Talk:Ran (film)

message: OK, this looks good for an initial expansion, but more work has to be done.  I'm out of the game until the Criterion Collection edition comes out in another month, but anyone who has The Warrior's Camera handy is welcome to continue.  I'm not very happy with the quotes, but I don't have my copy with me so I can't put some better ones up. Palm_Dogg 14:21, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: ran

message: I see you've self-nominated this as a Good article - and I thoroughly agree and support this nomination.  This is well on it's way to Featured standard IMHO.  I'll perform a more full review when I get a serious chunk of time - so please don't hold your breath.  For now, well done, sir. :-)  --Estarriol 10:46, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Good article listing

message: I noticed that a couple of the characters names have working links. Ikoma links to the Japanese city of Ikoma, Nara and Tango links to a disambig page, which doesn't include the Ran character (although it does include the Tango Province of Japan).
These links should be edited so they're not pointing to incorrect pages, but I'm not sure of the naming convention in this case - for example, would you use Tango (Ran character)? Or Tango (Ran 1985 film character)??
Secondly, and forgive me if I'm wide of the mark on this, but if the names Ikoma and Tango were used in the film intentionally as being representative of those real Japanese regions, then something should be noted about this...   Gram 21:11, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No clue about Ikoma/Tango, but cleared out the character links. Palm_Dogg 15:14, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Character Links

message: As a new Wikipedia contributor, I have to say that I find this article rich and well-forged.  Those who contributed to it should feel pleased with themselves.  This is excellent work on a movie that deserves excellence.  Thank you.  --BridgeBurner 06:14, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Applause

message: I think when you were dicussing The film in comparison to the play, Lady Kaede may not have been somewhat representing Goneril, but more likely embodying Edmund, in his lust for distinction, and the affection of two of Lear's children for him that led them to be deceived. As well as Lady Kaede's obvious lament of her birth, thinking she would have been a better man/ruler than Hidetora's sons if she had been born to the position, very much akin to Edmund's lament over his bastard standing, when he is obviously more competent than Gloucester's legitimate heir Edgar.
     --ThyLostUlalume 22:25, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Different Interpretation

message: Isn't the interpretation of "乱" as "chaos, wretchedness" a typical example of Western mystification of words of Eastern languages, when wwwjdic lists the word (the word, not the kanji) as simply "revolt; rebellion; war"? I suggest changing the translation in the header to simply "war". clacke 15:06, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you should check a couple of other dictionaries first. For all we know, the dictionary you cited may be typical Western over-simplification of Eastern languages. I'm not saying it is, but check a few others first.Cop 633 15:27, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Touché :-) clacke 13:58, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nelson says: RAN, RON – "riot, rebellion, war, disorder" then under other pronounciations lists "confused" and "arbitrary" and "morally corrupt", and some composite words starting with this word have meanings like chaos and such, but for the pronounciation RAN this pretty much seems to be simply about armed combat. clacke 14:09, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Then why hasn't it been changed ? It would make more sense in the context than "wretchedness". And two interpretations such as "war" and "revolt" are probably enough, they most certainly carry the meaning of the kanji as intended to be used in the film. In the Waeijiten, definitions for 乱 are: war; revolt; rebellion; insurrrection. Another argument to consider is that most of the Japanese feudal wars use the kanji "ran".--sanjuro 23:46, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would suggest changing the rendering to "disorder, madness." Chaos in English actually refers to not to things that have lost their order but rather complex systems that behave unpredictably. Ran, or midare as it is also pronounced, quite clearly refers to something that either once was or at the very least ought to be in order but has become disordered or disheveled. Also, incidents in Japanese history that are described with the word ran refer not to war or revolt but to the disorder and upheaval that resulted. Given the psychological nature of the film, I really don't think a direct reference to something that is obvious to the eye is needed. One look at the theater poster tells you that there will be a battle; ran refers to what came before and after the battle in the hearts of the men who participated. Spventi (talk) 22:11, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overmystification of title 

message: :He also found himself competing against television, which had reduced Japanese film audiences from a high of 1.1 billion in 1958 to under 200 million by 1975.
I presume this is movie admittances per year.  Given how these numbers are stated, an unthinking reader might confuse the population of Japan with the population of China. MaxEnt (talk) 23:55, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Units required

message: The first remark link " Hagopian, Kevin. New York State Writers Institute Film Notes - Ran. URL accessed March 27, 2006. " does not exist anymore.  
--YoavD (talk) 04:54, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  missing links 

