Jump to content

Talk:Akira Kurosawa/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Styles

Kurosawa tends to incorporate the wind and rain in all of his films. I'm not sure of the reference for this one but I remember a quote from him that states he does this to add more emotion into the scene.

Kurosawa also likes to put objects near to the camera which are long and extend outward into the scene, such as swords and bamboo pikes in seven samurai. He titled this as adding "dynamism". Again, I don't have the reference for it.

--Trenidor (talk) 02:30, 09 Jul 2010 (UTC)

Favourite author

The article states that Dostoevsky was Kurosawa's favourite author, and a little later that George Simenon was (this time with citation). Who shall it be? - andi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.113.121.167 (talk) 23:33, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

It was in fact Dostoevsky who was Kurosawa's favorite author. He said he was "fond of" Simenon.--Stepusual (talk) 01:33, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Original versus English titles

I realise that this is the English page but I humbly believe that the original movie titles should be used. There should still be redirects from the international titles. Microsnot 01:48, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Since this is the English edition, I think the English titles should be the main titles used (if only so that people can find the films in video stores), but I think you're right that if the original title is actually different (e.g. Throne of Blood was originally Cobweb Castle in Japanese) there should defenitely be a note about that somewhere, maybe in brackets after the English title. This should be fairly easy to do. The Singing Badger 12:11, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Definately not trolling but from looking at imdb.com, I would like to know why Madadayo instead of Not yet, Yojimbo instead of The Bodyguard, Ikiru instead of To Live, etc. Surely the international titles should be used instead of whatever it's released as on video in North American. It just seems a little inconsistent. Microsnot 12:56, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Yes, but Wikipedia, unlike the IMDB, is a multi-language encyclopedia. The IMDB has only one entry for a film, so they have to give each film its original title. But Wikipedia (in an ideal world at least) has different entries for each film in every language. If a user speaks Japanese and wants to know the original titles, they can just go to the Japanese Wikipedia article on Kurosawa. And if a user doesn't speak Japanese, the original titles are just pretty sounds and don't mean anything. That's my justification, anyway! The Singing Badger 20:58, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Reply to: The Singing Badger 20:58, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC) Which is what I'm saying. Madadayo, Yojimbo, Ikiru and a couple of others are the "Japanese titles" rather than literally translated/international/subtitled titles. Microsnot 01:16, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Isn't that the opposite of what I'm saying?! This could go round in circles... but if you want to change the titles, I won't revert it, but I do think the English titles should be made VERY clear, via redirects and so forth. This is supposed to be a site for English speakers. The Singing Badger 01:27, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

These issues are bigger than one director. They apply to all directors, authors etc. So, I suggest debating at Wikipedia:Manual of Style for Japan-related articles. Fg2 02:12, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)

If you use whatever is the most common international title and the original english translation of the japanese title (in brackets if different) it would be most helpful. Often a title of a US release is different from the UK or other European release which is often the same as the original. I haven't noticed much variation in the UK from the Japanese titles of any Kurosawa release. DjDrAkiraGonzo 07:17, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

An automated Wikipedia link suggester has some possible wiki link suggestions for the Akira_Kurosawa article, and they have been placed on this page for your convenience.
Tip: Some people find it helpful if these suggestions are shown on this talk page, rather than on another page. To do this, just add {{User:LinkBot/suggestions/Akira_Kurosawa}} to this page. — LinkBot 10:32, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Infobox

Does anyone feel that the quote in the infobox seems a bit oversized and out of place? Shawnc 04:57, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree with you it is rather too long. --DannyWilde 05:24, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
It's not that it's long, but it should be reformatted. Palm_Dogg 20:43, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't think we need an infobox at all Estrose 21:54, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Ran (film) (Nomination)

FYI Ran is up for FA status and the vote so far is 8-0 in favor. Palm_Dogg 18:36, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Kurosawa's brother

I am watching the PBS "Masterpiece Theater" entitled 'Kurosawa'. It mentions a brother, whose suicide may have influenced Kurosawa's career. Does anyone know more about this? Does anyone think that this deserves mention in the main article? Bill Jefferys 01:19, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I think it does. Kurosawa's Something Like an Autobiography goes into some detail about his brother and their relationship. If you're watching the documentary made in ~2000, Paul Scofield reads various portions of this book. Z Wylld 20:37, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Miller's Crossing?

Article states that Yojimbo was the basis for the Coen Brothers' Miller's Crossing. While there are some parallels between the two, I believe it's generally conceded that MC is primarily based on the works of Dashiell Hammett. I feel this reference ought to be either weakened or removed.

