316 Ran

Message

lord_clyde · #51 Post by **lord_clyde** » Tue Aug 30, 2005 3:56 pm

Release of the year. Period.

I'm with you there. I can't think of a movie this good Criterion has released this year.

Taketori Washizu · #52 Post by **Taketori Washizu** » Tue Aug 30, 2005 6:36 pm

I think Kagemusha, Ugetsu and Pickpocket are on par with Ran, for different reasons.

ByMarkClark.com · #53 Post by **ByMarkClark.com** » Wed Aug 31, 2005 8:22 am

Kurosawa is my favorite director. I've collected all his films, in one format or another, and definitely plan on adding the CC RAN to my collection (upgrading from the Masterworks Edition). However, I don't consider RAN one of Kurosawa's finest. It's very good, but not in the same league as masterpieces like SEVEN SAMURAI, IKIRU, YOJIMBO, RASHOMON, etc. from his 50s and 60s heyday. I would also disagree with the assertion that RAN will be the best film Criterion releases in 2005.

Off the top of my head, UGETSU, JULES AND JIM, THE RIVER, CASQUE D'OR, AU HASARD BALTHAZAR and HEAVEN CAN WAIT (and probably a few others that I'm forgetting) are better films, as well as more historically significant and influential.

Don't get me wrong -- I'm delighted that the CC is finally (I hope!) going to give RAN the high-quality presentation it deserves. But let's not get carried away.

Oh, sure. In terms of presentation, extras, etc., RAN could be the best of the year. We'll find out. I was only taking issue with the "this is the greatest movie Criterion has released all year!" assertion.

tavernier · #54 Post by **tavernier** » Fri Nov 04, 2005 3:17 pm

Some specifics on the new RAN set (which I just got to see):

- the print looks great, of course; I haven't pulled out my Wellspring and Warner R2 discs for comparison yet.
- the commentary by Stephen Prince expands upon his Wellspring commentary
- Sidney Lumet's 15-minute interview is good but not essential
- the Marker film "A.K." is in 16x9.
- 10-minute interview with star Tatsuya Nakadai is insightful and his anecdotes about filming (including nearly getting burned to death in the climactic battle scene) are priceless
- 30-minute excerpt from the "It's Wonderful to Create" series is another good addition
- the 35-minute storyboard reconstruction shows how vivid Kurosawa's imagination was, whether he was painting or directing
- the 28-page booklet includes Michael Wilmington's appreciation and the texts of two short interviews with Kurosawa and composer Toru Takemitsu (whose score, I think, is his best ever)

In other words, another first-rate Criterion.

unclehulot · #55 Post by **unclehulot** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 12:30 am

The Wellspring release was the second US DVD release, after Fox Lorber's truly abominable effort. This is where personal opinion comes in: I much prefer the film-like Wellspring DVD release to the sharper, DVD-like French and UK releases (which the Criterion release is very unlikely to improve on, by the way). On my aging Sony Wega 32" screen, the Wellspring DVD has a painterly like quality, a very rich (over-rich) palette similar to Del Toro Devil's Backbone DVD picture - this seems to me to be a lucky accident in that some DVDs just look different to the common herd of releases.

Are you watching it on a progressive setup? If not, I suppose you're lucky in a sense.... on a progressive setup the flickering drives me freakin' batty! But I'm not going to set things to interlaced just to forgive a defectively done transfer...... of course, every one is entitled to their opinion, but after having spent the bucks to "upgrade" from the Fox Lorber atrocity, and having this Wellspring dangled on that screwy Amazon exclusive collector's set before it was offered seperately, I'm not inclined to cut these guys slack. By the way, I saw the Wellspring theatrical print, which claimed to be a "restoration", and THAT looked like crap too.....thank GOD someone else owns the rights to this film now!

FilmFanSea · #56 Post by **FilmFanSea** » Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:49 am

First review is up at DVD Movie Central

The Invunche · #57 Post by **The Invunche** » Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:06 am

Video ***1/2

I've waited for years hoping for a Criterion release of this title, and it was worth the wait. Kurosawa's film is a cornucopia of colors, and at long last, they've been rendered the way they should on DVD. Images are sharp and striking, detail level is strong throughout. Occasionally, there is a touch of noticeable grain, but it's very slight...I almost feel bad not giving this a full four star rating. The overall effect is truly stunning. If I had my way, no studio but Criterion would touch Kurosawa's films on disc.

