IslandGuru Who payed the critics

Reptileenbu Did you people see the same film I saw?

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

Erica Derrick By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

mnpollio If this film adaptation depicting lives ruined by the social mores and hypocrisy of turn of the century upper crust New York society seems to have a lot in common with the similarly plotted The Age of Innocence, it would be because authoress Edith Wharton was responsible for both novels. Unfortunately, like The Age of Innocence, this is yet another wallow in victimization and misery that Wharton seemed to specialize. However, unlike The Age of Innocence where director Martin Scorsese seemed psychotically obsessed with the elegant trappings at the expense of his story, director Terrence Davies is actually more interested in the players of his piece.The primary player is one Lily Bart (played by Gillian Anderson), a lovely, elegant young woman, who not only bungles her chance at true love, but comes to realize to her detriment how much she is at the mercy of a fickle high society filled with pettiness, envy and jealousy.Lily is at heart that rarest of beasts - a genuinely decent person. She has had the misfortune of accumulating a sizable debt from card playing, which she anticipates paying back with the inheritance to be left her by harridan aunt Eleanor Bron. As Bron is infinitely more taken with dishrag ward Jodhi May, it is questionable how much Lily can count on this development. Lily pines for scandalous attorney Eric Stoltz, who is the sometime lover of society grand dame Laura Linney, but finds bad timing and circumstance consistent obstacles to a relationship. In fact, bad timing and bad luck seem to relentlessly dog Lily in every endeavor. Trusted friends and companions reveal themselves to be bitter enemies beneath the surface. When some scandalous letters fall into her lap that would prove to be her personal salvation, Lily takes the high road to her further detriment.The House of Mirth does not have much mirth in it. It is depressing, gloomy and leaves the viewer in an utterly hopeless state. It is a despairing experience to watch the destruction of a person, who did not invite it, does not deserve it and is left broken and battered by life, while some appalling specimens of "humanity" glide past unscathed. This is by no stretch of the imagination an enjoyable viewing experience and one would imagine that it would be an even more trying reading experience.All that aside, there are definitely reasons to watch the film. Davies' assured direction and the fine literate screenplay being two of them.Another compelling reason would be Anderson's central performance. Anyone who is only familiar with Anderson from The X-Files and oblivious to the stellar acting she has also contributed to British TV and films, will most certainly be impressed with the appealing, nuanced and heartfelt performance she contributes here. What makes Lily's inexorable downward spiral a spirit crushing blow is that until the final moments where she confronts her dismal future, Anderson never plays Lily as a victim. She seems entirely too self-assured and confident in her quest to do the right thing. The climactic moments where her emotional walls crumble at what life has in store for her is a powerful sequence. The entire performance is a demonstration of understated grace.The supporting cast is strong with one notable exception. Linney is matter-of-factly monstrous as society force of nature Bertha Dorsett, who throws Lily to the wolves on a whim to make herself look better. Terry Kinney is sympathetic as Linney's cuckolded husband. When he makes an offer to Lily late in the film that would make both of them whole, it comes across as a meeting of two lost souls and one is disappointed that Lily does not take him up on it. Dan Aykroyd is terrific playing against type as a joyfully manipulative scoundrel.Unfortunately, the film is thrown off-balance by the miscasting of Stoltz in the pivotal role of the scandalous lothario that inspires so much consternation among the female characters. I usually find Stoltz underrated, but here he is all wrong. Pasty-faced and limp, Stoltz adopts an effete fey attitude that is more off-putting than attractive. It reminds one somewhat of the miscasting of John Malkovich in Dangerous Liaisons. It is difficult to believe that one woman would find him irresistible, but the fact that three women are in such ardor over him as to launch campaigns of betrayal on each other strains credibility at every turn. Worse, Stoltz barely registers a pulse when Anderson shares the screen with him so that it hardly seems that Lily is letting much pass her by with this colorless smelt. He seems less like an unrequited love than a chance acquaintance. When Lily makes the ultimate sacrifice to spare his reputation, it seems like a wasted effort. This casting leaves the important unrequited romance between the two characters a bust. And while it may be believable that a milksop like May would be enamored of Stoltz in this film, it is inconceivable that a being depicted with the voracious appetites of Linney's Bertha Dorsett would stoop to inspect him much less expose herself to vulnerabilities to chase him. A really foolish bit of casting here that nearly throws the film off balance.

toddstlmo This was the absolute *Worst* movie I've ever watched. Yes, the scenery was nice, the costuming was fairly good, and the story line may have been a realistic portrayal of the powerlessness of women in that time period. However, the movie was not quite as exciting as watching paint dry, and significantly more depressing. Sooooo terribly Boring! And did I mention, depressing? How about depressingly boring? Imagine something like a root canal, without the fun and excitement, but lasting for hours on end. I couldn't muster the willpower to care about the characters, hoping that somehow the plot would lead *somewhere* - but it didn't. Last but not least, let's face it, the accents didn't cut the mustard. If you consider "Jane Eyre" to be an edge-of-your-seat action/adventure novel that you just couldn't put down, then this movie is for you! Everyone else, *please* do yourself a favor - don't watch this movie! If you ignore my review and watch it anyway, and if you have the fortitude to stay awake to the end, and if you manage not to hang or eviscerate yourself out of sheer depression, you will still curse yourself for not heeding this warning and wasting almost 2 & 1/2 hours of your life!

G K The House Of Mirth is a substantial, well-upholstered picture with more sinew and power than almost any other period drama of recent times... a brilliant film from a great British director. A cash-strapped single woman (Gillian Anderson) in early 20th-century New York fails to marry for love or money, and finds herself stuck with a scandalous debt that threatens to bankrupt her entirely.The film is a stunning adaptation of Edith Wharton's novel about a doomed social butterfly, elegantly crafted on a limited budget, and built around a piercing lead performance of Singer Sargent-esquire luminosity. It makes harsh points about an even harsher social order, and makes them feel fresh.

kimberly_ann I'm not sure how this movie could get a bad review. Of course, there are those people who find its pace too slow. However, one must realize that this is a period drama; it's not meant to be an action-packed suspense thriller. Everything is subtle, but it is so beautifully prepared, thought out, and executed by all.1. Were it for nothing else, the technical aspects of this film would have kept me watching until the very end. The music was perfectly placed to rise and fall with the internal emotions of the characters - especially Lily and Lawrence - and to express the turmoil of the social downfall of Lily. On top of that, you have phenomenal costumes and set with the most lavish colors. Lastly, and possibly what I found most fascinating about the film, was the lighting. it always seemed just bright enough or just dark enough to reflect the romance or dreariness. In addition, there is just not denying that the way the light fell upon Gillian Anderson in every, single scene is something I have never seen before.2. The all-star cast! Gillian Anderson. Eric Stolz. Laura Linney. Anthony LaPaglia. Dan Akroyd. Do I have to go on? I can almost guarantee that you'll find yourself, at one point or another, yelling at the screen. These characters are so manipulative and deceitful and malicious. And Lily is so naive and just won't accept love when it's given!! I think the best thing about the cast and performances in this film is that watching the film and listening to it are 2 completely opposite experiences. The actors convey one thing with their faces and another with their voices; it's pure talent. I was amazed.3. If nothing else, this film should watched purely for Gillian Anderson. This project was so different than her 'X Files' persona - and such a success, at that. The way she uses her eyes to express 5 different emotions in a matter of seconds blew me away. Her acting and utter vulnerability was awe-inspiring.