Drive My Car (2021)

He isn't tough; he’s just a coward. He lacks the grit shown by that young actor who actually carries himself with authority. This guy is soft. It feels right that he’s being driven by a woman.

The whole point of letting him drive is all about shifting the perspective—throwing a totally different light on his complaining. It’s basically those tiny little steps that kick off a turnaround leading to some personal catharsis by the end.

For some reason, I feel like the dynamic between the couple isn't hitting home for everyone. It’s actually pretty straightforward: she wants him to show some actual desire for her, but he thinks doing that would make him too exposed and vulnerable. They're both right. So instead, he builds this perfect, pure image of her in his head—and that kind of idealism just leads straight to alienation. Looking at it through the lens of Japanese culture, you could argue it's that classic theme of *uchi* (inside) vs. *soto* (outside)—basically the private self versus the public persona. In Japan, the "self" is contextual; it's shaped by the group rather than just the individual.

amberfox7 said:The chauvinist in me caught onto the underlying theme here: this movie basically argues that women can be whatever they want, and men just have to stoically endure it if they want to be loved or enjoy their lives.

By the end, he’s even blaming himself—yeah, it’s your fault because she enjoyed using young actors as warm bodies on your couch, and you're the bad guy because you didn't explicitly tell her it bothered you. I guess we live in an era where we just glorify being unfaithful.

Jokes aside.

That whole subplot about the young actor hitting photographers is just cringe—a cheap, lazy writing shortcut. I honestly expected something more Hitchcockian, maybe the protagonist snapping and murdering the kid in a fit of madness; that would've been something. The initial outburst at the photographer worked okay as a character beat, but turning it into this repetitive cycle? Without spoiling too much, it was a massive missed opportunity. It should have gone in a completely different direction.

The car scene where the young actor wraps up her narrative is hands-down the worst acting in the film; you can literally see the kid struggling, just staring blankly into space.

The last thirty minutes are a slog—emotionally hollow and frankly pathetic. And that moment where the driver explains how she, spoiler, killed her mother? Just lame.

It’s like Batman—ninety minutes too long.

That said, there is merit here. The husband's performance, playing the silent actor, is Oscar-worthy; top-tier talent right there. The lead actor is also flawless throughout—he absolutely crushed it. The direction and framing are very polished and soothing; I genuinely enjoyed the shots of the city, the roads, and the landscape. That bit with the tunnels felt like a lovely nod to Tarkovsky.

I have to admit, I'm getting tired of these films that feel like filmed stage plays, but it's alright.

Anyway, it’s a forced experience. Realistically, it’s a 6/10. It falls apart way too much.

p.s. I won't even touch that nonsense about her "pre-orgasmic" ideas for drama; it feels like a solution cooked up by some adolescent playwright obsessed with erotic thrillers. However, the sex scenes with the husband were beautifully directed, so I'll let that slide.

Give me a break, that would have been beyond cringe. 😁 Luckily, Hamaguchi isn't Chabrol.

amberfox7 said:The chauvinist in me caught onto the underlying theme here: this movie basically argues that women can be whatever they want, and men just have to stoically endure it if they want to be loved or enjoy their lives.

By the end, he’s even blaming himself—yeah, it’s your fault because she enjoyed using young actors as warm bodies on your couch, and you're the bad guy because you didn't explicitly tell her it bothered you. I guess we live in an era where we just glorify being unfaithful.

Jokes aside.

That whole subplot about the young actor hitting photographers is just cringe—a cheap, lazy writing shortcut. I honestly expected something more Hitchcockian, maybe the protagonist snapping and murdering the kid in a fit of madness; that would've been something. The initial outburst at the photographer worked okay as a character beat, but turning it into this repetitive cycle? Without spoiling too much, it was a massive missed opportunity. It should have gone in a completely different direction.

The car scene where the young actor wraps up her narrative is hands-down the worst acting in the film; you can literally see the kid struggling, just staring blankly into space.

The last thirty minutes are a slog—emotionally hollow and frankly pathetic. And that moment where the driver explains how she, spoiler, killed her mother? Just lame.

It’s like Batman—ninety minutes too long.

That said, there is merit here. The husband's performance, playing the silent actor, is Oscar-worthy; top-tier talent right there. The lead actor is also flawless throughout—he absolutely crushed it. The direction and framing are very polished and soothing; I genuinely enjoyed the shots of the city, the roads, and the landscape. That bit with the tunnels felt like a lovely nod to Tarkovsky.

I have to admit, I'm getting tired of these films that feel like filmed stage plays, but it's alright.

Anyway, it’s a forced experience. Realistically, it’s a 6/10. It falls apart way too much.

p.s. I won't even touch that nonsense about her "pre-orgasmic" ideas for drama; it feels like a solution cooked up by some adolescent playwright obsessed with erotic thrillers. However, the sex scenes with the husband were beautifully directed, so I'll let that slide.

