A Few Words About A few words about...™ Maurice -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Robert Harris]

The Merchant-Ivory catalog has been picked up by The Cohen Collection, which has made huge strides forward in quality, in the past year or so.

Their initial M-I production is Maurice, a beautiful 1987 film, previously un-released on Blu-ray. This is a film many fans of M-I have been waiting for, as few of their works are represented in the format. Apparently, The Cohen Collection will be doing something about that.

The new release is derived from a 4k scan, and the final result is a lovely representation of the film. Viewing the film, I would have preferred to see just a bit stronger black levels, but this is dangerous turf, as there is approval by both Mr. Ivory as well as cinematographer Pierre Lhomme. This once again proves, that personal desires, without total knowledge of the subject, can be a dangerous thing.

Viewers opinions do not count.

As it stands, black levels are more delicately rendered, than I might have presumed, and yield very interesting final imagery.

Everything is in place here, from both an image, as well as sonic perspective, which makes me wonder when the next titles in the library may be hitting the market.

Maurice is a magnificently mounted production, that deserves to be seen.

Image - 5

Audio - 5

4k Up-rez - 5

Pass / Fail - Pass

Recommended

RAH

 

[Will Krupp]

Thank YOU, sir!! This release hasn't felt "real" until this very moment. It's ACTUALLY happening! Glad to know it passes muster. Thank you, again!

 

[Michel_Hafner]

That was overdue...

 

[JoshZ]

The Merchant-Ivory catalog has been picked up by The Cohen Collection, which has made huge strides forward in quality, in the past year or so.

Their initial M-I production is Maurice, a beautiful 1987 film,

Technically, Cohen's first Merchant-Ivory Blu-ray was Howard's End, released last December. That disc had weird problems with the framing and was overly matted to 2.50:1 without explanation.

Viewing the film, I would have preferred to see just a bit stronger black levels, but this is dangerous turf, as there is approval by both Mr. Ivory as well as cinematographer Pierre Lhomme. This once again proves, that personal desires, without total knowledge of the subject, can be a dangerous thing.

For what it's worth, the Howard's End release was also claimed to be approved by James Ivory and that film's cinematographer.

 

[Malcolm R]

I'd agree that while nice, the blessing of the director and/or cinematographer don't necessarily mean a flawless disc. There have been a few controversial discs over the years that have been "director approved" or similar.

They may sign off on the master, but there can be issues with duplicating and manufacturing that may result in the disc not looking as it was "approved".

 

[Robert Harris]

Technically, Cohen's first Merchant-Ivory Blu-ray was Howard's End, released last December. That disc had weird problems with the framing and was overly matted to 2.50:1 without explanation.



For what it's worth, the Howard's End release was also claimed to be approved by James Ivory and that film's cinematographer.

I had wiped that one from internal memory.

 

[Konstantinos]

Technically, Cohen's first Merchant-Ivory Blu-ray was Howard's End, released last December. That disc had weird problems with the framing and was overly matted to 2.50:1 without explanation.



For what it's worth, the Howard's End release was also claimed to be approved by James Ivory and that film's cinematographer.

also, let's not forget that the "corrected" disc had another gamma level resulting in not so deep black levels. What gamma had mr Ivory approved? The first or the second? That is why these claims, don't really say anything to me too.
Although in this case i had read the comments of someone that had seen the restoration at cinemas and he also noticed the same thing about the blacks and brighter image.

 

[JoshZ]

also, let's not forget that the "corrected" disc had another gamma level resulting in not so deep black levels. What gamma had mr Ivory approved? The first or the second? That is why these claims, don't really say anything to me too.

Reading up on that now, it sounds like Cohen may have authoring issues resulting in raised black levels. If true, that would mean that Maurice is wrong too.

 

[Will Krupp]

Although in this case i had read the comments of someone that had seen the restoration at cinemas and he also noticed the same thing about the blacks and brighter image.

Oh Oh Oh...this is ringing faint bells with me and maybe others can chime in because I don't know that I'm going to get it right. It's just on the vague outskirts of my mind but wasn't there something about Merchant Ivory choosing a different brand of film stock from the one they used up until ROOM WITH A VIEW because it was able to achieve a more antique look? I want to say they switched to Fuji stock but I really can't remember the details and have no idea where or when I heard this (SOME help I am, huh?)

Is this ringing bells with anyone else? I only bring it up because it's possible a more "delicate" look is what they were going for. I didn't see it in theater in 1987 so I have no idea how it would have looked.

 

[lark144]

It rings a very distant bell, Will, from the fog of time. As I recall, a number of filmmakers (among them Wim Wenders) used Fuji stock because it had a lower contrast than Kodak, when they were going for a specific low contrast "look" especially in period films. But I can not talk about Fuji stock with any kind of authority, as I never used it as a filmmaker.

Now I did happen to see MAURICE at the Paris, which for those of you who are unfamiliar with NYC movie houses, the Paris, just behind the Plaza Hotel, was THE place for couples films going back to when I was in my teens; A MAN & A WOMAN, ROMEO & JULIET, A ROOM WITH A VIEW all played there for over a year. Whenever I went, the line for the woman's room was immense, and there were always just a smattering of guys in the men's room. However, when I went to see MAURICE, it was exactly the opposite. In fact, the woman I was with became impatient and went downstairs to see what was going on, and started to laugh when she saw the long line of men, with myself near the end of it.