On a similar note if you look at the Yojimbo (film) article you'll see that it is not official that Yojimbo is based off of Red Harvest, the Red Harvest says about the same. Highlandlord 12:19, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Yes, Miller's Crossing is based on the novels The Glass Key and Red Harvest by Hammett. 145.222.138.134 16:37, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Cultural depictions of Akira Kurosawa

I've started an approach that may apply to Wikipedia's Core Biography articles: creating a branching list page based on in popular culture information. I started that last year while I raised Joan of Arc to featured article when I created Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc, which has become a featured list. Recently I also created Cultural depictions of Alexander the Great out of material that had been deleted from the biography article. Since cultural references sometimes get deleted without discussion, I'd like to suggest this as a model for the editors here. Regards, Durova 15:59, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

His influence

"Remake" has a specific meaning, and to say that A Bug's Life or Three Amigos is a remake of Seven Samurai is just factually incorrect. "Inspired by" is also questionable; it implies that the one film was the impetus for the creation of another. "Influenced by" is pretty clearly a better choice of words. Also, "huge influence" is rather unprofessional language. I tried to fix this stuff, but it all got reverted. I hope somebody else will make an effort, as this section is a joke right now. 68.183.204.155 18:13, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Here's a few reviews indicating some of the remakes and retellings, inlcuding A Bug's Life. It's common knowledge, really, owing to the fact that it can be sussed by watching the movies. And here's Wikipedia's own definition of remake, which gives the term some room for variations which would seem to include replacing people with bugs and some story variation. A compromise of "loosely remade as" might work. I'd also like to see some evidence that Kurosawa helped "create" the Western seeing as the genre is older than the advent of cinema.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/gperf/shows/kurosawa/multimedia/m_7samurai.html
http://otherstuff.laurelandhardycentral.com/7samarai.html
http://www.dvdjournal.com/reviews/s/sevensamurai_cc.shtml
http://www.jamesbowman.net/reviewDetail.asp?pubID=407
http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/bugslifece.php
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20010819/REVIEWS08/401010356/1023
Doctor Sunshine 21:27, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
You're right, Magnificent Seven launched the "Spagehetti Western" genre, I changed the article to reflect that. Bug's Life, etc. are not, by any reasonable definition, "remakes." However, you could mention that the influence of Seven Samurai is so wide as to show up in such diverse movies as Bug's Life, Three Amigos, etc., if you wanted to.
68.183.204.155 00:55, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Unless he grew a beard and moved to Italy he didn't help create the Spaghetti Western. Inspired or, your word, influenced would be more appropriate. And even then, the placement of that statment implies that it was The Magnificent Seven and/or Seven Samurai that sparked it as opposed to Kurosawa's samurai films in general or Yojimbo which was remade almost shot for shot into A Fist Full of Dollars which is considered one of the first Spahgetti Westerns.
Regarding A Bug's Life, Three Amigos, Battle Beyond the Stars, etc., Wikipedia goes by consenus and I'm not really looking to research this extensively but just those first few links I googled list them as remakes, unofficial remakes, refashionings and reworkings, all which warrant more direct summation than "influenced". --Doctor Sunshine 02:24, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Ok, change it so it's better. My bit on how it influenced Spaghetti Westerns isn't very good, I agree. And if you can find a major review that describes any of those movies as "remakes," I encourage you to list them as such.
68.183.204.155 19:40, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Done deal. Really, this section could stand plenty of additions, the more eclectic the better, I say. --Doctor Sunshine 22:18, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Influenced Spike Lee??? And Tarantino?? what about him —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.122.50.82 (talk) 15:38, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Movie list

anyone against setting up a table like on the Kinji Fukasaku page? could probably incorporate a small movie poster image as well. --AlexOvShaolin 19:39, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

That was me. This was actually the next article I'd planned to do that on, though, as evidenced, I have not gotten around to that in the past couple months. If anyone gets to it before me the only things I would change is not linking the years (they're low value links according to MoS:L), stretching it out to 100 screen width (easily done) and maybe adding the ability to hide the whole thing — only because I've noticed a lot of FA film bios either do away with filmographies entirely or put links to them or condensed versions in the "see also" section; I think making it hidable and maybe transcluding it from a template article, like I've done at Seijun Suzuki, would be a better option. Doctor Sunshine 03:21, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
I ended up doing this to the Takashi Miike, however i'm at a loss for info, especially for what the original Japanese characters are, what was your resource for finding them for the Fukasaku and Suzuki articles? --AlexOvShaolin 20:34, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
I used the JMDb. Just cut and paste the directors name in kanji (without spaces) into the search box. Miike's here. If you got his filmography from the IMDb it'll probably be missing some titles but you can usually line them up roughly by the dates and more specifically if you understand Japanese. I don't but I can usually figure it out from the hiragana and what few kanji I know. Also jisho.org is a great help if you want to confirm you've matched up the right title and get the macrons right. Figuring out the romaji with only the kana is something best left to a fluent Japanese reader but I'm sure there's a full filmography in English and romaji somewhere on the Internet. One thing, the Wiki table policy advises against using tables for living peoples filmographies, just because it's more difficult for most people to add new titles. Miike's prolific but he's popular enough that someone'll always be able to figure it out so that's no problem but just a heads up. Well done by the way. Doctor Sunshine 05:54, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thanx, this is a little above my head though. i could probably handle kana but the kanji is too difficult for me. --AlexOvShaolin 03:02, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
No worries. I'll maybe give it a shot at some point. Doctor Sunshine 09:29, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Kurosawa pd?

according to this all pre 1953 japanese movies are public domain, so the p.d. category should be added to more kurosawa articles, correct? --AlexOvShaolin 04:54, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Affirmative. Doctor Sunshine 03:21, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Finance and revenue

