RAN 261
two dozen countries. Ran did not do very well at the box office, initially making
only enough to break even. It did, however, receive Oscar nominations for Best
Director, Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography, and Best Costume Design (which
it won), among many other international nominations and awards. Reviews were,
for the most part, adulatory. Vincent Canby wrote, “Though big in physical scope
and of a beauty that suggests a kind of drunken, barbaric lyricism, Ran has the ter-
rible logic and clarity of a morality tale seen in tight close-up, of a myth that, while
being utterly specific and par tic u lar in its time and place, remains ageless, infinitely
adaptable... Here is a film by a man whose art now stands outside time and fash-
ion” (Canby, 1985). Roger Ebert called the film “visually magnificent” and said he
realized on seeing it again in 2000 that “the action doesn’t center on the old man,
but has a fearful energy of its own, through which he wanders. Kurosawa has not
told the story of a great man whose sin of pride drives him mad, but the story of a
man who has waged war all his life, hopes to impose peace in his old age and
unleashes even greater turmoil” (Ebert, 2000). De cades after its release, most film
critics and scholars view Ran as Akira Kurosawa’s masterpiece.
Reel History Versus Real History
The story that Ran tells is, of course, entirely fictional. One can only judge its his-
torical accuracy in terms of its depictions of medieval Japa nese castles; the look,
dress, and demeanor of the Ichimonji clan; the conduct in battle of the samurai; etc.
On these counts, Ran has extraordinary verisimilitude.