Akira Kurosawa -- The Art of Film Exhibition

[Narukami]

For those of you in the Southern California area or heading this way before December 14th you might want to check out this exhibt at the motion Picture Academy in Los Angeles

http://www.oscars.org/events/kurosawa/i ... ition.html


Only a handful of directors have achieved the kind of international stature and creative respect enjoyed by Akira Kurosawa. And although millions of moviegoers have seen the films that stand as a lasting testament to his talent, few outside his native Japan are familiar with the vast array of artwork that he generated as part of his filmmaking process.

In the Academy’s new exhibition, “Akira Kurosawa: Film Artist,â€

[Gaius Decius Aquilius]

And well may we ask,"Why, oh why, does not Hollywood ever produce a Kurosawa?"

Actually this is a serious question. I note the exhibit is at the Motion Picture Academy. Every producer in the world studies his work, and there is no shortage of talent. Yet the industry cannot seem to produce any historic film with the same merit.

Is it simply that our educational system is so poor that everything must be historically reduced or politically sanitized down to a common denominator for the industry and audience alike? Or what...


Ralph I.

[Narukami]

It is a good question Gaius, one that is worthy of discussion though I must admit that I'm not certain I have the knowledge to do so with any skill or grace.

One might run through a laundry list of great Hollywood films but that would, I think miss the point.

In 1978, when the Oscar nominations for Best picture of 1977 were announced Wood Allen found his Annie Hall in the running with Star Wars among other films. Allen's agent urged him to make the trip to LA for the awards -- if ever he had a chance to win the Best Picture Oscar this was it. Allen, who traditionally shunned the Awards event replied that he would attend if the agent could explain to him just how you could compare Star Wars to Annie Hall and select one as better than the other. As might be expected the agent could not so Allen did not attend even though Annie Hall did receive the Best Picture Oscar.

This a a round about way of saying that comparing films is a perilous undertaking at best and perhaps pointless at worst.

However, I do take your point Gaius, and basically agree with you. In terms of historic epics we seem not to have produced a master of the stature of Kurosawa, though in some respects that judgement is conditioned by how you define a historic epic.

Indeed I find Seven Samurai to be far more satisfying as a story and as a work of art than many other so called epics. On the other hand I would rank a period film like To Kill A Mocking Bird right there with Seven Samurai in terms of the artistry with which the story is told. Likewise I look at the works of Powell and Pressburger as cinematic art of the 1st degree. Are they historical epics? Perhaps not but Kurosawa made a wide range of films in additional to his great samurai epics and in that I think these directors of comparable accomplishment.

It is also interesting to note that Kurosawa was a fan of John Ford and that while we in the West consider Kurosawa a genius, he was not always admired or loved in Japan. Many Japanese critics thought Kurosawa too international, which perhaps is another way of saying too "western" in his film making. I find this view myopic for of course what Kurosawa had done was master the international language of cinema to a degree that few, if any, of his Japanese contemporaries had done.

Now I have waxed over long and have not even come close to answering your question Gaius, for which I apologize. I will say that there are many Hollywood films that I do admire (regardless of where they were actually made) and several film makers whose work is art, though most of these films would not be considered "Historical Epics" as I believe you mean to use the term.

More to your point, I'm not certain that it is our educational system that is to blame though American's seeming lack of historical perspective might be a reason why our best film makers shy away from doing historical epics -- they know that such films usually cost a fortune but will not reach a wide audience and nothing ends a life in Hollywood faster than a box office failure.

On another note...

For those of you who have not seen Seven Samurai or who would like your own copy the Criterion Collection is currently running a 40% Off sale on all of their DVD's including Seven Samurai.

http://www.criterion.com/asp/release.asp?id=2

As some of you may know Criterion does the very best work transferring films to DVD. They tend to be much more expensive but they are worth every penny. At 40% off I'm tempted to add a few titles to my collection. Even though these are not Blu Ray discs they are still excellent copies.

Again, my apologies to rambling on -- I look forward to hearing the opinions of our other members concerning your question Gaius.

:wink:

Narukami

[Gaius Decius Aquilius]

.

This a a round about way of saying that comparing films is a perilous undertaking at best and perhaps pointless at worst...

Indeed I find Seven Samurai to be far more satisfying as a story and as a work of art than many other so called epics.
Narukami

Yet we do compare films... and even judge them by awards like "Best Picture."

And yes, Seven Samurai is satisfing as a story, which makes it work. There is no explanation of historic context and some knowlege of the period is assumed. This kind of assumption does not seem to be done or even desired in a film like Gladiator, that must give at the same time both an abbreviated and exaggerated historical context from the onset.

To make my point: Imagine Seven Samurai redone in a Roman world of about 260 on the fringe of empire. No Commodus, no invented "Felix Legions", not 16 years of history compressed into seeming only a few. Just some dirty soldiers cut off in an anarchic region protecting some nameless village from some marauding Goths.

Anyway, when I win the lottery next month I will hire us all to make such a film.

Ralph

[Narukami]

You're quite right Gaius, we do compare films and awards all the time. It is a very subjective process.

To your point -- indeed there is a shared cultural language in Japan that allows, to some degree, for a level of historical knowledge to be assumed. Almost a cultural shorthand that allows a film maker to concentrate on the story at hand and not spend time explaining the cultural context. I would hazard to guess that this has slipped a bit in Japan today. It is often the case when speaking with kids from Japan that they know little or nothing about the Kabuki Theatre. Then again I know very little about Jazz music. :oops:

Your example of Gladiator makes sense and it would be interesting indeed to see a film done along those lines. I remember in a thread of some time ago that someone is making a film of the book "Eagle of the Ninth" (I might have that title wrong.) Perhaps that will be more along the lines you're speaking of.

Good points Gaius.

:wink:

Narukami