Now, while I did see MAURICE, and I do remember it being a lot less contrasty and even a little hazy in terms of detail and definition, like paintings by Gainsborough, for instance, because it was so long ago, I really can not speak of the look with any authority,. except to say that what I've read on this thread about the look of the Blu-Ray is probably quite similar. But again, I haven't seen the Blu-Ray, so I am not going to make any kind of a definitive statement, except to say that it's possible. You know, back in those days one really didn't pay attention, unless you were a lab or a tech person pre-screening prints, to issues like contrast or milky blacks. You just watched the movie. But yes, I do remember there being much less contrast than usual, and a certain kind of painterly or nostalgic haze in the images, but I do not remember seeing any particularly milky blacks. But then again, I wasn't looking for it, either.

But visually the film was utterly gorgeous, really breathtaking, even more so than ROOM WITH A VIEW, so based on Mr. Harris' "Few Words", I'm planning on getting this Blu-Ray.

 

[Mark-P]

...You know, back in those days one really didn't pay attention, unless you were a lab or a tech person pre-screening prints, to issues like contrast or milky blacks. You just watched the movie...

Only back in those days? Nah. People in these days pay no attention to such things either. Ask some of your friends what aspect ratio the movie they just watched was in and you'll get a puzzled look. It's only film enthusiasts that hang out in online forums that pay attention to these kind of things. I'd venture to say that since "those days" you've become an enthusiast, and the world hasn't changed.

 

[lark144]

Only back in those days? Nah. People in these days pay no attention to such things either. Ask some of your friends what aspect ratio the movie they just watched was in and you'll get a puzzled look. It's only film enthusiasts that hang out in online forums that pay attention to these kind of things. I'd venture to say that since "those days" you've become an enthusiast, and the world hasn't changed.

I ran a movie theater for 14 years, so it was kind of part of my job to pay attention to things like aspect ratios and such, but when I went out to see a film, I tried not to notice, as long as the projector was in focus.

 

[Will Krupp]

Now I did happen to see MAURICE at the Paris, which for those of you who are unfamiliar with NYC movie houses, the Paris, just behind the Plaza Hotel, was THE place for couples films going back to when I was in my teens; A MAN & A WOMAN, ROMEO & JULIET, A ROOM WITH A VIEW all played there for over a year.

With the loss of the Ziegfeld, I believe the Paris is the last of the great single-screen New York cinemas and I hope we never lose it.

September 18, 1987:

 

[lark144]

The Paris is owned by Pathe, the French film company, and they feel it's important to have a showplace for their films in New York, at least, that's how they felt back when I was in the exhibition business. I too hope it will always stay there.

Speaking of the Paris, one rainy Saturday I was taking the bus which turned on 58th Street past the Paris. There were two elderly ladies sitting behind me. There was a long line stretching down 58th Street and around to 6th Avenue. The film was GET OUT YOUR HANDKERCHIEFS.

"Look at all those people waiting on line in the rain," one woman said to the other. "I wonder what the film's about."

"It's about sex," the other woman said. "Now I would wait on line half an hour for sex, or even forty-five minutes, but I would not wait a whole hour for sex."

Of course she meant a movie about sex. Hopefully, we'll always have the Paris."

 

[Robert Harris]

If I remember correctly, Days of Heaven played at the Paris in 70mm. Not positive.

 

[Will Krupp]

If I remember correctly, Days of Heaven played at the Paris in 70mm. Not positive.

I believe it was Cinema I

 

[Robert Harris]

I believe it was Cinema I

Quite possible.

 

[lark144]

Yes, DAYS OF HEAVEN opened at the Cinema I in a 70mm blow-up in October of 1978 after premiering at the New York Film Festival. After it's initial run, it moved a block and a half downtown to the Trans-Lux East in 35mm. At that point, the Trans-Lux East only had 35mm Century heads with carbon arcs. I think it may have been the last first run theater in New York, or at least on the East Side. to still have carbon arcs. ( In 1981, 70mm projectors w/zenon lamps were put in.)

I was working for Trans-Lux at the time, so I'm absolutely certain about the information above. In terms of the Paris, I must be a little more vague. While I don't recall DAYS OF HEAVEN ever playing there, it's possible that it did, though I think it would have been 35mm, for I think the Paris didn't install 70mm projectors until sometime in the late 80's. I'm not sure exactly when 70mm was installed, but I'm thinking it might have been for HAMLET. Again, I'm a little vague about this. I was friendly with the manager of the Paris at the time, and was occasionally in the projection booth in the late 70's to early 80's, and I remember there being only 35mm projectors. I hope this helps.

 

[Will Krupp]

Quite possible.

The answer was harder to track down than I thought it would be, lol. DAYS opened in September 1978 right smack in the middle of the pressman's strike that shut down the NYT and the NY DAILY NEWS from mid-August through early November of that year. Fortunately, New York Magazine is archived for free on "Google Books" so I was able to track it down. It was DAYS at Cinema I and The Paris was playing VIOLETTE at the time.

 

[lark144]

Oh, and I do have a good movie theater story about DAYS OF HEAVEN. I hope this doesn't deter the thread too much, but...

A townhouse on 58th street next to the building the Trans-Lux East occupied caught fire. Though the fire was put out very quickly, clouds of smoke billowed through the exit door that led to 58th street, and drifted across the screen. It just so happened that at that very moment while I was trying to evacuate the theater, the scene of the cornfields catching on fire was playing, and many people refused to leave as they thought the smoke was part of the show.