It's not an erotic thriller; it's more like Scheherazade and *One Thousand and One Nights*. 😉

Sure, she wants him to be someone he’s just not—she refuses to accept him for who he is, which gives her all the excuses she needs to cheat. That’s why she stays. It’s comfortable to live with a loyal, steady man who actually has his act together and won't hurt you. She’s the one who’s a coward and a conformist, not him. He’s just the idiot who didn't hold out for a better woman.

amberfox7 said:Sure, she wants him to be someone he’s just not—she refuses to accept him for who he is, which gives her all the excuses she needs to cheat. That’s why she stays. It’s comfortable to live with a loyal, steady man who actually has his act together and won't hurt you. She’s the one who’s a coward and a conformist, not him. He’s just the idiot who didn't hold out for a better woman.

And he wants her to be someone she isn't by idealizing her. 😉

Like I said, it all comes down to that uchi/soto dynamic—the public vs. private self. He's a bit detached socially, objectively speaking, and emotionally too—that's his private side. He stays formal even with her just because it's "proper" and "clean." That uchi/soto concept even applies to the threshold of a home—it's that rigid rule everyone follows where you absolutely have to take your shoes off at the door. She, though? Sometimes she actually wants a little "dirt" in the mix.😁

Dennis Martin6 said:The whole point of letting him drive is all about shifting the perspective—throwing a totally different light on his complaining. It’s basically those tiny little steps that kick off a turnaround leading to some personal catharsis by the end.

For some reason, I feel like the dynamic between the couple isn't hitting home for everyone. It’s actually pretty straightforward: she wants him to show some actual desire for her, but he thinks doing that would make him too exposed and vulnerable. They're both right. So instead, he builds this perfect, pure image of her in his head—and that kind of idealism just leads straight to alienation. Looking at it through the lens of Japanese culture, you could argue it's that classic theme of *uchi* (inside) vs. *soto* (outside)—basically the private self versus the public persona. In Japan, the "self" is contextual; it's shaped by the group rather than just the individual.

Give me a break, that would have been beyond cringe. 😁 Luckily, Hamaguchi isn't Chabrol.

It's not an erotic thriller; it's more like Scheherazade and *One Thousand and One Nights*. 😉

The reality is that things should be viewed in binary. Forget about "relatively simple."

electriccanyon26 said:Man, I don't know if that's a thing, but we should probably add it to the dictionary. 😁 The part with the silent woman felt unnecessary to the overall story. I rewatched the final third today, and maybe it's because I watched it in isolation without being fully immersed, but that whole sequence of mutual confessions at the end of a cigarette instead of a candle felt kind of cringe. To me, the entire section where they articulate everything we've already figured out could have been coldly cut. The final scene—the play scene—is powerful and cathartic enough on its own.

This totally knocked me out. 😬

And another thing, I spent the entire time feeling this weird sense of sleaziness toward him, so I ended up finding a review later that describes it perfectly, so I'll just drop a snippet of it here:

"I have this one issue with Haruki Murakami and film adaptations of his work. It's not that I have a problem with all his books and their screen versions—the silly, magical-realist ones are great. But when he writes meditatively, clearly from a personal and emotional perspective, his relationship with women creates this discomfort. Sure, he's sensitive, intellectual, progressive, and sexually positive, but he's obsessed with sex in a way that feels greasy and awkward. He always manages to mystify the fact that women communicate with his male characters through sex, and then takes such a mundane, everyday reality and turns it into some grand, divine experience for his male protagonists. This gives them these subtle, layered qualities, while the woman who 'awakened' him sexually remains nothing more than a nostalgic memory—a tool used to turn him into a real man."

That was exactly how I felt at the start of 'Drive My Car,' that highly acclaimed adaptation of a Haruki Murakami story directed by Ryusuke Hamaguchi, which isn't just competing for an Oscar for Best International Feature this year, but is also in the running for three other 'big' Oscars—for directing, adapted screenplay, and Best Picture. Right from those opening frames, I spotted that classic Murakami obsession, which is pretty much the obsession of all his male readers too. 'Here we are, naked and in a sexual frenzy, and now because sex is so transcendentally fantastic, my beautiful partner is going to grant me something special.' In this specific case, we're looking at a married couple where the wife, right after sex and still riding that post-orgasmic hormonal high, tells her husband these strange, interesting stories. She's a writer—she writes scripts for TV dramas and uses these stories for them—but the unexpected twist is that she doesn't remember these stories the next day, so he has to retell them to her, often adding his own commentary and suggestions.

