302 Harakiri

Discuss releases by Criterion and the films on them. Threads may contain spoilers!
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

Re: 302 Harakiri

#151 Post by MichaelB » Thu Sep 15, 2011 11:42 am

If they're from the same master, it's unlikely to be an oversight.

I haven't seen the Criterion, but I'm delighted to confirm that the MoC looks fabulous in motion - and not once when watching it did I think "tsk, if only it had a bit more contrast!".

Zot!
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:09 am

Re: 302 Harakiri

#152 Post by Zot! » Thu Sep 15, 2011 12:21 pm

Others seemed to indicate that the MOC and Crit Blu are from the same master, but I agree the Crit must be a rehash of their DVD master. I will again reiterate that I found the cropped framing to be extremely distracting, as the film has a great deal of geometry going on in the frame. So please do consider this if you have a choice.

peerpee
not perpee
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:41 pm

Re: 302 Harakiri

#153 Post by peerpee » Thu Sep 15, 2011 3:22 pm

The fact that the Criterion BD has exactly the same cropping as their 6-year old DVD suggests that Criterion used their own 2005 HD master for both releases.

Contrast boosting does have the effect of appearing to enhance detail and resolution. When it's pushed too far, it doesn't look filmlike, and can be akin to pumping the bass and the treble on a hi-fi's graphic equalizer. In this case, I think both BDs look magnificent.

The MoC BD was made from a 2011 Shochiku HD master, created by Shochiku for their Japanese Blu-ray.

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

Re: 302 Harakiri

#154 Post by MichaelB » Thu Sep 15, 2011 3:34 pm

I believe I may have used the phrase "demonstration quality" in my upcoming S&S review (with specific reference to the opening shots) - and I can see why you decided not to fiddle with the Shochiku master.

User avatar
manicsounds
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 10:58 pm
Location: Tokyo, Japan

Re: 302 Harakiri

#155 Post by manicsounds » Fri Sep 16, 2011 10:30 am

Isn't it like the case with the BFI DVD of "High And Low" having significant image on the sides (much wider than the 2.35:1)? Is the extreme edge of the negative what was printed and projected? Or was it masked to fit to 2.35:1?

cls
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 8:51 am

Re: 302 Harakiri

#156 Post by cls » Sat Oct 15, 2011 9:06 am

I'm not the only one who thinks the Criterion BD looks awful, am I? The cropping isn't really much of an issue because if anything it makes it closer to the OAR, but god.. the image quality of the movie is just bad. The contrast is modified poorly; whites are blown out (check out the GLOW on those faces) and blacks are crushed. The EE is also pretty bad and makes the grain look unnaturally coarse. It just has a very... digitally modified look to it. Not natural at all. The Shochiku/MoC releases on the other hand look great.

Criterion needs to stop shoving DVD masters onto BD just because they're HD. If they couldn't afford to do a new transfer for this title themselves, then why not obtain the Shochiku master like MoC did?

I suppose I should start looking into getting a region B player because I feel like this isn't the last time this will happen..

User avatar
Peacock
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 7:47 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: 302 Harakiri

#157 Post by Peacock » Tue Nov 22, 2011 3:42 pm

Criterion on cropping with their wide Japanese titles
Criterion on Facebook wrote: We want to assure you that when we spend a ton of time and money making a new 4K master for a classic film like High and Low, we don't do it with the secret aim of ruining the filmmaker's framing. Looking at the comparisons you refer to, here are a few observations:

On HIGH AND LOW, the new Criterion DVD & BR aspect ratio is 2.32:1 (consistent with our HD master). The Madman/BFI DVD aspect ratio appears to be about 2.56:1. That transfer clearly shows more at the sides, but they have also cropped the top (significantly) and bottom, probably to avoid showing the splices on every cut. We chose to maintain the 2:35 framing and restore the cuts. Also, on HIGH AND LOW capture #3, which someone pointed out, notice that on the Madman and BFI you can clearly see the soft edge of the film, especially on the left. That definitely shouldn't be there.

