The theme of this film is that everyone is selfish; for their own interests, they will not only deceive others but also deceive themselves. In the end, the actions of the woodcutter and the monk bring a glimmer of hope to the world.
This film has four perspectives: the samurai, the wife, the robber, and the woodcutter, each with its own doubts. Many people may believe the woodcutter's perspective, thinking he only concealed the dagger, but his perspective is also problematic, which will be explained slowly below. I firmly believe in one principle: the plot acknowledged by the majority is not necessarily true.
Robber's Perspective#
Why was I captured?#
I tend to think it was because the horse threw him off. But this raises another question: why didn't the woman look for the horse when she escaped?
Why did I have to confront NTR instead of committing the crime when I saw my wife?#
His own explanation is that his wife's face turned pale, her cold gaze, and her serious expression like a child made him feel jealous. The paleness could be said to be from fear, but why was there no concern? Why these descriptions? However, this is not related to the main issue and is somewhat excessive.
I killed the samurai with a katana and exchanged it for alcohol.#
He claimed to have used a sword, but in the end, he said it was a katana. It is clear that he slipped up; a fight must have occurred, and during the fight, he obtained the opponent's weapon.
Am I really that magnanimous, not killing directly but opting for a fair duel?#
Wife's Perspective#
Why did the robber voluntarily untie the samurai afterward?#
Why did the samurai only have a blaming, disdainful look, not speak, and take no action?#
Samurai's Perspective#
The important events of the robber untying the ropes and the wife asking the robber to kill her were not elaborated upon.#
The biggest flaw is that the robber tied him up, yet his katana was still on him. This contradicts what the robber said earlier about exchanging the katana for alcohol.
Woodcutter's Perspective#
The protective talisman box and the trampled samurai hat were not mentioned in his later narrative, nor by others.#
His words seem overly laudatory towards women; in the old society, women's characters were also false, emphasizing that women should break free from constraints.#
He said the man was not stabbed to death by a dagger but by a katana. However, in his final narrative, the man was said to have been killed by a sword.#
Did he really have six children? He was greedy before, yet in the end, he didn't care about raising one more child. Is this repentance?#
The child had a protective talisman, and in his initial narrative, he saw a protective talisman box. Does he think this child belongs to that couple?
Moreover, in the end, the wife said she could understand the samurai being useless, but saying the robber was also useless was because the robber couldn't free her?
I don't understand this logic. Isn't it because the wife betrayed the robber to save the samurai?
The robber initially liked the wife so much and pleaded for so long, only to abandon her in the end because of betrayal? Shouldn't this be understood? After all, it was initially forced by him.
Core Issues#
Who untied the ropes?
Why did they fight?
Suppose the wife secretly untied the ropes, and the samurai, in anger, fought the robber.#
The wife must have used a dagger to untie him; otherwise, it would take too long, and the robber would have reacted sooner. After the samurai was killed, she ran away herself.
So why didn't the wife say this? Moreover, the wife emphasized the samurai's disdain.
In that case, the samurai shouldn't hate the wife so much.
The wife secretly unties the ropes, and after being scorned by the samurai, she incites the two (whoever wins, I will follow).#
Then why did the robber say it was the woman who ordered the killing, just to show his righteousness?
Why would the wife lie?
The wife asks the robber to kill the samurai; the robber unties him for a fair duel.#
The robber, having just fought, became arrogant and untied the ropes. As a result, he almost messed up, and during the duel, he took the samurai's katana and ultimately killed the samurai.
The robber lied to emphasize his bravery; the woman lied to cover up her role in the samurai's death, and the man lied partly because he was moved by the robber's righteousness and partly because he was unwilling to admit he was overpowered and killed.
The woodcutter hid the dagger's whereabouts and praised women; strangely, he used the objectification of women to do so. Whoever wins, wins; doesn't that make oneself an object?
The wife asks the robber to kill the samurai, is subdued by the robber, and lets the samurai decide her fate.#
This wouldn't lead to a fight, so it must be false.
Other Minor Issues#
Did the robber plead with the wife? He probably did. The robber himself is unwilling to admit this, leading to a significant reason for the wife's change of heart: the robber's identity and his sincerity.
Was the wife initially not strong-willed? The samurai also acknowledged the initial events, indicating that the wife was still strong-willed at first.
Was the wife willing in the latter part? If she was willing, there would be no later pleas from the robber.
Unexpected#
The director also lied; the audience was deceived.
Regardless of which perspective, there are contradictions that cannot convince others. The woodcutter, to some extent, carries the director's intentions; the director does not want the audience to understand and deliberately creates mysteries. The director is also selfish. He may have even deceived himself, which is why the woodcutter's most frequent phrase is "I don't understand."
Moreover, if only the wife could explain where the katana and dagger went, the situation would be clear.