331 Late Spring

[teddyleevin]

And there is talk earlier in this thread about subtitles during the concert they go to: the song was definitely not subtitled, which apparently contrasts with the Criterion release.

Similarly, during the scene in Early Spring when a soprano's voice lesson is heard in the background, she sings Sempre Libera from La Traviata (felt extra apt, as FF just screened Becoming Traviata. The lyrics of the aria add a layer of depth to the scene that anyone unfamiliar with the text or scenario of the opera wouldn't have gotten (or maybe Ozu would prefer it only working with the in crowd. Would have been hard to translate it all as most of the aria is sung under dialogue, but I wonder if any subtitles of Early Spring made any reference to the aria (a Japanese language subtitle for the hard of hearing would be most likely possibility, as the aria is more a sound effect than a centerpiece). The Early Spring subtitles also left out the military song sung at the war buddies reunion, and the song sung that has the same tune as Auld Lang Syne (and may very well be a translation of the English lyrics but I couldn't tell), and I wish I could have understood them both.

Why leave these out? Especially in the moments where the singing is the main focus. Is it too hard to make out? I presume these subtitles are often transcriptions (unless the screenplay survives) or adaptations of older translations? It's a business that I know too little about. Potential tangent: There seems to be an attitude that "newer" translations means "better." Certainly, I've seen cases where newer ones are more complete, but is there any reason to believe that we're getting better at translating and subtitling from a technical standpoint? Or is it just that tastes have changed, and we're more willing to translate directly instead of poetically?

[Michael Kerpan]

I took a look at the Japanese scripts of some of Ozu's films -- and song lyrics did not seem to be in the scripts (Alas, I no longer recall which songs I looked for).

[hearthesilence]

MoMA is premiering a new restoration of Late Spring at their To Save and Project Festival the Wednesday before Thanksgiving.

According to the link, "This will be the first American screening of a major new digital restoration of the film, which was carried out by Cineric in New York City under the sponsorship of the Shochiku Company." However, their pre-screening preview cards during the restoration festival add that it is a new 4k restoration.

[andyli]

Yes. A Japanese blu-ray is due out in December.

[hearthesilence]

I just saw the restoration tonight, came straight home and popped in the BFI Blu-Ray disc (which if I'm not mistaken, uses the same master as Criterion's BD). The restoration is definitely an improvement, mainly as a clean-up job, but it's still limited by its source material.

At the screening, they mentioned that the original negative was destroyed because an order was given to destroy all flammable (i.e. nitrate) film materials for public safety. A positive was duped from the original negative, and this remains the best source of this film, but it has since become very worn and damaged. (More on that in a bit.)

Before the restoration, they showed a before/after demo, and I'm guessing the "before" was a raw scan. The BFI BD didn't look anywhere near as bad, but it's probably had some restoration work done on it by Criterion. Regardless, the point was made that the original source materials had a lot of damage to fix: tears, missing frames, shakiness (a LOT of this), dirt, scratches, etc.

The results of the restoration are impressive - it looked damage free, I didn't notice a single scratch. (There were two instances of what looked like wet residue applied by something like a brush, but that was it.) The BFI BD has countless tiny scratches (thinner than hairline) over every single frame, so they definitely did a lot. Furthermore, they stabilized the shit out of this picture - the BFI has tremors in a lot of places, but the restoration we saw tonight was rock solid. I want to revisit the bicycling scene again, because I think they may have even taken the shakiness out of the actual characters riding the bikes in close-up - that would have been a Herculean task.

Still, the BFI disc ain't bad at all. It's tough without comparing it side-by-side, but a spot check suggests contrast, exposure and general photo quality of a lot of shots look very similar.

Yet despite all this, they can't work miracles. The close-ups fare the best - they almost all look great. But there are little oddities in the picture that were probably too difficult to correct, and I'm not sure if they were introduced in the copying of the original negative or if they were inherent in the negative. (I should point out that the safety positive was created decades after the film was finished.) Generally, any red flags that I thought I saw were still there in the BFI BD - parts of the picture that get a little blurry/mushy, usually doubling in a few spots (visually similar to what you'd see in a registration problem of a 3-strip Technicolor print, except this is just a single B&W film). I think they got rid of 95% of these in the restoration, but there are spots where you'd still see a little bit of it. Generally in long shot and medium shot, if you pay attention to the outline of a character's head, etc., you may see the outline break up in this doubling manner, but it's very, very brief. (The worst that sticks out is a MS of the father and daughter eating dinner right after she gets back from the bike ride - there's a moment in the restoration where the father's eyes seem to break in two very briefly and just slightly. Again, this was a heavily damaged area.)