I mean, seriously, thank God I didn't throw my dinner at the screen. Murakami & Hamaguchi, please, stop trying to intellectualize and mystify your sexism. It's like a woman can't be creative without having sex with her man, and then, being the inferior poor soul that she is, once his killer sexual magnetism wears off, she can't even remember her own creative outbursts and has to turn back to the source of all her creative power—her man. It's gross.

source

We might as well shut this thread down now—someone went and quoted the female version of Miljenko Jergović, Zrinka Pavlić. Just when the debate was finally getting interesting, too. There’s always some party pooper, isn't there?

amberfox7 said:We might as well shut this thread down now—someone went and quoted the female version of Miljenko Jergović, Zrinka Pavlić. Just when the debate was finally getting interesting, too. There’s always some party pooper, isn't there?

It wasn't "someone," it was me. 🤣

But you totally misread me... It’s not that I’m obsessed with her aggressive way of writing, or all that over-the-top emphasis on how "revolting" or "nauseating" things are, but she somehow managed to nail the actual vibe of the movie in this review. To me, that whole "creativity equals raw, unrefined grit" thing just landed perfectly.🙂

P.S. I only quoted that specific part, which she even praises at the end. 🤣

P.P.S. And I just had another epiphany... I had that exact same feeling after watching The Lighthouse.

Lisa Cox4 said:This totally knocked me out. 😬

And another thing, I spent the entire time feeling this weird sense of sleaziness toward him, so I ended up finding a review later that describes it perfectly, so I'll just drop a snippet of it here:

"I have this one issue with Haruki Murakami and film adaptations of his work. It's not that I have a problem with all his books and their screen versions—the silly, magical-realist ones are great. But when he writes meditatively, clearly from a personal and emotional perspective, his relationship with women creates this discomfort. Sure, he's sensitive, intellectual, progressive, and sexually positive, but he's obsessed with sex in a way that feels greasy and awkward. He always manages to mystify the fact that women communicate with his male characters through sex, and then takes such a mundane, everyday reality and turns it into some grand, divine experience for his male protagonists. This gives them these subtle, layered qualities, while the woman who 'awakened' him sexually remains nothing more than a nostalgic memory—a tool used to turn him into a real man."

That was exactly how I felt at the start of 'Drive My Car,' that highly acclaimed adaptation of a Haruki Murakami story directed by Ryusuke Hamaguchi, which isn't just competing for an Oscar for Best International Feature this year, but is also in the running for three other 'big' Oscars—for directing, adapted screenplay, and Best Picture. Right from those opening frames, I spotted that classic Murakami obsession, which is pretty much the obsession of all his male readers too. 'Here we are, naked and in a sexual frenzy, and now because sex is so transcendentally fantastic, my beautiful partner is going to grant me something special.' In this specific case, we're looking at a married couple where the wife, right after sex and still riding that post-orgasmic hormonal high, tells her husband these strange, interesting stories. She's a writer—she writes scripts for TV dramas and uses these stories for them—but the unexpected twist is that she doesn't remember these stories the next day, so he has to retell them to her, often adding his own commentary and suggestions.

I mean, seriously, thank God I didn't throw my dinner at the screen. Murakami & Hamaguchi, please, stop trying to intellectualize and mystify your sexism. It's like a woman can't be creative without having sex with her man, and then, being the inferior poor soul that she is, once his killer sexual magnetism wears off, she can't even remember her own creative outbursts and has to turn back to the source of all her creative power—her man. It's gross.

source

Maybe try looking at it as her using those men to reach her Zen and find her creative flow. Though, the whole film definitely reeks of sexism. As for whether he's making fun of him or if he's actually a sexist himself, I'm not sure. People will interpret that however they want.🍿

electriccanyon26 said:He isn't tough; he’s just a coward. He lacks the grit shown by that young actor who actually carries himself with authority. This guy is soft. It feels right that he’s being driven by a woman.

🤣🤣

amberfox7 said:We might as well shut this thread down now—someone went and quoted the female version of Miljenko Jergović, Zrinka Pavlić. Just when the debate was finally getting interesting, too. There’s always some party pooper, isn't there?

What are you even complaining about? This is still your own doing. If someone is being accused of chauvinism, that’s the whole point.

Daniel Kelly57 said:Maybe try looking at it as her using those men to reach her Zen and find her creative flow. Though, the whole film definitely reeks of sexism. As for whether he's making fun of him or if he's actually a sexist himself, I'm not sure. People will interpret that however they want.🍿

That’s just a male perspective talking—that's not how women actually operate. 🕺

So, is he actually mocking him, or is he just being a sexist himself? I can't tell. Everyone likes to twist things to fit whatever narrative suits them best.🍿

He's a total control freak, there's no doubt about it. 🙂

electriccanyon26 said:What are you even complaining about? This is still your own doing. If someone is being accused of chauvinism, that’s the whole point.

