This film is a 2013 color re-make of Yasujiro Ozu's 1953 "Tokyo Story," that was voted the #1 film by directors in the 2012 Sight and Sound poll. The plot lines and characters are very similar with some distinct differences; even some lines of dialogue are the same or very similar. The biggest difference is that while Noriko in the 1953 film is the daughter-in-law of the elderly couple, whose son was killed in WWII, Noriko in the 2013 film is the future daughter-in-law engaged to the elderly second couple's son (much more developed in this film, not in a flattering way). In addition, the incomparable Setsuko Hara, known as the Japanese Garbo, played Noriko in the 1953 film and brought to the role a transcendent luminosity of compassion and wisdom. Secondly, while Ozu had a distinct cinematographic style of usually having the camera directly in front of the characters while they spoke, we see this much less frequently in the 2013 film. These are just a few of the differences. Overall, it is an interesting re-make, but Ozu's "Tokyo Story" is still one of the greatest films ever made.
Add a Review
-
moviexclusive12 October 2013Cinephiles will tell you about the greatness of Tokyo Story, a 1953 Japanese film directed by Yasujiro Ozu. The story about an aging couple who travel to Tokyo to visit their grown children, only to have them being too busy to pay them much attention, is regarded as one of the most poignant tales ever told on screen. And as with every remarkable piece of work, there is a need to introduce it to a wider audience, hence the contemporary filmmakers' decision to produce Tokyo Family, an interpretation which you can either define as a remake, a tribute or an update.
Yoji Yamada (The Twilight Samurai, The Hidden Blade) takes on this story and gives it a relatable angle to today's viewers. The plot is identical to the classic: An old couple from an isolated part of Japan takes the train to Tokyo to spend time with their grown children, not expecting them to be too occupied and indifferent to host them. A tragic death reunites the family in a quiet country town and has them coming to terms with how they have drifted apart because of selfishness.
Made 60 years after the premiere of Tokyo Story and celebrating the 50th anniversary of the respected Ozu's death, this 146 minute film serves as a kind reminder of the importance of family ties. This is especially current in today's society, considering how new media and social expectations have changed how family members interact with each other.
With that said, Yamada's latest work does not seem to offer anything refreshing. That is nothing surprising though, considering how Yamada was an assistant director of the earlier film. The 1954 graduate of Tokyo University painstakingly attempts to replicate the style of the original, from its slow pacing to how important events are revealed in dialogue instead of being shown on screen.
Those who have watched the original (a large group would probably be film students) may find this version uninspiring, and the younger ones may find their patience being tested with the unhurried storytelling. However, do not let this make you feel that this is an unimportant piece of work. There are still pertinent themes which we as children ought to understand in this evergreen tale. There are times you know how things should work, but nothing works better than a screen visualisation to remind you of how things should be.
There is strong acting from the cast here – Isao Hashizume and Kazuko Yoshiyuki shine in their roles as the unassuming parents who travel to bustling Tokyo from their quiet home on a small island, Masahiko Nishimura's unassuming screen presence gets to you as he plays a GP who runs a clinic from his home, Tomoko Nakajima flaunts her chops as a busy beauty parlour manager, while the charismatic Satoshi Tsumabuki takes on the role of the youngest son who is a freelance stagehand. Each member of the ensemble cast plays his or her character without outshining each other, and gives ample room for performance in the film's many key scenes.
While Tokyo Family may not go down film history as a classic, it is still a commendable piece of work worth your time – if you are willing to sit down and appreciate life's slower moments. -
topitimo-829-2704593 August 2020To understand how this film came about, you got to know a little bit of background about the director, Yamada Yoji. Though he may be internationally best known for his late-career "Samurai Trilogy" (2002 - 2006), Yamada has been directing films since 1961, and is best known for films that are set in the contemporary present, but feature a heavy dose of nostalgia. Yamada started his career at Shochiku, the same studio where Ozu worked. Though he initially tried to make films very opposite to the Ozu style, he came to be compared to Ozu time and time again, as the years went on. Yamada himself blames the Kamata studio style, which is present in the films of many older Shochiku directors.
