Rating: 
Summary: Edith Wharton's The Age of Innocence
Review: This movie wrenched my heart so much so that it hurt to watch; yet I could not take my eyes from it. Daniel Day-Lewis was superb; I love his style. Mr. Day-Lewis was just as good, if not better, as John Malkovich was opposite Michelle Pfeiffer in Dangerous Liaisons. Newland Archer (Day-Lewis) was more honorable than the underhanded and treacherous Vicomte de Valmont (Malkovich), as this movie deals more with unattainable love than the filthy manipulative love of Dangerous Liaisons. The forbidden romance's outcome is prolonged from being revealed as long as possible to torture the viewer. Martin Scorsese has made a masterpiece here. His long shots coupled with the exquisite costumes and glorious scenes are breathtaking. This film is highly underrated and if you are one of the unfortunate many who has not yet seen this film, do so now. Michael Gough is a pleasant surprise and it's interesting to note that only a year before he worked with Michelle Pfeiffer as Alfred in Batman Returns. Michelle Pfeiffer herself is as always gorgeous and makes you pity her character's loneliness; I really wanted things to work out for her. Winona Ryder is overshadowed by Pfeiffer's stellar performance but does have some memorable moments herself. This is the second movie I've seen Winona made up to look like an elderly woman, the first being Edward Scissorhands. A well deserved five out of five stars.
Rating: 
Summary: I like this..but find it irritating....
Review: I basically purchased this movie...and a million others that are similar, because I loooove stories that are set within this time period. Just like anyone, I love a good romance...and the way this movie was shot was breathtaking, but...Daniel Day Lewis annoys the [heck] out of me!!! Are we actually suppose to feel sorry for him??? He doesnt even try to pretend that hes not in love with his wife...and its his own fault!!! The ending left me wanting to scream in frustration...what can I say?..I like to walk away from a movie feeling satisfied...and this movie left me feeling distinctly empty.
Rating:
Summary: A Performance Masterpiece
Review: I have viewed this movie nearly 10 times now, and I continue to be captivated by the brilliant performances of the actors. DD Lewis rivets every scene with gracious style, coupled with subtle moments of inner strife (and sometimes silliness) that forces me to search my own archives for these torn and unresolved emotions. After all, it's just acting! But I can't help but be drawn into the emotional undercurrent. As for W Ryder, what a shockingly incredible performance. I normally find her quite predictable as an actor, yet I found myself guessing whether or not her character was just a sheep, or amazingly brilliant. And I didn't feel cheated. M Pfieffer follows suit, as I had this inner plea for her to win all that she sought. The supporting cast (including bit players) were also perfectly placed and helped create this piece into "Master". I highly suggest this DVD (movie) to those who care to look at motion pictures intelligently, which purposely refrains from suggesting the NEED to look artistically, although it is very artistic, as well.
Rating:
Summary: Elegance Inexpressively Captured!
Review: I cannot write anymore kinder words about this movie than what the previous reviewers have said here. Here is what I can say. If you like period pieces, this movie will not disappoint. Scorsese made this picture in a style reminiscent of old Hollywood when time was taken to tell a story and you weren't confronted with vulgar humor, meaness of spirit, and explosions every few minutes.
THE AGE OF INNOCENCE is simply timeless and elegance inexpressively captured on film from the opeining credits to the end credits.
Rating: 
Summary: Long and Bloated
Review: This movie is ridiculous beyong words. To begin with, the plot might justify a brief hour and a half to 2 hour film, but nothing like this 15 hour (feels like it, really) snooze-fest. It's very simple, and has been done thousands of times much better. Two people fall in love but for some reason they can't get together or they wouldn't still be in love if they did (I only saw it two weeks ago and already I can't remember). Then there is the dialogue, which is mostly schmaltzy and overly melodramatic, and is completely mangled by most of the actors. Especially annoying is Joanne Woodwards voice-over narration, which chirps up whenever the music swells to tell you a) what just happened (which you know if you've been paying attention at all) b) what everyone's thinking about (which you know because most of the performances are so cartoonish) and c) what the fallout will be (which you don't need to know because they'll show you the scene about it later). Daniel Day-Lewis looks grumpy most of the time, whereas Michelle Pfeiffer is suitably radiant, but says most of her lines in a breathless whisper with her eyes unfocused, gazing dreamily at the wall. In the supporting cast, Scorcese has a miniature stable of British actors in near-cameos. Unlike their American counterparts, they look comfortable and relaxed doing a period peice, but the dialect coach seems to have them all doing ridiculously exagerrated American accents. Basically, had the Brits made this movie, it might have been a lot better, because they do enough costume dramas to know not to get caught up lingering on the pretty sets. So I'm giving the film one star for itself, and one for Winona Ryder, as the only cast member who doesn't look like a rank amateur, despite being the youngest person there.
Rating: 
Summary: eye candy.
