MovieChat Forums > Suna no onna (1964) Discussion > How's the Criterion version?

How's the Criterion version?

posted 17 years ago by mikpii
6 replies | jump to latest

I emailed Criterion to ask about the additional two dozen or so minutes that are in their version over Milestone's and Bfi's and they told me no new scenes were added but some of the existing ones were lengthened. I felt the Milestone version was right in length and I am a bit suspicious whether Criterion have made the film too long at almost two and a half hours. But the Milestone version is out of print and awfully expensive secondhand.

So a question to those who've seen Criterion's version and preferrably either Milestone's or Bfi's version: what do you think? Is it too long or does the new material make a significant contribution to the story?

Secondly, is there any difference in image quality?

Edit: I just noticed Bfi too have released the "uncut" version; it's 141 mins while their earlier one was 119 min.

[–] gotmyorangecrush 17 years ago

Well to start this off I will simply say that you should have more faith in Criterion. This company more than any other in existance knows what makes great cinema and they are masters at the entire process starting with finding the proper material suitable for the collection all the way to the actual production of the disc including everything inbetween. Everything right down to the package design is the best I have ever witnessed with the SD DVD medium. I am a Criterion junkie and nothing gets me excited like new Criterion releases do. I have the 100% complete SD DVD collection up to #404 Robinson Crusoe on Mars and I have never once come across a disc or a transfer or a decision that they made that actually did harm to the piece in question.

As for Woman in the Dunes, this Criterion transfer is incredible and is simply another notch in Criterions amazing feats belt. I never thought in a million years that this print could look this good and both the AFI and the Asmik Ace Edition pale in comparison. While I considered the AFI edition to be the best available I never got used to the softer image quality of that transfer and Criterion really answered my prayer for a really high quality release for this film. The contrast range is excellent. You can see fine detail in the shadows yet the image isnt muddy and has nice solid blacks. This is a dark film in general and Criterion really went to alot of trouble getting the balance just right. As for the extended scenes it did absolutly nothing to the pace of the film and I noticed no difference at all in running time. This is by far the single greatest release this title has ever had, which of course is what Criterion does just about every single time they take on a project.

I dont know if your aware of this or not but Woman in the Dunes cannot be purchased separately. It comes in a 4 disc box set that contains 3 separate films by Hiroshi Teshigahara. They inlcude The Face of Another, Pitfall and Woman in the Dunes and a bonus disc. Its one of Criterions best releases yet IMO and well worth the money. I your a big fan of this film and of Teshigahara in general then this would be a no brainer purchase. Trust me the other editions dont stand a chance against this transfer, its that good.

EDIt...

I actually looked on DVDBeaver and didnt find the Criterion release but did a google lloking to see if any websites had done a comparison and low and behold it is on DVDBeaver, I just wasnt looking in the right place. Anyways take a look at the screen shots between the AFI edition and the criterion edition. This is actually the first time I have seen them side by side and WOW! The Criterion version just crushes the AFI even more than I originally thought. I always knew the AFI version was soft but this comparison makes the AFI look terrible in comparison.

Here is the full page

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDReviews32/three_films_hiroshi_teshigahara.htm#woman

and here are a few samples if you dont wanna go there directly.

Here is an AFI screenshot

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDReviews32/a%20hiroshi%20teshigahara%20boxset%20criterion/bfi%20tesh%20PDVD_006.jpg

and here is the Criterion version

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDReviews32/a%20hiroshi%20teshigahara%20boxset%20criterion/cri%20tesh%203845-sub.jpg

Here is another AFI shot

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDReviews32/a%20hiroshi%20teshigahara%20boxset%20criterion/bfi%20tesh%20PDVD_000.jpg

and again the Criterion version

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDReviews32/a%20hiroshi%20teshigahara%20boxset%20criterion/cri%20tesh%20306-cri.jpg

There are even more at the main page but I think you will agree after seeing these side by side that Criterion has once again shown that they are without a single doubt the best at what they do. Again get this set you wont be disappointed. They are all this stunning.

[–] mikpii 16 years ago

Ok thanks. Yes I know it's bundled with two of his other films (that also are excellent).

[–] jussi_m 16 years ago

Where to get the Criterion box without paying urself to death?

[–] ancientnut 16 years ago

If you're still looking, Jussi94, the set retails for $79.95 and the best deal I have found is $51.87 at www.deepdiscount.com/

[–] WelcomeToParadise 16 years ago

Quality: The Milestone version isn't that great at all in this regard. The screen is completely black for some parts, which obviously sucks. The Criterion is much better, visually.

Length: I agree with the OP that the Milestone version is perfect in length. I mean, the movie is pretty slow already, no need to make it any longer. The additional shots that Criterion added weren't really important, in my opinion.

I have the Milestone downloaded onto my computer and actually paid for the Criterion boxset. If I were to rewatch Woman in the Dunes again, it'd be Criterion, just because.

[–] youllneverbe 16 years ago

"Length: I agree with the OP that the Milestone version is perfect in length. I mean, the movie is pretty slow already, no need to make it any longer. The additional shots that Criterion added weren't really important, in my opinion."

I've only seen the Criterion 'Director's Cut' version and while it is indeed a long film considering its plot (it does seem quite fleshed-out at 2hrs27mins), I thought it felt right. In a film about man is being held captive in a sand-dune village for months/years on end, it would be a misstep to not allow a certain amount of space to develop around the key events so we feel that little bit more "lost" with him. After the 2hr mark, I had almost lost track of the series of events preceding where I was, and that worked FOR the film rather than against it.

Still, not having seen the 2hr version, I can't really be certain. It might just be down to which one you see first.