• Shogun vs. Shogun

1/2/25 (Tues)

I never caught the original Shogun series way back when, so having seen the new version recently, I figured it was time to get caught up. As it turns out, both are superb renditions of the book, but their aims and approaches are very different.

The original Shogun of 1980 was produced at a time when Japan was still largely an unknown quantity in the US; I remember having to explain what sushi was. The old series was thus presented from a Western viewpoint. The Japanese actors – an impressive lineup, including Mifune Toshiro, Shimada Yoko and Frankie Sakai – spoke extensively in Japanese, but their talk was never subtitled and only dubbed when absolutely necessary. That is, the audience is in the same position as Blackthorn, never knowing what is being said until and unless it is interpreted for him/us. That produces an interesting dynamic, especially with the lack of knowledge at the time even about modern Japan, much less the interregnum after Hideyoshi’s death. We experience Japan through Blackthorn’s eyes.

Japanese audiences, on the other hand, may not be as enthralled. Aside from the fact that they don’t need their country explained to them, they understand dialogues that they are not supposed to, which greatly dilutes the drama. The situation is the same with the film Lost in Translation, which I always felt should be re-released in Japan with the Japanese dubbed in Korean or such so that audiences here can appreciate Bill Murray’s situation and understand why a guy like him can land Scarlett Johansson. I think the same would be needed for the old Shogun to allow Japanese viewers to experience the film like the rest of the world.

In contrast, the Japanese in the new Shogun is entirely subtitled, so we, unlike Anjin, know exactly what they are saying. In fact, some 70-80% of the dialogue is Japanese, dealing with the rivalry between Ieyasu and Ishida (in the show, Toranaga and Ishido) for supremacy. Anjin is simply a tool used by Ieyasu to his own advantage. The viewer’s sympathies shift to the Japanese, with Anjin becoming a bit player in his own story. The focus is the political intrigue, which works beautifully, though it helps to know the history behind all of this.

Mariko in the earlier film, played endearingly by Shimada, is ladylike and soft-spoken and, while never bossy or deprecating, emanates complete confidence in her role as interpreter and guide. Shimada is rather less convincing in the love scenes with Anjin, though that’s not helped by the archaic thees and thous sprinkled through the dialogue. But her sweetness as well as her determination are completely in character with the traditional image of Edo women. Her accented English was also more convincing than the later Mariko’s native rendering, and her portrayal was utterly charming.

The later Mariko was a more typical 21st-century woman. She was determinedly strong without the charm to accompany it. The actress is fine, but the part itself isn’t as natural a fit with the material as in the earlier version. Still, this presumably better suits modern women’s sensibility.

The story in both cases more or less follows the book, but the change in emphasis from the foreigners to the Japanese makes both versions of interest. I’m sure some Japanese will complain about the overuse of seppuku and such, and I’m not sure why the creators felt it necessary to change the names of historic characters like Ieyasu. Still, both offer viable versions of history even allowing for dramatic license and are each worth watching. I presume the upcoming sequels to the recent version will revolve in the first year around the decisive Sekigahara battle of 1600 that led to Ieyasu taking the title of shogun (note: no shogun actually exists yet in either of the old series), and in the second year the siege of Osaka Castle that destroyed the last remnant of resistance to the Tokugawa reign. I’ll be there.