I would like to see more information here about how his films were financed, particularly in the 1950s and 1960s, and whether they made enough money at the box office to redeem his studio's indulgence with his dictatorial approach. The extras on Seven Samurai state that filmed was scheduled for three months, but ultimately took most of a year, with the final mud battle sequence shot in sleet filled mud in March. It also states the mill was rebuilt twice to get it to burn properly in the background of the dramatic baby rescue. Did this make financial sense for the studio, or was Kurosawa indulged as a matter of post-occupation national pride? MaxEnt (talk) 23:33, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Public domain

recently a japanese court ruled that kurosawa's early works (pre-1953) were no longer in public domain (previously it had been ruled that all pre-1953 films made in japan were PD), however there has yet to be a case in the USA that i'm aware of in which a work considered PD to our system is resigned a copyright, therefore it would naturally seem that in the USA, these films are still in PD. --AlexOvShaolin 02:00, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

  • "were no longer in public domain (previously it had been ruled that all pre-1953 films made in japan were PD)": actually no, it weren't. General rule : anything that became PD (lost copyright protection) will stay so, in Japan as in USA. What happened exactly here is that a recent Japanese copyright law reform left some ambiguity for those works. Some wondered which law ruled the copyright expiration for those films: the pre-1970 copyright law ? the 1970-2003 one ? or the post-2003 one ?. For instance, if the 1970-2003 copyright law applied, then a film released in 1952 would have been public domain in 2002 (and if so, it would still be PD). But if the pre-1970 law still apply to those work, it would be different (that would be 38 years after author's death). This ambiguity is now clarified (and as usual, not in the interest of the public/commons).
  • That's why some (ie. a few wikipedians, Cosmo Content) have believed that those pre-1953 AK films may be public domain (1953 = 2003 - 50 years: works that may have fallen in the public domain before the 2003 reform). The September 14, 2007, the Tokyo District Court ruling just clarified the situation: films released before 1970 are and had alway been under the pre-1970 copyright law conditions regarding IP longevity, meaning that a 1952 film never was public domain, and won't be until author death + 38 years. Therefore, Akira Kurosawa films ar not, and never were, public domain. They will be PD on December 31, 2036. Yes, too bad.
  • "it would naturally seem that in the USA, these films are still in PD" as stated above, those films never were PD; it's not a matter of "loosing the pd status" (that's impossible, yes). Furthermore en.wikipedia is not USA's wikipedia but the wikipedia written in English language. So even if the copyright status of those films was different in USA, it would be quite misleading to call them globally "pd" (and such an assertion wouldn't be very useful anyway, since en.wikipedia has a policy of accepting faire use pictures (as opposed to, say, de.wp, fr.wp and ja.wp)).
  • Now, we have a interesting question: Yasujirō Ozu released films before 1970 (and even before 1953, for that matter), and is dead 44 years ago...
  • I noted, my discoveries about the pre-1953 japanese films status on commons (the important part are the last two paragraphs): http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Help_desk_archive/2007Apr#Are_pre-1953_Japaneses_films_ok_for_us_.3F
Hope that helped. Benjamin.pineau (talk) 14:23, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
PS: note that Cosmo Content may have appealed this recent ruling (I don't know, I hope they did). But for now we're left with this ruling. Benjamin.pineau (talk) 14:30, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Its a shame japan has been so closed-lipped on the subject of PD, so i dont buy the fact that the films might have never been declared PD, there are a few reports out which suggest otherwise[1], so to assume that these films were never assigned PD status at one_point_or_another without much existing documentation from the japanese government is probably too hasty. what we know is that in japan the films are no longer in PD, until a ruling occurs in the US there is no clear way to know. governments need to learn to document these kinds of things better, so we shouldnt be put in the situation to 'assume' which in this case we will have to do, regardless of the recent ruling. --AlexOvShaolin 16:11, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes but please note that the contactmusic's article is not very complete or serious. They missed the fact that plaintiffs appealed to the Tokyo High Court, for instance. Also, and that show all the weirdness about protective copyright judgements and conspicuous relation to national industry support: in this case (First Trading Corp vs Paramount) they ruled so liberally about an American film copyright, owned by an American company while the later judgement (Toho vs Cosmo Content), about a Japanese film, left us with a contradictory judgement opting for a conservative copyright reinforcement. Incidentally, that may show why Japan has been so closed-lipped, as you say (btw, many important - and still profitable - Ozu and AK films were released in 1952-1954, hence the 2003 copyright law reform)... Here is a more serious study on the case you're talking about : http://www.law.washington.edu/Casrip/Newsletter/Vol14/newsv14i1Mitani.html (but don't forget, this was written before appeal was judged, and before the Toho vs. Cosmo Content case was closed). My take: let's just wait until the two aforementioned cases appeals are judged (then at least one of: Ozu or either pre-53 Kurosawa will be considered PD, depending on the court decision about which law apply). Benjamin.pineau (talk) 18:16, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
hmmm, very interesting, thank you for sharing that article, i was under the impression that the law was for pre-1953, not including that year, but it looks like its pre-1954 films. of course i understand that this was before the recent ruling, i hope they dont cave to the western pressure on this issue. AlexOvShaolin 16:31, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Barenaked Ladies

Should the Kurasawa reference in the Barenaked Ladies' song "One Week" be mentioned in this article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.68.246.87 (talk) 00:36, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I was going to mention that, I think it should. --Ashitaka96 | E-mail • Talk | 22:17, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
How could a brief mention of Kurosawa in one song be relevant enough to be included in this biography? WP addict 0 (talk) 23:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Upgrade to B-class