I like Yamada quite a bit, though he is nowhere near the master of cinema that Ozu was. The core difference between them is that Ozu depicted the sentiments of his contemporary society. Yamada's films have very similar sentiments, but from a nostalgic viewpoint. Less "mono no aware" and more of a longing to a childhood home, tragicomic everyday realism with warm undertones and soft narratives. At his darkest, Yamada is not as dark as Ozu, and at his funniest, he is not as hilarious. He is good, balanced, and humane, and his works benefit if you don't compare the two.
But I guess Yamada couldn't help himself from eventually remaking an Ozu film, after making Ozu-esque films for 52 years (!). "Tôkyô kazoku" (Tokyo Family, 2013) is a remake of "Tokyo monogotari" (Tokyo Story, 1954), the Ozu film that is repeatedly voted to be the greatest film of all time. Because of the casual nature of the the narrative, it is not exactly like remaking "Vertigo" (1958) or "Citizen Kane" (1941), but you've got to admit: it's a challenge. Instead of making a scene-for-scene remake (god forbid!), this is more of a re-imagining of the original, with contemporary setting and some differences made.
I came in with an open mind, and the initial reaction was good. The original Ozu film was in black and white, Yamada's film is in color, but he has chosen a color palette that resembles that of Ozu's late-career color films like "Ohayo" (Good Morning, 1959). In hindsight, Yamada would have been wise to remake "Ohayo" instead. "Ohayo" is a comedic and pretty relaxed narrative, a good fit for Yamada, and in itself a remake of an earlier Ozu film (1932). It could have been updated, just change the television set of the 1959 film into a computer, or an iPhone or something. Not necessary a masterwork, but Yamada could manage the tone. "Tokyo Story" is too dark for Yamada. Ozu described it as one of his most melodramatic pictures, and Yamada's softball approach does not resonate with the narrative. The dramatic tension is not very high, and we feel too much sympathy for every single character.
The original film was told largely from the perspective of the parents who come to visit their adult children in Tokyo. This film does the opposite, and starts with the children. Therefore we come to understand their perspective too much, and they are made too kind for the film's core thesis to come through. Yamada's film is cozy and the nostalgia he has for the olden day family idyll goes opposite to Ozu's thematic about the selfishness of the modern generation. Because the drama doesn't bite, the film starts to feel slow, which is something I never felt with any Ozu film, though they were long. I feel bad watching this, because Yamada is talented and can do several things very well. This film highlights what he can't do.
All this being said, the film carries some charm from the original, though it doesn't add much. Some scenes have become too iconic to change, and are thus too similar to the originals. The acting is very good throughout, as Yamada films are always full of likable faces. -
harry_tk_yung25 April 2013"Tokyo Monogatari" (1953) has purportedly been considered to be master auteur Yasujiro Ozu's own favorite, and by many others as his greatest. It takes a director with the caliber of Yoji Yamada ("Twilight samurai") to dare a remake. "Tokyo Monogatari" has been held so deep and dear in the hearts of many film lovers that a remake can almost be consider sacrilege. I confess to the fact that watching "Tokyo kazoku" (2013), I was asking myself "What's the point?" That is, until near to the end, when it suddenly clicked as I saw what Yamada is doing. Ozu is inimitable. "Tokyo Monogatari" is not remarkable. Yamada's work, however, is not so much a remake as an update.
The backdrops are markedly different. The post-war world in "Tokyo Monogatari" is gloomy and depressing. "Tokyo kazoku" is set in today's post-IT-revolution world, with cell phone and all. The modern-day mood is familiar to us, excitement but also alienation in a modern world-class city. People are in general less subtle and more expressive.
While not a shot-for-shot remake (say, as "Psycho") "Tokyo kazoku" generally follows "Tokyo Monogatari" very closely, particularly in the dialogue. However, there are some significant changes. One of the cleverest things I find is how Yamada uses the same dialogue and situation on the altered characters and scenarios. I'll come to that later.
Let me to quote from a film critic: Long before the term "generation gap" was coined Ozu probed it profoundly. The central theme in Ozu's mind is the relationship between parents and children. This is also very much the case of Yamada. The two couples, the eldest son and daughter and their respective spouses, are very similar to their original counterpart. In both, the doctor and his kindly wife are left intentionally underdeveloped, so as not to overcrowd the film. The daughter is as attention-grabbing as in the original, compelling a question whether she is being selfish or just practical. Her husband has been given a little more of a comic relief role. One change, somewhat insignificant, is replacing the youngest daughter (back in the village) with the neighbor's daughter.
