This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Japan Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 22:06, December 18, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Japan to do list: edit history watch purge Peer review: None A-class review: None Featured content candidates –  Articles: None Pictures: None Lists: None Good article nominations: Vinland Saga (TV series), Godzilla Minus One Add requested images to articles that need them. Pages for Deletion: Participate in Japan-related deletion discussions. Improve and expand Japan-related stubs. Create some requested articles. Help translate an article from the Japanese Wikipedia into English. Assess unassessed articles Film: Japanese This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm This article is supported by the Japanese cinema task force.

There's a remake in progress: http://www.tsubaki-sanjyuro.jp/ --72.70.50.238 23:03, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May be a domain squatter but that page contains info about choosing hospitals at the moment. JoshuSasori (talk) 15:56, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tsubaki Sanjūrō → Sanjuro – Standard English title Girolamo Savonarola 07:36, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~

• Support: article says "better known as Sanjuro in the West." Jonathunder 16:39, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support on the basis that "À bout de souffle" is located at Breathless --Lox (t,c) 20:48, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moved. Nightstallion 08:40, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Much of the plot summary reads like a review. Can it be re-written to be less subjective? -CaptainJae (talk) 20:26, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I chopped it down a bit. To the original writer: While it was an interesting review, there were too many personal opinions. Anyway, I think it reads better now. -CaptainJae (talk) 20:30, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Four years on and there were still quite a few opinions in the article. JoshuSasori (talk) 15:55, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

... he invents the name Tsubaki Sanjūrō (from sanjū 'thirty', because he always asks for thirty ryo).

I don't remember any such explanation. On the contrary, he says "nearly forty", apparently referring to his age (and a later line plays on this). —Tamfang (talk) 05:53, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Besides, when does he ask for money? —Tamfang (talk) 09:43, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He asks for money in the beginning after he first takes the nine loyalists under his wing and hides them... right after he fights the bad guys for the first time, and then tells his new found followers that he's hungry and could use some money to eat. And he does ask for 30 ryo in Yojimbo... however, this is the sequel and I don't recall the price of 30 being mentioned in Sanjuro so maybe the editor who posted that is conflating the two... or Kurosawa mentions this in the interview (which I haven't seen). Ryecatcher773 (talk) 04:02, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When Mutsuta's wife asks the rōnin his name, he looks out of the window at the surrounding camellia trees and says it is Tsubaki Sanjūrō (椿三十郎), literally "thirty-year-old camellia".

