---
title: "Ran"
year: 1985
kind: "film"
canonical: "https://film.one/film/ran"
fi1m_id: "ran"
imdb_id: "tt0089881"
tmdb_id: 11645
wikidata_id: "Q565231"
fi1m_score: 92
critics_score: 92
critics_reviews: 14
published: "2026-09-15"
updated: "2026-09-18T08:38:18.059985+00:00"
region: "US"
licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL."
---

# Ran (1985)

Directed by Akira Kurosawa · 2h 40m · MPA R · Action, Drama, History

## Identity

Ran

- **Canonical:** https://film.one/film/ran
- **Type:** Film
- **Fi1m ID:** ran
- **IMDb ID:** tt0089881
- **TMDB ID:** 11645
- **Wikidata ID:** Q565231
- **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089881/, https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/11645, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q565231

**Fi1m score: 92** · Critics 92 from 14 reviews

*In a sentence:* A family argument with colour-coded armies and nobody fit to chair the meeting

> Akira Kurosawa’s *Ran* is a harrowing war film that keeps the family quarrels clear amid the armies. A few overextended conversations do little to diminish its fierce performances or the frightening precision of its battles.

## Synopsis

Lord Hidetora Ichimonji (Tatsuya Nakadai) is a warlord in feudal Japan, where family loyalties and political power are bound together. Around him are Taro (Akira Terao), Jiro (Jinpachi Nezu) and Saburo (Daisuke Ryū), with Lady Kaede (Mieko Harada) and Lady Sue (Yoshiko Miyazaki) also caught in the struggle for power. Akira Kurosawa reworks *King Lear* through a family conflict whose reach extends to armies and battlefields. Intrigue, betrayal and bitter comedy shape a story in which the decisions of those in command affect everyone beneath them.

## Review

*Ran* is a terrible family quarrel made large enough to fill a battlefield, and we would recommend it even to those who usually avoid war films. Akira Kurosawa’s reworking of *King Lear* asks what happens when a powerful man’s failures become everybody else’s problem. The scale matters because private malice can command armies here. It is a severe film, but its anger is easy to understand. The screenplay is by Kurosawa, Hideo Oguni and Masato Ide.

The cinematographers, Shoji Ueda, Asakazu Nakai and Takao Saitō, give the armies enough space for us to follow their movement. The colour coding gives us a practical way of distinguishing the rival forces without constant explanation. That precision lets us register how many people are caught inside a quarrel among a handful of powerful figures. Kurosawa keeps returning to the armies and their banners in sweeping views.

Emi Wada’s costumes help keep the figures distinct within those wide compositions. Production designers Shinobu Muraki and Yoshirō Muraki give the chamber scenes a severity that suits their occupants. These rooms offer little suggestion of domestic comfort, and the formal confrontations feel at home in them. The shift indoors puts the actors and their confrontations at the centre of our attention, without making the struggle over power seem any smaller.

Kurosawa’s editing preserves that sense of organised movement through the battles, giving us time to understand the forces involved rather than simply count the cuts. Tōru Takemitsu’s mournful score makes the fighting harder to enjoy as a display of skill. We were horrified by the battles. The coloured formations stay readable through the brutality, so there is little refuge in pretending we cannot follow what is happening.

Tatsuya Nakadai gives Lord Hidetora Ichimonji enough frailty to make him recognisably human without asking us to excuse him. His Noh-influenced make-up can make the face appear almost fixed, which gives small changes of expression unusual force. The acting is openly theatrical, and it suits a man accustomed to being watched. Mieko Harada’s Lady Kaede belongs in the same heightened style, with a ferocity that holds our attention through the private confrontations.

The screenplay sometimes labours a point the staging has already made, and the formal exchanges can feel overextended. This is also where the film’s distance becomes a limitation: a less emphatic conversation might bring us closer to the people involved. Nakadai’s vulnerability usually supplies the human detail these passages need, but a few could have been shorter. The film runs 160 minutes.

Many war films encourage us to admire whoever gets the armies moving. *Ran* makes that authority look dangerous even when the movement is magnificent. Its spectacle keeps sending us back to the damage done by people who expect obedience, and the private scenes make clear how little judgement they can possess. Give it an uninterrupted evening, preferably on a screen large enough to keep the people visible within the formations.

*Fi1m score 92, published 15 September 2026.*

## What the critics say

Fourteen reviews, all of them positive, and the agreement is unusually complete. Most critics read it as Kurosawa’s late summing-up: a King Lear moved to feudal Japan, with sons in place of daughters, that ends in chaos rather than consolation. The praise clusters on the battle scenes, staged with real horses and colour-coded armies, and on the control with which Kurosawa cuts between those set pieces and the quieter court intrigue. Several single out Nakadai’s slow descent into madness and Takemitsu’s score.

