The Age of Innocence

A -.

R1 rude

I’m kind of intrigued that the Julian Fellowes HBO show The Gilded Age is filming in Troy, NY where they shot many scenes for the Age of Innocences standing in for 19th century NYC.

It looks like a good series.

Is Sillerton Jackson gay? That was the impression I got.

OP, it's such a beautiful film. Michelle Pfeiffer is exquisite in it as Mdme. Olenska. Day-Lewis' yearning for her is palpable.

Someone who worked on the film pointed out that in the novel, the exotic countess was brunette and the homey nonthreatening wife was fair. But when an Italian American director adapted it, his exotic was blonde and his homey was brunette.

R6 I think that was more because of Pfeiffer and Ryder.

The book is fantastic. The movie is only fine.

R7, but Scorsese cast Pfeffer and Ryder because they fit his vision of the characters. His stock was very high at that time, he could have cast any actress he wanted in those roles.

I thought Ryder was great in that role and Pfeiffer miscast. It was a beautiful movie.

My favorite Wharton novel is House of Mirth.

R10 That's a good one.

R8 I will say the first fifteen-twenty minutes in the opera and gala are the best part of the movie.

It's the only really good Winona Ryder performance as an adult, in part because Scorsese made a point of her inadequacies as both a beauty and an actress to show how insecure May Welland was underneath her guise of purity.

Pfeiffer was indeed miscast, although she tries hard with the part (which may be the problem). But Day-Lewis and all the other great actors who Scorsese put in the supporting roles, especially Alexis Smith and Miriam Margolyes as the two most formidable queens of old New York society, are phenomenal. Smith really impresses me--she captures the point of the character of Mrs. van der Luyden as Wharton delineates her in the book: she is the ultimate arbiter of this society in the book, and she never loses her temper or is anything less than perfectly gracious because she knows exactly how powerful she is.

There are phenomenal sequences in the film: the opening at the opera house that segues into Newland attending the Beauforts' annual ball; the dinner party "meant to teach a lesson" at the van der Luydens; and the great sequence of the archery contest, with Ryder being both hilariously dorky when May wins, but also being quietly menacing when she walks up to take her shot.

I love these kinds of threads; they're DL at it's best

I agree with R12's comment about Ryder; she wasn't ACTING so much as being herself: a very insecure person under a beautiful exterior

I watched the film again a year ago and have always felt that there was no real heat between DDL and Pfeiffer. The film left me cold except for Ryder, Smith, Margolies, and especially Woodward's narration. There's more emotional resonance in Woodward's voice than anything else in the movie.

I've also seen the 1934 film with Irene Dunne, which isn't much.

The book is excellent.

OP is another DL graduate of the Sheboygan Conservatory of Boilerplate Hyperbolic Arts & Culture Writing.

Edith Wharton was one of Belle Watling's girls, wasn't she?

One of my favorite films. And, Edith Wharton is one of my favorite authors. BTW, OP, it is Miriam Margolyes.

I'm both a Wharton and a Scorcese fan. I adore the novel but I find Scorscese's "The Age of Innocence" a beautifully designed and meticulously observed dud. I give kudos to the exquisite recreation of the period in New York and Woodward's narration is flawless but I find the lead actors all ill suited to their roles. Could never understand the accolades bestowed on Ryder as May. That character interpretation seemed more customized to Ryder's persona than it did to Wharton's character. The same with Pfeiffer's Olenska. Worst of all for me was Day-Lewis's cloying Newland Archer. Oddly enough, I like these actors very much but I found their performances and Scorcese's interprations of them hugely disappointing. I've watched it quite a few times over the years and sadly my opinion doesn't change. I appreciate it as a glimpse into 19th Century New York society and its mores but chemistry of the main characters is like a black hole for me.

The movie could have been more fun and much more luridly luxurious if they had set it around 1900, 1910. Not 1870s. Loosely adapted from Wharton.

May may have been insecure when it came to Newland’s feelings about her but she held all the cards in the end and knew exactly when to play them.

r15, if we had wanted to hear from a cunt, we'd have asked Cheryl to queef for us.

