criterionforum.org

I remember just a few gags in King Lear and while he was in a lot of scenes he really didn't do anything. I may be wrong though since I haven't read it in about ten years.

knives wrote: Kagemusha is my last hope for good color.

Best of luck-- I have almost as little use for Kagemusha as I do for Ran (though it has some decent moments). I actually find Dodesuka-den more interesting (it's flaws aside) than those two epics. These films, and Madadayo, etc, just totally put me off of the hope of finding any connection to color AK... for this reason I've not bothered w Rhap In August or Dreams.

Smart of you for Rhap in August. Dodes actually isn't that bad. Just horribly mediocre and terrible compared to stuff like Seven Samurai or Ikiru.

knives wrote:I remember just a few gags in King Lear and while he was in a lot of scenes he really didn't do anything. I may be wrong though since I haven't read it in about ten years.

The Fool is pretty important up through the middle of Act 3 (especially important in the scene on the blasted heath) and then (without any explanation) vanishes thereafter.

HerrSchreck wrote:

knives wrote: Kagemusha is my last hope for good color.

Best of luck-- I have almost as little use for Kagemusha as I do for Ran (though it has some decent moments). I actually find Dodesuka-den more interesting (it's flaws aside) than those two epics. These films, and Madadayo, etc, just totally put me off of the hope of finding any connection to color AK... for this reason I've not bothered w Rhap In August or Dreams.

Parts of Dreams are rather good, other parts are ... not.

I enjoyed (moderately) much of Rhapsody in August (in fact, much more than I expected to). But its concluding scene is a total "fail" in every respect. Too bad. Overall, Rhapsody was closer in tone to Yoji Yamada's films than to anything else by Kurosawa (though not nearly as good as the typical non-Tora-san Yamada film). I preferred it (by a good margin) to Dodesukaden.

Michael Kerpan wrote:

knives wrote:I remember just a few gags in King Lear and while he was in a lot of scenes he really didn't do anything. I may be wrong though since I haven't read it in about ten years.

The Fool is pretty important up through the middle of Act 3 (especially important in the scene on the blasted heath) and then (without any explanation) vanishes thereafter.

Rather unfortunately vanishes, if you ask me.

kaujot wrote:

Michael Kerpan wrote:

knives wrote:I remember just a few gags in King Lear and while he was in a lot of scenes he really didn't do anything. I may be wrong though since I haven't read it in about ten years.

The Fool is pretty important up through the middle of Act 3 (especially important in the scene on the blasted heath) and then (without any explanation) vanishes thereafter.

Rather unfortunately vanishes, if you ask me.

Not really needed in Shakespeare's play after that point. But Kozintsev comes up with a nice way of fitting him back in (without actually changing anything) in his version.

I need to re-read Lear, or maybe watch and good adaptation. Any good suggestions. Maybe something like the 90s Richard III or Titus.

Michael Kerpan wrote:Not really needed in Shakespeare's play after that point. But Kozintsev comes up with a nice way of fitting him back in (without actually changing anything) in his version.

No, he wasn't needed I suppose. But he was funny, and the more humor in that play (especially in its later pages) the better.

knives wrote:I need to re-read Lear, or maybe watch and good adaptation. Any good suggestions. Maybe something like the 90s Richard III or Titus.

Well, if you're looking for something of a "radical" version of Lear, the best is probably My Kingdom, starring Richard Harris and Lynn Redgrave. It's a sort of gangster adaptation. I also enjoyed King of Texas, starring Patrick Stewart, but then I'm a sucker for just about anything set in Texas and done with a modicum of talent.

A very good, more "literal" or traditional adaptation is the BBC-produced version starring Ian Holm and directed by Richard Eyre. A DVD is available.

knives wrote:I need to re-read Lear, or maybe watch and good adaptation. Any good suggestions. Maybe something like the 90s Richard III or Titus.