The spread is narrow; nobody has a serious reservation. What dissent there is comes down to emphasis. The Times finds it gripping but not quite Shakespeare. The Guardian notes that swapping daughters for sons pushes the film towards violence and machismo and away from sympathy. The New Yorker admires the vast, heaven-high vantage point while conceding it keeps the tragedy at a distance. Reviews written around the 4K restoration are, if anything, warmer than those from 1985.

## Straight answers

**Is Ran worth watching?**

*Ran* is worth watching for almost anyone who can sit through 160 minutes of severe, battle-filled drama, and we scored it 92. Akira Kurosawa's reworking of *King Lear* keeps the family quarrel clear while armies fight over it, and Tatsuya Nakadai's frail, unforgiven warlord holds it together. A few formal conversations run long; the film earns the patience they ask for.

**How long is Ran, and what is it rated?**

*Ran* runs 2h 40m and is rated R by the MPA in the US. It is an action and drama film.

**Where can I watch Ran in the US?**

*Ran* is streaming on Tubi, The Roku Channel, Amazon Prime Video and Apple TV in the US. It leaves Tubi on 1 October. Availability is checked daily; the links above go straight to each service.

**How violent or frightening is Ran, and is it suitable for children?**

*Ran* is a 15 in the UK and rated R in the US, and it is not suitable for children. The battles are brutal, and Kurosawa keeps the colour-coded armies readable throughout, so there is no looking away from what is happening to the people inside them. We were horrified by the fighting, which Tōru Takemitsu's mournful score refuses to make enjoyable. Older teenagers with some appetite for war films can manage it.

**What should I watch after Ran?**

After *Ran*, try [*Throne of Blood*](https://film.one/film/throne-of-blood) (1957, Fi1m 88): Kurosawa tackles Shakespeare with fog, military ambition and an equally unforgiving view of power. Then [*The Leopard*](https://film.one/film/the-leopard) (1963, Fi1m 88): Another ruling family faces change, with political calculation visible in clothes and rooms; and [*The Lion in Winter*](https://film.one/film/the-lion-in-winter) (1968, Fi1m 81): A royal family negotiates succession with enough spite to make armies seem unnecessary.

### Reviews we read (14)

- **The Times**, Kevin Maher (★★★★★): The 4K restoration of Kurosawa's King Lear adaptation makes the violent, hellish story of betrayal and retribution pop with vivid colors and massive battle scenes using real horses and soldiers. It is gripping and not quite Shakespeare but never boring. [Read](https://www.thetimes.com/culture/books/article/classic-film-of-the-week-ran-1985-n7zfm0g2c)
- **Time Out**, Tom Huddleston (5/5): The critic praises Kurosawa’s adaptation of King Lear as a director’s film packed with brutal violence, tragedy, intrigue, comedy and betrayal. Visual mastery stands out through sweeping shots of banners, armies and shifting colour palettes that heighten the emotional intensity. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/ran-1)
- **Empire**, Ian Nathan (90/100, inferred): The critic calls it an absolute triumph and Kurosawa's last great masterpiece, a Shakespearean epic of betrayal and chaos that remains a film of rare greatness. They single out the monumental scale of the production, the masterful control of vast dramatic and visual elements, and the ferocious performances for particular praise. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/ran-review/)
- **Little White Lies**, Oscar Rickett (90/100, inferred): The critic praises Ran as Kurosawa’s final masterpiece and a stunning meditation on humanity’s capacity for destruction. They single out its grand visual and emotional scale, drawn from Shakespeare and Japanese history, with no easy salvation for the viewer. [Read](https://lwlies.com/in-praise-of/ran-4k-restoration-akira-kurosawa)
- **Los Angeles Times**, Kevin Thomas (90/100, inferred): The critic hails it as a superb re-working of King Lear and a glorious culmination of the director's career, at once brisk and elegiac, intimate and epic. He singles out the images as beautiful and terrifying as any captured on film and the impeccable performances. [Read](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1985-12-28-ca-29779-story.html)
- **RogerEbert.com**, Roger Ebert (90/100, inferred): The critic calls it a great, glorious achievement that Kurosawa could perhaps only have made at 75. He singles out the director's command of epic battle scenes contrasted with intimate chamber drama, and the freshness brought by samurai costumes and Noh-inspired makeup. [Read](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/ran-1985)
- **The AV Club**, Scott Tobias (90/100, inferred): Kurosawa's 1985 King Lear adaptation in feudal Japan is a self-canonizing masterpiece whose epic battle sequences and visual poetry exceed mere spectacle. The critic singles out the painterly cinematography, Nakadai's delicate descent into madness, and Takemitsu's haunting score for particular praise. [Read](https://www.avclub.com/ran-1798195491)
- **The Guardian**, Peter Bradshaw (90/100, inferred): Kurosawa's re-release offers a stunning, darker adaptation of King Lear with staggering battle sequences and a pessimistic tone drawn from Macbeth. The gender shift to sons foregrounds violence and machismo over feminine sympathy. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/mar/31/ran-review-re-release-of-kurasawas-dark-epic-version-of-king-lear)
- **The New Yorker**, Pauline Kael (90/100, inferred): The critic admires the monumental, conceptualized scale of the film viewed from a detached, heaven-like perspective, praising the fastidious preparation, color-coded armies, and extravagantly beautiful battle imagery that pays off despite the tragic story. [Read](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1986/01/13/macro-micro-stinko)
- **The New York Times**, Vincent Canby (90/100, inferred): The critic describes it as a film of grandeur evoking the greatest epics in cinema history, with the terrible logic and clarity of a morality tale and the visual mastery of a myth that remains ageless. He notes the astonishing physical spectacle and integrated battle scenes. [Read](https://www.nytimes.com/1985/09/27/movies/the-screen-ran-directed-by-akira-kurosawa.html)
- **Variety**, Variety Staff (90/100, inferred): The review calls the film a dazzlingly successful addition to Kurosawa’s career at age 75. It singles out the superbly staged battle sequences and gripping court drama and intrigue. [Read](https://variety.com/1984/film/reviews/ran-1200426490/)
- **The Skinny**, Ross McIndoe (★★★★★): The critic praises Kurosawa's visually stunning and perfectly composed adaptation of King Lear, highlighting its timeless quality and masterful craft. They single out the breathtaking visuals and composition for praise. [Read](https://www.theskinny.co.uk/film/dvd-reviews/ran)
- **Eye for Film**, Jennie Kermode (95/100, inferred): Kurosawa's epic reworking of King Lear is one of the greatest works of art in cinematic history, a mythic yet clear-eyed tragedy of a warlord's self-inflicted downfall and the chaos it unleashes. The film stands out for its grand scale, fusion of ideas, and unusual clarity of perspective amid the madness. [Read](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/ran-1985-film-review-by-jennie-kermode)
- **Collider**, Jeremy Urquhart (92/100, inferred): The critic calls Ran a staggering achievement and Kurosawa's grandest and most impressive film, praising its epic scale, visual storytelling, and how it culminates the director's career. They single out the masterful battle sequences and the film's magnificent use of color. [Read](https://collider.com/akira-kurosawa-movie-ran/)