The Olenska character is a pasteboard figure that the author uses as a firecracker. Newland Archer is the central character that struggles with the social demands that Olenska pushes against until her capitulation.

This is one of those film that will always be used as a textbook example of “if the director uses narration, it’s because he has failed to convey his meaning through his images and dialogue.” Beautiful but inert film. Was a flop for Columbia (this was the notorious Peters/Guber era when filmmakers were given huge budgets and creative freedom and produced such misfires as Bram Stoker’s Dracula and I’ll Do Anything) and snubbed in most major categories at that years’ Oscars.

I adore this novel. I felt like a bomb went off when I finished it, I was so shocked by the journey and that it had to end. Really incredible work. I saw the film when Criterion Channel had it as part of their Scorsese focus. I could see how much love he had for the story and appreciated that it came from his heart, but some of the choices he made did not appeal to me. But some sequences were breathtaking (the last dinner scene where everyone knew? MY GOD!) and I'm glad we have it to look back upon, I can't imagine this movie getting made as well today.

R23 I totally agree about the use of narration in this film. It felt like Scorcese was trying to explain this world to himself as well as the audience.

I kind of transposed this love triangle with that of Gone with the wind, with Scarlett, Ashley and Melanie, just more proper and no fiddle dee dee and I get confused about what Melanie and May did in what story. But both are about an old time that will never come back.

Don't blame me!

Please correct me if I'm wrong, it's been ages since I read the book, but isn't Ellen Oenska American born and bred? She just married an Italian count and there's nothing particularly exotic about her as written.

[quote] Edith Wharton was a woman who was ahead of her time

How was she?

Wharton recognized and wrote of women's lack of the ownership of their own destinies long before Betty Friedan.

[quote]I'm ... a Scorcese fan

Come on, though.

[quote] The movie could have been more fun and much more luridly luxurious if they had set it around 1900, 1910. Not 1870s.

The movie would have made no sense if they had moved it to 1900 or 1910. It could only have taken place in the 1870s. The real shift in the NYC social world from the old Knickerbocker aristocracy (the van der Luydens) to the new extremely moneyed upstarts (the Beauforts) was in the 1870s, the time of Edith Wharton's actual childhood.

By the 1900s-1910s era, the old Knickerbockers were in severe decline, as Wharton delineates in her 1913 novel "The Custom of the Country," where the Dagonets (the old l New York family) have basically retreated altogether into hiding in their few remaining Washington Square houses from the wealthy ostentatious upstarts like the Van Osgoods. That's a great novel and should be filmed. But the story of "The Age of Innocence," which is largely about the conflict of old inherited money and new self-made money, would not work in that era.

R12, my friend pointed out that if you look at Ryder's scene, there are lots of cuts, but Pfiefer's are long takes.

That is because Ryder could not sustain a scene and her moments had to be edited together, whereas Pffiefer could play a scene strongly from start to finish.

Great book, good movie, wonderful taste OP

And they had to cut most of the archery scene because Ryder could not act it effectively.

I didn't read the book and I was fascinated by the movie. At the time I saw it perhaps 5 times in a theatre. How was Pfeiffer miscat ? I thought her perfect and unforgettable, I think it's her greatest performance. Ryder was exceptional. It's the only Scorsese movie I can tolerate. the rest is shite, or mafia glorification

I love the film, despite Lewis' performance. Gabriella Pescucci won the Oscar for her costume designs, and rightfully so.

I thought the narration was fine---not at all lazy on the part of Scorsese. I think Woodward was reading from the novel--and it was elegant prose; listening to her fine diction and rich voice was a major plus imo. Also, I think the narration helped a modern audience understand more clearly the tenor of the times and the total exclusiveness of that society--it helped explain some of the subtleties/behavior that were essential to being a part of that world.

I did they explain Pfeiffer horrible nose job in the 1870's ? did Joanne richly narrate that ?

[quote] they explain…

Some things are beyond explanation. And I can't explain why I think Pfeiffer has an inappropriately 20th century face.

