Rating: 
Summary: A movie Worth seeing
Review: This movie on a shelf seems like a boring old movie but when you actually watch it its suprising great. All the characters were wonderful. Gillian was excellent as was Eric Stoltz. When you watch how these horrible things happen to her you just start to cry. Its so touching. ITs a movie worth wasting your time on. You wont be sorry.
Rating:
Summary: Fine adaptation of a vicious novel
Review: As a fan of Wharton's works, I had some trepidation about such a difficult novel being made into a film. Davies is a great director of some wonderfully introspective works but I still wondered if it could be done properly. I'm glad to say that I was pleasantly surprised by the film. Davies directed and wrote this film with austerity and economy. I'm amazed at how much of Wharton's dialogue remained in the final product. Granted, there are some cuts in the story but nothing that was harmful to getting the complex themes across to the audience. Wonderful acting (for the most part), cinematography, costumes and writing make this film worth looking into if you're in the mood for some serious drama. Where the acting is concerned, I thought the supporting players were very good. Linney, as the evil Bertha, and LaPaglia, as Rosedale, really stood out for me. Stoltz was just right as the ineffectual Selden. Ackroyd was troublesome in certain scenes, mainly because he seemed out of place, but was very effective in his most pivotal scene with Lily. Jodhi May, at times, seemed over-the-top in her acting but after listening to Davies' commentary, I realize that he intended her behavior to be a contrast to the dignity displayed by the character of Lily. As wonderful as most of the supporting cast was, the film really hinges on the performance of Anderson as Lily. I admit I was taken aback by the casting of Anderson as Lily Bart. My surprise did not have to do with her being a television actress, since it would be ignorant of me to think that just because an actor has been on TV they are second-rate, but because my understanding is that she has been playing her character on the TV show for quite a while. This can cause an actor to become stagnant. This was my main worry. I did look her up and she does seem to have impeccable theatrical training. Well, my fears proved unfounded. Her performance was subtle, delicate and intricate. The look in her eyes was truly haunting in some of the scenes. She was quite marvelous. There is a warning for those looking into purchasing the film; it isn't for everyone. I think some of the negative reviews given on this site indicate that a thorough knowledge of Wharton's time and the treatment of women during this period are absolutely necessary to viewing this film and getting the most out of it. Perhaps, a review of the philosophy of "naturalism" used in Wharton's novels, especially "The House of Mirth," will help in understanding the themes in the film. Knowing a bit about Wharton herself, her feelings toward her own upper-class contemporaries, her struggles with depression, her family's views toward the education of women, and the attitudes toward the women in aristocracy "working" would be beneficial. Also, the film isn't fast in its pacing compared to most of today's Hollywood fare and requires concentration, mostly due to Davies giving you the information without actually spelling it out for you. The film isn't a Merchant and Ivory piece with over-emphasis on the glamour, the clothes and sumptiousness of the period. It's simple and focuses on the details of human emotions and class struggles, which are at the heart of the film and novel. Overall, this is a great film deserving of all the praise it received by the critics and film experts. Depressing, yes, but also a great look into a character's fight to do what is right no matter the consequences and despite her upbringing and temptations to follow the immoral behavior of her "friends" who are more concerned with superficiality and comfort.
Rating:
Summary: Actually, I saw this at the theatre...AMAZING
Review: At first, I was thrown off by Gillian Anderson, not that she is not a superb actress, but I kept seeing her as Scully from X-Files. Slowly, but surely, however, she won me over. It is a knock-out performance. She is very self-contained, amazing, and a firebolt when necessary. The emotional build-up is slow but when it hits you, you are devastated. The other actors are good also. This is a great movie!
Rating:
Summary: Beautiful, heartbreaking film
Review: The House of Mirth is one of the best films of 2000. Gillian Anderson gives an amazing performance and supporting players such as Laura Linney, Anthony LaPaglia, and Eric Stolz are wonderful as well. If you enjoyed Howards End, Age of Innocence or Remains of the Day, you will love this film. The DVD includes many extras such as deleted scenes and the Director's commentary, which I found fascinating.
Rating: 
Summary: Hated it!