I think the article is now suitable for an upgrade from C-Class.--Stepusual (talk) 01:51, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you, Stepusual. In fact, I would like this article to become a Featured Article by Kurosawa's birthday on March 23, 2010. So how does one go about upgrading this article to B-Class as a first step? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dylanexpert (talk • contribs) 01:08, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Citation added and request for Peer Review

I took care of the only "Citation needed" note remaining in the article by editing one sentence. The passage refers to the well-known story about Rashomon, in which Kurosaw had dyed the "rainwater" with black ink in order to make it visible against the sky. In the original edit, the sentence included the following phrase: "... and [Kurosawa] ended up using up the entire local water supply in creating the rainstorm." I had never heard this story, did not know where it came from and thought it unlikely in any case. The memoir by Kurosawa's trusted assistant Teruyo Nogami, Waiting on the Weather (Rashomon was the first film she made with the director), indicates that, after shooting ended and while the film was being edited, for its Tokyo premiere several days later on August 25 1950, a fire broke out at the Daiei studios, endangering the negative. Nogami specifically states that the water tanks were full (p. 84) and thus the crew were able to put out the fire quickly. This casts doubt on the story about Kurosawa using up the entire water supply during shooting. So I simply deleted the phrase and added the citation from AK's autobiography mentioning the black ink in the water.

The article is now ready for Peer Review and I will attempt to nominate it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dylanexpert (talk • contribs) 15:25, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Contradicting statements

In the "Youth" section of the article, there are a few sentences that contradict each other:
1) "Akira Kurosawa grew up in a household with three older brothers and four older sisters."
2) "Of his three older brothers, one died before Akira was born and one was already grown and out of the household. One of his four older sisters had also left the home to begin her own family before Kurosawa was born."
If three of his siblings had died or left the household before he was born, he could not have grown up in a household with them. I don't have access to his autobiography (I'm guessing this is where the information is from), can someone who has take a look and edit accordingly? Crusoe704 (talk) 01:48, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Google

Worth mentioning in the article that he's currently featured on the google homepage?--Nick??? 07:15, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

A discussion on the copyright status of Akira Kurosawa's works has started at Commons:Commons:Village pump#I don't understand.... Any contributions would be welcome, especially from those that can read and understand Japanese law. -84user (talk) 17:23, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Common theme of Kurosawa's movies

I don't know where to add this: When Kurosawa was asked in a 1993 interview what was the common theme of his movies, he answered: "If I think about it, it is the question of why people can't be happy together." This appeared in an article in Haaretz's City Mouse section for Kurosawa's 100th birthday: http://www.mouse.co.il/CM.articles_item,1019,209,48083,.aspx Wtaa (talk) 05:27, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Extensively revised lead section

I have completely revised the lead section of this article. The few sparse sentences that existed previously have been split into two paragraphs and I have greatly expanded it by adding an additional long paragraph in the middle. I have also fixed up the reference in the last sentence, which previously linked to an irrelevant page. Now everyone reading this lead section will understand why Kurosawa is historically important and rates an encyclopedia article.

PLEASE do not cite any of the passages in the new lead section for lack of references! This is only the basic information on the artist that would not be disputed by anyone with any knowledge of the subject. All the assertions made in the lead paragraphs either are already given citations when dealt with in detail in the main body of the article, or else will be provided with such citations when the revisions are finished.

--Dylanexpert (talk) 02:57, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Restructuring and Criticisms section

I am currently completely restructuring this page. For example, I have started a new section "Worldwide Impact," which includes as subsections "Kurosawa's Reputation Among Other Filmmakers," "Remakes," "Homages and Allusions" and two new subsections, "Awards" and "Current Standing." This is not complete, so please hold off on major changes or comments until it is finished.

I am also introducing a brand-new Criticisms section, which will compile and examine much of the critiques that the director has received in Japan and elsewhere. This is to create a balanced view of the artist, which I believe is necessary because of the presence of so many quotations and other material in the piece that rather fulsomely praises him and his work. (Not that I don't think him worthy of such praise!) Again, this is a work-in-progress, so please don't make any major changes or offer comments until it is finished. Thank you! Dylanexpert (talk) 00:11, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Just a suggestion, it would probably be best if the list of directors influenced by Kurosawa were altered into a paragraph (which is what was recommended to me when I started editing this article).--Olduch (talk) 01:08, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Seriously what's the point of this gigantic "Criticisms" section? I think it should be removed altogether.  Dr. Loosmark  18:12, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Good question! The point of this whole exercise is to make this a featured article. One of the things necessary for a featured article is balance. No artist, however great, has not suffered his or her critics. It's really surprising how many people, particularly in Japan, simply did not like Kurosawa's art or even Kurosawa as a person. Besides, the history of these negative views -- what they say about the culture(s) in which the director operated -- is a fascinating story in itself. You must realize that the Criticisms section, as originally planned, was considerably longer! However, I'll probably whittle it down a bit more before I'm finished. But if you take the whole thing out, all that's left are accolades and awards, a one-sided hagiography. You, as an exopedian, should of all people appreciate that fact. Dylanexpert (talk) 00:31, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
There's a big difference between NPOV and "balance" which seems not to be appreciated. NPOV is just that: neutral, factual. Having an equal number of positive, negative and other viewpoints leads to an unreadable and unencyclopaedic article but not necessarily a "balanced" article. If you're looking for a complete biography and discussion of Kurosawa and his works, one could be pointed to by Wikipedia, but trying to include that much material in the article makes it largely unreadable. Digitalican (talk) 02:17, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I hesitate to make alterations during the massive rewrite that several editors (or possibly just one, using multiple IDs) are doing right now, but want to ask a question of all followers of this article: do not the categorization headings seem stylistically off-kilter in a couple of cases? Every time I read "Son and immediate post-war works" or "Daughter and international recognition," I wince, because there is no relation between the two parts of each heading other than their occurrence in the life of the same man. The son and daughter remarks belong, it seems to me (and a huge percentage of WP articles bear this out as standard), in a Personal life section. To state that Kurosawa had a son, in a single sentence, and then go on for a paragraph or two about his post-war work, seems both stylistically hodge-podge and misleading insofar as the heading suggests that the material on Kurosawa's son will be of equal or greater importance in the section. It just reads weird to me and my English Comp students would get an F for organization on this aspect. Headings should label specifically related sets of paragraphs, not merely list everything that's been dumped into those paragraphs. One doesn't find a section at the bookstore labeled "Auto mechanics and pie baking."Monkeyzpop (talk) 03:03, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