And this woman named "Billie Piper" with her plunging neckline, uplifted bosom, unkempt hair, and buck teeth doesn't look acceptably 19th century.

I concur with others that the book was much better than the film, but the film is so beautiful to watch that its flaws are quite bearable. Elmer Bernstein's score is beautiful, as well

And, another vote for The House of Mirth as the favourite amongst the author's works.

Oona O'Neill, who played May's mother, in her youth also played Wharton's doomed heroine, Lily Bart, in a televised adaptation of The House of Mirth (as well as Dr. Zhivago's young wife in the lush film of that novel).

I lived in Troy NY for a few years back in the mid 90s . The architecture is amazing,and there were still signs of when they filmed the movie there. For instance,when they were leaving Mrs. Mingotts house thats actually the steps of the Troy public library . Coming from Fl where the oldest building is like 1900,I never tired of walking around downtown and looking. But talk about a grim atmosphere .It was very,very depressed economically when I lived there,RPI being the main employer. Everyone I met was on unemployment or welfare of some sort because there were just no jobs. Whne my husband died from MS I was of course heartbroken,but partially overjoyed I could get the hell out of NY. Ive heard it isnt as bad now as it was then and I have often thought Id like to go back and revisit some of my old life there.

[quote] Oona O'Neill

OMG we're discussing her here—

^*Geraldine Chaplin, not Oona O'Neill - O'Neill was her mother.

it's Gerry you stupid cumdump. Oona O'neil would have been 125 yo by the time Geraldine played may's mother

[quote] OP is another DL graduate of the Sheboygan Conservatory of Boilerplate Hyperbolic Arts & Culture Writing.

But I can see no spelling mistakes.

R43 - You posted ahead of my correction of my error.

R45 - Um, you did see that I corrected the slip immediately, dear?

Try some civil discourse.

R44

Pfeiffer's part was difficult to cast. Scorsese needed someone to portray a boarding school background, but an unconventional personal life---a younger Jane Fonda would have been perfect, because that was her life. Even if someone lived an unconventional life, they would have had "upbringing" and a wacky Shirley MacLaine type would not have worked.

Ryder is good at being the naif, but if she had a little more going on, she could have captured the potentially manipulative part.

Lewis is distant from all the women in his life--they depended on them and had expectations of him. He couldn't survive if he was engaged in a contemporary way.

R46 Good school.

[quote] civil discourse

That is a rarity nowdays. I'm all the time telling Dataloungers to refrain from using toilet talk in their sentences.

The Age of Innocence is one of my top 3 favorite books of all time. It's one of the rare books I've read twice.

My other favorite book by Wharton is The House of Mirth. However, unlike the film version of The Age of Innocence, the film is horrible (despite the best efforts of Gillian Anderson and Laura Linney).

Jane Fonda couldn't do period costume work. For that matter, Pfeiffer also had problems with the costumes, she waddled in them. Ryder, for all her shallow gifts, looked far more natural in them.

[quote] Jane Fonda couldn't do period costume

Her buck-teeth mouth is as bad as that women in R40.

Jane Fonda is fug an she can eat an apple through a picket fence

Hanoi jane ? again ? why she not in Kabul, posing on some talibans cannon ?

You miss the point of her manner and her life. Fonda is not flaky in the manner of someone without her background.

Jane did OK with complicated costume work.

the only actress ever who ever looked good in period costume was Vivien Leigh. She moved like she was born in them. all the rest look like the costume wears them

hogwash.

I thought this movie came across as pretentious twaddle. So many modern versions of period books are like that, though. The characters were mostly flat and affected. And I’m an Edith Wharton fan who’s read most of her books.

[quote] So many modern versions of period books are like that

Which ones aren't?

R54: Fonda looks fine.

[quote] looked good in period costume was Vivien Leigh

I've never worn a bustle. But I think you have to have some kind of élan to make buttock-enhancements looks good.

sure does

I want Vivien as madame Olenska, claire bloom or even better, jean simmons as May (her alikeness with vivien will be interesting for the Archer dilemna) and for Newland...Larry harvey ?

