29 / BD 228 Kwaidan

Message

denti alligator · #51 Post by **denti alligator** » Wed Apr 19, 2006 10:17 am

Am I the only one who feels that the MoC looks less sharp and somewhat washed-out next to the Criterion? Ok, so the colors may now be correct, but the image seems hazy.

#52 Post by **Matt** » Wed Apr 19, 2006 10:26 am

I think the MoC may appear slightly less crisp in those captures only because they did not turn the "contrast boosting" knob to 11 like Criterion obviously did.

Bleddyn Williams · #53 Post by **Bleddyn Williams** » Wed Apr 19, 2006 11:47 am

While I consider screenshots to be a useful guide, I don't take them as gospel. I watch films on my calibrated 53" set, but I look at screenshots on my PC monitor at work, and iMac at home. At home last night, when I compared the shots on the Mac, the MoC looked too pale, and lacked decent blacks. Criterion looked strong and sharper. At work this morning, the Eureka looks great, the Criterion overly dark.

The MoC package sounds too good not to miss, and I will pick it up, but you're never 100% sure what you're getting until you see it on your equipment. I do wonder how Gary can say with assurance whose version is more accurate though. At this stage in the game, who really knows?

jcelwin · #54 Post by **jcelwin** » Wed Apr 19, 2006 1:48 pm

I would take 'slightly washed-out' over 'bad colours' and 'lost detail in the darkness' any day

.

Can't wait to get my hands on the disc, the picture looks excellent.

Ishmael · #55 Post by **Ishmael** » Wed Apr 19, 2006 3:04 pm

So, judging by those screen caps, the MoC has the correct colors and brightness? I'm supposed to believe that the filmmakers went to the trouble of designing all those crazy, beautiful sets and makeup designs but then photographed all these wild colors in ugly, flat white light that makes them look like exhibits at a Woolworth's department store? I assume the disc itself actually looks better than those captures.

stroszeck · #56 Post by **stroszeck** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 2:44 pm

Is there a reason that Criterion didn't include the WHOLE cut of the film? I can't imagine them leaving out so much from such an important masterpiece by Kobayashi...

Lino · #57 Post by **Lino** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 4:45 pm

The Criterion cut is the international version. Maybe they didn't have access to the full 183 min. cut. If they did, I'm quite sure they'd have released that one instead.

HerrSchreck · #58 Post by **HerrSchreck** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 10:03 am

It really seems like the two discs came from sources colored completely differently-- how could such differences in color scheme result from telecine operators with different impulses? Take for example the shot from HOICHI where the royal child of the doomed clan is being held in the womans arms just prior to their suicide jump-- see the blue of the studio wall in the CC, and the very neutral color of the same wall in the MoC. Now I know the hallmark of digital control in telecine is the ability to capture a color and boost/reduce it independantly without effecting green/red levels a la analog tint-control. But how does one decide to up and turn a dark blue wall into a pale neutral color without any corresponding reaction in flesh hues... or the rest of the existing frame spectrum for that matter. There is no corresponding reaction in the rest of the frame to what would obviously be considered a radical color adjustment vs the CC. I always found the rich icy navy blues of the HOICHI scenes to be, along with the WOMAN OF THE SNOW scene, flagship representations of the palette of this film, i e yellow and blue. The film always reminded me of the swedish flag. With the disappearance of this rich blue on the CC, I dunno now...

Clearly in most areas the MoC is the superior edition. I'm just not sure that the softening of these primary colors in certain scenes are the most accurate.

Gregory · #59 Post by **Gregory** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 2:23 pm

I was having many of the same thoughts (except less technically informed re: telecine). Part of my reaction is that I watched the Criterion disc enough to get really used to the way it looked. For me, the main selling points of the MoC disc are the restored footage, the extras, and the lack of over-cropping. Maybe watching it once or twice will be enough to re-adjust my expectations of how the colors "should" look.

