Criterion quality

Ive heard various things. The largest complaint Ive heard is that the whole film is too dark. Its hard to see in many scenes, the subtitles are not easily read. The print overall seems to be of poor quality (the one Criterion is using anyhow). There was mention of some issues with the color also, but not as frequent.

-It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it-

I have them and they seem fairly good. The only real problem is that due to age there are some bits missing not a big deal just occasionally there while be a flash of black. Other than that they are pretty good and probably the best that while ever be available for the film.

I have just finished watching the first two, and I really thought they were of decent quality, considering the age. Here is a link to dvdbeaver where you can see some screen shots of the various releases.
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare3/samuraii.htm
VegasF6

I thought that the lighting for a lot of the scenes was terrible, but I think it has more to do with the production than the print.

[deleted]

The quality of the first 2 movies was pretty good but the 3rd is in the worst shape, it has a lot of scratches on it and the picture quality isn't as detailed as the other films. If you watch the original trailers for the films it gives you a better idea of what the original quality was like.

-Timo

The lighting isn't bad -- it's just how they used to do night scenes. They would film at day but intentionally darken the film to make it seem like it was night. The old westerns did it all the time too. It's kind of lame because you are seeing cloudy skies and shadows on the ground, but you're supposed to think it's night just because it's dark and hard to see.