HARAKIRI is a more complicated case. The Criterion DVD/BR again is 2.32:1, and the new Shochiku restoration released by Masters of Cinema appears to be about 2.41:1, which accounts for a small part, but not all, of the difference in side information. What is notable here is that the Shochiku restoration shows significantly more on the left hand side but not much more on the right edge. We bought a new 35mm fine grain preservation master from the original camera negative to serve as the source for our master, and our transfer conforms to that element. There was some evidence that the left edge of the negative had shredded, and that may account for the left-side cropping, which would have occurred at the photochemical stage, when making our fine grain. The new Shochiku restoration appears to have addressed that issue, but at the expense of some detail. Both are solid presentations, but we still like ours better for the difference in image quality.

In the end this is very subjective territory. When it comes time to make these judgment calls, we apply what we call "the good projectionist rule." The good projectionist has to show the film to best effect, balancing objective guidelines, like aspect ratio, with the realities of what is on the film. There is an art to it. A good projectionist wouldn't put up a 2.56 matte for a 2:35 film or show the soft edges of the film. Width is not the only measure. Headroom is important too. So is centering. So is image quality. It's a balance, and we really do try our best to get it right. You may disagree with the some of the choices we have made, but to suggest that, as some on this wall have, we don't care about Japanese classic cinema is just ridiculous.

Zot!
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:09 am

Re: 302 Harakiri

#158 Post by Zot! » Tue Nov 22, 2011 5:17 pm

Criterion on Facebook wrote: HARAKIRI is a more complicated case. The Criterion DVD/BR again is 2.32:1, and the new Shochiku restoration released by Masters of Cinema appears to be about 2.41:1, which accounts for a small part, but not all, of the difference in side information. What is notable here is that the Shochiku restoration shows significantly more on the left hand side but not much more on the right edge. We bought a new 35mm fine grain preservation master from the original camera negative to serve as the source for our master, and our transfer conforms to that element. There was some evidence that the left edge of the negative had shredded, and that may account for the left-side cropping, which would have occurred at the photochemical stage, when making our fine grain. The new Shochiku restoration appears to have addressed that issue, but at the expense of some detail. Both are solid presentations, but we still like ours better for the difference in image quality.
So this looks like a official admission that their A/R on Harakiri is compromised. Strangely enough, people don't seem to care for the image quality either, but that is a separate matter.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: 302 Harakiri

#159 Post by knives » Tue Nov 22, 2011 5:21 pm

I think it's admitting they're within the window of acceptability.

Zot!
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:09 am

Re: 302 Harakiri

#160 Post by Zot! » Tue Nov 22, 2011 5:45 pm

knives wrote:I think it's admitting they're within the window of acceptability.
They are specifically shifting blame to their master with the shredded edge in this case. I don't think they would be making such excuses if they thought theirs was the preferable framing, instead their response is to indicate that the appearance is not due to negligence on their part.

User avatar
stevewhamola
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2011 7:20 pm
Location: NWT, Canada

Re: 302 Harakiri

#161 Post by stevewhamola » Tue Nov 22, 2011 6:10 pm

I never regretted buying the MoC for even a second. Brand new 2011 master from the original studio vs. 2005 master from a damaged print? Easiest decision of my life.

User avatar
dwk
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 6:10 pm

Re: 302 Harakiri

#162 Post by dwk » Tue Nov 22, 2011 6:55 pm

Criterion didn't say their master was damaged. They said the negative is and when their master was made, the damaged area was cropped.

Those people on facebook are awful melodramatic, this slight cropping doesn't destroy the compositions. (we are not talking about the film being Storaroed)

User avatar
Peacock
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 7:47 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: 302 Harakiri

#163 Post by Peacock » Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:02 pm

It doesn't destroy the compositions, but it does HURT them, at least in the case of Harakiri missing a substantial portion of the left edge. Just like DVDs don't look terrible in comparison to Blu-ray, but obviously DVD doesn't look as good.