I expected nothing less.

solaris72 · #58 Post by **solaris72** » Wed Nov 09, 2005 2:24 pm

DVD Movie Central wrote:Occasionally, there is a touch of noticeable grain, but it's very slight...I almost feel bad not giving this a full four star rating.

I think it's a little ridiculous for a reviewer to rate the image quality of a DVD transfered from film lower because of "a touch of noticeable grain". I guess it would surprise that reviewer to find out that the 35mm print of Ran I saw at the Harvard Film Archive in May also had "a touch of noticeable grain."

#59 Post by **cdnchris** » Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:44 pm

Most DVD sites are aiming at the technophiles who like DVDs that show off their $80,000 set up. Something like A Bug's Life would get 4/4 most likely because it's crystal clear (obviously, though, because it comes from a digital source.) Ran would get, by the looks of it, a 3.5/4, and yes it's because of the grain, because the image isn't as clean as A Bug's Life. It's not saying that the transfer on Ran isn't any good (it is praising it still after all), it's just that they have a benchmark and they can't rate the image for Ran to be the same as A Bug's Life just because it doesn't look as good in comparison.

#60 Post by **Mr Sausage** » Wed Nov 09, 2005 10:53 pm

Also there should not be much importance put into a number rating; the important stuff, the meat, is in the actual description. The number is pretty meaningless next to that, as this particular review attests.

#61 Post by **kinjitsu** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 12:04 am

I think that if someone reviews an older film they should factor in the age of the film when considering the quality of the transfer, and to compare the quality of a CGI-generated animated transfer with a new digital transfer of a film like Ran, or even Seven Samurai, for that matter, seems ludicrous. Besides, that "touch of noticeable grain" is not an anomaly, but a naturally inherent element of the medium. After all, we are talking about celluloid. To say the transfer is excellent for its age seems apt, but shave points because it doesn't have the crispness of a film made in the last few years is a bit unfair.

#62 Post by **cdnchris** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 1:04 am

It is unfair, but technically I can see where it's coming from. In the sense of showing off your system, Bugs Life will still look better than Ran. It still doesn't bother me at all, though. I'm positive, after the nice image for Kagemusha (and that still positive review for Ran), that Ran will look sweet! At least better than that Masterworks DVD. Yikes! And as Sausage said, the grades are really meaningless. They're more for the people that just skim through (who are more than likely the people more concerned with how nice the image looks on their TV, not whether it's the best the film has ever looked.)

Gigi M. · #63 Post by **Gigi M.** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 9:44 am

Back cover is up:

Here

tasog37 · #64 Post by **tasog37** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 1:04 am

Review is up at dvdtalk

I can't wait.

jorencain · #65 Post by **jorencain** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 8:25 am

I can't wait either. What's with the Kagemusha-bashing in the review, though?? I didn't like Kagemusha's score either, but damn!

Stuart Galbraith IV wrote:Kurosawa famously said later that he regarded Kagemusha, despite all its acclaim, as a mere warm-up to Ran and, truth be told, Kagemusha fails in fundamental ways that Ran does not. Grievously miscast after the sudden firing of Shintaro Katsu, for whom the picture was written, it suffered from notably bad acting on the part of last-minute replacement Tatsuya Nakadai (made all the more painful when one considers how great Toshiro Mifune might have been), an awful score, and overbearing desire to hammer home its Theme at the expense of all else.

After Kagemusha, Ran then is a revelation.

blindside8zao · #66 Post by **blindside8zao** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 6:21 pm

I dont know but I need to brush up on my Kurosawa. Still need to see a lot of his, including ikiru, red beard, sanjuro, and yojimbo. I need to buy these instead of Ran, but I guarantee I won't be able to resist the temptation of trading my masterworks in for this.

