Gregory wrote: I meant true to the original release as Kobayashi intended it. And yes I have considered that he created a color-adjusted interpositive, as you've speculated. But is there any real evidence of this? It may be suggested by the fact that while the R2 and R4 contain the full cut, the Criterion is the "international version." But again, I think it's important to consider how often known anomalies have surfaced with Criterion's releases and why this is the case. I'm not saying they necessarily did it on purpose. As Nick said, it's possibly a result of difference in stock for export prints. This kind of thing may also explain Michael Kerpan's example of Zatoichi. So then which is correct? Presumably not the color scheme of the export which was determined by accidental factors.
Well, it seems we're spinning our wheels here where our posts just seem to be duplicating themselves over & over. I for the record have no firm decision in either direction, I'm just trying to keep minds opened to the possibility that an adjusted interpos was created, which would explain certain things.
The laws of telecine dictate that to effect the kinds of blues in certain CC scenes, the colorist would have had to have been dropping acid, for, for an undetermined reason, he would have had to have digitally selected zones for independant digital blueing (independant to other areas of the image like fleshtones which would have been radically effected if blanket blue settings i e analog had been so heavily amped) and slammed the levels thru the roof, then, once those scenes were over, say "Ok I'm done changing the color of the studio back wall," deselect those areas and return to a less radical setting.
As for "evidence" of criterion manipulating colors because of a few releases, I'd say this happens to every DVD company all of which have off releases. This makes them "a DVD company", rather than dubious. As far as track record is concerned I would say that this particular company should give you far more of a feeling of security that checks and balances exist to a degree that far exceed most top-name atomic budget studios. I'd go so far as to say they have the best track record of all. This to me, percentagewise is what the 'evidence' informs me. Less than one "off" release a year (percentagewise, it must come to .66%/year going by agreed-upon color-controversies) is a stellar track record givien how studios
fuck their own films up! Their telecine operators must answer to a supervisor who must answer to a whole Image Rest Team who must answer to a QC team who must answer to the whole crew who all screen the prints upon arrival, many of whom have seen the films upon first release.
Truth is none of us know anything except these two newest dvd versions are obviously from the same element, and I daresay if they had the CC they'd have produced a dvd apporximately the same (making allocations for technological advances since CC's disc). This element we can also safely surmise is probably reflecting best what was in front of the cameras during production: we do know however that the CC version was the "circulated" version, the one Kobayashi wanted Hollywood & Western European audiences to see. We do know that the blues in the CC version
cannot possibly be "blanket" settings during the telecine process, otherwise the natural blues in the Cannes screen and elsewhere would have bled & radiated insanely, and blue-affected hues like purples & greens & fleshtone-shading, would have gone martian.
On the other hand, we have absolutely no idea at this point what the directors intentions were. None. Simply because we have a faithful reproduction of what was on the preservation for the less-used "long version", which in turn is an repro of "realism" viz what was in front of the camera during filming, in no way "supports" the idea that this is what Kobayashi's intentions were for the look of the film. Post-camera-negative color manipulations, particularly during the Technicolor age, were simply part and parcel of the filmmaking process, owing to the seperate strips, the state of the film stock responsiveness & grain, and the resulting artificiality of the technicolor medium. MoC absolutely deserve major kudos for such a fabulous edition, which obviously is a must-own. As to whether or not this edition duplicates what was in the theaters, I have no idea. I just turned 39 so I wasn't alive to go see it, and even if my dad had gone to see it, and I could have athletically beat & fought & elbowed & swam my way to the head of the spermatozoa (I was head & tails above the resta these lazy buncha bums laying around jolting jello shots of endorphine while I was latching onta shit with my tail doing pullups) to peek thru my dad's testicular pores at the screen, his dry goods woulda blocked my view leaving me in the dark just as dark now.