The reason the question was asked was because almost all, or possibly all (?), Japanese DVDs and Blus released by Criterion seem to be cropped at the sides compared to other releases, something noticeable even with the recent Suzuki Blu's. While often it isn't a major issue (High and Low Blu, Onibaba, the Suzuki's), it did seem quite strange and others have consistently commented on it in review comparisons for dvds, on the old Masters of Cinema website and here on this board. I still can't work out why the Suzuki's were cropped when Criterion's own old dvds weren't; but I think this still clears some things up.

Zot!
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:09 am

Re: 302 Harakiri

#164 Post by Zot! » Tue Nov 22, 2011 10:31 pm

So what is the MOC/Shochiku restoration Master sourced from originally? Not the damaged negative, but a print? Obviously the Criterion is watchable, and might have been considered definitive, but the contemporaneous MOC is the easy winner in this case, and makes it the Criterion irrelevant if you can do all regions.

cls
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 8:51 am

Re: 302 Harakiri

#165 Post by cls » Wed Nov 23, 2011 1:35 am

I still don't get why they just didn't try to obtain the Shochiku master if they knew their print had a damaged edge..

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: 302 Harakiri

#166 Post by swo17 » Wed Nov 23, 2011 2:43 am

Criterion on Facebook wrote:The new Shochiku restoration appears to have addressed that issue, but at the expense of some detail. Both are solid presentations, but we still like ours better for the difference in image quality.

User avatar
movielocke
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am

Re: 302 Harakiri

#167 Post by movielocke » Wed Nov 23, 2011 3:23 am

Peacock wrote:It doesn't destroy the compositions, but it does HURT them, at least in the case of Harakiri missing a substantial portion of the left edge. Just like DVDs don't look terrible in comparison to Blu-ray, but obviously DVD doesn't look as good.

The reason the question was asked was because almost all, or possibly all (?), Japanese DVDs and Blus released by Criterion seem to be cropped at the sides compared to other releases, something noticeable even with the recent Suzuki Blu's. While often it isn't a major issue (High and Low Blu, Onibaba, the Suzuki's), it did seem quite strange and others have consistently commented on it in review comparisons for dvds, on the old Masters of Cinema website and here on this board. I still can't work out why the Suzuki's were cropped when Criterion's own old dvds weren't; but I think this still clears some things up.
might it have something to do with optical soundtracks?

User avatar
htom
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 1:57 pm

Re: 302 Harakiri

#168 Post by htom » Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:49 pm

dwk wrote:Criterion didn't say their master was damaged. They said the negative is and when their master was made, the damaged area was cropped.

Those people on facebook are awful melodramatic, this slight cropping doesn't destroy the compositions. (we are not talking about the film being Storaroed)
As well, if we accept that Criterion's source is a print derived from the camera negative then does it replicate the aspect ratio for the original theatrical release, or was the edge damaged only afterwards?

On the other assertion made in their comments, is there any agreement that the other releases of High and Low show too much of the image, and that this area of the frame would have/should be masked out or cropped?

User avatar
dwk
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 6:10 pm

Re: 302 Harakiri

#169 Post by dwk » Wed Nov 23, 2011 2:36 pm

I don't have an answer for your first question. I assume that the damage occurred later on.

As for High and Low, I think the Criterion is closer to what would have been projected, so yes the BFI/Madman release shows too much.

User avatar
movielocke
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am

Re: 302 Harakiri

#170 Post by movielocke » Thu Aug 22, 2013 5:44 pm

My opinion of Kobayashi completely reversed after seeing this. Previously, I had only agonized through a film screening of the first film of Human Condition. Empathetically, I couldn't handle that film, it was too severe a stressor on me to experience the pathologically naive protagonist intent on making his own life as miserable as possible through overt confrontation that will only increase his hardship. I could get the point and context of the film, I just couldn't handle actually experiencing the film, at some point the sledgehammer dashed in my skull, but it kept pounding on.

