Thursday, October 14, 2010

BD impressions: The Last of the Mohicans

9:10 PM / BD Impressions / Comments13 Comments

BD Impressions
Blu-ray

I don't know how to rate this disc. I honestly don't.

I'm sure just about everyone reading this is already aware of the controversy surrounding this disc. To put it simply, it's dark. REALLY dark. So dark that during night scenes it is at times literally impossible to see what's going on, and even scenes taking place in daylight have a tendency to look murky and indistinct. Compared with the DVD release I bought a few years ago (the Region 1 Director's Expanded Edition), a considerable amount of shadow detail has been lost, and scenes that once took place in bright sunlight now seem to take place in some sort of perpetual dusk. Compositions that used to read now don't, and at times it's actually unpleasant to look at, because you're straining to see anything through the heavy gloom.

All of this, as far as can be ascertained, is an accurate reflection of how director Michael Mann's vision for the films visuals. There's been a bit of talk on the various AV forums about the release being defective, but personally I'm not convinced. I never saw the film theatrically, so I can't possibly comment on how it looked at the time of its original release, but suffice it to say that those used to the appearance of the previous DVDs or HDTV broadcasts will be in for a bit of a rude awakening. Whether it looked anything like this back in 1992 or not, however, I see no reason to doubt that this is how Mann now wants his film to look... which is his prerogative. It's not a look that I find remotely aesthetically pleasing, though, which is a shame from my perspective because, based on the various DVD and TV broadcasts I'd previously seen, I'd always considered it to be a pretty stunning-looking film.

So... let's see. They clearly went back to the original negative for this new master, which yields the sort of results you can expect when the studios go the extra mile like that: detail is top-notch, when you can see anything... the grain looks completely natural... the encoding is solid across the board. And to be fair, the second half of the film, which takes place largely in daylight, fares considerably better than the first half, and that shot of Jodhi May is every bit as wow-inducing as it always was. On the whole, though, I found this presentation very frustrating.

I'm not going to give a rating to this title. I don't want my own prejudices (i.e. a bizarre desire to see what the heck is going on when I watch a movie rather than constantly feeling like I'm squinting through a dirty window) to lead to me marking down what may very well be a completely accurate representation of how the film was always intended to look. But in that case, it's (in my opinion) a less attractive film than I previously believed it to be.

The Last of the Mohicans
studio: 20th Century Fox; country: USA; region code: A; codec: AVC;
file size: 35.3 GB; average bit rate (including audio): 44.12 Mbit/sec

The Last of the Mohicans The Last of the Mohicans The Last of the Mohicans The Last of the Mohicans The Last of the Mohicans The Last of the Mohicans The Last of the Mohicans The Last of the Mohicans The Last of the Mohicans The Last of the Mohicans The Last of the Mohicans The Last of the Mohicans The Last of the Mohicans The Last of the Mohicans The Last of the Mohicans The Last of the Mohicans The Last of the Mohicans The Last of the Mohicans The Last of the Mohicans The Last of the Mohicans The Last of the Mohicans

 
13 Comments

1. FoxyMulder said:

Doesn't Warner have the rights to the UK theatrical edition so perhaps we may see a different transfer of the original theatrical edition released here.

I did see this in the cinema back in 1992, can i remember what it looked like. ? Nah i cannot.

The colour tint seems a little annoying to me more than the darkness of it all, i mean i watched Alien Vs Predator: Requiem, now that's a dark film and i didn't mind it so if i can watch that i can probably watch this and not mind the darkness of it all too much.

(Posted on Thursday, October 14, 2010 at 9:25 PM)

2. Kram Sacul said:

Michael, how would you compare this to the remastered Gangs of New York? Both are significantly darker than previous versions.

(Posted on Thursday, October 14, 2010 at 10:51 PM)

3. Author Profile Page Michael said:

Foxymulder:

I'd forgotten Warner had the rights to the film over here. That's a good point, actually - given the differences between the theatrical cut and this new and supposedly definitive cut, it would stand to reason that Warner's version would be taken from a different source. That may, of course, be a mixed blessing. Brightness issue aside, the Fox release is a textbook case of how to handle a catalogue title - transferred from the original negative, healthy grain, plenty of detail etc. I have a feeling it would be expecting too much to hope for Warner to do the same with their version.


Kram:

The new GANGS OF NEW YORK is certainly darker than its predecessor, but you can still see what's going on in the more dimly lit scenes, unlike here. In the case of GONY, I can easily believe that the earlier version was brightness and/or contrast boosted - just look at how blown out these early scenes in the snow are. In terms of overall detail, MOHICANS is actually superior to the GONY remaster, but GONY is just more pleasant to look at on the whole.