I've always had some feeling against Claire Bloom. I'm not sure what it is, but I know I find her smug-looking as well as boring as an actress. I know she's not a bad actress; I don't warm to her at all, though. Anyone feel the same?

Wharton?

Oh, yes. Grade art on a curve so more women can seem mediocre.

That's going to serve art, int it?

I loved the movie of “The Age of Innocence,” and saw it at least three times in theaters. I think the narration was a fine addition, because it helped the audience experience another 19th century aspect of culture, when narration was expected for additional, leisurely understanding. A purely cinematic approach would have been too hurried.

Beyond all the previously mentioned kudos, I loved the music score by master film composer Elmer Bernstein, who was also nominated for an Oscar. Not his last, and not his last nomination, but certainly one of his greatest. And the way his music concludes the film almost makes up for Scorsese’s cutting of Wharton’s aching last line, when Archer says, “It’s better here than if I went up.”

For those who are interested, the CD can be found on Amazon.

[quote] Claire Bloom. I'm not sure what it is

I'm not sure what it is either. She has been in excellent stuff.

But I'm conscious her real name is spelled as Claire Blum and she (I assume) was rutting with those hairy animals Philip Roth and Rod Steiger.

Nipples here—

Recast it: Carey Mulligan as May and Kristen Scott Thomas as the Countess.

I agree, there was absolutely no chemistry between DDL and Pfeiffer so none of the movie made sense to me. OTOH, I found The House of Mirth very convincing.

Two weak female leads and too many interesting supporting actors—

[quote] Chaplin, Sian Phillips, McCowen, Grant, Pryce, Alexis Smith, Sean Leonard, Gough.

This movie (and most of Otto Premingers') teach us that the supporting actors can overwhelm he lead performers and dissipate the drama.

I need to revisit the novel. I read it in graduate school and remember really enjoying it. I've seen the film too, which I remember liking as well. I bought a copy of the Criterion Blu-ray during Barnes & Noble's recent 50% off sale, so I need to give it another watch. From what I remember, Winona Ryder was the weak link, while Michelle Pfeiffer and Daniel Day-Lewis stole the show.

Alexis Smith's final film.

She wasn't THAT innocent.

R69, She was also married to theatre producer Hillard Elkins in addition to having been one of Richard Burton's lovers.

Sigourney Weaver would have been perfect in the role of Ellen Olenska when she was younger. A young Cate Blanchett could also have done it.

I love The Custom of the Country so much more. No pretensions and a female lead character Undine Spragg (that name!) who really engages the reader. I don't understand why it's never been made into a film or better yet, a mini-series.

It would have even been a great MGM film with Lana Turner in the lead in the early 1940s. Except for Ethan Frome, I think it's Wharton's most accessible novel,

If you want a vicious portrait of Claire Bloom, read Philip Roth's I MARRIED A COMMUNIST. He based the character of aging Jewish (though anti-Semitic) actress Eve Frame on Bloom.

Lynn Nottage's play Fabulation is in part inspired by The Custom of the Country.

R78, And then read Claire's autobiography, in which she savages Roth.

I believe Sofia Coppola is adapting The Custom of the Country.

Laverne Cox IS Countess Ellen Olenska! With Pete Davidson as Newland Archer and the movie debut of Billie Eilish as young May Welland. Music by Lil Nas X.

R82, Don't forget Beanie Feldstein.

Elliot Page IS Larry Lefferts

Jerry Seinfeld and Larry David

I loved this film and thought it was extremely well cast, and Woodward's narration was perfect. I don't believe the narration existed because Scorsese couldn't convey its meaning otherwise. Lines such as "It was not the custom in New York drawing rooms for a lady to get up and walk away from one gentleman in order to seek the company of another. But, the Countess did not observe this rule" added so much layer to a scene, and I'm not sure how else this would have been conveyed unless he showed someone at the party actually saying this, which would have been kind of stupid. Or this, my personal favorite (re: Newland and May): "He could feel her dropping back to an inexpressive girlishness. Her conscious had been eased of its burden. It was wonderful, he thought, how such depths of feeling could coexist with such an absence of imagination." Absolutely wonderful film.

