Review of The House of Mirth (2000) by David U — 05 Sep 2006

[size=3][font=Times New Roman][b][i]House of Mirth[/i][/b] (2000) is British director Terrence Davies? adaptation of Edith Wharton?s classic American novel about New York high society (1905). Lily Bart (Gillian Anderson from the long-running television show [i]X-Files[/i]) is trying to make her way among the rich and [i]nouveau riche[/i]. She is trying to find an attractive and rich husband: As she says, a woman needs a husband, but a man may choose to have a wife or not. Although she is and always has been attracted to a young lawyer who must work for a living (Eric Stoltz), she plunges into the politics of high society on her own, dressed to the nines and slightly too old to be a perfect package. [/font][/size].

[size=3][font=Times New Roman]I loved the human subtlety she encountered. When a wealthy acquaintance (Dan Aykroyd) says, ?I will help you invest your money,? he means, ?You will become my mistress.? When he says he has made $4,000 for her on her investments, he really means that he has made nothing but is giving her his own money to put pressure on her to become his mistress. When one of her female friends (Laura Linney) says, ?Come with my husband and me on our yacht to get away from all this,? she really means, ?Your presence will destroy your reputation but be a good cover-up for the affair I?m having.? Anyone who is a great socializer or anyone who has been highly successful in bureaucracies will be able to understand all these Janus-faced statements, but, like me, Lily has a devil of a time deciphering all the hidden meanings?with tragic consequence.[/font][/size].

[size=3][font=Times New Roman]Although the costumes and set design are wonderful, and although the script is excellent, the movie ultimately succeeds because Gillian Anderson does such a superb acting job. Acting is the part of films I understand the least. I believe top notch acting a) has a wide range of emotions, b) has complex emotions, and c) is so realistic that you are not aware of the acting until you stop to analyze it. Gillian Anderson takes you to New York in the Gilded Age and drags you through the turmoil of fighting adverse social conventions and subtle social warfare. [/font][/size].

[size=3][font=Times New Roman]It says something about the Academy Awards that in 2000 [i]House of Mirth[/i] was not nominated for anything. Sure Julia Roberts was wonderful in [i]Erin Brockovitch[/i], but Gillian Anderson was not even nominated. Sure [i]Crouching Tiger[/i] had excellent art direction and beautiful cinematography, but [i]House of Mirth[/i] was not even nominated. [i]Traffic[/i] may have deserved the Oscar for best screen play from an existing book, but [i]House of Mirth[/i] was not even nominated. Nonetheless, Edith Wharton left us a caustic and cautionary portrait of the high society world she knew so well, and it translated into a fine movie with contemporary relevance. [/font][/size].

[size=3][font=Times New Roman]Rating: 10/10[/font][/size].