(Posted on Friday, October 15, 2010 at 1:05 PM)

4. Gaeljet said:

i saw it, in one word, PQ= DISAPPOINTING

(Posted on Saturday, October 16, 2010 at 4:10 PM)

5. Vincent Pereira said:

I watched this in a darkened room on my video projector in "Natural" mode and love the look of this. Michael, did you watch this in a darkened room? I think that might make all the difference. While dark, the darkness looked natural to me, and I could tell what was happening in those night scenes.

And yeah, that close-up of Jodhi May, just astoundingly beautiful!

Vincent

(Posted on Saturday, October 16, 2010 at 6:45 PM)

6. Author Profile Page Michael said:

Vincent:

I did indeed watch it in a darkened room, on a projector calibrated to ISF standards (by my brother, who is ISF certified).

(Posted on Saturday, October 16, 2010 at 6:57 PM)

7. David Mackenzie said:

Vincent:
We watched this on my JVC DLA-HD750 (also known in the US as the RS20). I "ISF calibrated" it myself with a Klein K-10 reading off the screen. Greyscale and Gamma tracking are basically ruler-flat. Granted it's been 50 hours or so since the last calibration, but that shouldn't knock things too far off target.

There's momements where the darkness did strike me as quite natural (at least within the limitations of any sort of video device), but I wouldn't say it looked pleasing.

(Posted on Saturday, October 16, 2010 at 6:59 PM)

8. Vincent Pereira said:

What do you guys think of the controversial BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA Blu-ray? I think that's the closest BD I can think of compared to LotM and complaints about it being dark, and like LotM I never had a problem with the "look" of DRACULA. I guess this comes down to whether or not one likes the aesthetic look of films like this, and I'm glad you make that very point in your review, Michael. I think far too many have immediately jumped to the conclusion that something is "wrong" with this release, and I think it's clear that the look was an artistic choice.

BTW, I envy your projector set-up :)

Vincent

(Posted on Saturday, October 16, 2010 at 9:53 PM)

9. ChuckZ said:

I haven't seen Last of the Mohicans yet, but I'll share my comments anyway.

I agree with several posters that the film appears to have a natural lighting setup. Dark IS dark in a few of those shots. However, some of the others look like they should be a tad brighter, considering the scene and locale. Overall, this movie just seems overall dark.

On the other hand with Bram Stoker's Dracula, I think that movie was completely botched. The black levels are so crushed and the color so desaturated at times. I think Sony may recognize there is an error with it internally (despite what allegedly has been reported about the transfer, etc.), but it's too costly to go back and fix.

(Posted on Saturday, October 16, 2010 at 10:16 PM)

10. FoxyMulder said:

I disagree, Bram Stokers Dracula looks fabulous, it's not a botched job, it fixes many of the errors from the Superbit edition.

(Posted on Sunday, October 17, 2010 at 12:11 AM)

11. Author Profile Page Michael said:

Vincent:

I'm afraid I haven't seen BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA on BD yet. I can't say it's a film I'm overly fond of, and I'm also not sufficiently familiar with the film's visuals to have any particular stance on how it "should" look. I understand it looks radically different from previous home video releases, though.

(Posted on Monday, October 18, 2010 at 10:35 PM)

12. LGans316 said:

I don't think the remastered GONY is this dark. Shame about this release which could have looked better had they borrowed the missing contrast from Leon or Kick Ass. Now, I really miss Gaumont :-)

(Posted on Wednesday, October 20, 2010 at 5:45 PM)

13. Guillaume said:

"And yeah, that close-up of Jodhi May, just astoundingly beautiful!"

I saw the film for the 1st time in theaters last year in Paris and yeah the finale is one of the most stunningly beautiful scenes Mann has ever done...the mute but so expressive confrontation between Magua (Wes Studi) and Alice (Jodhi May) leaves the viewer speechless...i indeed liked the film a bit more on the big screen,even if it's not my favorite Mann film,it really lives and breathes on the big screen (no shaky cam,tight framing,MTV editing or CGI locations here!!)

(Posted on Saturday, October 23, 2010 at 6:36 PM)

 
To combat spam, commenting is automatically disabled on entries older than 30 days.

Did a comment you tried to post accidentally get eaten by the spam filter? It happens from time to time. I get upwards of 200 spam comments every day and unfortunately don't have the time to weed through all of them in case something genuine ended up there by mistake. If one of your posts gets incorrectly flagged as spam, email me at m.r.mackenzie[at]gmail[dot]com and I'll do my best to retrieve it.

 
Archives
Categories
Recent posts