ADDITION - Tartan (Dec -04) - Tartan are using the more economical route to sell these DVDs. For the price of 1 1/2 of the Stellar Criterions, you can have three Ozu films. The image is undeniably weaker using the NTSC masters and not converting to PAL. The rest of the Noriko Trilogy (also includes Early Summer and Late Spring) is the same but an improvement over the Panorama editions. We have also compared now and they are, but still fall short for the more expensive and extra-laden Criterions. Stick with your Criterions folks, these Tartans were done on the cheap, and it shows!

Gary Tooze

The Tartan image is slightly cropped, aprx 1% right, versus Criterion, suggesting different source, not overscan. The Tartan, based upon the restored Shochiku masters, is basically spotless, but soft and dark, especially details in long shots are obscured by the soft image. The Criterion image is almost the exact opposite, lots of contrast, lots of details, but also lots of cracks and dirt. If I were to chose based on this alone, by vote would go to Tartan, because the Criterion, while most detailed, simply is below their usual standard and of poor quality. Compare Criterion “Tokyo Story” vs. “Early Summer” and you see the difference.

But sadly, Tartan’s presentation notes on production blunders and a messy production. Originally the first box was to contain “Late Spring”, “The Flavour of Green Tea over Rice” and “Tokyo Story”, but was late autumn changed to the Noriko Trilogy, replacing Green Tea with “Early Summer”. Fair enough, this happens a lot, press releases are only notes, so lets move on to the real problems.

The first and major blunder is a NTSC to PAL transfer. One thing is that Shochiku only makes NTSC masters and really push the envelope when negotiating rights, but Tartan could for instance have chosen to have released the set as Region 0 NTSC instead, rather than PAL. This causes ghosting, most of the time not noticeable at all, unless one goes forward with single frame, but once its in your head, you notice it. This is a critical element and thus Criterion gets away with the better picture, as I have to compare.

The minor blunder is that the box notes on commentaries not present. While due to conflicting deadlines, it is still an element, where Tartan has to excuse.

When one releases something as central in film history as the “Noriko Trilogy”, everyone's eyes targets it, and people will be more critical than usual, because of the legacy of the films. As such, the production simply has too many excuses to be acceptable. Granted, we critics often take a production for granted, never realizing the problems involved, and they probably had a deadline for Christmas sales and some boss said no to postponing it, but there are too many hiccups production wise here, too many excuses, and regardless of a, what I personally think is, beautiful image and presentation, this is too flawed a product.

Henrik Sylow

*****

Not much needs to be said here - again we have a question s to whether Criterion "sold" the rights and image to a Korean company or they simply bootlegged. The image quality is poorer on the Oasis with excessive contrast boosting. They have the same menus. It has AWFUL yellow subtitles and virtually no extras. I hate seeing things like this, but I guess it is a factor of $'s. Buy the Criterion!  

 - Gary W. Tooze