View Larger Image |
Ran (Masterworks Edition) Actors: Tatsuya Nakadai, Akira Terao, Jinpachi Nezu, Daisuke Ryu Director: Akira Kurosawa Number of Items: 1 Picture Format: Anamorphic Widescreen Format: Color, Widescreen, Dolby Audience Rating: R (Restricted) Running Time: 160 minutes Studio: Wellspring Media, In Aspect Ratio: 1.85:1 Region Code: 1 Product Group: DVD Release Date: 2003-04-15 Buy from Amazon |
 ""Masterworks Edition" DVD is badly botched"The "Ran: Masterworks Edition" DVD could have been much better, but was badly botched by the producer (Wellspring Media). By far the biggest problem is the so-called "digital restoration," which consists of two things: running the whole movie through a miscalibrated digital denoising filter, and increasing the contrast and color saturation to cartoonish levels. The latter change can at least be undone at the playback end, but the former does irreparable damage to the image. Most of the image problems mentioned here by other reviewers are due to this "restoration," not to defects in the new transfer. The damage from the digital denoising is severe and present throughout the film. It's easily recognized with experience, or when the denoised image is shown next to the pristine original. But since I don't have that luxury here, I'll just mention some of the more easily seen symptoms. Clouds seem slightly unnatural, as if hand-painted, because their delicate wispiness is interpreted as noise and removed (see for example 0:11:45 and 2:18:00). Thin bright lines against dark backgrounds "sparkle" or "twinkle" like stars; this is caused by cross-frame denoising, which misinterprets movement of sharp edges due to frame jitter or camera movement as transient noise (see for example the sunray pattern in the Ichimonji crest beginning at around 0:04:30). Fast-moving objects shrink or disappear completely for brief intervals, again due to cross-frame denoising (see for example Kyoami's legs as he runs, at around 0:09:15). The new _Metropolis (1927)_ DVD includes a restoration featurette which explains why computerized denoising was not used in the restoration of that film, and shows examples of some of the problems described above. And denoising was only considered for that film because the available prints were badly in need of restoration. _Ran_ does not need restoration, which makes this unnecessary damage all the more tragic. Many DVDs released by Central Park Media have also been defaced in this way, notably the new two-disc edition of Takahata's _Grave of the Fireflies_. I think the same company is responsible for all of these botched "restorations," since the modus operandi is always the same: moderate to severe denoising artifacts, grossly oversaturated colors, and a "restoration demo" comparing the restored version to a previous video release in a distinctive splitscreen format. There are many other problems with this DVD, though they are minor in comparison to the above: The new transfer was apparently made from a theatrical print rather than a higher-fidelity interpositive, since it contains reel change marks (flashing black circles at the upper right corner of the frame). Surely such a beautiful film deserves better than this. There are several embarrassing mistakes in the subtitles which would have been caught by a human being, but not by a software spelling checker. Apparently the producers of this DVD labor under the delusion that proofreading, like restoration, can be done by computer. The MPEG-2 encoding was done improperly, with the result that the image switches randomly between progressive (film) and interlaced (video) encodings, instead of remaining film throughout. This causes annoying random blurring and sharpening during playback on many DVD players, noticeable mainly in still scenes. (See for example the long shots of Hidetora starting around 0:50:00; please note that this problem is not visible on all players.) Some players can be reconfigured to mask this problem (on software players choose "bob" rather than "weave" or "automatic"), but this will reduce the playback quality of properly-encoded DVDs. Technical incompetence aside, this is not a bad disc. The subtitle translation is problematic, but I've seen much worse; I can't complain too much here. What's lost in the translation is probably insignificant compared to cultural details which no translation could hope to explain. A short "production notes" extra fills in a few of those details but neglects others. Two uninteresting trailers for the film are included. The "restoration demo" is good for seething at in impotent anger, and also for seeing how Kurosawa probably intended the film to appear, colorwise, before it was "enhanced" for this DVD. There are two commentary tracks. One, by Stephen Prince, focuses on narrative technique and is clearly intended for students. It's quite good. The other is by Peter Grilli, who was present on the set during part of the shooting of _Ran_; he talks about his experiences there and his opinions of Kurosawa and his work. Though sometimes interesting, Grilli's comments make no sense as a commentary track since they're wholly unconnected to the action on screen. They should have been printed in a companion booklet. The film itself is a masterpiece, of course; even the shoddiest technical treatment can't mask its emotional impact. I would have given it five stars but for the problems with the DVD. This is the first non-Central Park Media DVD that I've seen to use this "digital restoration" process. I'm frightened that it will spread further. I urge anyone concerned by this to write to Wellspring Media and tell them that they could have produced a much better DVD, with less effort, by simply omitting the "restoration" step. If you decide not to buy the disc for this reason, tell them that too.  "Ran will outlast the naysayers"While reading the angry rant from the gentleman from Johannesburg, a question crossed my mind: Dear reviewer, when stating your case, is it asking too much that you get the most simple facts straight, or are you so consumed with unhinged vitriol that making assertions that are truthful is utterly beyond your capacity? Just wondering. You state - with some angry, seething "ALL-CAPS" thrown in - that Kurosawa's films were unpopular and "despised" in his home country. It fascinates me that a person would publicly embarrass themself by getting things so wrong. Where to start? 1952's "Ikiru" was such a huge popular success that it gave Kurosawa the clout to complete "Seven Samurai" - which ran over-schedule and over-budget - where it subsequently was a phenomenal box-office hit. Other huge popular successes included "The Hidden Fortress," "Yojimbo," and "Red Beard." In 1979, a group of Japanese critics and artists voted "Seven Samurai" the all-time greatest Japanese film, with over twice the votes of the runner-up, "Tokyo Story" (a fine, heartfelt film in its own right). Regarding Ran, the film is an epic, visionary masterwork that stands as a fitting culmination of Kurosawa's career. Although intelligent, well-reasoned dissenting opinions certainly exist, I'm afraid that such thunderous, fulminating hatred of the late Kurosawa such as appears on this page is not only misguided, but will take years off of one's lifespan. ""Ran" still awaiting a definitive edition on DVD""Ran" is one of my favorite films, and so eager was I to have it on disc that the predictably sub-par Fox Lorber edition was one of the first DVDs I acquired soon after we bought our first DVD player. Fox Lorber did their usual quick-and-dirty (but first-to-market) job, basing their crude transfer on a copy of the film that was anything but pristine and was in no sense "restored". Unlike the present edition, however, the subtitles were error-free and faithful to the original theatrical release of the film. Needless to say I eventually bought this version, too, and to say that the image and sound on this edition are an "improvement" over the Fox Lorber edition requires a great deal of qualification; it would be faster to say that they've been extensively processed but not necessarily improved in most respects, and I fully endorse Ben Rudiak-Gould's review of this DVD. My own less technically knowlegeable assessment is based on what I see and hear on this disc and what I saw and heard in the theatre when this "restoration" was screened theatrically a couple of years ago, compared with a still absolutely clear and distinct memory of my first theatrical experience of "Ran" in 1985 -- an experience which astounded me and profoundly enlarged my understanding of the possibilities of cinema. My hope is that some day Criterion will acquire the rights to produce their own version of "Ran"; one which, I'm confident, would finally do justice to this masterpiece in this medium. The history of "Ran" on DVD has been a sorry one, with the profiteers triumphing over those who sincerely love movies, especially this movie, and a more capable and ambitious writer than myself could almost discern apt points of comparison with the story of the House of Ichimonji and Shakespeare's tragedy of King Lear, on which it was based. In the meanwhile I have two editions of "Ran" sitting on my shelf, neither of which are are worthy of this immense work of art, for which they are but faded simulacra.  "The transfer is not that bad....ITS the FILM that SUCKS"Some people should really stop knitpicking. Get a life, really. All this moping about the destruction and disregard for Kurosawa's unfailing and precise "vision" (whatever the hell that's supposed to mean). We even get a technical expert (sounds like mumbo jumbo to me, buddy boy) further doen the page explaining to us what went wrong. Thanks for the two cents, bro. The man's films aren't that wonderful.... there's nothing too terribly Japanese about them (except for the uneassy superimposition the traditional lore, pomp and pageantry). Also: no American director would get away with filming only battles and their contexts. It's no surprise that vacuous 'thrill' artists like John Sturges and George Lucas used K's films as 'inspiration' for their empty Hollywood confections. There' just nothing else there. Would it surprise you to know that his films were despised and UNPOPULAR in JAPAN (!!). Patently overrated. That's how Kurosawa's unfathomable influence started, with a bunch of pseudo-art conscious Americans in the fifties confusing 'exoticism' with blatent and planned pandering to American tastes. Watch Ozu's "Tokyo Story" out on Criterion (at least we won't have too much moaning about THAT transfer, he?). Stop wasting your money on Kurosawa's one-note junk. "One of the most powerful movies I have seen"When I first saw Ran, it had a huge affect on me emotionally. I don't think any other film has left me with such feeling as this has. The characters, the cinematography, the use of colors, and just in general every thing that has made Kurosawa one of the greatest film makers to ever set foot on this earth. Scenes from this film will stick in your mind forever. The massacre of the lord's samurai (that music still haunts me like a ghost from the past) and his walk down the steps with the armies of gold and red departing aside like a river itself, the scenes of the countryside, the old fortress, and finally the classic Kurosawa "metaphor ending." In fact, I would go so far as to say that I like this film better than I do Shakespeare's "King Lear." (but that's my own personal opinion) This is a wonderful classic in Japanese film history, and (despite the review of the individual below, who must be an anti-scholar) shall remain so as long as the world turns. Kurosawa has left many precious gems for the next generations to admire. |
