jon@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Jonathan Gingerich) (01/09/86)
a I saw "Ran" the other night with several friends. I was somewhat wary of the movie, since the last Kurosawa I saw was "Kagemusha", and I felt it suceeded more on the directors reputation than on the content. I did enjoy "Ran" however; it is truely epic and a masterpiece of visualization. As for the content, I'm not convinced of its profundity. It is loosely based on "King Lear" and although it has been a long time since I read that play, I recall it as more of a vehicle for a actor to rant and rave across the stage than as a particularly compelling plot, but then I'm not a parent! The screenplay divirges in two notable ways. The "Great Lord" richly deserves his fate as recounted in encounters with his victims, one of whom is now his son's wife and is bent on vengence for her family. Indeed, the actress's strong portrayal and the structuring of the film around her story would suggest the film is really about her rather than the lord, except that so much screen time is devoted to him. "Ran" means chaos and the film is unremittingly dark. In fact, it reminds me of nothing so much as "Night of the Living Dead", an association undoubtably prompted by one of the battle scenes. I can not see what the director is saying beyond "War is hell". If the subject is at all appealing you should see it, otherwise ... Can anyone who has seen it tell us anything about the Fox in Chinese or Japanese folklore?
steiny@scc.UUCP (Don Steiny) (01/13/86)
> > Can anyone who has seen it tell us anything about the Fox in Chinese or > Japanese folklore? Foxes can change themselves into human shape and make trouble. There are many stories about this. -- scc!steiny Don Steiny @ Don Steiny Software 109 Torrey Pine Terrace Santa Cruz, Calif. 95060 (408) 425-0382
edwards@uwmacc.UUCP (mark edwards) (01/13/86)
In article <2562@sdcrdcf.UUCP> jon@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Jonathan Gingerich) writes: >a >I saw "Ran" the other night with several friends. > >Can anyone who has seen it tell us anything about the Fox in Chinese or >Japanese folklore? The fox has magical qualities, usually in connection with maybe ghosts and such ( I think). It usually is associated with evil things that are about to occur. The key to the movie is that it is a Japanese version of a King Lear like story. Again the key word is JAPANESE. Most of the Japanese movies that I've seen, prior to "Jidaiya no nyoboo" have sad endings. This of course is atypical of American style movies. There is much symbolism, not only in words, but in actions, and props in the scenes.
shuju@videovax.UUCP (Shuju Burgess) (01/14/86)
> > > > Can anyone who has seen it tell us anything about the Fox in Chinese or > > Japanese folklore? > > Foxes can change themselves into human shape and make trouble. > There are many stories about this. > I missed the original postings on _Ran_, so I'm not sure what the 'Fox' reference is here. But just to add a short note here, in Chinese folklore (I don't know about Japanese), just about any animal can transform themselves into human shape as long as they have met the prerequisites. These animal- humans can be benevolent or malevolent. In fact, in most stories that I remember, they are often the good guys. The prerequisites may include saving lives and living a long time. I'm sure there are others, but I can't think of any right off the top of my head. Another interesting note here is that these animals usually transform into women rather than men. I don't really know why. Maybe these stories were originaly made up by men, and they usually fantasize about animals turning into women...I don't know. Shu-Ju -- Shu-Ju Wang Burgess UUCP: {ucbvax, allegra, uw-beaver, ihnp4,...}!tektronix!videovax!shuju #
nielsen@hplabsc.UUCP (Walter Nielsen) (01/20/86)
> a > I saw "Ran" the other night with several friends. I was somewhat wary of the > movie, since the last Kurosawa I saw was "Kagemusha", and I felt it suceeded > more on the directors reputation than on the content. I did enjoy "Ran" > however; it is truely epic and a masterpiece of visualization. As for the > content, I'm not convinced of its profundity. It is loosely based on "King > Lear" and although it has been a long time since I read that play, I recall > it as more of a vehicle for a actor to rant and rave across the stage than > as a particularly compelling plot, but then I'm not a parent! The screenplay > divirges in two notable ways. My understanding was that Ran is based on the story in Japanese folklore and that the similarity to King Lear was recognized by Kurosawa HALF-WAY through while he was making it. Therefore any comparisons on the divulgence of the movie's plot to King Lear are invalid. Walter Nielsen ARPAnet: nielsen%hplabs@csnet-relay.ARPA USEnet: {ihnp4,sdcrdcf,ucbvax}!hplabs!hplabsc!nielsen
leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) (02/04/86)
RAN
A film review by Mark R. Leeper
Capsule review: Kurosawa's final film tells the story
of King Lear in 16th century Japan. This is as well as King
Lear can be done, but KAGEMUSHA is still the better film.