Look, I’m just as fed up with these Murakami-esque male leads—the ones who are handsome, kind, endlessly patient, and ready to forgive everyone, yet somehow "tough" at work. They have sex without ever breaking a sweat or smelling bad; they just look even more beautiful afterward, because apparently, sex is the only thing that matters in the universe.

But this particular critic—one of the last ten I've seen—is absolutely embarrassing herself while remaining utterly convinced she actually understands something about films or series.

The core "philosophy" of the film: no matter how you treat a woman, she’ll eventually betray you, but that's when she loves you most—because that’s what a woman *is*. How deep. How mystical. How gorgeous. It's all about love. You had to tap into your deepest emotions just to understand her, but you never will, because you simply lack the depth required to grasp something as complex and mysterious as a woman. Whose fault is it that you foolishly believed she was noble and good?

It's just these stunted, male visions of the "femme fatale"—pure, unadulterated misogyny.

And that's why it gets four Oscar nominations.

Lisa Cox4 said:That’s just a male perspective talking—that's not how women actually operate. 🕺

So, is he actually mocking him, or is he just being a sexist himself? I can't tell. Everyone likes to twist things to fit whatever narrative suits them best.🍿

He's a total control freak, there's no doubt about it. 🙂

No question about it. 👍

amberfox7 said:Look, I’m just as fed up with these Murakami-esque male leads—the ones who are handsome, kind, endlessly patient, and ready to forgive everyone, yet somehow "tough" at work. They have sex without ever breaking a sweat or smelling bad; they just look even more beautiful afterward, because apparently, sex is the only thing that matters in the universe.

But this particular critic—one of the last ten I've seen—is absolutely embarrassing herself while remaining utterly convinced she actually understands something about films or series.

The core "philosophy" of the film: no matter how you treat a woman, she’ll eventually betray you, but that's when she loves you most—because that’s what a woman *is*. How deep. How mystical. How gorgeous. It's all about love. You had to tap into your deepest emotions just to understand her, but you never will, because you simply lack the depth required to grasp something as complex and mysterious as a woman. Whose fault is it that you foolishly believed she was noble and good?

It's just these stunted, male visions of the "femme fatale"—pure, unadulterated misogyny.

And that's why it gets four Oscar nominations.

you're such a Zrinka Pavlić.

Honestly, I can't stand Murakami. I've read a few of his novels and they all feel exactly the same. What’s funny is that when I read his first book, I actually liked it, but by the second one, I was bored, and by the third, I was completely done with him.
Regarding this film, his fans will probably love it since it manages to capture all those pretentious elements from the book. That whole obsession with sex is just ridiculous. In those three novels, not a single woman ever turned down sex—in fact, most of the women in his books are usually the ones initiating it.

Dennis Martin6 said:you're such a Zrinka Pavlić.

Hah.

If only I could stab someone in the eye with a fountain pen and recite some šišak Menčetić line at the moment of climax.

Dennis Martin6 said:The whole point of letting him drive is all about shifting the perspective—throwing a totally different light on his complaining. It’s basically those tiny little steps that kick off a turnaround leading to some personal catharsis by the end.

For some reason, I feel like the dynamic between the couple isn't hitting home for everyone. It’s actually pretty straightforward: she wants him to show some actual desire for her, but he thinks doing that would make him too exposed and vulnerable. They're both right. So instead, he builds this perfect, pure image of her in his head—and that kind of idealism just leads straight to alienation. Looking at it through the lens of Japanese culture, you could argue it's that classic theme of *uchi* (inside) vs. *soto* (outside)—basically the private self versus the public persona. In Japan, the "self" is contextual; it's shaped by the group rather than just the individual.

Give me a break, that would have been beyond cringe. 😁 Luckily, Hamaguchi isn't Chabrol.

It's not an erotic thriller; it's more like Scheherazade and *One Thousand and One Nights*. 😉

Is that 'classic theme' exclusive to Japan?

Nah, it’s just that they have the longest tradition because of how their society, culture, and language actually work. Europe mostly obsesses over social issues, while America is all about that individual impulse. The Japanese are the only ones systematically making films that holistically bridge both worlds. That’s what I was trying to do—expand the debate beyond just some shallow, emotional "this guy is a jerk" realization. But then Zrinka Pavlić's spirit possessed the thread and everything just went totally off the rails. 😁

Dennis Martin6 said:Nah, it’s just that they have the longest tradition because of how their society, culture, and language actually work. Europe mostly obsesses over social issues, while America is all about that individual impulse. The Japanese are the only ones systematically making films that holistically bridge both worlds. That’s what I was trying to do—expand the debate beyond just some shallow, emotional "this guy is a jerk" realization. But then Zrinka Pavlić's spirit possessed the thread and everything just went totally off the rails. 😁

Sorry 🙂 😬 ...I wasn't trying to drop a quote from some review, I was just trying to highlight how it helped me realize that raw part of the story that was bugging me. 🙂