Antonio G. Spindola I have very bad memory. Out of solidarity with my memories, I choose to lose myself too. Preferably in a movie theater.