Back in time

Mr. Jones looks just thrilled to be at a press event, as always.

Tommy Lee Jones has the same expression as in the Boss commercials, Is that Hama-chan left from him? Will he make another Fishing movie?

I have mixed feelings about Ruth Benedict. To put in another context, a North Korean academic, who cannot speak English, has never been to America and has largely interviewed or observed American students studying in North Korea, writes a much hailed book on American culture for North Koreans. That Sums up Ruth Benedict. That her book is widely praised says much about how much Westerners really know about Japan. Sorry.

He is thinking (I think), suck it up, it is money and my agent assured me no one will see this outside Japan. But still very uncomfortable.

I don't think I have ever seen Tommy Lee Jones smile anywhere at any time.

Tommy Lee Jones should have played the male lead in Lost in Translation, in stead of Bill Murrey. He would have nailed the part.

@BG: The time of this picture was when people were hungry and thin. Good casting. If it had not thin actresses, movie will not be realistic. Haikyu rationing time.

He must be unhappy with the fit of his suit... or the fact that he has to wear one in the first place!

Will he make another Fishing movie?

Probably not seeing as how "Su-san", the President of Suzuki Construction passed away!

Eriko is horribly thin. Give that woman a steak!

Tommy looks miserable and the gurn on Tosh is just too precious.

Tommy boy's not taking the cues - everyone else is looking at another camera.....

Tommy Lee looks like he has a gun to his back

Matthew Fox looks happy to be there and not "Lost".

Seems like and odd crowd.

Not surprised Tommy looks a bit unhappy. He obviously couldn't talk them into letting him go 'cool biz'.

Mr Jones must be thinking to himself, heck why didn't I just wear that jeans this morning.

The BOSS does not pose for a camera; the camera poses for him.

The film is historical, nevertheless it's just a modern interpretation of historical events. It shouldn't be treated as a source of historical knowledge.

If someone is interested in this particular story presented in the movie I'd recommend you the book "Chrysanthemum and the sword: patterns of Japanese culture" by Ruth Benedict. It's the last book of famous ethnographer of her times, written for the American military during WW2. The reason for writing this book was that the western world had serious problems with understanding Japanese culture, so different from the western philosophy. Ruth Benedict didn't have a chance to actually visit Japan, still her work is pretty accurate, and considered very useful, even today. I'm sure it did have an impact on the American tactics during the Pacific war, and the story presented in the movie.

Give the man a break, from his facial expression, Tommy's obviously constipated.

That Sums up Ruth Benedict. That her book is widely praised says much about how much Westerners really know about Japan.

Good analogy and good point: however, it's quite possible that a Korean doing just that could get a good deal of it right about Americans. As with any book or article or or broadcast or documentary, the subject position and bias of the academic or creator must always be taken into consideration.

movie tanked...who gives a hoot