Grigori Kozintsev's 1969 Russian version (based on Boris Pasternak's famed -- in Russia -- translation) is probably the best cinematic rendering of Shakespeare's play. One can get find a US release (non-anamorphic widescreen, issued by Facets) but the Ruscico PAL DVD may be better (but hard to find -- don't bother with the Ruscico NTSC one, however).

I don't even remotely see the need for added humor in the last couple of acts of King Lear.
;~{

The way this thread has gone off-topic in itself seems to me an indication that "Ran" might be the far more interesting film (though more controversial) than "Dodes'kaden", but anyway...

Likes and dislikes aside, and also not considering that I have to speak up for Takemitsu's score for "Ran" (which I find gorgeous), I simply don't agree with Napier that "Ran" is "less personal" than the works up to "Red Beard". Yes, it has grandiosity of the utmost scale in places, but what makes this film so fascinating for me is precisely the combination of spectacle and what I perceive as the most bleak, and also most disturbing expression of Kurosawa's world view, which had changed at the time compared to his 50s work, and would change again with the late trilogy of films. Despite its visual splendour, "Ran" clearly expresses Kurosawa's fear of humanity falling into the abyss (literally at one point) of utter self-destruction; the heroic attitudes which were already in question in "Yojimbo" or even already in "Seven Samurai" are now shown as futile or non-existent in the face of a meaningless world devastated by war and party politics. For me, "Ran" has never been a period piece in the strict sense of the word, but was a commentary on the (political) fears and attitudes of the 1980s (which I remember very well). I would even dare to call it one of his most personal films, but without falling into the trap of dreaming himself away into the sentimentalisms of the three later films, which I like nevertheless, but which are much more prone to criticism for obvious reasons. Perhaps I tend to be too forgiving with respect to "Dreams", "Rhapsody" and "Madadayo".

HerrSchreck wrote:I have almost as little use for Kagemusha as I do for Ran (though it has some decent moments). I actually find Dodesuka-den more interesting (it's flaws aside) than those two epics. These films, and Madadayo, etc, just totally put me off of the hope of finding any connection to color AK... for this reason I've not bothered w Rhap In August or Dreams.

What exactly is it you find flawed or off-putting in colour Kurosawa? Though I can understand anyone who doesn't like the last three films, I simply can't believe that you don't at least like "Dersu Uzala".

Michael Kerpan wrote:I don't even remotely see the need for added humor in the last couple of acts of King Lear.

No, it absolutely isn't needed, but it's one of those Shakespeares, like Titus, that really push me as they go on with their level of violence (in the case of Titus) and/or utter despair. Humor would make it worse in terms of literary/cinematic merit, but it would also make it a bit more sit-through-able for me.

That said, I'll watch any competently performed version of Lear. It's just so draining if done properly.

Tommaso wrote:I simply can't believe that you don't at least like "Dersu Uzala".

I was all prepared to like this -- but found it it mainly bored me -- surprisingly, it made less impressive use of its rugged scenery than Kulevshov's Pa zakonu / By the Law (1926), Kozintsev and Trauberg's Odna / Alone (1931) and Kalatozov's Neotpravlennoye pismo / Unsent Letter (1959) -- despite its color and widescreen format.

Okay, maybe less personal was the wrong term to use. As I'm sure AK viewed each of his films as his children. In that, they are truly labors of love. You can see and feel the care and emotion he feel's for all the characters in Dodes'ka-den in almost every frame.The thing that got me the most,(and I'm an AK fan), is that I just couldn't find myself caring for the character's as much as I thought the director thought we should. I still think it's a beautiful film, and I've only seen it once mind you. But this has to be the most depressing AK film I've seen. And I've seen them all now. The film was long enough, and it seemed it could have used another 100 minutes to fully get us into the characters. As for color AK, Dersu will always be my favorite. Has anyone noticed that Dersu has many a similar quality to Lucas's most lovable Star Wars character?