That's also not quite literally right. 三十 sanjū means thirty, no question there. But 郎 –rō does not mean "years old"; it is a common suffix in male given names, often preceded by a number – first son, second son, … – so if anything the composition would seem to mean "30th son". (Perhaps his real name ended with rō, or he took that syllable from rōnin.) —Tamfang (talk) 05:36, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any clues? I'm wondering if this Sanjuro is the same character from Yojimbo. 97.118.63.76 (talk) 09:06, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know of no reason not to think they're the same. They share mannerisms (unlike the yojimbo played by Mifune in Zatoichi and Yojimbo). —Tamfang (talk) 06:14, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The character from Yojimbo was named "Sanjuro". It's possible they're different, but pretty unlikely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.227.206.79 (talk) 03:01, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter whether they seem to be the same person, to put into the article there needs to be some statement by someone somewhere. For example the film direcotr. Otherwise it is just an opinion of a wikipedia editor and should not be put in there. JoshuSasori (talk) 15:53, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The character is supposed to be the same character and the film was marketed as a direct sequel to 'Yojimbo'. The fact that wikipedians here seem to be reluctant to call it a direct sequel is quite staggering...and pretty amusing. The Mummy (talk) 06:54, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Or even staggeringly amusing. Instead of amusing yourself, please try to find a reliable source that it was marketed as a direct sequel. WP:BURDEN. JoshuSasori (talk) 07:02, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As to the title question, such movies typically are set in the Edo Period. One of the Zatoichi series has, early on, a written caption naming Tenpō era iirc. (This is not a reliable answer, but OP did ask for "clues".) —Tamfang (talk) 16:21, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The plot section contains the line " The group take refuge in a house within the chamberlain's compound".I don't have a copy of the film to hand, but from memory, when the women are freed they first go to a barn in the compound - with the hay - then climb the wall out of the compound, then go to the house of one of the Nine. I think there is a bit of discussion about the merits of hiding in a house next door to Muroto's house. As I said this is all from memory, so I didn't want to change the line in the article in case I am wrong. Idealfarmer (talk) 17:14, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some busy person removed my link so I'll put it here until the article is finished. Reiko Dan JoshuSasori (talk) 15:07, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I found the relevant Wikipedia policy and don't see any need to remove this link from the article. JoshuSasori (talk) 00:09, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And the relevant policy states "Red links should be removed only if they point to articles that are unlikely ever to be created". For a Japanese person who has been dead for over 8 years and who film career only spanned 16 years there is little chance that enough WP:VERIFIABLE WP:RS can be found to ever sustain an article that is anything more than here filmography. Again you arefree to create an article for her if it is that important to you. MarnetteD | Talk 03:11, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Let's try to improve Wikipedia articles, otherwise there is no point editing them. JoshuSasori (talk) 04:37, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's very surprising to me that anyone thinks this film is a straight sequel to Yojimbo. There is absolutely nothing in the film which suggests that it is a continuation of the earlier story. Can you justify this in simple terms? JoshuSasori (talk) 22:07, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First, per WP:BRD I am a bit shocked that you reverted especially since there was sourcing for the assertion in the article. Next, I am afraid that you have not read much about the film over the years. Donald Richie talk about it in his book that is one of the two referenced items in the production section. IT is also mentioned in the "Akira Kurosawas It is Wonderful to Create" documentary included on the Criterion Collection DVD where they point out that Toho was so happy with Yojimbo that they put up money for this film right away. A simple google search turns up this [1] and this [2] and this [3] and this [4]. Sequels don't always continues a specific storyline. Fistfull of Dollars, For a Few Dollars more and Good, Bad and Ugly carryover no storylines but the last two are also considered sequels. I suggested that you could tone down the wording along the lines of [5] or this [6] due to the fact that it isn't a storyline sequel but to remove it completely is a mistake. MarnetteD | Talk 22:51, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"The Good, the bad, and the ugly" is very clearly not a sequel of the "For a few dollars more". Have you seen the films? In "Few dollars more", Lee Van Cleef plays bounty hunter "The Colonel", but in "GBU" he is killer "Angel Eyes" - almost the exact opposite person. "they are considered sequels" - by who? This is nonsense. JoshuSasori (talk) 22:57, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and BTW the way that Mifune's character, Named Sanjuro in both films, finds his second name is a direct connection between the two and, according to numerous sources, was filmed that way on Kurosawa on purpose. MarnetteD | Talk 22:51, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh please. In one film he gives his name as the obviously fake "Tsubaki Sanjuro" while looking at Tsubaki plant, and in the other he says he is "Kuwabatake Sanjuro" while looking at a mulberry field (Kuwabatake). The first name, Sanjuro, is actually the ONLY connection between the two films. As far as I know, there is absolutely no other reason to view these films as sequels. JoshuSasori (talk) 22:57, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry that you feel that way. Are you going to ignore the reliable sources that I have provided out of some narrow definition of what a sequel is? I am sorry that we are butting heads over this. You do a ton of good work here at WikiP but to not mention this a at least a "thematic sequel" is a mistake. MarnetteD | Talk 23:05, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's easy to find lots of "references" saying this is a sequel, all written by lazy people who don't bother checking facts and probably haven't even seen the film, but just copy what they find elsewhere. What is the point of wikipedia repeating such lazy assertions? It is obvious to anyone who has seen both the films that it is not a sequel to Yojimbo. I won't remove the edit from the article again but I will register a protest against this here. JoshuSasori (talk) 23:07, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is a shame that you consider long time Kurosawa scholar Donald Richie or film critic Michael Sragow or the people interviewed in the documentary including Tatsuya Nakadai, production designer Yoshiro Muraki, and longtime Kurosawa collaborator Teruyo Nogami (all of whom worked on the film) as "lazy people" since they all point out the sequel nature of this film. It is a shame that you don't see them as reliable sources for WikiP's purposes. It may be obvious to you that this isn't a sequel but please do not speak for other people. Especially since more that a few of them do see it as a sequel. Perhaps your understanding will deepen as the years go by or it won't I will still wish you well in your continued editing her. MarnetteD | Talk 23:19, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Despite what you say, anyone who has seen both films will be able to point out to you that Sanjuro is not a sequel to Yojimbo, which makes this argument so mystifying. Since you brought the subject up, Donald Richie is indeed rather lazy. I'd caution about some of his books. Sorry, but I've never heard of Michael Sragow. I don't know what documentary you refer to, but if you have proof that Tatsuya Nakadai or Yoshiro Muraki or Teruyo Nogami regarded this film as a sequel to Yojimbo, please show it. JoshuSasori (talk) 22:51, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the most telling point is that the film's marketing does not say that it is a sequel. For example, the poster on the page says nowhere that it is a sequel to Yojimbo. It's extremely bizarre that people arbitrarily label this a sequel when it was never marketed as such. JoshuSasori (talk) 00:05, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So the man who is a published Kurosawa scholar. The man who new him as a friend and was on location with Kurosawa for several of his films is lazy. Could you provide a WP:RS backing up that assertion. You have no idea how the film was marketed at the time and your WP:SYNTH regarding the poster proves nothing. You will have to watch the documentary for your welf one day. More than enough sources have been provided to cover the brief mention in the lede. MarnetteD | Talk 00:35, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a welf. Richie is basically a journalist and his scholarship is slack. He's very, very lazy, and even worse he actually makes things up. I actually wrote a lengthy diatribe about Richie in the above and then decided to omit it on the grounds of propriety and length of message. If you want to discuss Richie, maybe we should take it offline. It's really up to you to provide support for this unsupported allegation that the film was marketed as a sequel, isn't it? Why would someone release a film as a sequel to another one, and not mention that on the film poster? Simple fact: Sanjuro is not a sequel to Yojimbo. End of story. JoshuSasori (talk) 00:52, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

