| The Age of Innocence | | Cast : | Daniel Day-Lewis, Michelle Pfeiffer, Winona Ryder | | Director : | Martin Scorsese | | Studio : | Columbia Tri-Star | | Format : | Color, Closed-captioned, Widescreen, Dolby | | Released Date : | October 01, 1993 | | DVD Released Date : | March 04, 2003 | | Language : | French (Subtitled), English (Dubbed), French (Dubbed), English (Subtitled), Portuguese (Subtitled), Thai (Subtitled), English (Original Language), French (Original Language), Chinese (Subtitled), Korean (Subtitled), Spanish (Subtitled) | | Audience Rating : | PG (Parental Guidance Suggested) | | | BUY THIS DVD FROM AMAZON |
Customer Reviews
| Rating |  | | Date | July 28, 2005 | | Summary | "Can't love you unless I give you up" | Content
 | In the year 1993 Martin Scorsese surprised everyone by reining his directorship to Edith Wharton's most enduringly popular novel set in the Golden Age(1870s) of New York society. He is the most renowned and controversial director of his time specialising in theme of violent turmoil(guilt, desire,passion) which is commonly found in people.
Newland Archer (Daniel Day-Lewis), an upstanding gentleman and partner in a rewarding law firm, is engaged to the perfect society woman, the pretty and polished May Welland (Winona Ryder). Newland's world changes when he meets Countess Ellen Olenska (Michelle Pfeiffer), May's beautiful,intelligent and 'different' cousin who has resided in Europe and going thru a divorce. Her liberal sensibility starts falling for Newland's fervent spirit.
Not a word of rigid social code is written down anywhere which governs how these people should talk, walk, meet, part, dine, work, love, and marry. But these people have been studying it since they were born. Here it is where Newland and Olenska dare to differ and hence begins a submissive tiff between the individual and the community. Newland has to make a painful choice between a passionate life with Olenska and a safe life with May--the life he was born and raised to lead.
We're guided on this voyage by narrator (Joanne Woodward), who understands all that is happening and makes it captivating by supplying at times the private thoughts of some of the characters.
Without a literal bloodshed the film offers meticulously designed costumes and settings that evoke a culture as classy in its surface as it is conflicting in its customs. Ryder and Pfeiffer glow in their respective acts, but it is Daniel's restrained performance that is a real turn-on, particularly his scenes with both the leading ladies and the last scence are to watch out for.
Over a decade old but the film leaves you thinking with a lump in the throat. Perhaps violence attains a new meaning here that Scorcese calls his "most violent film".
|
| Rating | | | Date | July 02, 2005 | | Summary | Visually ravishing, but Michelle Pfeiffer is all wrong | Content
| Martin Scorsese and his team have faithfully captured the atmosphere of Edith Wharton's magnificent novel, and most of the actors are up to the task. The production design and music are particularly splendid. But Michelle Pfeiffer is all wrong for the role of Ellen Olenska. In fact, I'd go so far as to say she ruins the movie. She's the wrong physical type, the wrong emotional type. Ellen is supposed to be a mysterious, exotic woman -- "different," as Newland Archer puts it. But Pfeiffer is anything but different. She's too all-American, too garden-variety-pretty, too much the cheerleader type. It's not that she doesn't have acting chops in general, but she doesn't have what it takes to carry off this role. She even resorts to a kind of kooky, indefinable, faux-foreign accent at times, to signal, I suppose, that Ellen has been living in Europe for years. She's just all wrong. That's why I give this otherwise spectacular film only 3 stars. Imagine what a more appropriate actress could have done with this role! Smoldered right through the screen. Anyway, you can always read the book, which is easily 5 stars and then some. |
| Rating | | | Date | June 16, 2005 | | Summary | An excellent adaptation | Content
| I was a big Wharton fan, and read all her work several years ago. THE AGE OF INNOCENCE I've read at least three times completely. And I have a feeling that Wharton would have been a fan of this adaptation. Scorsese found the book's atmosphere, characters, and the sheer narrative grace of Wharton's sad tale of destiny in old New York. As the last scene unfolded, I almost had a sense of deja vu, that the setting in the Parisian courtyard was exactly capturing the final moment of Archer's recognition of his fate. It was so touching.
What a production! The soundtrack, the cinematography, the costumes, the editing and narrative flow--masterful and amazing. I've seen the movie a few times now, and find more to admire with each viewing. I did notice that the painting, the Bouguereau "The Return of Spring" that hung in the Beaufort's home in the 1870's, is actually supposed to be from 1886, but I think Wharton got that wrong in her novel...And why couldn't Daniel Day-Lewis manage an actual kiss at some point...he nibbled like a rabbit.
Scorsese's a genius, the best we have.
|
| Rating | | | Date | February 26, 2005 | | Summary | Splendid Adaptation of Wharton from Scorsese | Content
| "The Age of Innocence" was Martin Scorsese's first effort at a period drama; in a sense, a cinematic prequel to his successful "Gangs of New York". It is often overlooked as one of his finest films, perhaps because the psychological tension so vividly depicted on screen isn't nearly as captivating as what he has accomplished in films such as "Taxi Driver", "Raging Bull", "Goodfellas", and of course, "Gangs of New York". But both he and his long-time collaborator, screenwriter Jay Cocks, have done a splendid job capturing the atmosphere of 1870s upper class New York City, ranging from the costumes to the fine - if somewhat muted - performances from the cast. Both Scorsese and Cocks have crafted a visual feast which is reminiscent of many Merchant-Ivory films.
Daniel Day Lewis is most impressive as Newland Archer, who conducts a secret romance with young May Welland, played by Winona Ryder, in a dignified performance that may leave some wondering whether the passion between May and Newland is absolutely real. Michelle Pfeiffer's performance of Countess Olenska, May's cousin, surprisingly also lacks some of the sexual sparks she had set off in her performance in "Dangerous Liaisons". Still, the cast performs credibly in this long, though faithful, adaptation of Edith Wharton's novel. |
| Rating | | | Date | February 25, 2005 | | Summary | Innocence Lost | Content
| As a huge fan of Martin Scorsese, I was always anxious to see this. Many people I know have criticized the film for being too long and too boring, and after seeing it, I can agree. I have not read the novel that this film was based off of, which apparently after reading some reviews here, I should have. Nevertheless, I shall review the film as is, without knowledge of the book, the way this medium should be reviewed.
Newland (Daniel Day-Lewis) is engaged to May (Winona Ryder), but has this increasing yearning to be with Ellen (Michelle Pfieffer), a recently divorced siren in the late 1800s. They constantly long for each other behind everyone's back, especially May's. In the midst of this basic story, the film sporatically comments on the societal complexities of this age in early New York, as well as morals and morality. The main problem I had with the film is the pacing of it. Tension needs to be built, and long periods of dialogue with no evident threat of being caught doesn't help. The film may be faithful to the book, but in the cinema world, this is not always a good idea.
Ryder as May is also sorely underused in the story. She seemingly randomly appears whenever it's convenient for the film to remind us that Newland is engaged to her. On the bright side, Day-Lewis, Pfieffer, Ryder, and the rest of the cast turn in pitch-perfect performances in their roles, and the costumes and settings look great, but all this can't help the fact that the film drags on too long. |
|
|
|
|
