This was a lovely little Japanese film about an acting troop's visit to a small town. One of the troop's members is an older man who fathered a child in this town many years ago and it has remained a secret. His arrival is greeted by the boy and his mother as a visit from an uncle, not his father. These relationships and the relationship between the man and other women in the troop are interesting. While not the very best Japanese film I've seen, the acting and direction are excellent and this film is well worth your time. However, it is possible that SOME may find the ending somewhat unsatisfying, though I did not feel that way. In other words, the typical Hollywood-style ending is NOT what you get from this movie.

This film was originally made by Ozu in 1934--though oddly this version is silent. And the original is nearly identical in many, many ways. Because of this, I actually preferred the remake, though both are well worth seeing.

'Floating Weeds' was regrettably one of Yasujiro Ozu's, one of Japan's greatest directors, last films. Am aware of a lot of people that consider it one of his best looking, one of his more restrained at times (due to the tenderness of the romantic relationship) and also one of his most violent (due to the character of Komajuro). It has often been one of his most positively reviewed, despite also being aware that some found it too slow and found the characters difficult to warm to.

Can absolutely understand why people would find immense appeal in 'Floating Weeds' and why it is generally one of Ozu's most acclaimed actually from very trusted reviewers. Personally on the most part really liked the film and consider it on the whole towards the better end of Ozu's films. This is coming from someone who has become re-acquainted with him relatively recently and have really liked to loved much of his best known work. It is easy though to understand why others may not connect with 'Floating Weeds' and that the reasoning some have given holds weight.

It can drag at times, with it taking a little too much time to set up. Was a bit mixed on the ending, it was beautifully filmed and acted, very unexpected and emotionally touching, but because of the way Komajuro was written for most of the film it just felt too pat and not easy to digest properly on first viewing (one does wonder what any character would see in him still with the way he behaves). Maybe that's just me being silly.

Regarding the difficult to warm to the characters criticism, this is agreed for one character but the rest weren't a problem. Komajuro's negative character traits for my tastes were taken to extremes, so much so that when there were softer moments with him they didn't ring true properly to me. One of the few exceptions of Ozu's mastery at making his characters so true to life and like real people.

The other characters though felt very human and with both flaws and strengths, like anybody in real life. Sumiko in particular. The character relationships were also written with poignancy, intensity and honesty, namely between father and son, the tender romantic relationship and any scene to have Sumiko. The conflict has genuine tension, especially that quite scary brawl. The script is sly, human and emotionally varied and Ozu regular Kojun Saito's score is beautifully nostalgic and hauntingly beautiful.

Ozu's direction is typically sensitive and have no issues with the acting. Despite not being a big fan of Komajuro, the issue does not lie with Ganjiro Nakamura's searingly intense performance. Machiko Kyo is sheer magic as Sumiko. 'Floating Weeds' in my mind is one of Ozu's most visually stunning films, and no it is not just because it is in truly luscious colour. The photography, from Kazuo Miyagawa in his first and only collaboration with Ozu, is particularly stunning.

In conclusion, very good with so many things impressive. 8/10

The story here is simple. It's about responsibility and betrayal. It's about being a coward and removing oneself from uncomfortable situations, but then expecting to pick up the pieces when someone else has done all the work. This is a masterwork of visual cinema. The camera raises a somewhat mundane story to new heights. Every shot is rife with beauty and intensity. The background images contribute to the angst that the characters are feeling. It gives us a portrayal of a group of tired actors, doing their thing, being under-appreciated but going on. When their foibles get them in trouble, they manage to land on their feet, but what does the future hold for them? It also means that unlike many films of this time, there may not be a happy ending. There may be no ending at all as the pieces must be picked up and the characters move on. Roger Ebert picked this as one of his favorite 10. It's a quite, understated but powerful two hours of great art.