It's a bit of a cliche to say that a film "doesn't offer any easy answers," but this one almost mocks the idea that there are questions to be asked. There are a few moments of dark humour here, but mostly Imamura avoids both pathos and irony; the result is a more understated but deep cynicism: "the banality of evil" in the most literal sense. The IMDB summary is awful, btw.

Imamura was, to western eyes, one of the first directors to subvert what was otherwise expected of japanese cinema. His gritty, raw and mordantly funny pictures the diametric opposite of the grace and measured emotion of masters like Ozu and the didacticism of revered hacks like Mizoguchi. That being said, the kinetic and frantic cinema of Ishii and his ilk was still a few years away at this point, and for all its pros, the film stills lags at points and lacks direction in others.

There's a kind of claustrophobic, unpredictable and unshakable horror in this film. "Evil" is not taken up for fucking debate - the world is just "evil", sick, whatever. Love is, at best, present in a distorted condition. Nothing is clean. Michael Atkins in Sight & Sound says: "[...] Imamura may have been cinema's premier cynic - next to him, Bunuel looks like a romantic". After seeing this, one has to nod with resolution.

Fantastic. Sets the bar for serial killer films, with Badlands.

You have to keep up with this movie; if you can, its a rewarding look at a sociopath/killer.

Ogata is fascinating as Enokizu, a brutal criminal. But there are many characters here who have one thread running through them: guilt. This is probably a better film for summer, when the long nights won't cause one to brood over it.

The technically stylish takes on real life crimes such as Zodiac seem paper thin to this subdued take on a real murderer. It avoids the barrier true life stories can create between them and the viewer by slowly pulling you into the world of the 'characters', all of them fatally flawed but with some humanity, amplified by a fragmented narrative that avoids leading you by the hand through a rigid timeline and allowing Imamura to bring in his view of Japan at the time. It confirms his talent.

One of those movies where nearly every character is deeply flawed, which makes it hard to watch at times. Add a main character that commits murders for seemingly arbitrary reasons, and you end up with 140 minutes of bleakness that doesn't add up to anything truly special in the end.

Well, that was unpleasant. I'd such high expectations after Profound Desire.

Vengeance for what? What makes a man become this evil? The movie isn't concerned with answering these questions with some grand revelation. But that's what makes it all the more fascinating - and more true.

I thought of Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer as I watched this. Both are based on true stories about remorseless killers, and neither attempts to explain the psychology of their subjects, each giving only a small glimpse of the events that may have shaped their psychoses. Each also has a bit of humor to it, and a gratuitous level of sex and/or violence. I like this one more, though. The fragmented narrative keeps you on your toes, and I'm intrigued by the social and religious undertones.

Excellent performances all around keep Vengeance is Mine thoroughly engaging. It's not often that movies about real-life serial killers are as interesting or well done as this one is.

It deals with the murders, the investigation, and Enokizu's journey on the run very straightforward and bluntly, which might turn some people off. I liked it, though. It made the movie an interesting, and pretty brutal, character study of a psychopath. The documentary-style camerawork contributed to that feeling, but the movie still doesn't necessarily feel like naturalism. I think it drags on a bit too long for its own good, and at certain points it loses some steam, but it ends on a high note.

A very interesting study of a serial killer. It starts off feeling like a crime procedural, but as the film progresses we get flashes of insight into the disturbed mind of Enokizu. The film doesn't really provide many answers, which is a bit of a letdown at first, but that's probably the point. We see contributing factors, both personal and societal, but at the end of the day the killing spree is primarily the product of a sociopath. While Enokizu is the focus of the movie, postwar Japan is also

Fascinating character study of a psychopath, immaculately incarnated by Ogata. The sex and violence aren't as explicit as can be found elsewhere, but the force with which they are delivered makes this a highly disturbing and involving work.

It's not about how Iwao came to be the way he is. It's not about why Iwao does what he does. It's not about Iwao running away from the police. To put it simply, it's about Iwao, and one of the better performances of a serial killer you'll find.

Ken Ogata gives a compelling performance as Iwao Enokizu, a sociopathic serial murderer who's sort of a cross between Max Cady and Frank Abagnale Jr. But outside of that, this is a rather dull, lifeless account. I've seen more interesting explorations of similar material on Court TV.