The most significant change is on the two "single" young people. In the original, these two are the third son and the widow of the second son (who died during the war). In the remake, there is no third son, while the second son is not dead. This second son actually takes on the persona of the third son in the original – young and impatient. Obviously there is no longer a widow and the character is replaced by the second son's girlfriend, who has acquired the widow's name Noriko. With these changes comes the "something to offer" I cited in my summary line.
One change is the introduction of the "Boromir/Faramir complex" which to "The Lord of the Rings" devotees would be quite obvious. It's the situation in which the father lopsidedly favors the older son, and is forever critical of the younger. In this case, the favoritism seems almost justifiable as the older son is a medical doctor (albeit not particularly distinguished) while the younger is sort of a drifter. Still, it's also the same old generation gap - just more acutely brought out.
The biggest change, however, is in the woman. Old Noriko approaches being angelic, steadfastly maintaining her loyalty although her husband has been dead for 8 years. Her role in the film is pivotal. New Noriko has less of a role to play and yet it is a rather important role. In the final scenes, when they were on a ferry leaving the island, she is instrumental to a subtle reconciliation as she intimates to her boyfriend that his father wasn't really thinking badly of him after all. "He asked me to take care of you", she tells him. This is how it happened: the scene between the father and Noriko - how the same dialogue and situation is used for two very different scenarios. In the original, the father was thanking Noriko, repeating to her what the mother said about the time she spent with Noriko being the best time she had in Tokyo. He then gave Noriko the watch that the deceased mother left behind. This scene crystallized the almost saintly self-sacrifice of a widow of 8 years.
The scene is repeated almost exactly with the new Noriko, but in an entirely different scenario. Here, the young girlfriend, although nice and tolerant all along, is not above occasional grumbles to her boyfriend about the outwardly cold, aloof and taciturn father. This is the "updating" I mentioned earlier. In today's world, one as angelic as the old Noriko would be a little removed from reality. The new Noriko is in fact more "human", someone we can relate to. It's the same scene with almost the exact same details, with just one difference. The new Noriko, upon realizing that the old man is after all kind and considerate, protests that she is not really as good as he describes, and breaks into sobs. Both scenes, old an new, are the most touching in the film, but in different ways.
The old Noriko was played by legendary Setsuko Hara who will always remain one of the best loved actresses in Japan. The new Noriko is played by Yu Aoi, whose charm has been more than adequately demonstrated to those who have watched her in "Hana to Arisu' (2004) and "Flowers" (2010), just to name two of her many screen performances. -
JvH485 April 2013Saw this at the Berlinale 2013 film festival. It is an "update" on the famous original Tokyo Story (Yasujiro Ozu, 1953), but I learned that only afterwards. I did not see the original before this one, so I cannot compare.
An elderly couple who have lived in a remote village for many years already, bring a visit to their three grown children in the big city of Tokyo. The first half hour shows a lot of chit-chat between family members without really communicating with each other. It may be normal on such an occasion, when family members have no real common topics apart from ancient memories. Yet it leaves on me a depressing view on family relationships. I would not be surprised when this afterthought is deliberate, and as such intended by the film makers.
The older son (doctor) is very occupied with his patients, and the daughter (beauty parlor) is very busy with her daily tasks. And the younger son who is not taken very seriously by the other family members, has decided to live his own life and moved out. Older son and daughter conspire to move the elderly couple from place to place, making their parents feeling lonely and deserted. Later on the parents are even shifted to a hotel, and a lot of arguments pass by why this is only for their own good (we know better than that).
The story becomes interesting when mother and father follow a different route during one night. The mother meets the girl friend of the younger son, and there is an immediate "click". She even entrusts the girl friend with her savings, to use in case of an emergency, rather than giving it to her son, because the mother knows about his impulsive buying pattern. The father drinks too much in a bar, and arrives in the morning in a grumpy state. But (!) he immediately sees that his wife returned in a happy mood from whatever she did that night. What the latter was precisely, he would never know due to her sudden heart failure later that day.
Sitting and waiting in the hospital brings the whole family together physically (but still not mentally), until the dreaded moment that the mother is declared dead. Eventually they all travel to the village where father and mother used to live, to attend the funeral rites. Of course, the older brother and sister cannot wait to return to their duties after the funeral, and only the younger son and his girl friend stay for a few extra days. When they are about to leave, we see a crucial scene when the father and the girl friend have a real talk together. Suddenly, we see the father figure in a very different light, before that time always seeming a father-knows-best figure, but after that scene we stand corrected.
