Akira Kurosawa, known among ardent film fans by the well-deserved moniker "The Master" has been a profound influence on the state of modern film, and everything from "Star Wars" to "A Fistful of Dollars" owes a debt to his immeasurable contribution. Among his extensive filmography there are actually several films that were loose but very well-executed and beautiful adaptations of Shakespeare's works; the best of these, and the film that is often cited as Kurosawa's final masterpiece, is the vibrant and colorful "RAN" (pronounced "Rahn"), which was released in 1985 and is based on the Bard's classic "King Lear". At the time it was the most expensive Japanese film ever produced, and it is an epic for sure; the color (an element that people were skeptical of with Kurosawa, since he was known for black and white) is breahtaking. Some of even the most violent scenes have a tinge of beauty because of the palette that was chosen. And the direction is different for Kurosawa; a lot less close ups and many more wide shots, but this change shows that Kurosawa is just as potent from a distance.
The play, like "Lear", deals with an elderly warlord who divides his kingdom among his offspring, only to see this decision lead to chaos, disruption, and disorder. However, there is a key element that is changed; Hideotora, the Lear figure in this film version, is not an honorable man as Lear is. The thing that makes "Lear" the ultimate tragedy is the fact that he is undeserving of all of the sorrow and emotional torment he endures in the play. On the other hand, Hideotora has been responsible for numerous rapes, murders, and other acts of despicable violence in order to claim that which he possesses. As a result the overreaching message of the play and the film adaptation are both good but starkly different; "Lear" is a tragedy about the unfortunate and needless emotional ruin of an experienced elderly man, and a commentary on how the elderly generation is easily dismissed by the younger one once the younger generation has the power it craves. "Ran" is about how the sins of the father will be passed on to the child, and can lead to the destruction of both in the process. Hideotora's ruthlessness is what dooms himself and his beloved childrfen, and Hideotora only realizes this once it is inevitably too late, and that is the ultimate tragic element of his particular story.
This spin on the story is framed against the backdrop of feuding samurai warriors and political scheming. there's even an appearance by a truly evil, ghastly woman Lady Kaede who echoes elements of Lady Macbeth, and gives a very expressive but minimalist performance that is unnerving without being showy. It's roots are in Shakespeare but it never forgets to make the material feel alive and maintains the spirit of Shakespearean tragedy without taking many of the pratfalls of the era.
So Can I Watch This Instead of Reading the Play?
No. Well, let me preface this; definitely watch "Ran". It really is a remarkable piece of cinematic art, and the costuming and battle sequences are astounding even 25 years later. However, if you are watching this instead of reading "Lear" and expecting not to look like a fool on your next book report, you are sorely mistaken. The film is clearly based on "King Lear" but the direction the play is taken on the screen version is starkly different, and even the ultimate message both stories are trying to convey are not really alike at all. "Lear" is a tale of how evil things happen to decent yet foolish people, and "RAN" is about how evil people will see their sins replicated and magnified in their offspring. As a piece of film art its a masterpiece; as a straight adaptation, it really only uses the actual play as the framework on which the director's own vision of the story was built, and therefore, watch it in reference to its Shakespeare ties with this fact firmly in thought.
And for those who have never seen a glimpse of how "RAN" looks as a film, here is a really lovely fan-made trailer:
No comments:
Post a Comment