^ [quote] conscious conscience

[quote] brunette and the homey nonthreatening wife was fair.

You MUST have a physical dichotomy in motion pictures.

Gentlemen prefer blondes. But marry brunettes.

It’s just such a visually beautiful movie that I can overlook the actors’ limitations in the roles. It would have been useless without the narration, though.

Miriam Margolyes still hasn’t forgiven Winona Ryder! LOL

I always wondered exactly what it was that Madame Olenska's husband did that was so terrible. Can you figure it out from the book and I just missed it? Or is it left up to the reader's imagination to come up with their own scandalous activity?

Count Olenska was cruel and abusive to Ellen and had numerous affairs. He supposedly only married her for her fortune.

Count Olenska was also bisexual and fucked all their gardeners and stable boys.

If you don't get the Ryder performance you missed the show. She was actively involved in the plot without being present in every scene. I never thought May was an innocent. She showed you she did things on purpose to manipulate all the while smiling and acting coy.

R93/R94, all that seems likely, but aside from his cruelty, is any of that actually stated in the book?

Of course not you twat

You probably expect Flaubert to say out loud that Madame Bovary got fucked in the ass.

Winona Ryder was the front runner for Best Supporting Actress for the film. When she lost to Anna Paquin in The Piano it was one of the biggest Oscar surprises of the last 25 years.

This is the kind of movie where the costumes and backgrounds do the acting. The actors recite their lines in a strange monotone reserved for pretentious period dramas but that nobody ever really talked like in real life.

I’ve tried to read Custom of the Country twice and could not get into it. I generally prefer to read British novels though.

"When she lost to Anna Paquin in The Piano it was one of the biggest Oscar surprises of the last 25 years."

I can think of another.

R97 Clearly an author does not need to specifically spell out every detail and can communicate facts by implications that are clear to the reader. My point is that, to the best of my recollection, all the reader really knows about Count Olenska is that there are rumors and innuendo, none of which are specified, thus encouraging the reader to supply the details of the scandal from his or her imagination. You may also note that everything the people in the novel "know" about the connection between Archer and Countess Olenska is also based on rumors and innuendo, and is competely wrong. I think that was probably an intentional parallel on Wharton's part. That is all I really meant to point out, you uncivil asshole.

Victorian and Edwardian literature never provides the specifics of characters' sex lives. Nor any details of the servants' lives.

R103 Read Henry James' The Bostonians. Basically a love triangle that is never really there.

Sophia Coppola is making CUSTOM OF THE COUNTRY as her next film. It will be luscious, at least.

excuse me, Sofia:

Imagine if Merchant-Ivory or Sydney Pollack directed this over Martin Scorsese.

R100 must be a Harry Potter fan.

[quote] [R15], if we had wanted to hear from a cunt, we'd have asked Cheryl to queef for us.

Sir, this is the Datalounge.

We hear from cunts because we are cunts.

[quote]Winona Ryder was the front runner for Best Supporting Actress for the film.

She was only one of the front runners. Yes she won the Golden Globe but many of the critics awards gave it to Rosie Perez for Fearless (and Paquin received some of those as well). The Supporting Actress Oscar that year was up for grabs among these three actresses. Emma Thompson was simply honored to be nominated for In The Name of the Father, and Holly Hunter's nomination for The Firm was never going to happen in its own right, but even more so given her lead actress nomination for The Piano.

[quote]When she lost to Anna Paquin in The Piano it was one of the biggest Oscar surprises of the last 25 years.

No.

[quote] Recast it: Carey Mulligan as May

Carey Mulligan is not hot enough for the part

This want a surprise?

Pfeiffer's sharp, angular face would have been considered ugly in the 19th century.

[quote] This is the kind of movie where the costumes and backgrounds do the acting.

The certainly occupy a lot of the screen space. And they occupy our perception of the movie. And they distract us from the central drama .

Scorsese is too ill-disciplined to make this story.

I saw the messy Jennifer Jones movie but is this statement true? (I don't have the time to read the turgid novel in translation)

[quote] Madame Bovary got fucked in the ass.

^ So handsome.