All in all, this microscopic study on family relationships proved very interesting, visualized very well, thereby portraying each family member in his/her own merits. There is no ending to spoil, and there is no real plot either. It is something that should be watched as it passes by on the screen. The actors perform very well in their respective roles, perfectly outlining each ones good and bad features. There are no bad guys in this movie, however, each pulls his weight in the busy ways of living and coping nowadays. -
esteban174714 January 2019The plot goes around an elderly couple, parents of children, who decide in the twilight of their lives to visit the capital of their country and thus meet their sons, daughter and grandchildren. Many things happen during the visit, that one cannot really imagine, itr didn´t go well. At certain point, the film reminds me somewhat Visconti´s "Rocco and his brothers (1960)". The behavior of the parents, their way of thinking, is far from that of their sons and daughter. The epilogue of the movie is very educational, worth to be analyzed, let anyone thinking if something can be done to correct some aspects of their lives, which may help life´s improvement in today's modern society. One cannot just live thinking about the material, the spiritual has to occupy good space in our lives. This film shows that good movies can be made without always having to deal with crime scenes, fictions, or with almost pornographic scenes. The cinema may serve to entertain, true, but equally to educate, and this film teaches and educates.
-
Updating a classic as revered as Yasujiro Ozu's "Tokyo Story" is no small feat, and it is left to former Ozu protégé Yôji Yamaha along with co-screenwriter Emiko Hiramatsu to contemporize a film that managed the magical feat of being timeless and of its time (post-WWII Japan). Yamaha was 82 when he directed this overlong 2013 drama, and there is a sense of gravitas to his approach which could be seen as a respectful tribute to his mentor. However, what's missing is the deep sense of melancholy of the original, the delicate emotionalism which was well matched by empathetic performances from Ozu's regular players, chief among them the legendary Setsuko Hara's beautifully modulated turn as Noriko. This character has been relegated to a smaller role here, and this is just the beginning of the problems with the new film made exactly sixty years after the original.
The plot follows the same basic framework. Retired teacher Shukichi Hirayama his wife, Tomiko live on a small island near Hiroshima. They come visit their grown children in Tokyo for a few days. There were five children in the original film, the youngest a schoolteacher who lived with them. This time there are three, probably a more accurate demographic for current-day Japan, but like the first story, the elderly couple is shuttled around rather mercilessly by their children who are leading their own hectic lives. They first visit with elder son Koiichi, a local doctor, his wife and two kids. Then there is the snippy daughter Shigeko who has a buffoonish husband and runs a hair salon. Last is youngest son Shoji, a freelance set designer who barely scrapes by but doesn't seem to mind. Noriko is no longer a widow central to the story on her own but rather Shoji's hidden girlfriend, the one who eventually provides the bridge to his largely estranged parents.
As anyone familiar with "Tokyo Story" will know, tragedy strikes, and the surviving family comes to terms with what remains of their elusive bonds with one another. Zeroing in on three children would lead one to believe deeper characterizations would follow, but Yamaha and Hiramatsu seem so intent in evoking the original story, the opportunities are lost. Even passing mentions of the Fukushima earthquake and the country's pallid economic state do little to make the story feel more vibrant and relevant. The cast is proficient but variable when it comes to lasting impact. As Shukichi, Isao Hashizume plays the role in a more standard curmudgeonly fashion than Ozu regular Chishū Ryū, but Kazuko Yoshiyuki hits the right notes as Tomoko. Masahiko Nishimura plays Koichi even more stoically than Sô Yamamura did as the role remains elliptical at best.
