The Inadaptability of Murakami

Attack on a Bakery (1982), is a perfect yet entirely unenjoyable adaptation of Murakami. This short film, based on Murakami’s short story, serves as the perfect example of why Murakami’s writing is not suited for adaptation. The plot is fairly simple: two young, hungry college students attempt to rob a bakery, and the baker allows them to take whatever they want as long as they listen to Wagner with him. The director does an amazing job of capturing the existential absurdity of the situation. The philosophy of a girl trying to decide between a croissant and a donut, the communist baker who listens to Wagner, and the revolutionary undertones of the narration. The camera work and strange narration do well to portray the mood that Murakami cultivates. 

However, all of that being said, the short film frankly sucks. It is not a very fun watch. I think this speaks to the inadaptable nature of Murakami. In class, we also watched the American adaptation of the Second Bakery Attack. That short film was horrendous on every level: bad acting, generic setting, literally nothing compelling about it. That film was trying too hard to make something palatable out of Murakami’s absurd yet blasé story. It failed. It lost every semblance of Murakami. While the Attack on a Bakery short film does capture Murakami’s essence quite well, that doesn’t make it a good film. Murakami creates a mood in his work, and the internal monologues of his characters are essential in creating the vibe he creates. These internal monologues are nowhere near as effective or interesting when transformed onto the screen, even in the form of narration. 

I have yet to watch any other adaptations, but I really don’t view Murakami’s work as something that can be successfully adapted into film. The first step in creating a good adaptation is choosing the right work, and Murakami’s prose and absurdism make it difficult to find a work suitable for adaptation. Isaac Robillard

Norweigan Wood: What Were the Directors Even Doing?

        The Norwegian Wood movie was extremely disappointing. I really only understood what was going on during the movie because I had read the novel, and I’m sure that many of the film’s viewers had already read the novel. But the lack of both strong scenes and character building most likely left viewers who have not read the novel extremely confused. I mean, the point of adapting a book to film is to successfully translate the source material into something digestible. And while the film generally doesn’t have to follow the book completely, it felt as though Norwegian Wood tried to and failed horrifically. Or at least when it didn’t follow the book (i.e., the opening scene of the novel, or the emphasis on food, or even Midori's father’s final words), it ended up making the characters much less complex and harder to follow.

        In fact, the removal of most scenes or the shortening of others really led me not to care about any of the characters, including the relationships between them. When Naoko died, I simply didn’t care. Whereas in the novel, I felt as though I had lost someone important to myself. The translation from the novel to the film is just extremely poor. I struggle to understand how the movie could possibly be as long as it was, without having some of the most important scenes or even developing character relationships. Storm trooper’s and Nagasawa’s characters were cut down to a few scenes, none of which were significant.

        The movie focused so much on sex that it felt like pornography. The scenes where Toru has sex seem to be the only ones that were genuinely “fleshed out”. This again leads me to not care about the characters. I didn’t have the same feeling watching Reiko and Toru have sex as I did reading it. It felt wrong, but there was no substantial reasoning for it (except for the fact that I had already read the novel). I think that if I had not read the novel, I would be extremely confused when certain characters were introduced and would not remember them when they were reintroduced. 

        I am not alone in this opinion. Many online reviewers and my classmates have voiced this same discontent with the film. Overall, I think it was very poorly executed. I may be missing some sort of symbolism or expert design choice in the making of this film, but I honestly don’t care if I am. It was a hard watch. 

- Kyla Pascoe

Japanese Loneliness in Norwegian Wood and Other Films

I think the film Norwegian Wood is beautiful in the images it captures, specifically of the landscapes at the sanatorium and the decor of the houses. The hue gives it a uniquely Murakami vibe, making it feel hazy, like a memory, which is fitting as the story is told through Toru’s memory in the book. While looking at the settings and feel of the movie, I wonder if this story would work, or have the same effect, in an American context. I think the fact that the story, characters, and setting is Japanese creates this unique lonely, detached Murakami vibe. 

For example, when we watched the short film for “The Second Bakery Attack”, the class pretty unanimously felt that the story seemed awkward and diverged too much from the source material. Whereas, the Japanese short film adaptation accomplished the hunger and confusing, empty feeling that is so imperative for Murakami. In Norwegian Wood, I think the beauty of the rural sanatorium, and the culture of Japan that comes through on screen, makes the film. A scene of an American eating alone in New York City has a different feeling than the image of Toru eating alone at a Jazz café in Tokyo. The loneliness comes through more, and it doesn’t seem as out of place as it would be for someone to do this in a place like New York. I notice a similar feeling of Japanese loneliness in Lost in Translation by Sofia Coppola. There is something about the aesthetics and culture of Tokyo that evokes this feeling alienation and existentialism. 

Ultimately, I thought the setting and narrative came alive on screen when I could actually see the shops, apartments, and landscapes more accurately than in my mind. I also think the setting is crucial for accomplishing this memory-like, lonely, detached feeling, which we see in other films that take place in Japan. I wonder if anyone else has thoughts about this, or maybe disagrees?