message: Why is a citation required for the statement that RAN is set in the period of the Japanese civil wars?  Everything from the status of the warlord to the conflicts and costumes would suggest this historical era. It may be difficult to find a citation that confirms this because it is so basic.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Icb0005 (talk • contribs) 21:57, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation needed

message: Shouldn't this have one of those obtrusive annoying templates... aaah, here it is: Template:Contains Japanese text. I'm not sure how often this template should be used, and I don't really like the amount of space it takes up personally... do you guys think it's necessary to put on this page? TIM KLOSKE|TALK 04:23, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's being phased out according to a discussion at WikiProject Japan, archived here. Doctor Sunshine talk 15:24, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japanese characters 

message: ...shouldn't the lead be a little longer? Again, I think we need to discuss and lay down a more specific guideline for lead length, but this one is barely over one line for each page of text, and only 2 paragraphs where at least 3 are recommended. Of course, it was never brought up throughout the GA/FA process, but that's hardly anything new. Richard001 (talk) 01:25, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Given the length of this article... 

message: Are the completely unreferenced segments of the article, and the badly formatted links (To non-existant articles) recent additions since it made the front page? As I've worked hard on certain articles with the failing to even get GA status and would be frankly pissed off if this managed to make it so far in it's current incarnation. Red157 02:57, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Just look at the article history to find out. I have no idea. Wrad (talk) 03:16, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

text: What about the opening sentence using the words "Oscar-winning".  See WP:FILM talk archive.  And the MOS for films doesn't recommend using it either. Lugnuts (talk) 08:02, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the way the article looked when it was promoted. It certainly does look better then... In some areas. Wrad (talk) 13:48, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, but from what I can see, the standard of film articles that reach FA status is much lower than that of music articles. In comparison, that wouldn't even make GA. Red157 20:52, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question over FA status 

message: I thought the featured article was not supposed to be protected. If it does really have to be protected (I can see there has been a spate of vandalism), could the "Editing of this article by new or unregistered users..." notice at least not be displayed? It's quite ugly.--217.171.129.74 (talk) 09:10, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Protection

message: I recall from both the commentaries and written materials in the Criterion edition of Brazil (which was released years before they also did an edition of Ran), that the incredible release controversy over Brazil (the studio refusing to release Gilliam's version and the fight going very public), led some critics --notably the Los Angeles Film Critics Association-- to vote Brazil their best picture over Ran, in order to get Brazil distribution (here's a source); in the Criterion DVD, at least one critic mentioned regretting making the decision on studio politics rather than pure merit.  The same commentaries noted that Ran was the critics darling in other places.  As such, the two films fates (at least in American release) seem a bit intertwined. --Bobak (talk) 16:39, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  In relation to Brazil (film) 

message: I have removed this statement from the article (which has been tagged for a citation since March 2007) and posted it here until a source is found. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 04:05, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Unsourced statement

message: Could someone familiar with the topic writes about Takemitsu's music for this film? It is mentioned in the introduction that it is inspired by Mahler's music, without further discussion. Thanks! 144.32.56.121 (talk) 00:28, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Film music by Takemitsu

message: I am considering an FA push for the article. Here's what we need to do:
*Lead section - needs to be expanded to three-four paragraphs
*Plot section - looks good, well in the WP:FILMPLOT range of 400-700 words.
*Production section - needs to have principal photography dates and history of settings, background section needs to be consolidated as well as casting and acting style.
*Music section - needs to be added in the production section
*Reception - needs to have RT score and also have an accolades section as well as home media section.
*Miscellaneous - The IMDB sources must be removed, as it is not really considered reliable by any means.
Any other suggestions would be very helpful. Thanks, Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:36, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know who "we" is, but it might be better to send it to peer review first. JoshuSasori (talk) 03:29, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  FA push 

message: Compare:
"Despite the similarities to Shakespeare's play King Lear, Kurosawa only became aware of the similarities after he had started pre-planning."
to:
"Kurosawa was influenced by the William Shakespeare play King Lear and borrowed elements from it."  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrbrianlk (talk • contribs) 16:10, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction regarding influence of King Lear? 