In the comparatively showy role of Shigeko, Tomoko Nakajima stands clearly in the shadow of the memorable Haruko Sugimura who could show respect, pettiness and conniving in a realistically mercurial fashion. However, former teen heartthrob Satoshi Tsumabuki manages to convey a palpable figure out of the puppyish Shoji who loves his mother but remains shaped by his father's disappointment. Yu Aoi has the unenviable task of stepping into Hara's shoes, though her sympathetic likability gets her through her key final scene with Shukichi with surprising poignancy. It would have been unimaginable to conceive of an update that could approach the resonance of the original, and somehow Yamaha proves that point with his overly deliberate pacing. Still, certain scenes like the heartfelt bedside chat between Tomoko and Shoji, well played by Yoshiyuki and Tsumabuki, make this worthwhile for a once-through. -
d-JCB22 October 20149/10
watched an amazing film this morning just when i was trying to get to sleep after another "up till sunrise" night it's called Tokyo Family by Yôji Yamada, a tribute to legendary Japanese director Yasujirô Ozu and his most famous film, Tokyo Story from 1953 it's quite similar in idea, where older parents from a country sea side town come to Tokyo to visit their kids / grand kids, but no one really has time for them Tokyo has this high paced way of living, while in the country the old folks just kick back and enjoy life go by
the relationship between the father and son reminded me of my situation with dad who recently passed away - my personality & outlook in life is like mine while the fathers is like my dad also there's a death in the film where the whole family has to go thru, very sudden like dad's circumstances
it destroyed me, but in a good way cause it allowed be to grieve a bit more, cause I've been resisting it a bit since dad's funeral it really is a heart breaking film, and like death it is hard for all family members to endure in the film the funeral & wake were very beautiful, respectful all the family got together like we all did it finishes on a positive note that life must go on, the father becomes more accepting of the son & vice versa thru this death in the family they break their stand off between each other and bond in their own unique way
instant 9/10 & keen to watch it again u should too, to see the contrasts between generations, traditions & cities old times compared to modern times something that will be timeless, just like Yamada modernising the Ozu 50s masterpiece with another masterpiece that will be also treasured for generations to come -
Jeremy_Urquhart18 October 2021Legendary Japanese filmmaker remakes (or perhaps retells?) one of the most famous Japanese movies of all time, Tokyo Story, approximately 60 years after its release, with a very similar plot but a very different modern day setting. It does, in a way, highlight how timeless the themes are surrounding getting old and what happens when a family starts to reject or ignore its eldest members that were already well explored by the original classic.
It's arguably not a necessary remake because of how well the first still holds up, but Yamada shoots it well, as always, and gets naturalistic, compelling performances out of his fairly large cast. Hitting the same beats as the first and having similar strengths and a very comparable slow pace does make watching this feel more than a little familiar at times, even if it's been years and years since you've seen the original (like my personal experience).
Yamada clearly has a lot of love for the original, and it shaped his style and many of his films that he's been making for nearly 60 years now, so maybe it doesn't matter how relevant the audience thinks it is? If he did it for himself, and because he wanted to tribute that original, then he's earned the right to do that, in all honesty.
Thankfully, those choosing to watch will still experience quite a nice film (although it is better to watch the original first, and then maybe check this one out too, if you liked it). -
A remake of Yasujiro Ozu's Tokyo Story (1953), which is widely regarded as one of the finest films ever made. Director Yoji Yamada follows the plot of the earlier film closely (though he doesn't borrow Ozu's stylistic touches; thus, this is necessarily a more conventional movie).
There are also changes in some of the characters. The youngest children, Kyoko and Keizo, do not exist in this version. Noriko here is not the widowed wife of their fallen son in the war, but the girlfriend of their son Shoji (who is alive here, and works as a theater decorator). Noriko is played by Yu Aoi, who is pretty and charming, though she lacks the screen charisma Setsuko Hara has in the original version (she is given less screen time, also). Also, I notice that in this version the elder children and the grandchildren are less rude to the elder couple. For instance, the eldest daughter Shige, as played as Tomoko Nakajima, is not as mean and bitchy as Haruko Sugimura was in the original. And the grandfather Shukichi, is less nice here than in the original version. He openly questions his children, especially Shoji, which in the original only did obliquely.
Obviously, this film is not up to the level of the original, but it is a well made, pleasant movie to watch. -
panta-48 June 2021Yamada Yoji has been directing films since 1961, but internationally is best known for his late-career "Samurai Trilogy" (2002 - 2006). There is always a heavy dose of nostalgia in his films and this one is no exception! Director Yoji Yamada delayed principal photography of Tokyo Kazoku, a remake of Yasujiro Ozu's Tokyo Story, from the beginning of April 2011 due to the devastating Tohoku earthquake and tsunami, and subsequent Fukushima meltdown, which occurred on March 11th 2011... from the beginning nothing was going easy!
