criterionforum.org

Just watched this again and started wondering about the original dialogue (not the translation). As I understand it, the Japanese spoken is somewhat formalized. But to what degree? Am I right in my assumption that Kurosawa did not take the lines from any official Japanese translation of the play? How does the spoken words sound to a modern Japanese? Normal, dated (as in from the 50's), or slightly (and deliberately) archaic (as in Hoaglund's use of the word "slay" instead of "kill")?

He went as free and easy with Shakespeare as he was with any of his other literary adaptations, so he definitely wasn't working directly from an official translation. However, he used period speak for all of his jidaigeki films. I just glanced through the booklet and according to Hoaglund this one's more authentic, vocabulary-wise, than something like Seven Samurai but with added poetics. Check out the essays, dude.

Oh, but I have. Of course I have. There seems to be some disagreement though, as the commentary track describes the language as modern, slightly formalized Japanese where as Hoaglund apparently finds it more archaic. I just wanted to hear what somebody fluent in Japanese (I know there are some on the board) thinks about it, how dated it feels today and in what way.

The Japanese in THRONE OF BLOOD is more or less the same Japanese used in all "jidai-geki" or period films: it uses modern Japanese grammar, a lexicon stripped of all foreign loanwords (which modern Japanese is chock to the gills with) and has a few archaic-sounding words thrown in for good measure. Filmmakers can't use the Japanese that was actually spoken during the periods depicted because then nobody would understand what the hell was being said--Japanese has undergone far more radical transformations over the centuries than English has. Whereas modern, untrained audiences can still sort of piece together what's being said in a play by Shakespeare, anything performed in 16th-century Japanese (Noh plays, for example) pretty much goes over the heads of all but specialist scholars in Japan.

The approach that a translator takes towards this invented "jidai-geki language" is largely a matter of taste. Having a slightly Shakespearean ring in the titles to a film that's based (however loosely) on Shakespeare is a perfectly legitimate approach in my opinion, as long as it doesn't go overboard. At any rate, it's no more or less legitimate than the invented language being used in the original.

Jimaku wrote:The Japanese in THRONE OF BLOOD is more or less the same Japanese used in all "jidai-geki" or period films: it uses modern Japanese grammar, a lexicon stripped of all foreign loanwords (which modern Japanese is chock to the gills with) and has a few archaic-sounding words thrown in for good measure. Filmmakers can't use the Japanese that was actually spoken during the periods depicted because then nobody would understand what the hell was being said--Japanese has undergone far more radical transformations over the centuries than English has. Whereas modern, untrained audiences can still sort of piece together what's being said in a play by Shakespeare, anything performed in 16th-century Japanese (Noh plays, for example) pretty much goes over the heads of all but specialist scholars in Japan.

Thanks for the brief survey of modern Japanese-- fascinating. One tends to think of English of the most whorish language on the face of the globe, and-- regardless of whether or not Japanese has truly per word-capita undergone a higher mean average of maintenance over the years-- that was a succinct little overview which surprised me.

As for the disc-- definitely a high point in the collection, and the two translations are a godsend because one (can't remember which, must pull it out) severely obfuscates the plot, whereas the other one makes the narrative immediately accessible to an occidental.

Thanks, Jimaku, for your very interesting and insightful post. This was exactely the sort of thing I was looking for.

I wanted to know your thoughts on a re-release of this movie. Though it's probably a fact that it's not going to happen nowhere in a near future, this is by far my favorite Kurosawa AND one of the movies that I'd like the most to see a new edition released. What do you think? Could it happen? When?

The current Criterion edition is quite good. What makes you think it can be improved?

It's a good edition alright, but there are no extras, and I don't really like the cover a lot. And this being my favorite Kurosawa, I wanted it to be given a fancy treatment. It's not that I'm not happy with it, I just think that it's not as great as other Criterion releases. I know that there are no plans at all of re-releasing it, but it there were, I'd really like it.

Dante Vescio wrote:It's a good edition alright, but there are no extras, and I don't really like the cover a lot. And this being my favorite Kurosawa, I wanted it to be given a fancy treatment. It's not that I'm not happy with it, I just think that it's not as great as other Criterion releases. I know that there are no plans at all of re-releasing it, but it there were, I'd really like it.

There is a good commentary and a good booklet, along with some notes by the subtitle creators and the trailer.

Maybe you bought a bootleg version that left these out?

one of the best covers in the collection, and good special features including the unique subtitles..."Two alternative subtitle translations: a new version from renowned Japanese-film translator Linda Hoaglund, and Kurosawa expert Donald Richie"

Some people ask for the moon when they already have the stars.

I'm not asking for anything. As I said, I'm happy with this edition.
I just wanted to know your thoughts regarding it.
I can see that I'm the only one here that thinks that though this is a good edition, Criterion HAS done a better job on other movies.

The only thing that might conceivably be "missing" from the current release is the Throne of Blood installment of It is Wonderful to Create. Other than that, this is a splendid edition.

kinjitsu wrote:The only thing that might conceivably be "missing" from the current release is the Throne of Blood installment of It is Wonderful to Create. Other than that, this is a splendid edition.

Exactly. Almost every Kurosawa movie has it and I think this one should too.

Dante Vescio wrote:

kinjitsu wrote:The only thing that might conceivably be "missing" from the current release is the Throne of Blood installment of It is Wonderful to Create. Other than that, this is a splendid edition.