Akira Kurosawa is a director with an international reputation for maing
very fine films. Of these the best known are historical dramas from feudal
Japan. His films are memorable enough that the plots or characters are
often borrowed for films in the West. His RASHOMON was made into a Western,
THE OUTRAGE. THE SEVEN SAMURAI was remade as THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN, BATTLE
BEYOND THE STARS, and SEVEN MAGNIFICENT GLADIATORS. It is rumored that STAR
WARS borrowed from many films but the basic plot came from Kurosawa's HIDDEN
FORTRESS. Kurosawa's YOJIMBO with its hero, the grubby but invincible
samurai Sanjuro, was remade as A FISTFUL OF DOLLARS and Sanjuro became "The
Man with No Name," on whom Clint Eastwood built a career.
Kurosawa has also been known to borrow from the West, but only from
Shakespeare. His THRONE OF BLOOD is set in feudal Japan, but the plot is
from MACBETH. Now Kuosawa has announced his retirement, and his final film
and his crowning achievement is to be RAN. Again feudal Japan is the
setting, but the story is very much borrowed from KING LEAR. At least that
was what was said at first. Now I hear that it is based on a traditional
Japanese story and only during production were the parallels to KING LEAR
pointed out. I am a little sorry to hear Kurosawa make that claim because
the plot is too similar to KING LEAR, incident for incident and right down
to having characters like the wise fool. I respect Kurosawa as a filmmaker,
but I simply think he is lying here. In addition, of Shakespeare's best
known plays, I like KING LEAR the least. Lear goes through such histrionics
that even the greatest actors are forced to give a performance that has the
bouquet of overripe ham.
If you know the story of KING LEAR, you already know most of the story
of RAN. Lord Ichimonji Hidetora wishes to divide his kingdom among his
three sons (not daughters as in LEAR). This leads to tragic chaos ("ran" is
Japanese for "chaos"). As Hidetora realizes his mistakes he looks paler and
greyer. He sits in a field with a trance-like stare as his fool (played by
Peter, a famous Japanese transvestite) tries to coax him into action.
Tatsuya Nakadai's histrionics as the Japanese Lear rival those of Albert
Finney's Sir in THE DRESSER.
The film has two beautifully staged battles scenes with incredible
color. One is a bloody massacre done silently to music in a manner
reminiscent of the film ROYAL HUNT OF THE SUN. Each is staged in exquisite
detail. Also of interest is a subplot involving a manipulative woman. The
most enjoyable scene of the film involves her and a speech about foxes.
(Those who have seen the film will know which scene this is; those who
haven't can rest assured I have not just spoiled the scene for you.) The
film is a delight as long as Lord Hidetora is not on the screen. I think my
natural prejudice for Kurosawa and against KING LEAR balance out and I would
give RAN a +2 on the -4 to +4 scale.
Now for a little piece of heresy. For me Kurosawa's crowning
achievement will not be RAN but his previous film, KAGEMUSHA. RAN lacks the
historical scope and the enthralling story of its direct predecessor. It is
hard to appreciate a film seen on video as much as one seen on a really wide
screen, and in spite of that KAGEMUSHA still strikes me as the more stunning
film. If I am disappointed in RAN, it may be because I was hoping for
another KAGEMUSHA. If you are given the choice of renting KAGEMUSHA or
seeing RAN on the wide screen, well, you know what I'd recommend.
Mark R. Leeper
...ihnp4!mtgzz!leepercs111olg@ucla-cs.UUCP (02/05/86)
In article <1629@mtgzz.UUCP> leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) writes: >the story is very much borrowed from KING LEAR. At least that >was what was said at first. Now I hear that it is based on a traditional >Japanese story and only during production were the parallels to KING LEAR >pointed out. I am a little sorry to hear Kurosawa make that claim because >the plot is too similar to KING LEAR, incident for incident and right down >to having characters like the wise fool. I respect Kurosawa as a filmmaker, >but I simply think he is lying here. I've heard that Kurosawa has been talking of making "King Lear" for over a decade and has stated that RAN *IS* based on "King Lear"... One of inetersting minor sub-plots of RAN was about a role and significance of Buhddism and the false security of faith.
leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) (02/10/86)
I believe where I read that Kurosawa was disclaiming LEAR as a source was a newspaper article reprinted outside the theater. I can't swear that this was where I heard it, but it seems that I read it about the time that I heard it. Regardless of where I heard it, I am beginning to doubt that it is true.