Remaking a film like "Tokyo monogotari" (Tokyo Story, 1954), the Ozu film that is repeatedly voted to be the greatest film of all time, was very challenging task. I love the result - re-imagining of the original, with contemporary setting and some differences which could be almost called improvements!
Likeable faces with excellent acting skills, combined with great camera work and interesting cinematography revoking some old Ozu styles. As well as great directing, made this family drama one of the best ones coming from Japan. -
que_no_me_toque_un_alto_delante13 January 2016Almost always when seeing oriental movies, I find myself in front of the cultural abyss that separates us. I see the characters almost as if they were from another dimension, making strange gestures, eating strange things and saying strange things. This film is no exception. But in that very strangeness, the director manages to tell a daily and customary story as simple and direct as the title of the film. That is what the film is, no more and no less: a family in Tokyo. Although at the beginning it becomes very heavy, then picks up a lot and I could enjoy a mundane story and nothing flashy but somehow therein lies its value as a movie. In the normality, the wonder of family relationships appears. And in this case, we can be dragged to the parallel universe of life and Japanese culture, in which we find extremely different but also tremendously universal things. I think the movie does not "pass", but worth it for the "Japan-curious". The screenplay delivers an everyday, simple story. The are A LOT of actors, but a special mention for Yoshiyuki (the grandmother) and Yu Aoi (Noriko, the girlfriend of Shuji).
-
Some movies you cant be bothered to follow the plot because its so two dimensional and so badly acted. Some movies you forget the minute you leave the theater. Some leave an impression on you. But then some movies are more than just a good story told, they touch your soul. These moves are experiences you cherish. They have great story that transcend the senses, they are so well acted the characters come to life, you don't see actors acting the part you see people living their lives. These movies are masterfully directed, with great music. The Tokyo Family is such a movie.
I read some of the comments, on this movie, there was one reviewer who said "Almost always when seeing oriental movies....I see the characters almost as if they were from another dimension" My advice to him is don't watch oriental or for that matter foreign movies anymore. This movie is about human feelings and family relations which is universal in human race. -
poubrujas19 February 2020There is something magic in this movie as in all Yasuhiro Ozu movies. it catch your eye and captivate your attention with very little happening. I think it is the rhythm, the composition, the good actors that altogether make a film full of poetry that is easily absorbed by the slow but relentless rhythm of the history. It will be enjoyable to watch by any one that enjoyed 'Tokyo Story' (and the other way around and the opposite are also probably true)
-
geer-91 February 2014I was anticipating a respectful homage to Ozu's Tokyo Story. What I got was respectful but a very different take on Ozu's classic. Watching the first half was a little worrying as the movie took its time establishing the characters and setting the scene, with the obligatory nods to Ozu's super low camera angles. Had Yoji Yamada lost his way while eulogizing his hero? But this start made the second half really shine as you really knew the characters, and became involved in their actions since we understood their faults, and wondered if, or when, they were ever going to develop and change. Fans of Yamada will again delight in his subtle depictions of contemporary Japan. He has long championed the innate goodness of ordinary people living in suburbs and villages away from the tourist-trampled extremes of Shinjuku, Ginza or Gion. Although his characters are imperfect, they exemplify Yamada's profound respect for the institutions of family and friendship. Additionally, Im not sure if this was a deliberate subplot or not but, students of Japanese gender-based communication style differences will find a minefield of scenes to use for generating discussion. Highly recommended for those who also believe in Yamada's values.
-
user-15-84015412 December 2016This is a very touching movie, but after saw a film critic, I found that for Westerners, the film may not have that deep feeling. So as an Asians, I would like to say this film is quite moving for Asians.
Perhaps the emotional expression of Eastern and Western cultures are quite different. Asians express their emotions in a more delicate way. Therefore, in the film, the delicate movements and expressions are very emotional expression to the Asians audience. ''
In addition, filial piety, and the gap between urban and rural life, as well as homesickness, are very important issue for the Asians.
The most touching of this film is the love of parents to their children, although there is no direct face to face expression, but through the mother and father's behavior, they show indeed deep love.
So I would like to say to Western audiences that this is a very good movie that expresses the emotions of Asians. If you can really appreciate the moving part of this film, you can understand the Asians's emotion world.
Not to mention, the soundtrack of Hisaishi is really great!