Exactly. Almost every Kurosawa movie has it and I think this one should too.

Quite a few do not, in fact. Rashomon does not, for example, despite being another good release otherwise. Neither does Red Beard or Hidden Fortress. Personally, I don't see Criterion revisiting any of these four titles just to add the Wonderful to Create extras. Perhaps they'll add the entries for those films when they revisit High and Low...? (At any rate, I can't see myself buying Throne of Blood, Rashomon, or Red Beard just for an extra half-hour documentary.)

I originally imagined that the Seven Samurai re-release would be a four disc set, including the episodes from the Wonderful to Create series missing from the already fine discs of Rashomon, The Hidden Fortress, Red Beard, and Throne of Blood.

Hopefully, they'll do something like that, rather than release new editions of these already superb discs.

I think it's just that Criterion only has limited resources. They're not going to re-release something unless they can make a huge improvement, and that would take a great deal of effort. Meaning that new stuff gets delayed.

What it comes down to is... would you rather have a spiffier version of Throne of Blood in a nice digipack, or having the rest of Kurosawa's films released.

Perhaps a more realistic question;

Which would you prefer; a better Throne Of Blood, or more rereleases of MoC movies?

Personally, for those who already own the older Criterion, I think a better Throne Of Blood is a bad idea for one simple reason; there's so much fog in this movie that we're only going to get an adequate transfer once someone releases it in HD. I'm perfectly happy with my current DVDs of, say, Rashomon or Ran, and haven't much interest in upgrading to HD. But, Criterion's Throne Of Blood looks terrible in the fog scenes (probably depending on your set-up,) and, given the nature of the technology, no SD remaster is ever going to be good enough to justify a 'double dip' (knowing that I will, very definitely, be getting this in HD as soon as someone releases it)

As for extras, I genuinely did think there was a lot that could have been included. For a Criterion release, I would have expected some kind of documentary on Kabuki theatre to be almost a given, maybe even some footage of a Kabuki play being performed. Same goes for costume-sketches and such. The whole reason people pay extra for a Criterion release is (aside from visual quality) for all this kind of useful background information. Not just details on were each scene was filmed, etc. but actual substance to the extras that will enable one to better appreciate the themes and purpose of the film.

Succinctly, the Criterion Throne Of Blood is the one 'Special Edition' were I've found some reading about the film on the internet to be far more informative than the Special Features themselves.

The Criterion discs were released before the Japanese DVDs, hence the Toho Masterworks documentaries were not even made at the time.

That settles it then, at least in part.

Dante Vescio wrote:

kinjitsu wrote:The only thing that might conceivably be "missing" from the current release is the Throne of Blood installment of It is Wonderful to Create. Other than that, this is a splendid edition.

Exactly. Almost every Kurosawa movie has it and I think this one should too.

Saying that something "might conceivably be missing" is a far cry from saying that it needs it, nor is it an affirmation that this should be re-released simply because it hasn't a particular documentary.

Throne of Blood, along with the other Kurosawa discs mentioned by tryavna are fine and stand on their own without the documentaries.

Ping Chong is adapting Kurosawa's adaptation into a stage play for the 75th Anniversary of the Oregon Shakespeare Festival, in 2010. Very exciting! Here's a report on the news.

Caught this twice on IFC a few months back, once live and then a week later on DVR. Until a Blu-ray or high-def master is commissioned blocky artifacts in the many foggy scenes of "Throne of Blood" will continue to be an eyesore in Kurosawa's sumptuous visuals. Toshiro Mifune and Akira Kubo might be billed as the stars of this re-imagining of “Macbeth” (and they're both quite good) but it's Isuzu Yamada that delivers the movie's knockout performance (IMO). Her portrayal of a manipulating wife/queen and instigator of the ideas that lead to her (and her man's) downfall is simply masterful. Symbolism and foreign influences have always been part of Kurosawa’s arsenal of filmmaking ideas and tools. He uses them all in “Throne of Blood” (high/low angles, brightly-lit spirits, thick fog blinding the leads to run away from and back to the camera, etc.) to great effect. Like “Citizen Kane” though this is one of those 'IMPORTANT' films that my cinema-loving half of the brain respects and admires while my other half doesn't really feel the desire to see it again.

Does anybody know which translated subtitled version of "Throne of Blood" the cable channels are airing, Richie's or Hoaglund's? The dialogue seemed fine to me but I'd like to know if I should rent the movie again to check out the alternate translation. Does it really make that much of a difference? Not going to buy this ("Ikiru" is my type of rewatchable Kurosawa flick ) but certainly wouldn't mind seeing it again.

dad1153 wrote:Caught this twice on IFC a few months back, once live and then a week later on DVR. Until a Blu-ray or high-def master is commissioned blocky artifacts in the many foggy scenes of "Throne of Blood" will continue to be an eyesore in Kurosawa's sumptuous visuals.

The Criterion release is based on an HD transfer, which I would imagine looks a good deal better than an IFC broadcast.

Re: The translations for the opening scene chants.

Richie's translation is very mundane, whereas Hoaglund's translation leans powerfully on the Buddhistic fatalism which is germane to the film as a whole. This is also the case with the Witch's songs. My impression is that Ritchie dumbed down his translations for Throne of Blood.