-Ayjia

The Tone of Tony Takitani(2004)

To be honest, when I heard there was a film adaptation of Murakami’s short novel, Tony Takitani, I didn’t have high expectations. However, the film was a pleasant surprise in many ways. First, I really liked how the plot remained faithful to the original story, without changing major plot points to increase movie revenue or add director’s taste. The consistency of the plot aligned beautifully with Murakami’s calm and concise tone, as did the lighting and the camerawork of the film.

Throughout the film, there is extensive horizontal camera movement, especially used to transition between scenes, in chronological order. In a way it felt like old film reels, where each static scene is contained within a box. It effectively depicted the feeling of the mundane passing of time in Tony’s life. 

Additionally, the lack of variety in camera angles make it seem static, but also emotionally ambiguous. In most scenes, we don’t see much of Tony’s facial expression(nor does he have much). This choice not only comments on the nature of the protagonist, but also through this emotional distance, it conveys the emptiness that characterizes Murakami’s work. Especially since the horizontal transitions slowly stop as Tony feels more deeply about his wife, it really sets the tone of the film clear according to how Tony feels.

Lastly, the lighting of the film truly brought it all together. The lighting is usually very warm and it shines through the characters. This creates nostalgia, the central element in Murakami’s novels. The warm, illuminating lighting combined with the camerawork brings the film closer to Murakami’s tone.

Yewon Yun

Norwegian Wood - Mark

     After watching the Norwegian Wood Movie, I have some mixed feelings regarding the movie compared to the book. I did enjoy Norwegian Wood to an extent but it's definitely not my favorite bit of Murakami's writing. I felt that while the book did well with dealing with serious topics like suicide, loneliness and love, it did fall short in some ways. The female characters seemed poorly written and  oversexualized in some ways and they were just there for Toru, and the ending was a bit unclear as well as it was open ended, and it felt a little depressing and had a slow pace to it. The descriptions were very in depth though, and once again the serious topics in this novel were written very well. After watching the movie, I think a lot of important scenes were missed from the book such as getting rid a lot of the parts with Stormtrooper as well as the hospital scene with Midori's father. I did really enjoy some of the backdrops, especially the forests and grasslands of the sanatorium. I felt like seeing that brought a lot of meaning to the movie since it helped bring the characters to reality instead of just reading about them on pages. I think the character selection was pretty good, but some of the character interactions as well seemed a little weird to me but some scenes were good as well. Overall, I think the movie was a decent addition to the novel but I think I'd only recommend it for someone who has already read Norwegian Wood who wants to literally see what the worlds and characters are like instead of just reading about them from the novel.

Norwegian Wood (2010) Review

What stood out to me the most was how Norwegian Wood (2010) moves through Toru's life in a much more shallow way, which is common for movie adaptations of books. The plot does match the book on a basic level, especially Toru's relationships with Naoko and Midori after Kizuki's death. Though the way the movie handles these events feels very different. 

The biggest difference I noticed was the lack of Toru's older-narrative perspective. The film removes the older Toru looking back on his past and focuses on the present-day without any of the commentary we see in the book. Watching it, I noticed early in the movie that the characters appear quickly and we aren't told much about anyone beyond what they say out loud. Reiko is the easiest example, because she appears and while we're told she's important, the film barely explains who she is. 

Naoko's time at the clinic also feels different without Toru's internal thoughts being narrated. The movie shows the conversations and setting clearly, but without his point of view, I felt like some interactions came across as quite abrupt. Also, Midori's storyline is still there, but certain moments from the book, like scenes involving her family, felt shortened or insignificant. While I can understand why the director chose to make it that way, I felt that this was essential to her character. 

Overall, the film tells the story accurately, but I think the lack of internal narration removes a lot of what makes the book an emotional masterpiece. All in all, Norwegian Wood is definitely not a novel you can effectively depict in under 3 or so hours. 

- Anika

Norwegian Wood Movie

I found the Norwegian Wood movie online, and my thoughts lean towards the negative. Starting with my positive notes, I found the imagery and the general lighting/composition/staging beautiful, and I think they did a great job with that (especially the scenes in nature). Some scenes I thought were well done were the scene with Midori and Toru in the snow towards the end (to agree with Pilar's point) and the scene with Hatsumi and Toru in the car (though I think it could've been longer and drawn from the novel more). So for me, these raw moments truly made the movie worthwhile for me. 

Despite these scenes, I really couldn't get past the music present throughout the movie. I am not a huge fan of classical music in general (sorry Rysen) but I am not ignorant to the effect that music can have in framing a scene. Despite this, the harsh/ dramatic violin throughout the entire movie really drowned out some of the scenes. I think they definitely missed the mark on this. After the scene where it's revealed that Naoko died, the movie moves into this surreal interlude where Toru is hopeless, sleeping outside by the beach. I think this scene in particular could've been done better. Why are we hearing this dramatic music as Toru is breaking down? What happened to men having emotions? In that sense the producers are literally taking a page from Murakami's book since his protagonists are cynical and tend to lack drive and emotion... and are maybe even toxically masculine? Regardless, this weird music ruined the movie for me. I even had to turn off volume during some of the scenes and rely solely on subtitles. 

Max