Excalibur(1981 film), any good?

[Oregano]

I have it on DVD but have never got around to watching it, it's apparently a really good film but my brother says other wise, I also need a film with a good scene to analyse for my film coursework, I did want to do about Ran but he said it would be too difficult.

Is this film

a)good?

b)Have anything worth analysing?

[Closet_Skeleton]

If by "Ran" you mean the Kurosawa film, I did my film studies Coursework on Kurosawa and it wasn't especially hard.

[Oregano]

That's the Ran I mean, he said with what we have to learn for the AS I wouldn't have the knowledge to apply to Ran because it's a total separate culture and stuff, but we'll be doing Japanese Cinema next year and Kurosawa.

[Tirian]

I watched it when it came out and recall it being not at all enjoyable, but it seems to be well regarded. From a filmmaker's perspective, it is probably interesting and I'm sure it has no lack of scenes to analyze.

[Oregano]

Thanks, I'll probably watch it then and decide whether or not to use it. I could do Fight Club(because I have the special edition DVD) but I fear it's a bit of a cliche choice.

[Matthew]

Bah! Excalibur is a fantastic film, though the director originally wanted to do the Lord of the Rings. If you are familiar with Arthurian mythology then there is plenty to analyse in terms of what was included and what was excluded from the film. If you are not, then you will find it just as difficult as Ran, which is based on King Lear, a story which similarly has a long medieval pedigree (both Arthur and King Lear have their earliest recorded history in Geoffrey of Monmouth's twelfth century Historia Regum Britanniae).

[Oregano]

I'm not too familiar with Arthurian legend but we're more analysing gcmaera angles, edits and sound, stuff like that. I thought it would be easier than Ran because it's using Hollywood techniques and conventions, whilst Ran is using Japanese techniques.

[bosssmiley]

Excalibur's ok as an Arthurian film. It's certainly better than Fuqua's terrible 2004 effort (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0349683/). But let's be honest, neither is a patch on the greatest and most profoundly moving Arthurian film of all time:

"A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0041259/)" :smallbiggrin::smallbiggrin::smallbiggrin:


"Ran" is easy and fun. Don't let the subtitles scare you off what's essentially one of the best, most accessible retellings of Lear available. Film-making is film-making, and there's bound to be a ton of material on Kurosawa's technique.

[Oregano]

I'm not too fussed about not doing Ran because I get a chance to study Kurosawa films next years, but apparently it'll be pre-1970 so it'll most likely be Rashomon and Seven Samurai, I bought The Hidden Fortress and Yojimbo on saturday, so subtitles aren't really the problem.

I've started watching Excalibur, good imagery, music's fantastic, the only issue so far is that the guy playing Merlin sounds like one he's from (Monty Python and) The Holy Grail(which coincidentally is a good Arthurian fim).

[Matthew]

I'm not too familiar with Arthurian legend but we're more analysing gcmaera angles, edits and sound, stuff like that. I thought it would be easier than Ran because it's using Hollywood techniques and conventions, whilst Ran is using Japanese techniques.

I think either would probably be fine in terms of technique. Though the former is more familiar, the latter has more for you to draw contrasts with. Whichever you choose, there should be plenty to discuss.



I'm not too fussed about not doing Ran because I get a chance to study Kurosawa films next years, but apparently it'll be pre-1970 so it'll most likely be Rashomon and Seven Samurai, I bought The Hidden Fortress and Yojimbo on saturday, so subtitles aren't really the problem.

Might as well do Excalibur, then. Even if you are only studying Kurosawa's earliest work, you can draw on his later work in order to make comparisons and show familiarity with the larger subject matter. Besides, both Ran and Kagemusha are well worth watching. You might want to take a look at something like Oni Baba, as well.



I've started watching Excalibur, good imagery, music's fantastic, the only issue so far is that the guy playing Merlin sounds like one he's from (Monty Python and) The Holy Grail(which coincidentally is a good Arthurian fim).
Some people find him very irritating, but if he just behaved normally, he'd lose something of the mystique of the character.

[Oregano]

Coincidentally, I have both Ran and Kagemusha on DVD, Kagemusha was actually the first Kurosawa movie I saw, although I'd heard great things about him.

I don't find him irritating, comical maybe, he kind of makes the film lighthearted.

Oni Baba, I'll look into that.

[Closet_Skeleton]

That's the Ran I mean, he said with what we have to learn for the AS I wouldn't have the knowledge to apply to Ran because it's a total separate culture and stuff, but we'll be doing Japanese Cinema next year and Kurosawa.

I think I did The Matrix for AS, just because it was so darn easy. I did Kurosawa for A2 Coursework.

Ran is based off a Shakespeare play. To analyse it, you don't need knowledge of Japanese culture, you need knowledge of 16-7th Century English Culture.

One of the books I read for my Kurosawa coursework basically said that every claim that you need Japanese Culture to understand Japanese Movies was over-intellectual "othering" mostly based on a mythical version of modern Japan where everyone's mind is wired like a Buddhist scripture with some Bushido badly pasted in.


I'm not too familiar with Arthurian legend but we're more analysing gcmaera angles, edits and sound, stuff like that. I thought it would be easier than Ran because it's using Hollywood techniques and conventions, whilst Ran is using Japanese techniques.

Not really. Kurosawa is well known for being really Westernised as a Japanese director. All the experts say that that you want Ozu if you want to study a typically Japanese director.

[Oregano]

Oh I know Kurosawa is very westernized as Japanese directors go, but I have faith in what my tutor said. I'm got two ideas for what to do now, either Excalibur or Flags of Our Father/Letters for Iwo Jima, because if I'm allowed to analyse both, there's so much I can mention. Thanks for the help and through watching certain scenes from Exaclibur it looks like it may well be worth watching anyway and you can't exactly knock the actors.