Review: IS THIS MOVIE COMPUTER GENERATED? WELL IT IS CERTAINLY EYE CANDY. THIS MOVIE IS AS BEAUTIFUL AS LIFE ITSELF. THE AGE OF INNOCENCE IS NICE TO LOOK AT, HOWEVER THE STORY CAN REALLY GET UNDER YOUR SKIN. IF YOU HAVE EVER BEEN IN A RELATIONSHIP WITH SOMEONE, AND LOVED THEM, BUT KNEW OF SOMEONE ELSE THAT COULD MAKE YOU HAPPIER, YOU DO THE SO CALLED RIGHT THING AND SETTLE. THIS IS A MOVIE YOU CAN RELATE TO. THE ACTORS HERE HAVE NO PROBLEM BRINGING THE REALISTIC CHARACTERS TO LIFE. MOST NOTED WINONA RYDER PLAYING A VILLIAN THAT NEEDS ONLY WORDS AND EXPRESSION, NOT WEAPONS. IT'S EASY TO SEE WHY SHE EARNED AN OSCAR NOMINATION HERE. SOME MIGHT NEED TO SEE THIS A 2nd TIME TO FULLY GET IT, I DID. MARTIN SCORSESE WAS BRAVE TO TAKE THIS PROJECT ON, HE SUCCEEDS WITH HIGH MARKS. DANIEL DAY-LEWIS, MICHELLE PFEIFFER AND WINONA RYDER STAR. BY THE WAY THIS FILM IS 0% SPECIAL EFFECTS AND 100% DRAMA. WELCOME YOURSELF TO THE LATE 1800's
Rating:
Summary: does not wear well
Review: The sets and costumes are great; but this is a leaden production. Daniel Day Lewis turns in a wooden performance and the narration is irritating. Day Lewis's American accent is an embarrassment. Winona Ryder does well (especially in the last hour) with a thankless part; and Michelle Pfeiffer saves this movie from utter tediousness. Very disappointing, considering the undeserved praise it has received.
Rating: 
Summary: Very long and very boring!!
Review: I saw this movie when it was in theaters. Some friends from college and I went because it was getting such rave reviews. Luckily, I didn't have to pay for it because it was extremely long and boring. We were all very disappointed in this film and faught to stay awake.
It was very tedious to keep track of what was going on. It was also confusing on who was who because they all looked like each other.
Over all, I'd rate this as 0 if I could because I hated this movie! I don't suggest it to anyone unless you're having trouble getting to sleep.
Rating:
Summary: Nothing ever happens
Review: Boring, monotonous, tedious, irksome, tiresome. This is one of the most dull films i've ever seen. I'm never so harsh with any picture, but i was expecting a film with a little more life. Ok, this is not "The Matrix", so i wasn't expecting to see special effects or a big body count. I knew it was a movie about emotions and feelings. I saw it at the cinema with my (then) girlfriend (now my wife).... But the actors fail to show any emotions, most of the time you'll notice a small smirk, an unnoticeable frowning or a tear, but nothing else. Well, you'll supose that this would reflect the inner suffering of the characters instead of emotional displays, but it fails miserably to evoke any emotion in the viewer. The movie moves slow (even when we are used to Scorcese's slow pacing with sudden deployment of energy and speed), and the story ends in the most pathetical way. I know that probably my review would be different if i had read the book before i saw the movie, but, alas, a movie is a movie and a book is a book. They have different languages and ways to tell the story. A clear example is "The Lord Of The Rings": the book is rather slow and dense, but the director was able to extract the most important feelings and passages and make a dynamic movie out of it. You may wonder ¿ did your wife like the movie ? Well, actually she liked it at the cinema, but a few years later, she couldn't even remember if she ever saw it. Even when i told her some passages of the movie, she wasn't even able to recall a single image. That's probably the movie's worst defect: it goes into your system, doesn't get ever digested, and you'll quickly forget it. It's like adding more fiber to your diet, it will only help to make you remember that meat always taste better. If you don't believe me yet, try watching the first 3 or 4 minutes of the movie: nothing ever happens, and nothing gets your attention. I had more fun writing this review than watching the movie. At least, we can learn that a great cast, a great a director, and a great book, don't necessarily make a great movie.
Rating:
Summary: Lavish, Sumptuous and very much a Scorese picture.
Review: Yes it's frilly, filled with lace and stills could pass for photo spreads in Home & Garden. Yet even without Pesci, DeNiro, or foul language, 'The Age of Innocence,' at it's core is quintessential Scorsese. The key thematic is power, it's related hierarchy and about those who wield and fall to it - only this time instead of exercising power through gunplay and violence it is dispensed through mannerism and whispered subterfuge. Scenes with Mrs. Mingott interacting with her friends and family come off reminiscent of Paul Sorvino's character in 'Goodfellas.' All of Scorsese's visual trademarks are also intact with some great tracking shots and loads of loads of rich mise-en-scene. There's so much visual eye candy to take in, in terms of production and art design that multiple viewings are a must. From a technical standpoint this DVD is a treat and those lucky enough to have a proper TV connected to their DVD players through component cables will truly enjoy the rich, sumputous colors in this most excellent transfer.
|