I watched HaraKiri without even knowing it was the same director, and I was shocked to find out he had directed both, though it quickly made sense. This film, I was not crippled by the bleakness underwriting the picture, I felt everything about the darkness of the human condition and man's inhumanity to man was illustrated far more effectively in this form and this method. I think it is the story and the structure here that I find superior. The way Kobayashi unrolls this scroll allows him to layer each scene and fill in nuance and detail at just the right moment. He builds momentum and dread beautifully, structuring the revelations so the impact is cumulative and reinforced in a way that the theme climaxes perfectly with the plot.

Zot!
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:09 am

Re: 302 Harakiri

#171 Post by Zot! » Thu Aug 22, 2013 6:07 pm

movielocke wrote:My opinion of Kobayashi completely reversed after seeing this. Previously, I had only agonized through a film screening of the first film of Human Condition. Empathetically, I couldn't handle that film, it was too severe a stressor on me to experience the pathologically naive protagonist intent on making his own life as miserable as possible through overt confrontation that will only increase his hardship. I could get the point and context of the film, I just couldn't handle actually experiencing the film, at some point the sledgehammer dashed in my skull, but it kept pounding on.

I watched HaraKiri without even knowing it was the same director, and I was shocked to find out he had directed both, though it quickly made sense. This film, I was not crippled by the bleakness underwriting the picture, I felt everything about the darkness of the human condition and man's inhumanity to man was illustrated far more effectively in this form and this method. I think it is the story and the structure here that I find superior. The way Kobayashi unrolls this scroll allows him to layer each scene and fill in nuance and detail at just the right moment. He builds momentum and dread beautifully, structuring the revelations so the impact is cumulative and reinforced in a way that the theme climaxes perfectly with the plot.
If you battled your way through first part of the Human Condition, do yourself a favor and watch the others. On their own they paint a very incomplete picture. The initially naive character eventually gets considerably more...humble, as the films go on. He is a self-righteous pest in that first one for sure, which is kind of the point. It's definitely more of a slow burn than Hara-Kiri, but one I found perhaps even more profound ultimately. If that doesn't float your boat, you might enjoy Samurai Rebellion, which is also quite good, I thought.

User avatar
Max von Mayerling
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 6:02 pm
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Re: 302 Harakiri

#172 Post by Max von Mayerling » Thu Aug 22, 2013 6:56 pm

I'll second Zot! on this. When I first watched the first Human Condition film, I was really annoyed and put off. But I kept going, and by the end of the third film was completely blown away. I am very much looking forward to revisiting it at some point.

Edit: And I began to feel, as I got sucked in, that my reaction to the first film was necessary in order to get me to where the films were taking me.

User avatar
movielocke
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am

Re: 302 Harakiri

#173 Post by movielocke » Thu Aug 22, 2013 7:08 pm

I'll keep that in mind, maybe I'll get to the other films eventually.

User avatar
Michael Kerpan
Spelling Bee Champeen
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: New England
Contact:

Re: 302 Harakiri

#174 Post by Michael Kerpan » Thu Aug 22, 2013 7:50 pm

I liked the 2nd third of Human Condition best, but was not as annoyed by the final third as much as I had been by the initial one. Still have yet to get to the Eclipse set sitting one one of my shelves somewhere.

Zot!
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:09 am

Re: 302 Harakiri

#175 Post by Zot! » Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:59 pm

Max von Mayerling wrote:my reaction to the first film was necessary in order to get me to where the films were taking me.
It's been a couple of years now, but I feel the films do an interesting trick that can only accomplished at it's considerable length by really dismantling the young brash commie of the first film, not through the dramatic moments, but the glacial progression and crushing weight of life's inequities. Sort of shades of Bela Tarr, but more melodramatic.

Post Reply