MovieChat Forums > Dersu Uzala (1977) Discussion > Poor Quality DVD?

Poor Quality DVD?

posted 18 years ago by Voice-in-the-Machine
10 replies | jump to latest

I just watched this and was thoroughly dissapointed with the film quality. It was filmed in 1975, but looks worse than many picture made before 1965. Are they better quality transfers out there, or are they all like this?

[–] nishnishnishnish 18 years ago

See:

http://www.dvdcompare.net/comparisons/film.php?fid=2662

and

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/dvdcompare/dersuuzala.htm

Unfortunately it looks that way. To quote the latter site:

"I would buy the Image disc although the Spectrum has better extras, it has correct aspect ratio, colors and framing to my eye. Unfortunately all image discs are video-sourced."

We await a Criterion release.

[–] bls2182 18 years ago

I rented whichever version is available from Netflix. Granted, the picture quality is far from Criterion standards, but it is more than passable & the subtitles are also acceptable, if not great. I don't believe that a Kurosawa fan could find serious flaws with this, but I would like to see a higher quality edition released at some point. It is unfortunate that the two 1970's films of Kurosawa have been rather neglected by Criterion, who seems to have payed particular attention to most other periods of his film career - this might change at some point, however. I only wonder if a more suitable print could be discovered and a better edition released, if it could be a matter of rights, or if it is lack of public interest?

[–] Local Hero 18 years ago

The fact that there is no high quality DVD print available in North America for this breathtakingly beautiful film is a travesty.

The best print by far that I have seen is the Kino Video VHS. Even this video quality is only good, but not great. On a small screen, this VHS looks rather sharp, although I once tried to project it onto a large screen and I was staggered by the blurry, washed-out results.

[–] richard-1060 18 years ago

One of my top10 favorite movies. I'm feeling quite privileged after reading these posts. I've seen Dursu TWICE at the cinema in 70mm. Both times in New Zealand. Once in the late 70's and once in the mid 80's. It does lose a lot on the small screen especially as there so many wide and very wide shots. I've watched it recently projected on my home cinema and it wasn't TOO bad. The sound suffered more than the images. Just seen Elem Klimov's "Come and See" for the first time. WOW, that's definitely worth a watch too. Something about a Russian backdrop that inspires huge themes!

[–] notvertigo 17 years ago

I saw this at the Barbican in London in May 2008 and it is a truly great film. The technical achievement of producing this in such a harsh environment and stage-managing the cast alone is epic.

The Barbican put up a notice at the auditorium entrance apologising for the poor print quality. Apparently, that's all there is; probably exactly the same poor print the DVD outfits are left with. Check out dvdbeaver.com.

The landscapes are brilliant; you feel you are there, despite the print quality.

The story and its ending - no spoilers - is moving, very profound and gives cause to reflect, deeply.

The book on which it is based -'Dersu The Trapper' is a terrific read, bears more than one or two readings and adds a lot of value to the experience of the film.

Surfing produces the same old story - there may be a good print in the vaults of Mosfilm in Moscow. Nobody seems able to get any change out of them.

That this film was shot in 70mm, only to end up with dreadful colour and contrast quality is a travesty.

[–] richard-1060 17 years ago

I didn't know the film was based on a book. I'm definitely going to track down a copy of that. Thanks for the tip.

[–] notvertigo 17 years ago

It's a true story written by the Captain (Arseniev), which gives it so much power.

I got my book from Amazon; it's published in the States.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] CandySnatcher 16 years ago

Yep, I'm waiting for a Blu-ray release with a master struck from the 70mm negative. 2001 was shot in 70 and looks AMAZING on Blu-ray.

[–] 2jdv 11 years ago

The quality is so poor because the only existing print is in Moscow and they either don't have the equipment or the desire to remaster it and won't let anyone else do it.