There Was a Father (1942)

☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ½

There Was a Father (1942) – Y. Ozu

Yasujirô Ozu’s wartime portrait of a single dad’s self-sacrifice was likely exactly what the country wanted in order to spur young men to the call of duty.  His favourite actor, Chishû Ryû, plays the widower schoolteacher who sends his only son away to the best schools (thereby living alone without the comforts of family) to offer him the best opportunity for the future.  However, it is possible to question whether Ozu felt uniformly positive about such decisions.  Early in the film Horikawa (Ryû) gives up teaching because of a tragedy that happened under his watch, but this may have deprived a generation of students from a good teacher (later, he scolds his own son, who has grown up to become a teacher, when he also thinks about leaving the profession).  Moreover, as Tony Rayns points out, it is not too difficult to imagine the father’s dying words echoing the sentiments of Setsuko Hara (in Tokyo Story, 1953) about life being essentially disappointing; instead he claims to be satisfied that his son has turned out to be a good person and that he has found him a wife to support him. Of course, it is possible to be disappointed for oneself and satisfied for others at the same time and this may be what is/was required in Japan (although the disappointment must be accepted if it is even acknowledged).  So, the film has a tinge of ambivalence about it and this is reinforced by Ozu’s trademark “still life” scenes that punctuate the film’s major sequences.  Often, these are stone lanterns or the beautiful countryside locales where the early portions of the film (and later ryokan scenes) take place.  During these moments, one reflects.  Naturally, I thought of my own dad and the things he did/does for me, even after my parents divorced and even after I moved far away (as the son in the film does).  I also thought of myself as a dad and questioned whether I am doing enough for my two sons.  Ultimately, the wartime context could be completely ignored (and indeed the war is barely mentioned in the film, perhaps partly due to US censors) and the film would still be humane and transcendent as much of Ozu’s oeuvre was.  Worth seeking out.