RAN

[m.r.leeper]

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!leeper

[cs11...@ucla-cs.uucp]

In article <16...@mtgzz.UUCP> lee...@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.

[m.r.leeper]

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.