message: "Azusa castle" is a fictional name in the movie. As far as I know, no castles of the name exists in Japan.--124.27.125.192 (talk) 07:53, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Azusa castle is fictional 

message: Not starting a GA review, but I'd suggest nominator  address some issues before someone else does: Firstly, he "Prince 1999" ref link doesn't lead anywhere and needs a full citation. Might have to go into article history to figure out what it was. Secondly, the cast section is redundant in its use of a table and text; the text rehashes the plot in describing the characters, and both text and table equate Ran characters with King Lear characters, a type of analysis that could use citations, as with here. Ribbet32 (talk) 00:53, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Those are both useful comments. The Prince cite is a standard one in Kurosawa studies and I'll try to do it later today or tomorrow, the full cite is needed here. Your comments on the verbiage in the cast section I did think about previously since the article does have a themes section where this is discussed as well. A shorter version of the cast section would lead to greater brevity. JohnWickTwo (talk) 01:11, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  GAC comments 

message: I've made some copyedits, mainly to tighten the prose.  Feel free to reveert anything you disagree with.
* If this is to get through GAN, all unsourced statements (aside from the plot summary) will need proper sources.
:*This list may take a day or two and I'll start on the lede. Its a nice list of things to looks at. JohnWickTwo (talk) 15:58, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: *These are the preferred spellings from reliable sources in English language books dealing with the film. If you have thoughts on improving them then let me know. JohnWickTwo (talk) 15:58, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: * "Sué" in particular stands out—are sources consistent in giving this spelling?  There are no widely-used romanizations of Japanese that use the acute accent. Curly "JFC" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 23:00, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: *Donald Ritchie is the main Kurosawa scholar who does this in his book on AK here . The options might be to give her full titled name which is usually not done in the literature, or, maybe add a pronunciation key for her name (Anglo versions are something like 'Soo-way'). JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *Added a short capsule of Kurosawa's history with Shakespeare plots to lede. JohnWickTwo (talk) 15:58, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *Change to 2 sentence format. JohnWickTwo (talk) 15:58, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *Changed language on some of this. Maybe it looks better now. JohnWickTwo (talk) 15:58, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *The plot could be trimmed by 30% if that's the best thing to do. There might be some ideas for this plot section from looking at the plot summary for King Lear which was one of Shakespeare's longest tragedies. JohnWickTwo (talk) 15:58, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: * The length of the work is irrelevant—even short novels tend to be far, far longer than long films, but the plot summaries still have to be kept within the guideline lengths.  A summary is not meant to be exhaustive. Curly "JFC" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 23:07, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: *My reference was to Gone with the Wind (film) which is a GA and which uses the Part One-Part Two separate sections approach and then gives two separate 700 word summaries for Part One and then Part Two separately. If that was not proper then let me know. The 30% shorter route is always possible here on Ran, and it would be nice to hear your comment on what the editors did at Gone with the Wind. JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *The five acts are from Shakespeare's play. The film is also Gone with the Wind size in length of watching. Other similar long films are Dr Zhivago and Lawrence of Arabia. In general, all of your comments are interesting and if you can look at more sections that would be nice, since I need another day or two to finish with your list here. JohnWickTwo (talk) 15:58, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *Adding Skagrow citation from Salon for this. This is the common reading of film critics, to call this film a Shakespeare adaptation. JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *The 'castle' was constructed especially for the film, for the  purpose of the destruction burning scene (like the burning of Atlanta scene in Gone with the Wind). JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *The constructed castle destruction scene allowed only one take, since it was burned down for the drama shown in the film. JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *This could be reworded since it was Kurosawa in an interview who stated that he had a close autobiographical identification with this character. 'Stand-in' was used by another editor as shorthand for 'autobiographical identification'. JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *Lear and his loyal military followers appear throughout the Shakespeare play. This was included by another editor as a poetic comparison of the two men a military leaders. If you prefer 'rulers and military leaders' then I can put it into the article. JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *Changing wording to 'his version of King Lear'. JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *You are correct. JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *A previous editor had in mind that Mifune was originally considered for the role which went to Nakadai instead. JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *From my own reading, Mifune and Kurosawa fell out after over a dozen films together. Should this be added here as useful? JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *Wording corrected. JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *This is a reference to the depiction of her ritualized movements especially in the court scenes. JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *Agree. JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *Agree. JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *Agree. I'll try to shorten this section. JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *These should be the conversion numbers from that time, in that year. JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *All are USA numbers as I read the linked source. JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *Nominated for GG but did not win. JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *Academy Awards should be in caps, while use of the word as a verb should be l.c. JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *  Let me know if this is what you had in mind and feel free to change what you see as being subject to be improved further. JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Feedback from Curly Turkey

message: The introduction states that Ran was Kurosawa's second encounter with Shakespeare, Throne of Blood being the first. This is not true. Kurosawa's The Bad Sleep Well is also a Shakespeare adaptation  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daphomet (talk • contribs) 18:31, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kurosawa and Shakespeare 

message: The redirect 乱 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 02:46, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:乱]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]