Review: I was absolutely thrilled to learn that a movie was made of this classic- it is one of my favorite Wharton novels. When I read it, it brought me to tears. This DVD also brought me to tears, but for all the wrong reasons! One doesn't relate to Gillian Anderson as the lead- did she read the book? I picked up on a lot of self-pity and suffering but the story wasn't coherent or fluid. Maybe it came out too long for a movie and the plot was lost on the cutting room floor? Because Gillian is wooden, I feel as if everyone else seems awkward and out of place. Maybe it is true, what they say, that the book is always better than the movie? I highly recommend the book.
Rating: 
Summary: Worthless
Review: This movie was one of the worst I have ever seen. The story line is almost incomprehensible and the story itself is bad beyond belief. In my opinion the acting was poor as well. House of Mirth plods along at the pace of a death march, the dialog makes no sense and the characters are cardboard. None of the people in the movie even seem like people. The are so stiff and unlifelike that zombies would come off well by comparsion. The story itself is simply stupid. No one would follow the actions taken by the main character unless they were insane. And I think the produce may have been insane to even think about bringing this to the screen in this fashion. Avoid this lifeless, meandering, and boring movie. It was a total waste of effort to even sit through it. All good movies start with good writing. This one fails there and then goes on to fail in every other aspect of movie making. In a word - worthless.
Rating: 
Summary: A poor man's Age of Innocence
Review: I was very impressed by the lead actress Gillian Anderson. I have never seen an episode of the X-files (it's not that I don't watch a lot of TV it's just that I have no idea where and when this show is broadcast), and I can imagine that fans of the X-files might hate this movie. It's not a great film but it has its moments; certainly nowhere near as good as the Age of Innocence but if you liked that film you will enjoy this one. I really disliked Dan Akyroyd in this film; he's just a horrible actor, but his role is really not that prominent, thankfully. The DVD production is rather peculiar in that it doesn't tell me anything about the actor who played George Dorset, and the whole time I saw him (Terry Kinney) on screen I kept wondering where have I seen this guy before.
Rating:
Summary: It's like watching a train wreck
Review: Ee gads! Painful, tragic and long. I kept hoping it would surprise me and turn around, but it did not. What started out as an interesting period piece turned slow and torturious. Except for the excellent, and exceptional, performance by Gillian Anderson, this movie would have only gotten one star from me.
Rating:
Summary: A Poor Imitation of the Book
Review: After reading the book, I was looking forward to a fine adaptation. What I got was a miscast Lily Bart, poor screenplay and actors saying their lines like school players. A great disappointment. If you are going to do Edith Wharton, you need to let her great words come through. They don't come anywhere near in this film.
Rating:
Summary: the worst movie I saw all year
Review: And when I say "the worst movie," I am including "Cabin Boy," which a friend of mine rented on VHS. I would watch "Cabin Boy" 1,000 times before I'd go near "House of Mirth" again. Never have I been so totally astonished by a critical response. NOTHING is good about this movie. Sometimes you'll hate a movie but understand how other people could like it. The only reasons I can even begin to imagine that anyone would praise this embarrassing waste of time and effort is (a) it's based on an old book, and (b) everyone is in costumes. It MUST be good. At 140 minutes, the film is about 130 minutes too long. It has not a single thing to recommend it. People talk about Gillian Anderson's fantastic performance. Fantastic because her lip quivers? On top of it all, the entire experience hinges on our ability to pity this woman, and what are we pitying her for? Her fall from incredible opulence for no particular reason. In one reprehensible scene near the end that would have been hilarious if the film were a comedy, her character is fired from a job (oh, no! how can they fire her?), and we learn that it's because she doesn't come to work on time or really do her job. But my main criticism of the film has nothing to do with the weird class issues in it (at one point a friend enters her ENORMOUS New York apartment and is overwhelmed with dismay at her living conditions). I wouldn't care a whit about that if the film were interesting in ANY WAY WHATEVER. This is a film that should not exist. It drives me to capitalize words. In a year that knocked George W. Bush into the presidency and gave Russell Crowe a "Best Actor" Oscar for "Gladiator," the success of "The House of Mirth" was the crowning bathos, making me wonder when I'd finally wake up from this nightmare our society has become.
| 