#60 Post by **zedz** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 1:49 am

HerrSchreck wrote:It really seems like the two discs came from sources colored completely differently-- how could such differences in color scheme result from telecine operators with different impulses?

Based on the captures, it looks like that to me, since there doesn't seem to be an overwhelming consistency to the differences between them (e.g. one is green-biased and one is red). In some instances the colour palette looks generally similar; in others wildly different. I'm looking forward to seeing how the "new-look" MoC version plays.

As for Criterion's release, I believe the full-length version only resurfaced after their disc came out. I don't think they deliberately chose the shorter version.

HerrSchreck · #61 Post by **HerrSchreck** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 1:51 am

I agree. It goes against everything they stand for. EDIT-- re the version length surfacing post CC's release, that is.

peerpee · #62 Post by **peerpee** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 8:26 am

The blues in Criterion's KWAIDAN remind me of the (inaccurate) blues in Criterion's GOOD MORNING. I'm not entirely sure, but this may have something to do with the stock that was used for export prints from Japan (rather than Criterion purposely ramping up the blues and changing the colour palette).

HerrSchreck · #63 Post by **HerrSchreck** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 8:40 am

The wrench into all this is the trailer on Criterions disc, containing material not in either cut I believe, yet still exhibits the "Swedish Flag Bias" (for want of a better term) of the CC.

Michael Kerpan · #64 Post by **Michael Kerpan** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 11:34 am

peerpee wrote:The blues in Criterion's KWAIDAN remind me of the (inaccurate) blues in Criterion's GOOD MORNING. I'm not entirely sure, but this may have something to do with the stock that was used for export prints from Japan (rather than Criterion purposely ramping up the blues and changing the colour palette).

On the other hand -- the color balances of Criterion's "Good Morning" and (to a lesser extent) "Floating Weeds" DVDs are noticeably different from the prior HVE videos and Criterion laserdiscs -- which were closer to the Japanese color balances (albeit not identical) ....

Lino · #65 Post by **Lino** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:06 am

Tell you what, I'm going to check my spanish DVD later today and see which one it most resembles, the CC or the MoC, color wise. I'll report later.

(the spanish DVD is also the full uncut version, BTW)

Hashi · #66 Post by **Hashi** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 3:27 am

Just like HerrSchreck, Gregory and someone other has already written, I'm very much troubled by the colour scheme.

Judging from the captures seen so far, I lean towards the MoC to be correct (comparing to many other JP films of that era) and I guess I'll have to get used to it being correct. But I cannot get over the feeling that I've used to watching the film with the blues of the CC disc, and so far really prefer them. The scheme (especially faces etc.) has much more eerie and cold overall atmosphere rather than this new warmer pale greenish/grey pea-soup.

Haven't seen any captures of the second (?) story with all-blue snow-covered scenes. I wonder how they appear on the MoC disc.

Lino · #67 Post by **Lino** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:47 am

Well, after comparing the two I can now say that the spanish DVD is more akin to the MoC one than the CC, color wise. Although I still feel that the contrast levels and the blacks are more balanced on the spanish DVD (but maybe the MoC looks kinda smudgy in my PC monitor - let's hope that my TV set improves that).

HerrSchreck · #68 Post by **HerrSchreck** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 9:05 am

It's also quite possible-- i e we can't rule it out, though I'm not saying this is What Happened-- that Kobayashi deliberately cranked the blues in his release prints for the specific effect... almost a post-negative "special effect" for which perhaps a release negative, from a unique color adjusted interpositive, served as the theatrical source as the film went into general release. If this element has been lost or generally fallen into disuse, going back to the colors as captured on the camera negative would naturally produce a new color schematic.

One thing is clear-- if the CC was blued into the atomic levels necessary to produce the effect seen in HOICHI & WOMAN OF THE SNOW, then the technicolor Toho 'scope logo, as well as the Cannes Jury Prize screen, would be ratcheted up into bleedville... whereas they look spot on colorwise.