Some spots of frames will also look a tiny bit mushy, but I think this is the result of cleaning up some heavily damaged areas because those frames in general were pretty scratched up on the BFI BD.

Also, a few typos in the subtitles, but nothing terrible.

[Drucker]

FWIW I thought the 35mm print I saw at Film Forum looked a heck of a lot like the BFI BD. I still think it's a great disc.

[hearthesilence]

Forgot to mention some parts that needed heavy fixing seemed a touch mushy - it's possible most people won't notice as I was looking for anything amiss.

[hearthesilence]

FWIW I thought the 35mm print I saw at Film Forum looked a heck of a lot like the BFI BD. I still think it's a great disc.

It is! And that's a great way of putting it - vintage 35mm prints will have these same defects, but it's just part of the medium, you ignore it. And the BFI BD has The Only Son, the only English disc with it in HD.

[artfilmfan]

For the new restoration, I hope they reduced the brightness a little bit. Some of the close-up scenes in the Criterion and BFI releases look too bright (washed out). The third screen capture at DVDBeaver is a good example of this.

[hearthesilence]

I noticed some shots on the BFI BD looking a little blown out too, but this was after the screening. I don't recall that being an issue with the restoration, but I can't be certain without double checking.

[Trees]

Thank god for Criterion and others who are working to preserve these films. Ozu in particular benefits greatly from this enhanced resolution and image quality, as the subtly of the acting performances is easier to read. Mention of a 4K restoration is music to my ears.

Regarding the early discussion in this thread about Ebert's review, I think American audiences in particular may be unfamiliar with many aspects of Japanese culture. For instance, I remember watching an old Japanese film on TCM where members of the family (father, daughter, etc) were taking baths together. As an American, this seemed odd to me. Japan developed a strong and very unique culture over the millennia and centuries, and these Ozu films are a wonderful glimpse, for example, at what remained and where the culture was in the 1940s, 50s and 60s. They are priceless time capsules.

[Michael Kerpan]

> an old Japanese film on TCM where members of the family (father, daughter, etc) were taking baths together.

Totoro?

[feihong]

A Ball at the House of Anjo?

[Moshrom]

If anyone wants some actual motion comparisons between the BFI/Criterion and the new Shochiku restoration (which will inevitably be released outside of Japan, I'm sure), here are some side by side videos:

http://webmshare.com/play/OMABY" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://webmshare.com/play/0Ex5K" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://webmshare.com/play/VN85P" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://webmshare.com/play/qDJy9" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://webmshare.com/play/3rxGj" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://webmshare.com/play/oKJy1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://webmshare.com/play/ZaeVJ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Criterion blu-ray is slightly more cleaned up than the BFI (hence its slight crop--for stabilisation), with a bit less damage, but it's still not even remotely comparable to the results of the new restoration.

[Trees]

Looking pretty good.

[StevenJ0001]

Wow!!!

[Moshrom]

On a more dour note, here's a similar clip, but for audio: http://webmshare.com/play/NM8wR" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I recommend opening two tabs and flipping back and forth between the BFI and Shochiku.

It's actually a massive problem with many blu-ray audio tracks released these days - in an effort to remove all age-related artefacts, a significant portion of frequencies above ~8 kHz (in this case anything over ~5 kHz!) is removed. Criterion does it, Warner does it, Masters of Cinema sometimes does it (not so much recently), and evidently Shochiku might be doing it as well. In Criterion's case, additional audio 'work' is usually done to the masters they're given, but whether that's what happened here I can't say - at least, not until another distributor puts out the same restoration. Or it might just be a problem that occurred upstream of the distribution level - perhaps it's the California-based Audio Mechanics who are to blame for this one, in which case I'll be clinging to soundtrack on the BFI disc.


For the record, the audio on the Criterion blu-ray lies somewhere between the BFI and the Shochiku, although it's certainly closer to the Shochiku.

Anyway, I can't stress enough that this is really just one film among hundreds that has been nuked with this amount of sonic noise reduction. And it's an issue that's only further perpetuated by reviewers who might not always be watching the discs they review (Mr. Tooze...), or by people who classify "hiss" as "distortion" in every review and attribute audio shortcomings to the age of the film (Dr. Svet).

[Roscoe]

I saw the new restoration at Film Forum in NYC earlier this week -- I can't speak with anything like knowledge about kHz, but I can say that the soundtrack sounded particularly tinny, especially in comparison with the richness of the visuals.

[FilmSnob]

What would be the definitive version of Late Spring in everyone's opinion?

