The House of Mirth (2000)

Meticulously adapted from Edith Wharton's 1905 novel, The House of Mirth may seem at first to be as dry (and as flat) as pressed flowers, but it's quickly evident that director Terence Davies and X-Files star Gillian Anderson (in a breakthrough film role) have tapped directly into the venality of Wharton's New York society. As the ill-fated socialite Lily Bart, Anderson perfectly conveys the understated wit and craftiness of a woman who knows how to play the game, and yet learns too late that it's loaded with ruthless, unspoken rules. Rising above the traditional crop of "marriageable girls," Lily is desired by any number of men who could ensure her place among the moneyed elite, but she deflects their courtship; lawyer Lawrence Selden (Eric Stoltz) is her true love but, tragically, his modest financial status leads them both into a cycle of unfulfilled romance.

Instead, Lily makes too many assumptions about her station, offending her aunt (Eleanor Bron), falling into a financial obligation to a manipulative investor (a curiously apt role for Dan Aykroyd), ostracized by a "friend" (Laura Linney), and refusing help from her most prominent would-be suitor (Anthony LaPaglia). All of these gaffes combine to forge Lily's downfall, and Anderson brilliantly captures the horror and confusion of a woman who is shocked when her expectations are no longer matched by her reality. Lily grows defenseless and dependent, and The House of Mirth evolves from stately reserve to become a devastating portrait of class cruelty. Heavy stuff, to be sure, but expertly crafted and blessed by Anderson's complex and heartbreaking performance. --Jeff Shannon Amazon.com

HOUSE OF MIRTH

HOUSE OF MIRTH (2000) is a period piece based on the Edith Wharton novel that portrays the early 20th century social caste of New York's elite. Gillian Anderson brings depth to Lily Bart's character as she navigates the protocols and expectations of society that are steeped within her own personal vices. Eric Stolz, Laura Linney, Dan Aykroyd, Anthony LaPaglia, and Elizabeth McGovern also display fine performances, portraying characters that provide a cohesive backdrop for Lily Bart. Caught between gambling debts and naivete, Bart (Anderson) finds herself in a maelstrom of life-altering events, which preclude her from being with the man she truly loves. April 24, 2008

A splendid and justified adaptation

The melancholic tale of rapacious Lily Bart, that was so meticulously and brilliantly written by Edith Wharton, deserves to be depicted onscreen with the same fluidity, subtleties and emotive presence as the novel, and I'm not exaggerating when I say that director Terence Davies truly accomplished this. Having read the novel a couple of weeks before, I was so anxious to see the movie adaptation that could do it justice and in my opinion, it sure did.

What Davies concocted in this small-budgeted movie that somehow looks extravangant and lush is the dreamlike atmosphere, with shades of ethereal lighting, that poses a stark contrast to the realism and a sense of brutality in the movie. It seems realistic in a way, as people have mentioned, by the lack of background music that may all but decimate the essence of the words said by the characters. The stillness of a scene without music whatsoever, pulls the audience in and makes the conversations more private and true.

I'm actually very happy that Davies had decided to retain the 'stilted', formal dialogue that Edith wrote, which makes the similarities between the novel and the movie more tangible. Most of the actors seem to be at ease with the dialogue, and I can only sing songs of adulation to Gillian Anderson. I'm not very familiar with her and the supporting cast's work, and the faintest memory of Gillian in X-Files that I have is when I was barely in elementary school.

Gillian is absolutely resplendent as Lily Bart, and the fact that her translucent azure eyes emoting a paroxysm of different emotions within seconds astound me. Her downward spiral towards penury is executed wonderfully; her trembled voice and breaths and her fatigued expression just express pure debility. She does an absolutely brilliant performance that deserves a universal recognition.

As Lawrence Selden, the handsome Eric Stoltz portrays him with such sophisticated charm, at times boyishly, and flirtatious air that it's no wonder that Lily, Grace Stepney and Bertha Dorset are vying for him. In the second part of the movie, Stoltz proves to be a remarkably effective actor in doing dramatic scenes, especially his final scene where he strips off Lawrence's righteous facade and pours his heart out that all but shows the vulnerability and despondency of a crestfallen man. Only stone-hearted people are not affected by this particularly sad scene.

I also have to mention that Gillian and Stoltz elicit amazing sparks and chemistry from each other, which makes their attraction very credible and justified. They react off each other perfectly just with clandestine glances, smiles and even behind cigarette smokes. Their intimate scenes are titilating and private, under Davies' claustrophobic frame, that makes me feel as if their rendezvous is not meant to be seen by the audience.

Other standout performances for me are Anthony LaPaglia as Sim Rosedale and Laura Linney as the vulturous Bertha Dorset, whose malicious intentions lie behind her placid smiles.

The only complaint I have about this movie is that some scenes can only be understood by the rarefied few, albeit those who have read the novel. One scene in particular is the entertainment at the Brys where they held a tableux vivants and Lily was Watteau's Summer. It seems to come out of nowhere in the movie without explanation whatsoever. Such problems occur, unfortunately, because of the meagre amount of budget.