A thought regarding the "Kurosawa on DVD" section: if you think that there is a need to offer more information about Kurosawa's availability on home video, one option could be to complement the section with an external link to this page, which is a somewhat more in-depth look at English friendly Kurosawa releases on DVD, as well as this page, which does the same with blu-ray releases.

I will not, however, be doing the linking myself, as 1) I am the author of the said pages, 2) those pages include affiliate links, and 3) I don't know if such external links are good form even if the above two were not true. As it stands, however, the "Kurosawa on DVD" section is a little US centric and smells a little bit like an ad for Criterion (not that Criterion hasn't earned it!).

Similarly, if you think that the "Further reading" section could do with an external link, I have a page on Kurosawa books as well.

- Vili (talk) 20:24, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Ran

Masterpiece? or not. In my opinion it was one of his finest films, other opinions are welcome...Modernist (talk) 23:41, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Absolutely one of his best, and thankfully now being rereleased in theaters. It's due here in early September, and having not seen it on the big screen since its initial release, I'm chomping at the bit. MarmadukePercy (talk) 23:48, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Ran for me is definitely a masterpiece, easily the best movie Kurosawa released after Red Beard. However, it has some major flaws. The lead role of Hidetora requires a monumental actor (like Mifune) to carry it off. Nakadai, excellent as he is, is not, and cannot be, that actor. At times, Nakadai is startlingly effective, as when Hidetora confronts Jiro at the second castle, and Jiro is (momentarily) cowed by his father's natural authority over him. At other times (the death scene), he is oddly ineffective. The character played by Peter is jarringly anachronistic -- a weird lapse on the part of a director who was such a stickler for historical accuracy. The Lady Kaeda character is one of Kurosawa greatest creations, a magnificent monster, and beautifully played by Mieko Harada, but she tends to upset the dramatic balance of the work. The great silent battle sequence has some beautiful shots and other that seem eerily false. The virtuous Sue character is completely lost in the sweep of the story: a significant flaw, since she is supposed to counterbalance the evil characters. In fact, we barely see her face. With all these faults, Ran is a work of great sophisticated/barbaric power, and the final shots of the blind man on the edge of the precipice are unforgettable. Dylanexpert (talk) 17:03, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Non-free use images

This article was recently tagged as including a significant number of copyrighted images, and the matter is also being discussed in the articles Featured Article Candidacy. I decided to be bold - WP:SOFIXIT - and start to cut down the use of that material. I've removed around half a dozen images. The ones I have left are still non-free. What they have in common (with one exception) is that they show the director himself, or his own artwork, or his film techniques. These appear to me to be areas in which it might be possible to defend the image use. They may, however, still be argued to be merely decorative - they must still meet all of the non-free content criteria. In particular, non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding (criterion 8). I certainly doubt this would be met, for example, by the portrait of Mifune (the one image that does not fit my criteria above); it may also not be met by most other images in the article. Other input gratefully received. hamiltonstone (talk) 00:40, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