I just want to state-- just because a brand new print reproduces according to strictest possible naturality & realism (particularly on a film created during the age of technicolor) what's on a camera negative or a low contrast interpositive from earliest possible generation-- doesn't necessarily mean that this reflects the directors intentions (which could severely diverge with realism) or the look of the prints circulating at original release.

peerpee · #69 Post by **peerpee** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 9:59 am

That's a great point.

[The Toho ident on the MoC edition is a completely different ident to the one on the Criterion edition, and the Cannes Special Jury Prize screen is not on the MoC edition.]

Gordon · #70 Post by **Gordon** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:19 pm

Yes, good point. It's like John Huston's, Reflections in a Golden Eye, which was shot on Eastman, but was processed and printed by Technicolor Rome according to Huston's instructions (I'm not sure if he was present in the lab) so that the film had a golden hue throughout (like a tinted silent film) but with certain objects - the red rose for example - appearing in vivid colour. This cost Warner Bros. considerable money and the execs didn't like the results, or more likely, understand the aesthetic and those 'golden' prints were recalled from theaters quickly and the film widely released in full colour. Huston was extremely pissed off by this. A DVD is planned (as part of Warners Brando box) but I doubt we'll see Huston's intended colour scheme. Original prints of Moby Dick were very distinctive, due to the four-pass processing: Eastman neg; Technicolor bath; black and white pass; silver nitrate internegative - or something like that. Those whose remember those prints say that the DVD transfer does not capture the aesthetic at all, although the film was digitally restored by Lowry Digital Images at some point, though I'm not sure if that for the DVD or done afterwards.

Bottom line: Original prints of, oh, pre-1980s films no doubt looked very, very different to current video masters, for good or ill.

#71 Post by **kinjitsu** » Fri May 12, 2006 3:43 pm

Nick, is this still set for May 22, or has it been pushed back to May 29?

peerpee · #72 Post by **peerpee** » Fri May 12, 2006 7:20 pm

May 29th, coz the book required a thicker box and we had to wait for the supplier to get them in. ABHIJAN is released on the 29th too. This date is definite for both.

#73 Post by **kinjitsu** » Fri May 12, 2006 7:41 pm

peerpee wrote:May 29th, coz the book required a thicker box and we had to wait for the supplier to get them in. ABHIJAN is released on the 29th too. This date is definite for both.

Thanks Nick, am really looking forward to it and sure it will be more than worth the wait. The booklet sounds terrific too, insofar as booklets can sound terrific.

Gregory · #74 Post by **Gregory** » Sat May 13, 2006 3:38 am

The DVDBeaver comparison updated to include the R4 release seems to confirm the correctness of the Masters of Cinema edition.

HerrSchreck · #75 Post by **HerrSchreck** » Sat May 13, 2006 7:54 am

Again, correctness insofar only as it relates to earliest possible elements vis a vis naturalism. We need somebody who saw KWAIDAN upon original release who can testify whether or not Kobayashi created a color adjusted interpositive from which original release elements were created. (issues concerning the normal blue of CC Cannes screen, the Tohoscope screen, and the same look in the trailer, which contains footage not in the film and alternate takes of scenes, yet look like the CC-- these argue against superatomic ratcheting of blue at least on a blanket basis viz the telecine operator.. and seems to argue against a digital blue-blasting certain zones of the film.. in other words the colorist completely changing the schema for the film from scene to scene thereby not having a color "setting" for the film.. these kinds of wild post-print manipulations seem quite inconceivable, especially for no reason whatsoever, and in departure from naturalism into artificiality. I'm sure that the producers have a projection of the elements delivered to them from Toho, especially if this is an element struck just for their licensing & dvd release; obviously all video & audio people would observe the look of the print, assess the level of restoration required, the how's & the why's & potential tools, thereby determine a budget.. with this group-look in mind, I can't imagine the telecine dude-- or dudette-- could effect such manipulations, especially on such a well-known, beloved, and color-inventive & color-celebrated film!)