Michael Kerpan · #67 Post by **Michael Kerpan** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 8:14 pm

The "Red Beard" DVD is gorgeous (and so is the film). I'm not nearly so big a fan of "Ikiru" -- and the DVD is decent, but not so good looking as some of the other recent Criterion AK releases (even "Stray Dog", which is older, looks better).

blindside8zao · #68 Post by **blindside8zao** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 12:45 am

so, after making this post, I go downstairs in my dorm to attend the "Taste of the World: Japan" program they're doing. While waiting on the food I comment, "You guys should show a samurai movie." The RA goes, "yeah, we're showing Yojimbo."

So, I watched Yojimbo amidst a good deal of talking the whole time and thoroughly enjoyed the visual compositions. There was too much noise to enjoy anything else so I'll have to wait and rent them.

Thanks for the advice on the films. I have always been paranoid of buying those three because of the talk on re-releases. I wasn't aware it would happen with Sanjuro and Yojimbo, though, so I'll just rent and wait.

As for Stray Dog, I forgot to mention I had not seen that one either. Bad Sleep Well will also be a first for me. I rented Dreams and saw the first two dreams and the DVd messed up after that. I was very dissappointed as the visuals were really pulling me in. The long shot of the little boy standing by the large wooden entrance at the beginning of the film really was something special, in terms of a shot for me. There was something very subtle that I picked up on there, some sort of compositional thrill. Will have to go back to this one, too.

TedW · #69 Post by **TedW** » Tue Nov 22, 2005 5:37 pm

Excellent -- though there was really nothing wrong with the Warners R2 and I had the Marker piece already. I'm a completist, though. Haven't checked out the commentary yet. Definitely worth owning (if you don't have the R2 already).

che-etienne · #70 Post by **che-etienne** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 7:27 am

Considering that the commentary is I hear the same as on the Wellspring (I'm talking about the Prince one), I can't wait. That commentary is truly one of the finest on a film I've ever had the pleasure of listening to. Prince really has quite a lot of incite to share.

#71 Post by **zedz** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:26 pm

Beaver review reports no cropping. The comparison is an eye-opener, with the different editions exhibiting an appalling range of artificial colouring and boosted brightness.

(And it had never occurred to me before that "Ran" would be rendered in the Cyrillic alphabet as "PAH" - thereby reducing at a blow these major upheavals in Japanese history to the status of a hissy fit.)

tasog37 · #72 Post by **tasog37** » Fri Nov 25, 2005 12:20 pm

Oh man, I am so excited!

I just got back from Best Buy of all places, where I found this title sitting on display for $27! Not a bad price at all, I thought!

I can't believe I found it at Best Buy, never would have expected that.

I haven't had time to check it out yet, but I'm really looking forward to it tonight.

benm · #73 Post by **benm** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 12:26 am

can someone tell me if i'm correct to wonder how one can explain the first large battle where hidetaro and his men are attacked by his two sons and supposedly he only has 30 men with him and yet it's this huge battle with lots of blood and hundreds of men on both of the brothers' sides and it drags on for a long time.

colinr0380 · #74 Post by **colinr0380** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 4:56 am

benm wrote:can someone tell me if i'm correct to wonder how one can explain the first large battle where hidetaro and his men are attacked by his two sons and supposedly he only has 30 men with him and yet it's this huge battle with lots of blood and hundreds of men on both of the brothers' sides and it drags on for a long time.

I would have thought of it more as a rout than a battle as Hidetora only sees something is wrong when the defences are breached. There is also the battle between Jiro and Taro for power with Jiro being shot (which is why you see no more yellow banners after that sequence - his army has been absorbed into Taro's). The actual battle is very short and the rest is really the aftermath and burning of the castle. .. wait why am I explaining this? "It drags on for a long time"? It is one of the most powerful scenes in all cinema!!!

benm · #75 Post by **benm** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 1:31 pm

my point is not that it's not interesting but that it seems to carry on way too long for what appears to be an attack of hundreds of soldiers against less than 30.

there's multiple scenes where dozens of infantry men are shooting at the castle and yet 3-4 upstairs seem to live on and on.

the only reasoning i can think, if this is indeed an entirely reflexive scene, is that kurosawa is trying to show how incompetent hidetaro's sons are.