There's a tremendous amount of overuse here. He is deceased, so it is acceptable to include one image of him if no free licensed images exist. It's also acceptable to include one, maybe two, movie screenshots from his films (presumably no free alternatives exist there). Currently, I see over a dozen screenshots, some other tangentially related stuff, a movie poster...We don't even generally allow more than one screenshot in articles about the movie itself.
As far as the "cutting" techniques go, it may be acceptable to include one short movie clip showing the technique. Eight nonfree images are way beyond appropriate for it, though. Seraphimblade Talk to me 04:47, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
User:Hamiltonstone: I don't understand why there's anything to discuss since you took the article out of Featured Article candidates unilaterally without giving me a chance to debate the issue or even rectify the problem, whether I agreed with you or not. What I don't understand is why Wiki doesn't offer an arbitration process.
A minor note - I didn't take it outof FAC - an FAC delegate did: they would have assessed it as being too far from meeting FA criteria at this stage and needing more work. That is likely to include responding to the image problems. hamiltonstone (talk) 01:31, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
User:Hammersoft: Why are you even bothering with this article when it's no longer a Featured Article candidate? Go concentrate on some other article like Banquo, a "Good" article which is written in sub-standard English. Regards, Dylanexpert (talk) 10:58, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Wikipedia does have an arbitration process. It's part of our dispute resolution process, and is usually a last resort. This dispute is merely a content dispute, and definitely does not rise to the level of requiring the Arbitration Committee to step in. I'm bothering with this article because I'm a Wikipedia editor. I do not need any other reason or permission to be here. You do not own this article. As to the specific issue, I concur with Seraphimblade. The use is extreme. It's been reduced from its previous high of 23, but the usage of non-free content in this article is extreme. Non-free images should be limited as much as possible, per our mission. A good way of looking at the inclusion of a non-free image is whether you can locate secondary sources that reference the scene shown in particular screenshot you are wanting to use. If you can't, the image is probably wholly unnecessary to convey encyclopedic meaning. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:22, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
I've gotten probably at least the worst of it, either duplicated ones or (in one case) a single section with no less than eight images...that should take care of a good deal of it, so unless anyone's got any objections to it, I'll remove the nonfree overuse tag. Seraphimblade Talk to me 07:35, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Your arbitrary edits were entirely insensible per policy and have been duly reverted. Do with the tag as you will—editors who actually care about the sense and purpose of our policy don't care about such trivial brandings.—DCGeist (talk) 09:25, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Care to explain why you disagree, rather than just taking a nasty and condescending tone? Seraphimblade Talk to me 22:34, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm with Seraphimblade on the images - in fact i'm not sure Seraphim went far enough in getting rid of non-free use images that are not absolutely essential, consistent with policy, etc. And to call them "arbitrary edits" and "insensible per policy" seems a long way off the mark. What gives? hamiltonstone (talk) 23:29, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Criticism in Japan

This is a fine article, but it does have some oddities. Considering how long the section on criticism in Japan is, it's rather strange to see that the criticism is mostly funneled through a single non-Japanese film writer, who--at least in this article--doesn't name the Japanese critics she's alluding to or even indicate the kind of status they have in Japan. (Are they underinformed pundits mouthing off in weekly magazines, or intellectual heavyweights writing copiously footnoted books, or what?)

I don't think that this is so very important and for this reason am very deliberately not inserting it into the FAC discussion. Tama1988 (talk) 08:27, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

post-humorous works section needs updating

mentions a documentary to be released in 2010, i haven't heard about it, does any one know? 07:19, 28 February 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by PatxiG (talk • contribs)

Awards

I am very surprised this was not mentioned anywhere http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/diary/oct98/octt.html User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:17, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

influences

There seems to be some controversy about what to put in the "influences" box. Please try to use references to decide this. JoshuSasori (talk) 22:26, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

JoshuSasori is right. Now if there is referenced info about "influenced by" or "influenced" in the body of the article then it usually doesn't need to be repeated in the infobox but if a name is added to either section that is not mentioned in the article then a ref needs to be added next to it. MarnetteD | Talk 22:46, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
I actually don't know very much about Kurosawa's influences so cannot judge which person is right, but hopefully there is a way to get consensus here. JoshuSasori (talk) 00:03, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Chusingun

Why is there no mention of Chusingun, which was also influential to George Lucas? It bothers me that no one has taken the time to pay homage to this director by even posting a non-objective review. Then again, I should probably get to the library and check out the movie myself.

If you mean Chūshingura, one reason could be that Kurosawa never filmed it. —Tamfang (talk) 03:09, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Infobox "influenced" - please discuss

Please can we discuss the "infobox influenced" field here? For about a week, this field has relentlessly been changed by people with wildly different opinions. Things to establish:

  1. Do we need an "influenced" field?
  2. How many names should it contain?
  3. Does it need citations or can the citations go in the article body?

Please reply under here, and I politely request that the repeated editing of the influenced field ceases until we have a consensus. JoshuSasori (talk) 23:43, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for featured article

"absorbing the democratic ideals of the Occupation" what an oxymoron — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.208.217.163 (talk) 19:58, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

You cannot have half nationalities...

The article mentions in the criticisms section "half-Japanese, half-American nephew". You cannot be half citizen of either of these nations. They only offer full citizenship. Please change this sentence. Cheers.184.155.120.157 (talk) 18:14, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your question. The item in question is not referring to his citizenship. It is referring to his ancestry as the character has one parent from Japan and one from the US - or it might be grandparents as it has been awhile since I saw the film. Thus, the sentence does not need alteration. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 18:28, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Then you should clarify that he was Indian. Otherwise, it is palpably a confounding statement.184.155.120.157 (talk) 02:36, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
He wasn't Indian. Where did you get that from? People have parents of different nationality all the time and this is the way that fact is written, thus, the statement reads just fine. MarnetteD|Talk 03:11, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
The question is not about his parent's nationalities. It is about the assertion that one could have half of a citizenship somewhere. Then how on Earth would he be "half American"??? lol What country in the world gives out half citizenships? Again, neither the USA, nor Japan give out half nationalities. You either are 100% or you are 0%. Your parents nationalities do not split in half for the child. Are you mental?184.155.130.147 (talk) 01:06, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

You don't seem to have a clue. Nowhere in the article does it state that the character in the film is a citizen of two countries. It states that his parents were from two different countries just like Japanese American these people. BTW there are hundreds of thousands of people who have dual, or even, multiple citizenship. As far as I am concerned this conversation serves no further purpose. MarnetteD|Talk 02:09, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

"In 1954, nuclear tests in the Pacific were causing radioactive rainstorms in Japan"

