Pulse

This is a uniquely Japanese horror movie, with little in the way of gore or jump-out-of-your seat thrills. Instead it slides inexorably into a vision of an apocalyptic world arising not out of atom bombs but alienation. Its perspective is fundamentally existentialist; all but a few of the characters talk about loneliness, how no one can ever be connected to anyone else, the essential isolation of being human -- even after death. This is a starkly horrifying concept in the context of Japanese culture, but might not translate as effectively into horror for American viewers (since we all think we're unconnected individuals already!). Like one of the earlier reviewers, I don't recommend it for neophytes to Japanese horror because the story does seem disconnected -- although it makes sense at the end, there's a lot for your own mind to fill in, which I find to be especially effective, because we'll each fill in our own fear). As the movie moved towards its conclusion, I felt a sense of dread that I haven't felt while watching a horror movie in a long, long time. Not a masterpiece, but a work of philosophic art and profoundly disturbing.

The philosophical premise of Kairo is nihilism expressed through loneliness. The superficial "connections" that one sustains with other people are conveyed as brittle, meaningless trivialities that shatter when confronted with the relentless isolation that exists on a much deeper level. Not one person is murdered in this 119 minute film for the very fact that the victims are consumed with a sense of eternal loneliness - many times caused by seeing spirits - and therefore take their own lives. There are no cheap scares in this picture, as it relies on disturbing, long-sustained images highlighted by awkward ghost movements. Classic scenes and imagery abound in this tour de force directed by Kiyoshi Kurosawa.

Kiyoshi is a criminally unknown director who is undoubtedly the single best filmmaker in the history of horror cinema. Unfortunately, many people confuse greatness with influence. Hideo Nakata is not a great director, but he did influence the entire film-making industry with Ringu. Kiyoshi Kurosawa, on the other hand, just makes great films - Kairo, Cure, Charisma, Retribution, Séance, Loft, etc. That's the essential difference between excellence and mere market influence. Now, Kiyoshi does get some respect from both moviegoers and critics alike, but there are some common complaints that I would like to address in conjunction with this review of Kairo.

The most outrageous criticism of Kiyoshi is that his films lack content. This is a patently false (and downright ridiculous) claim that holds no weight whatsoever. Taking Kairo as an example, there are a number of subtle references to LONELINESS throughout the entirety of the film - the literal isolation of characters, the individual dots expressed within the computer program, the patterns of dissolved ash, the influence of communication and information through both ghostly apparitions as well as red tape, apocalyptic doom, suicide, character mannerisms and interrelationships, etc. In other words, there's a boatload of content in Kairo. Those who say otherwise have no idea what they're talking about.

This structure of film-making is one thing that makes Kiyoshi so amazing. He takes a simple concept like loneliness and creates a constellation of phenomena that reference back to the underlying theme of the film. The same is true with Cure (identity), Charisma (false dichotomies, relationship between the individual and society), Retribution (memory), Loft (memory), and others. It's a fascinating method of storytelling that's so much fun to watch despite the glacial pacing from which it's presented. Don't fool yourself: the entertainment value of Japanese horror is frequently about content, and Kairo is a perfect horror movie largely because of its philosophical elements. How many other films can make the same claim? What more do you people want?

How the massive quantity of content within Kiyoshi's cinematic portfolio goes unnoticed is beyond me. The only possible explanation is that his stunning talent for creating dense atmosphere leads some viewers to overlook his content. Still, there's no excuse for missing it, especially considering how badly made dramas get all sorts of credit where none is due. For example, there are tons of reviews for Tsai Ming-liang's dreadfully atrocious Viva L'Amour that gloat about that movie's depiction of solitude. I read these reviews with the knowledge that Kairo gets little to no credit for its truly amazing portrayal of loneliness. The whole scenario makes me want to puke.

Another criticism of Kiyoshi is that his films are "self-indulgent." What a load of twaddle coming from reviewers who consider Akira Kurosawa to be the best thing since sliced bread. Anyone dim-witted enough to claim that Akira Kurosawa's Dreams is less indulgent than Kairo should immediately check themselves into a mental institution. So Akira gets a free pass at self-masturbatory cinema because some Californian bloodsuckers propped him up on an undeserving pedestal? You people are a joke. From the standpoint of sheer directorial precision and scriptwriting, Akira doesn't even deserve to sniff Kiyoshi's jockstrap.

Then we have all sorts of assertions that say Kiyoshi's films are slow and boring, but most of these comments are made by Hollywood fanboys who drool over rat-infested garbage like Friday the 13th, Freddy vs. Jason, and Alien vs. Predator. I would expect this reaction from those with such narrow-minded "tastes" in film. Just leave the intelligent horror cinema to the big boys and go back to worshipping overrated hacks like Wes Craven.

But that's not all. We have even more ludicrous complaints coming from Westerners like, "The Japanese take their horror films too seriously." I laugh when hearing stuff like this. God forbid someone actually puts some effort into making a horror film. Has the Hollywood horror industry really crumbled to the point where even their most fervent followers don't expect anything remotely ambitious? That's a pretty pathetic state to be in.

The point of this review-turned-rant is to simply point out the obvious: Kiyoshi Kurosawa is the greatest horror filmmaker that ever lived. It might just be my opinion, but considering how any and all criticism seems to be based on illogic or narrow-mindedness, there's really no valid reason for believing otherwise.

This movie is a real downer. Seriously, don't watch it if you're depressed. Loneliness and despair are themes that are stressed (very effectively) throughout the film, which features many dark settings and images.

Similar to "The Ring" and "The Grudge", the plot was a little hard to grasp and tended to jump around. The characters were not that developed, except for the young guy who played the lead, so it was kind of hard to get a handle on who was who and what their relationship to one another was. Basically, a young guy commits suicide and his friends are thrust into a strange world of spirits, ghosts, and odd images on computers. There are some genuinely creepy images and scenes. At the end we find out that this problem has affected all of Tokyo, where the movie takes place, and the film takes a post-apocalytic turn.

If you're looking for gore, you won't find it here. The horror in this film is much more psychological and subtle.

I was hoping for something really scary, but Pulse's plot moves slowly and just isn't that frightening. In the beginning it's a little scary, but once you finally discover the concept you'll see it's pretty lame and the ending is even lamer. By the middle of the movie I was so frustrated with it's slowness, poor sound effects and lack of scariness that I was ready to turn it off and put in another DVD. Unfortunately, my friend made me see it through and he was disappointed with the movie as well. Afterward, we imitated the movie's sound effects and pretended we were the ghosts in the movie and had a good laugh. Definitely do not rent this if you've seen any good Asian horror movies before. Don't let the good ratings on Amazon fool you!!

Speaking as someone who is rarely frightened by a horror film, (and I have seen quite a bit) this 37 year old didn't want to turn his lights off after seeing this.

If your scary-bone is ultra sensitive to the eerie (as opposed to hacker/slasher shock value) then this movie will haunt the pants off of you.

I felt that the plot's pacing/timing was perfect, and even the most frightening things had a way of coming off remarkably understated, which made it even creepier. The visuals are what truly make this film as terrifying as it is; lighting, use of color, staging of actors. It's quite brilliant. 45 minutes into watching it I knew that this was the scariest movie I had ever seen. (Besides "Wait Until Dark" with Audrey Hepburn.)