I just saw this for the first time and while I found it more uneven than Tokyo Story, I thought the last act was more powerful. I felt this movie more.

There were some comments in this thread years ago, in particular one poster who has an irrational hatred of Sestuko Hara, that derided the father's scholarly ability on the basis that he couldn't recall the correct spelling of List. Not only did several people make excellent points, including the language barrier and irrelevance of such an objection, but I also wanted to point out that it could be an example of the man simply aging and becoming more forgetful. Since one of the major points of the film is that he needs to marry off his daughter or she will be destitute when he is dead and gone, I think that small detail was more than appropriate.

[Michael Kerpan]

The definitive version is seeing it screened in 35mm if you ever get a chance. Definitely works far better screened (for real) than on TV (at least on our 50 inch plasma).

[movielocke]

The definitive version is seeing it screened in 35mm if you ever get a chance. Definitely works far better screened (for real) than on TV (at least on our 50 inch plasma).

my first viewing of late spring was in college, a couple years before criterion released the dvd, we were watching a 35mm print, then the print broke and we watched the last couple reels on projected vhs. It was definitely memorable!

[Moshrom]

What would be the definitive version of Late Spring in everyone's opinion?

There really isn't one. Rationally speaking, no 35 mm print would look as good as even the BFI and Criterion blu-rays, which are extremely unstable and marked with scratches and other visible damage.

The Shochiku restoration (currently available only on the 2015 Shochiku blu-ray) isn't perfect visually, but it's a huge improvement. It sounds absolutely horrible though, hence no perfect version existing.

[FilmSnob]

What would be the definitive version of Late Spring in everyone's opinion?

There really isn't one. Rationally speaking, no 35 mm print would look as good as even the BFI and Criterion blu-rays, which are extremely unstable and marked with scratches and other visible damage.

The Shochiku restoration (currently available only on the 2015 Shochiku blu-ray) isn't perfect visually, but it's a huge improvement. It sounds absolutely horrible though, hence no perfect version existing.

I see, thanks. I guess I'm limited to region A and will have to buy the Criterion version anyway (nothing wrong with that). Looking at DVDBeaver comparisons, neither one seems superior. The BFI does look blown out in some shots. But the CC looks dull in others. The sometimes artificial look and softness of the picture from too much digital cleanup does concern me. :(

Criterion does get credit and deserve a big thanks for removing prominent damage (like the left line in the bike scene) and the exterior product packaging is nice. Can't say I like the menu at all though. BFI looks much more appealing.

EDIT: Also I have to say that if these cap comparisons are accurate

I think the new 4k restoration looks horrible. Yes, all scratches have been removed. But so has all the grain and detail. Some shots like the book comparison are an improvement, but when you start taking away detail on people's faces, or softening the picture in low light settings, the viewing experience (for me) becomes very discouraging.

EDIT 2: Sorry, after I have seen all the caps, it looks to be a mixed bag between the BFI and the new JPN 4k. Same as the comparison with CC. No version looks better, they all have their positives and negatives. The really bad BFI shot of Aya where her face is all white looks dramatically better in the JPN 4k. The shot of Noriko sitting down on the floor also looks better. The one with her in the background and her father in the foreground looks really bad though.

Feels like I'm going in circles here, but I love this movie. :)

[Moshrom]

I think the new 4k restoration looks horrible. Yes, all scratches have been removed. But so has all the grain and detail. Some shots like the book comparison are an improvement, but when you start taking away detail on people's faces, or softening the picture in low light settings, the viewing experience (for me) becomes very discouraging.

It's not a case of grain removal. It seems more a byproduct of the extreme stabilisation that's been performed on (what I believe is) the same, problematic film elements.

Any advantages the BFI/Criterion might have in detail (I concede that there is occasional ghosting due to the stabilisation, resulting in marginally less detail when observed statically) is negated by the fact that they wobble violently in every direction. The end result, in motion, is inferior 'visual coherence' regardless of how the individual static frames look.

[movielocke]

Any advantages the BFI/Criterion might have in detail (I concede that there is occasional ghosting due to the stabilisation, resulting in marginally less detail when observed statically) is negated by the fact that they wobble violently in every direction. The end result, in motion, is inferior 'visual coherence' regardless of how the individual static frames look.

Interesting. To me, this begs the inverse question. Historically, how much is our _Perception_ of grain in a motion image end product the result of minuscule variations of the stability of the playback?

that is to say, is there an persistence of vision illusion that makes grain more noticeable to the human eye when small errors in frame to frame stability occur in an otherwise stable proscenium?