## Details

- **Director:** Akira Kurosawa
- **Director:** Akira Kurosawa
- **Screenplay:** Akira Kurosawa, Hideo Oguni, Masato Ide
- **Cinematography:** Asakazu Nakai, Shoji Ueda, Takao Saitō
- **Editor:** Akira Kurosawa
- **Music:** Tōru Takemitsu
- **Production design:** Yoshirō Muraki, Shinobu Muraki
- **Costume design:** Emi Wada
- **Producer:** Masato Hara, Serge Silberman
- **Cast:** Tatsuya Nakadai as Lord Hidetora Ichimonji; Akira Terao as Taro Takatora Ichimonji; Jinpachi Nezu as Jiro Masatora Ichimonji; Daisuke Ryū as Saburo Naotora Ichimonji; Mieko Harada as Lady Kaede; Yoshiko Miyazaki as Lady Sue; Mansai Nomura as Tsurumaru; Hisashi Igawa as Shuri Kurogane
- **Runtime:** 2h 40m
- **Certificate (MPA):** R
- **Release (the US):** 18 August 2000
- **Genres:** Action, Drama, History
- **Budget:** $12 million
- **Box office:** $23 million
- **Trailer:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwP_kXyd-Rw

## Where to watch in the US

- Tubi: free, hd, leaving 2026-10-01
- The Roku Channel: add-on, hd
- Amazon Prime Video: add-on
- Apple TV: add-on, hd

*Checked 2026-09-15.*

Also available in: AT, AU, BE, BG, BR, CA, CH, CZ, DE, DK, ES, FI, FR, GB, IE, IT, JP, LT, NL, NO, NZ, SE, TR, US. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country.

## Awards

- Academy Awards 1986: Best Cinematography (nominated); Best Director (nominated); Best Production Design (nominated); Best Costume Design (won)
- Amanda Award for Best Foreign Feature Film 1986: Amanda Award for Best Foreign Feature Film (won)

## If you liked this

- *Throne of Blood* (1957), Fi1m 88: Kurosawa tackles Shakespeare with fog, military ambition and an equally unforgiving view of power. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/throne-of-blood.md)
- *The Leopard* (1963), Fi1m 88: Another ruling family faces change, with political calculation visible in clothes and rooms. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-leopard.md)
- *The Lion in Winter* (1968), Fi1m 81: A royal family negotiates succession with enough spite to make armies seem unnecessary. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-lion-in-winter.md)
- *Aguirre, the Wrath of God* (1972), Fi1m 91: A leader’s delusions endanger everyone around him, with the landscape refusing to cooperate. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/aguirre-the-wrath-of-god.md)
- *The Tragedy of Macbeth* (2021), Fi1m 80: Shakespearean ambition in stark, enclosed spaces, with performances that welcome theatrical intensity. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-tragedy-of-macbeth.md)

---
© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/ran