I believe this is not possible, as winds move from atomic test areas toward United States, not Japan. The Japanese fishing vessel incident, cited in same paragraph, was not in Japanese waters but happened in proximity to the test areas. As an example, the Japanese "Balloon Bomb" program floated balloons from Japan to the US using these same wind currents. Thank You — Preceding unsigned comment added by Espania1958 (talk • contribs) 16:19, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Akira Kurosawa/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MusicAngels (talk · contribs) 19:05, 5 October 2015 (UTC)


The current outline to the article looks a little atypical for such a nomination and appears very closely oriented to the Biography of the director rather that his films. Are you able to possibly rework the article outline to a more traditional Wikipedia format for directors? For example, Early life and childhood are usually separated out into a separate section at the beginning. Similarly for Early education. Then your "Biography" section, or appropriate title, could be more closely oriented to the actual films Kurosawa made, which is usually what readers of his biography would be most interested in. Is this something you feel you might be able to pull together?

This message was also sent to the nominating editor's Talk page who has not answered in a week. If no-one can take up the assessment for Kurosawa within 2-3 days then this nomination shall be subject to quick close without further notice. MusicAngels (talk) 19:05, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

This nomination appears to be a quick fail following no response from the nominating editor in over one week on his Talk page, and no response here from any editor. I shall be notifying the editor on his Talk page later today and closing the nomination as the nominating editor appears to be on an extended break. GA Renomination is possible if someone is willing to do the required reading and to be available for the assessment in the future. MusicAngels (talk) 16:46, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Akira Kurosawa. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:55, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Akira Kurosawa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:01, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Akira Kurosawa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:24, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Akira Kurosawa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:51, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Akira Kurosawa/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contribs) 14:12, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Will be doing this. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:12, 22 June 2017 (UTC)


I have to admit that, at least on Wikipedia, my subject of expertise is more on anime and manga in general rather than live-action Japanese films, so doing this review was somewhat more challenging than the one I did for Hayao Miyazaki's article. I have to say that, so far, the article looks pretty good and is well-written; in fact, the level of detail is close to that of an FA instead of just a GA. Checking the external links, some of them are dead or have moved, but this is an easily resolvable issue. Earwigs detects some "issues", but these issues appear to be websites that copied from Wikipedia than the other way around. As the article is not a BLP, not every contentious statement needs sourcing; nevertheless, almost all paragraphs have at least one citation, and the phrases that don't are generally transitional phrases for the next paragraph.

Just a few minor issues though: the first is that the article's lede says "Akira Kurosawa (黒沢 明) (March 23, 1910 – September 6, 1998)" when this could instead be written as "Akira Kurosawa (黒沢 明, March 23, 1910 – September 6, 1998)". Related to this, the first paragraph of the "Childhood and youth" repeats his full name at the first sentence when perhaps simply "Kurosawa" is sufficient. In the "Director in training (1935–41)" section, the second time Kajirō Yamamoto is mentioned, his name lacks a macron (in addition, it's possible that his full name is unnecessary in this part as it's already clear which Yamamoto is being referred to). Finally, the "Documentaries" section is completely unsourced and the movie titles are not italicized. Otherwise, this should be good to go. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 05:45, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

That is pretty comprehensive on your part for the details given above. Your version of the lead sentence and dates is better than the one in the article, and yours is now placed there. For the "Childhood" section, his last name is sufficient as you state above, and I have left the footnote there for those interested in the details. For the "Director " section, your comment on Yamamoto is accurate and only the first instance of his name includes his first name with link to his article which gives the Nihongo straight away. For the "Documentaries" section, the titles are all now italic, with links to websites for readers and editors who need more details. It's really good of you to have taken on this semi-long article with such detailed remarks and comments. Let me know if more needs attention. JohnWickTwo (talk) 04:15, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
@JohnWickTwo: Almost all the issues I have raised above have been addressed. Once the problematic links have been resolved I will pass this. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 05:58, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: Earlier this morning I was able to format the rest of the references in the documentaries section. If I've missed anything in the cites then let me know. They should all be formatted and linked there now. 15:15, 24 June 2017 (UTC)JohnWickTwo (talk)
I should have made this clearer: the problem is not the formatting, it's that two of the article's links are dead. If possible, please provide an archive link for each dead link. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:37, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
After some looking, I think I found those two old 2009 dead archive cites, which I have now reformatted to active urls with updated access dates for June 2017. Some of those very old archive urls from before my time with this article have long been dead links and I changed them to the new active links. They should have been removed earlier since there is no back-up now. The new urls link fine now to the updated links. Both of the ones you pointed out were in the legacy section which you helped me locate and correct. I think that may be the last of them. JohnWickTwo (talk) 03:29, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
There are no more problems with the article so I'm happy to say that I am now passing this GAN. With a little more work, this should easily go up to FA too. There's a dead link to the Kurosawa studio website and an issue with the Oscars page, but these are minor and resolvable issues that do not really detract from the article as a whole. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:55, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: My appreciation for your doing that. If there are any other refs to look at then just leave me with the ref # either here or on my talk page. Is there anything that can be done to get the announcement of your assessment on Wikipedia:WikiProject Japan/Assessment and to get the GA logo on the top of the article page at this time. JohnWickTwo (talk) 12:50, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
The dead links can be seen at [2]. Actually any user (including you) can add the icon to the article as long as the article passes its GAN. As for news, you can add it yourself. Finally, you may be interested in nominating the article for WP:DYK as it's a newly-promoted GA; more information can be read at that page. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:09, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Akira Kurosawa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:23, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Trivia