Nonetheless, The House of Mirth is an extraordinary adaptation and it lingers on with me long after I finished watching it that I had to watch it again on the same day. And both times, I couldn't help but cry and feel extremely moved by the movie. This is the movie to see if you enjoy the aesthetics of great cinema and leisurely-paced movie that is deep and wreathing with emotional turmoil. February 22, 2008

A poorly made movie

I loved the book, and didn't mind the rewriting of the storyline. But this was just a badly made film. The acting was terrible, for one. As much as I like Gillian Anderson, I felt she was out of her depth for the role. Everyone else (with the exception of Laura Linney) seemed to be "faking" it. The worst part was the transitions between scenes, which were too long, and usually without dialogue or music. I'm not looking for an action-packed film, but the transitions really added nothing to the flow or emotion of the film. There were some good moments, and the costumes were beautiful, but otherwise, I'm waiting for someone else to make a film adaptation of Edith Wharton's wonderful book. February 16, 2008

skip the movie if you're very attached to the book

I just finished the dvd after having read the book a few weeks ago, and I'm sorry to say that my high hopes were disappointed. You would think that a novel worth adapting to film would be worth adapting with some sense of fidelity to the original...unless you have learned better by now. (I have not.)

My first frustration with this version was when I realized that the script had collapsed, into one very incoherent character, the heroine's greatest (blindest, even!) defender *and* one of her greatest detractors. Was this a misguided attempt to economize? In the novel, Gerty Farish is a crucial foil not only for Lily Bart's beauty but also for her taste for luxury, her selfishness, and her charm--perhaps someone decided that, with her unrequited longing for Selden and her bad complexion, Gerty would drag down the film's aesthetic standards. In the novel, however, this is essential: she is shabby, yes, she is exhaustively principled and self-effacing, but she also shows us that the extreme poverty that leads to such squalid ruin in the heroine *can* be compatible with some kind of respectable and useful existence. This all sounds like a load of moralizing, but what works about the novel is that it doesn't try to privilege this good-doing over what is undeniably more interesting; you could say that it is Gerty who manages to survive the course of the plot, but you would also have to admit that the life of Gerty Farish would never merit any kind of novelistic treatment. I have harped on this for too long, but to half-eliminate and half-combine what is probably the fourth- or fifth-most important character in the book with, of all people, Grace Stepney, is, to say the least, problematic.

My other main gripe with this adaptation was that I missed a sense of Lily Bart's tragic habit of doing the wrong thing, against her better conscience, until it was just too late. This was what sustained, through the better part of the book, a sense of ineluctable doom. If a pervasive sense of ineluctable doom doesn't sound like a good idea for a movie, then someone ought to rethink making movies out of stories that [spoiler, if you are still with me] end in suicide, even if the suicide is staged with a bottle of red liquid dripping artistically from the heroine's loosening fingers.

If you're looking for Edith Wharton, needless to say, you'll do better to read the book. If you're trying to save yourself the trouble of reading Edith Wharton for a class--shame on you!--you'll probably get more out of wikipedia than from this movie. October 4, 2007

For once, the film is better than the book

House of Mirth was actually number one on my Christmas list of must-read books last year. I'd heard so much about the movie, I forced myself to abstain from watching it until I finished this sure-to-be intensely satisfying book. I'm sure it's because I'm not used to Edith Wharton's writing style, but I think she may've been alergic to action. There's plenty of self-examination from our heroine, Lily Bart, and her seemingly endless commentary on society and her place in it. Thankfully, we're spared much of that in the film. The film brings up many interesting points that I'm sure the book discussed, had I cared at the time. Is Lily Bart a martyr for accomplished, well-to-do ladies of her circle? Does she surrender too soon? Does her weakness say more about her or society? It really is rather a disturbing look at societal politics and how quickly the upper echelons of society could eliminate or alienate rivals by rumor, slander or even the hint of impropriety. As much as I initially loathed Lily Bart and her ineptitude, I really should sympathize because she's not a survivalist in the skilled, strong work-ethic sort of way. She wasn't bred for that. We get early on that even she knows she's doomed to failure. She's given several opportunities to get back in the game, but shuns them out of pride or loyalty to her friends. Gillian Anderson is exceptional in the film because she understands Lily Bart is an uncomplicated woman. She wants to be a part of high society but won't step on anyone to get there or take the easy way out. She knows Lily's imperfections but she'd explain that they're necessary if she's to fight for her place in the world. That's all she knows. I do love the entire cast in this film, especially Dan Aykroyd as Gus Trenor. Some people dislike the casting of Aykroyd and I too think his presence is rather jarring. I'm waiting for him to whip out his proton pack. But his odd, slimy salesman presense was a brilliant choice as we instinctively don't want him anywhere near Lily. I'm rather partial to this film for restoring the bitter disappointment I felt for the book. I really find it more interesting to watch Lily's star gradually diminish without needing a constant commentary from the heroine. We only need to see how she reacts. She isn't able to share her inmost feelings and I think her silent, self-struggle, is what makes the audience wish they could help her or be her confidant. August 4, 2007

More reviews at Amazon.com ...