Alright, settle in folks, because we’re diving deep into the mind of Akira Kurosawa today. Not one, but two of his films are under the microscope: 1985’s Ran, a sweeping historical tragedy, and 1990’s Dreams, a surreal, personal odyssey. Now, I know what you’re thinking: “Mike, these are old movies.” Yes, they are. But like a fine wine, good cinema only gets better with age. And these, my friends, are good cinema, even if one of them makes me want to pull my hair out.
Let’s start with Ran. It’s a story ripped straight from the history books, a brutal retelling of King Lear set in feudal Japan. It’s about an aging warlord, Hidetora Ichimonji, who foolishly divides his kingdom among his three sons, sparking a bloody civil war. The core of this story is raw, it grabs you by the throat and doesn’t let go. It’s a classic tale of ambition, betrayal, and the devastating consequences of pride. No recycled concepts here, just a good old fashioned tragedy executed with a mastery that’s rarely seen. Dreams, on the other hand, feels like a peek inside Kurosawa’s own subconscious. It’s an anthology film, a series of eight vignettes based on his own actual dreams. The core of each dream is kind of random, some profound, some utterly baffling.
The plot of Ran is straightforward, even with the historical setting and the complex family dynamics. There are no cheap twists, no unnecessary subplots. It’s a relentless march towards destruction, and every scene serves a purpose. The film holds you captive from the moment the old warlord makes his fateful decision to the very end. Dreams, however, is all over the place, as dreams tend to be. One minute you’re in a field of dancing sunflowers, the next you’re witnessing the horrors of nuclear war. The lack of a coherent narrative can be frustrating; it definitely tests my patience. It’s like reading a collection of short stories that are not really related.
Now, characters. In Ran, Tatsuya Nakadai as Hidetora is a force of nature. He embodies the arrogance and the vulnerability of a man losing everything. The supporting cast, the sons, the advisors, they all feel real, each with their own motivations and flaws. You are emotionally invested, even when you hate their choices. In Dreams, the characters are more symbolic, archetypes rather than fully fleshed-out people. They are there to serve the dream, not to create an emotional bond with the audience. The performances are fine, but they don’t hold a candle to the power of Ran’s cast.
Kurosawa’s direction in Ran is masterful. Every frame is a painting, the battle scenes are brutal and breathtaking, and the use of color is simply stunning. The shots are meaningful, every detail is there for a reason, and the way he uses the camera is amazing. The direction serves the story, enhancing the drama and the tragedy. In Dreams, the direction is more self-indulgent. It’s like Kurosawa decided to show off his visual ideas without worrying too much about the narrative. Some of the shots are beautiful, sure, but others feel pointless. It’s all about showing off, not serving the story.
The pacing of Ran is perfect. It never drags, every scene is essential to the story. There are scenes of intense action mixed with quieter, more reflective moments, and the editing seamlessly connects them. Dreams, on the other hand, suffers from a serious lack of pacing. Some dreams feel like they go on forever, while others end abruptly. It’s like Kurosawa had a bunch of ideas and just threw them together without thinking about how they would flow together. I could have edited at least two of those dreams out, and the film would have been better.
The music in Ran, by Toru Takemitsu, is haunting and powerful. It perfectly complements the visuals, amplifying the emotional impact of the story. The sound design is equally impressive, from the clashing swords to the howling wind. In Dreams, the music is more eclectic, as diverse as the dreams themselves. Some of it works, some of it doesn’t. The sound design often feels like it’s trying too hard to be artistic, distracting from the visuals. It’s like they added some random stuff to make it more dramatic.
Ran is a film that tries to say something big about the nature of power, the dangers of pride, and the futility of war. It’s a film that stays with you long after the credits roll. Dreams, well, it tries to say something about the human condition, but it’s all very personal, very abstract. It’s not always clear what Kurosawa is trying to say, and it doesn’t leave you with much to think about. It’s like a private journal, not a social commentary.
Ran is a solid example of a historical epic, a tragic drama done right. It delivers on all fronts: action, emotion, and social commentary. Dreams, on the other hand, feels like a missed opportunity. It’s like Kurosawa had a bunch of interesting ideas but didn’t know how to put them together. It’s not a standout in its genre, it’s just a mixed bag.
Critics and audiences generally praise Ran. It’s considered a masterpiece, and for good reason. It’s a film that has stood the test of time. Dreams, however, is more polarizing. Some find it profound, others find it pretentious. The general consensus seems to be that it’s interesting but not great.
The production design in Ran is incredible. The costumes, the sets, the landscapes, they all feel authentic. No CGI was used. It’s a visual feast, a testament to Kurosawa’s attention to detail. In Dreams, the production design is more hit-or-miss. Some of the dreams are visually stunning, others look cheap. The visual effects aren’t seamless, they feel a bit dated. I’ve seen better special effects in student films.
Ran is a film you’ll want to watch again. It’s a movie that grows on you with each viewing. It’s a classic. Dreams, well, it’s a one-time watch. I doubt I’ll ever feel the urge to sit through that again. It leaves you feeling confused, not inspired. I’d rather watch paint dry, and that’s saying something.
The dialogue in Ran is sharp and poetic. The characters talk like real people, even though they are speaking in a historical setting. The script is well-crafted, every line serves a purpose. In Dreams, the dialogue is sometimes awkward. The conversations often feel forced and unnatural. I’ve heard better conversations at a dentist’s office.
Ran has layers. There’s meaning beyond the surface. It is a film that invites contemplation. Dreams, not so much. It’s all window dressing, a bunch of pretty pictures without much substance. It’s like looking at a postcard, not a real place.
The production quality of Ran is top-notch. It’s a polished film, a masterpiece of cinema. Dreams, is not. There are cracks in the quality, especially in the sound and visuals. It feels like a rushed job, not a carefully crafted work of art. It’s a shame, because with Kurosawa’s name on it, I was expecting more.
The conflict in Ran is believable. The tension builds effectively, leading to a devastating climax. It’s a gripping experience, the tension is palpable. In Dreams, the conflict is often forced and artificial. The tension falls flat, it’s not really engaging. It’s like a bad soap opera, predictable and boring.
So, there you have it. Two Kurosawa films, two very different experiences. Ran is a masterpiece, a must-see for anyone who loves cinema. Dreams, well, it’s a film that I wouldn’t recommend to my worst enemy. Unless you are looking for a good way to fall asleep.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I need a drink. And maybe a therapy session after reliving Dreams. I tell you, some films are just an insult to the art form, and that’s the truth.