I felt that (ultimately) Dodesukaden was remarkably condescending to its cast of misfits (which is not how I felt about Lower Depths).

Exactly MK,the ability of "The Lower Depths",to bring you to tears, is undeniable. It's eternally beautiful.(Renoir's version too).But not once,in Dodes'ka-den, did I even smell the rain.

I found the characters in Dodesukaden utterly unbelievable.

Post-Mifune Kurosawa reminds me a lot of post-Wada Ichikawa.

Somehow, the generation of the greatest works of these two directors seems to have been directly tied to the presence of a particular collaborator (an actor in one case, a writer in the other).

kaujot wrote:

Michael Kerpan wrote:I don't even remotely see the need for added humor in the last couple of acts of King Lear.

No, it absolutely isn't needed, but it's one of those Shakespeares, like Titus, that really push me as they go on with their level of violence (in the case of Titus) and/or utter despair. Humor would make it worse in terms of literary/cinematic merit, but it would also make it a bit more sit-through-able for me.

That said, I'll watch any competently performed version of Lear. It's just so draining if done properly.

Personally I love it when Shakespeare, or really anyone, can give me that great emotional kick. That's why I love Match Factory Girl so much. I can only see it every five months or so, but the feeling is so drained it's almost exciting.

Now that I think of it that might be a factor to why I don't enjoy Dodes or Ran. There's suppose to be this dread and horror to the film that AK really tries for but mostly fails out. Instead of wanting to lift up the underground man in Dodes, or what ever it is AK was trying for, all I could think was 'have I seen this in a July film before?' Probably not AK was shooting for.

Also thank you for the recommendations. Definitely going to hunt down the Russian and 'My Kingdom' versions.

I wouldn't call it a great emotional kick for me. It's more of a "Jesus, that was great but depressing" kick.

Didn't JLG do a version of King Lear with Woody Allen and Molly Ringwald?

kaujot wrote:I wouldn't call it a great emotional kick for me. It's more of a "Jesus, that was great but depressing" kick.

Lear's fool is maybe a bit too profound to be comical all of the time, but who doesn't find Edmund hilarious?

oldsheperd wrote:Didn't JLG do a version of King Lear with Woody Allen and Molly Ringwald?

Sort of. It's an adaptation of the first three pages of King Lear and then it sort of turns into a Jeanne d'Arc movie by the end. And there's feral models and Shakespeare's post-apocalyptic descendant and Godard sporting a haircut made of film strips, all of which were sadly missing in the source text

Michael Kerpan wrote:The Fool is pretty important up through the middle of Act 3 (especially important in the scene on the blasted heath) and then (without any explanation) vanishes thereafter.

Unless you count "And my poor fool is hanged" (but that's another kettle of fish!) It's often assumed that the Fool and Cordelia were played by the same boy, so there was a very practical reason for his early disappearance.

(See, this discussion has even gone off its original off-topic)

Tommaso wrote:

HerrSchreck wrote:I have almost as little use for Kagemusha as I do for Ran (though it has some decent moments). I actually find Dodesuka-den more interesting (it's flaws aside) than those two epics. These films, and Madadayo, etc, just totally put me off of the hope of finding any connection to color AK... for this reason I've not bothered w Rhap In August or Dreams.

What exactly is it you find flawed or off-putting in colour Kurosawa? Though I can understand anyone who doesn't like the last three films, I simply can't believe that you don't at least like "Dersu Uzala".

I'll reserve opinion on DUzala, because I havent seen it in a realllly long time-- but I find the other films mentioned offputting because they just don't work. They don't gel, jive, my mind wanders, there's something I find almost embarassing (these grand gestures that misfire, and the sincerity so sophomrically overblown) in them that I just can't put my finger on. It literally almost reads like AK went through a period where he was drafted and was badly wounded and when he came back to civilian life and started making films again it just wasn't the same.

Well, he sort of was, in a way, wasn't he? The depression, family loss, suicide attempt, etc.?