Maurice (1987)

Wonderful character development!

Just perfect...

Admirable film.

Tells a fascinating and unsettling true story, and does so well, without pretending to have all the answers.

to say it is beautiful is almost nonsense. because it is obvious its admirable beauty. to say it is a good adaptation is strange. because the art of Ivory is to tell the story for remind the original light. it is a courageous film. for exploration of the desire to be yourself. and for the courage to define the life in the most precise manner. not a story of a sin or portrait of society but a drawing of the birth of beauty and sense. about meetings, secrets and the air who becomes material. for the hesitation and decision. its gift - it is more than a remarkable film by Ivory. not for the theme but for the style to propose a challenge with deep roots and many answers. and only one true. it is a film of an age in a fresh manner discovered. tender, brutal, seductive. a film about the force of secrets. and about the need to assume yourself. so, courageous film. almost a challenge.

a love story in rigid society. a novel by Forster. a film by Ivory. and a brilliant cast. almost a picture. or page from a photo-album. because all is perfect. costumes, images, story. and actors... different as stones. charming Hugh Grant in a refined role who creates ideal shadow of model man, part of nice society. Rupert Graves as interesting-amazing Antinous , master of silhouette of his role - circle of precise nuances. Ben Kingsley in minor presence but as a gem. and, sure, James Wilby and his craft in which vulnerability, instinct, desire, fear, expectation, hope and surrounding are each full of beauty. it is a gay story. but only at first sigh. in fact, it is only a story. about freedom as basic rule.

We all make mistakes, of course. But I felt it was my «duty» to point out at least two slight mistakes in Mr. Christopher Sullivan's (from New York City, USA) comment. I only do this so that readers won't be mislead. I mean the best to all, including Mr. Sullivan's overall accurate and well-written review ! He states (and I quote -- while making my own remarks in BOLD LETTERS): ***************************** «Maurice" (prononced "Morris") -- PRONOUNCED -- is the film adaption of the book by E.M. Forster and stated to be semi-autobiographical of his life (OF A CERTAIN PART OF HIS LIFE, NOT HIS WHOLE LIFE, AS IT IS IMPLIED). The book was banned for many years (AND FORSTER HIMSELF WANTED HIS BOOK TO BE PUBLISHED AFTER HIS DEATH, WHICH OCCURRED IN 1970) and it wasn't until 1987 (YES, IT WASN'T UNTIL THEN BUT ONLY BECAUSE THE FILM PROJECT COULD NO BE PUT TOGETHER BEFORE -- OR AFTER CENSORSHIP STARTED TO BECOME MORE «BROAD-MINDED» IN THE LATE 1960's) that this visually splendid film was released from Merchant-Ivory - ("A Room With A View", "Howard's End"). Set in early 19th century England (NO ! EARLY 20TH CENTURY !, etc.»

James Ivory's Maurice (1987) is an example of subtle British stories which always tend to focus on idiotic, buffoonish aristocrats who lead spoiled, idle lives and are a complete bore. In the case of this film, it deals with the forbidden relation between men, one of whom is an upper class snob. That's not at all offensive, but the way the film crams it's monotonous and unnecessary message into our sympathetic eyes, it becomes tedious and rather quickly. There's no enduring his plight because he is so arrogant, and set in his ways of rigid family conformity and he's about as human as a pile of Welsh corn husks.Maurice Hall (James Wilby) is the said character, who is not that bright but along with other British spoiled thugs, is attending Oxford, or some other chum school. He hangs out with a few other mugs, who guzzle beer, sing school songs and slap each other on the arse when in the shower. Eventually, he meets a new bore, Clive Durham (Hugh Grant) and his interest is ignited. They hang out, clasping each other and visiting quiet secluded lakes.All seems fine until there is a change in Clive Durham's behavior. Maurice Hall is crushed over some time by his friend's denial of their true "love". It's obvious Clive Durham wants power and will marry a woman for fear of losing his land, titles, nobility, etc. so the story takes another turn, much in the way a soap opera would appear.We pass through Maurice Hall's life, which is far from any ordinary working man's dilemma, as he travels, eats well and is afforded the luxury of the upper classes but he longs for more. It's exasperating as one would wish he would visit India and die of the plague or tuberculosis.The film then strays further into the rubbish pit by placating Maurice Hall with an unbelievable love interest portrayed by an effeminate, no good, deceitful gardener, who I might add, looks quite clean and unburnt by the sun. Any intelligent viewer will probably either shudder or cringe at the simplistic derailment of the plot but it was obvious that James Ivory was tugging our emotional strings all along, following the clichéd portrayal of social classes and making the love interest look like an underwear model.There's no clear protest message, except to follow your "organ down below" and you'll be happy. If you expect any critique of the hostile social climate, look elsewhere, this is muddy melodrama at its most dense form.See this film only if you want to believe in chimerical inspired fictional stories that are concocted and utterly delusional and preposterous.