On one occasion Kurosawa got to meet John Ford, a director commonly said to be the most influential to Kurosawa. And not knowing what to say Ford simply said, "You really like rain." Kurosawa responded "You've really been paying attention to my films"

Didn´t he answer?: "you´ve NOT really been paying attention to my films"

Rain stands for sadness and agony in his movies - Kurosawa does not like rain

They were talking as filmmakers. As a filmmaker, Kurosawa loved rain. He went to extraordinary pains to make it look just right, in order to bring across a particular mood, which as you say, is not a happy one in most cases, but so what? That's not the point. You might as well say a painter who constantly uses a particular shade of blue to depict suicidal depression hates that shade of blue, when in fact he loves it to death, or he wouldn't use it at all. You're the one failing to understand the point of the story. Which may nor may not have happened that way, or at all, but there's no question that Ford appreciated Kurosawa, and Kurosawa revered Ford--and there's a lot of rain in Ford's work as well, and it's likewise used to create a mood. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.108.156.121 (talk) 15:13, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Akira Kurosawa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:26, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

filmography

I know there is a separate page for Kurosawa's filmography, but only because I did a search for it. You would never be able to find it from this page, yet it must be one of the main items of interest for someone looking up Kurosawa in Wikipedia.

I would recommend having a clearly labeled link to the Filmography page, easily visible upon first glance at the page. Either within the introductory paragraphs (maybe make it its own short one sentence paragraph, to draw the eye), or within the Table of Contents link to a new section called Filmography, and that section simply has the sentence, with appropriate aliased hyperlink: "See Akira Kurosawa Filmography page." No further text required for this section, but it would be easy to find at first glance.

Theres a lot of info on this page, all of it great, but that simple tabular filmography would be of interest to a new reader before the lengthy essay style historical sections.

J Edward Malone (talk) 19:45, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your post J Edward Malone. I've added a link based on your request. Due to the way the film sections are spread out I felt a see also section was best. If other editors can think of something better that is fine. MarnetteD|Talk 21:18, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
Ack messed up my ping so here it is again J Edward Malone. MarnetteD|Talk 21:19, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
Appreciated, but there is still nothing that actually says Filmography, which is what a person would be looking for. The link in Table of contents says "see also", then the section it leads to says "List of creative works by Akira Kurosawa". Note Hitchcock's page has Filmography as one of the sections in its Table of Contents. Kubrick's page makes it a little bit harder, it has a section called Film Career, but the very first thing you see in that section is a clearly labelled link to the Kubrick filmography page. In either case the director created Creative Works other than films, but they were primarily film directors and a clearly labelled link to the filmography would be (probably) the first thing a new visitor to a film director's main page would be looking for.
I see what you mean, the sequence of film productions is mixed up in biographical subsections. How about this, instead of calling the new section See Also, just call it Filmography (why not?), and the contents of the section remain exactly as is. A user lands in that very short section and all they see is that one hyperlink, first guess would be to click on it. That should be more intuitive.
I should probably just make the edit myself, since I can imagine it better than I can explain it. But I've kind of gone off editing wikipedia lately, and am more comfortable just leaving suggestions.
J Edward Malone (talk) 17:31, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks to Edward for his comments. Akira Kurosawa has a joint reputation as being an excellent screenwriter as well as an excellent director. Therefor the page was created for List of creative works by Akira Kurosawa which covers both his written film-scripts and his directed films. This List page is currently linked twice in the current article under See also and under the Screenwriting section as well. This was done because Kurosawa is unlike the two other directors you have named, Kubrick and Hitchcock, both of whom had reputations as top directors but not as film-script writers. Hope that is useful. JohnWickTwo (talk) 22:25, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
I missed both of these posts - apologies. I think JohnWickTwo explains things pretty well. Since we don't have an article named AK filmography it could be misleading to use the term. I missed the link in the screenwriting section JohnWickTwo do you think two links are okay in this situation? If so is there a better header than "see also" for the second one? Thanks for all of the work that you are currently performing on this article. MarnetteD|Talk 23:57, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your edits. It might be nice to hear if Edward has follow-up thoughts since he has been sticking with this since June 15. JohnWickTwo (talk) 10:34, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Image review

Second updates

@JJMC89: Three images switched to better images. Is it getting any closer? JohnWickTwo (talk) 22:53, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

One more good one. Images from any film that Kurosawa directed are copyright in Japan until 2036 (38 years after his death). — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:52, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Third updates

@JJMC89: There is no answer from your notice to the image download editor for the Kurosawa Infobox image at the top of the screen. The only hint he left was that it was from page 88 of an unidentified Kurosawa book. I am fully supportive of switching to the 1920s student image of Kurosawa which I provided from Tumblr above if you could help to get it into WikiCommons if its suitable. The other replacement images I just listed above are now in the article. JohnWickTwo (talk) 10:30, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Nesnad confirmed the image is from the 1953 magazine issue, so it is PD in Japan and the U.S. — JJMC89 (T·C) 16:23, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Fourth updates

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Akira_Kurosawa/Archive_1&oldid=1136289548"