-- Anyone thought of contacting the mods about Joshu's behaviour? He is turning this article into one about his own personal bias, because he doesn't know what sequels actually are. A sequel is a film which features the same central character usually, and usually doesn't continue the actual plot of the first movies. The Sanjuro of both films is the same character, his personality is the same, he dresses the same (including the same mon) and he has the personal name and picks a family name based on a different aspect of nature. A thematic sequel is one in which the same themes are present but no element of the preceding film is featured, so no characters or locations, only the film.

JoshuSasori has taken up ownership of this page because he has a poor understanding of what a sequel is, and he is on an power trip and wants to feel important by taking over this article. I have dealt with people like him before. In fact, I'm contacting moderators myself as he is trying to start an edit war and acting like a wiki-dragon. He is a disgrace to encyclopaedians, to be blunt. - The Mummy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.202.111.232 (talk) 03:46, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, why don't you contact the moderators and tell them that I asked you to provide reliable sources for a statement in a Wikipedia article. JoshuSasori (talk) 04:22, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Moderators contacted or not you have no right to remove a perfectly reliable source just because you have a bee in your bonnet about this. You are clearly exhibiting WP:OWN in this situation and we are waiting for you to stop edit warring or at the very least to present a WP:VERIFY source stating that this film has nothing to do with Yojimbo. You haven't even presented a source to back up your claim that Ridhie is "lazy". At least he was on the set more than once when AK Was creating. MarnetteD | Talk 07:24, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Because I didn't put the claim that Ritchie was lazy into article space. I don't need to put references to remove things, will you please read WP:BURDEN and please use proper references, and will you stop leaving offensive messages in edit summaries and talk pages? JoshuSasori (talk) 07:31, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No offensive messages exist. You are removing sourced material without justification. Odd that. MarnetteD | Talk 07:37, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are numerous sources out there that meet Wikipedia's standards stating that this film, at the very least, is a thematic sequel to Yojimbo. One editor feels that all of these should be discounted. Because they are lazy or something. The Wikipedia community should help in coming to a consensus on this so any input will be appreciated. MarnetteD | Talk 07:45, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• A very simple look at Google Books Search results backs the connection clearly. I agree with what you stated above about using reliable sources. JoshuSasori has been indefinitely blocked anyway for disruptive editing, so I think we can go ahead and mention with the connection with any one of the many references out there. And perhaps close the RfC. Erik (talk | contribs) 14:50, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• This dispute has a very clear resolution, a quick search returns result pointing out to the obvious connection, a mention in the article is worthy. — Eduemoni^↑talk↓ 18:03, January 27, 2013
• This discussion has a clear resolution so I think we should mention with the connection with any one of the references in the Google search. So, I think we should just close the RfC and JoshuSasori has been blocked for disruptive editing. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:35, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support―Rosscoolguy 18:35, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]