The House of Mirth (2000)

Director: Terence Davies

GetAttachment-1.aspx.jpeg

By Marilyn Ferdinand

A pretty girl, a pretty girl
Can walk anywhere
All doors open for her
Like a breath of fresh air,
Her beauty, it precedes her
Wrapped in her beauty,
Everywhere, she is welcome
First class on the plane,
Closed door of the club,
All faces turn, all faces turn
And they come alive,
With a desire to protect her…
…The rules do not apply
To people in love.

(lyric from Jerry Harrison, “Man with a Gun”)

The opening scene of The House of Mirth promises a story that fits the above lyrics: the slim figure of a woman holding an umbrella moves serenely along a train platform and out into the streets of Manhattan where she is met by the man she loves. Ah, but life is not a song, and Lily Bart (Gillian Anderson) is no ordinary beauty. She is a poor relation looking for an exceedingly good match at the very top of New York society. And since the source of this tale is Edith Wharton, not Jane Austen, the game she plays—is forced to play—will not end well, but rather as it usually does for people who are not making the rules and therefore cannot afford not to follow them to the letter—in squalor.

GetAttachment-3.aspx.jpeg

Lily has purposely missed her train to Belmont, the country estate of her good friends Judy and Augustus “Gus” Trenor (Penny Downie and Dan Ackroyd), so that she can arrange this meeting with Lawrence Selden (Eric Stoltz), a young attorney who moves in her social circle. Lawrence asks her to tea at a local shop to pass the time until the next train, but she prefers somewhere more private. He suggests his rooms at the posh Benedick apartments just a short walk away, and Lily disingenuously considers her reputation and then says, “I’ll risk it.” Lily accuses him of avoiding her because, “I have the reputation for being on the hunt for a husband.” Certainly, however, Lawrence does not wish to marry her; they both assume that she must remain on course to marry a very rich man, not one who must work. The tragedy of it is that Lawrence really likes his work, and judging by the look on Lily’s face as she pretends not to care, she would be very happy to share his unrich, but still very comfortable life. It is the straitjacket of social expectations that has pinioned their free will.

On the train, Lily spies another Belmont-bound passenger, Percy Gryce (Pearce Quigley), a very wealthy, straitlaced bachelor for whom she has been angling, and invites him to sit with her. Her flirtation is nearly derailed by Bertha Dorset (Laura Linney), who plops herself down next to Lily and begs her for a cigarette, shocking poor Percy. Percy asks Lily to attend church with him, and she agrees—that is, until Lawrence shows up. She stands Percy up, and he leaves Belmont in a huff the next day. Lily’s unwillingness to make this marriage for money reveals her to be a character of integrity who obeys the dictates of her nature rather than those of society in matters that really count. Being true to herself, which gives her the strength to talk back and resist in more dangerous situations, also leaves her gullible about the duplicitious goings-on around her.

GetAttachment-9.aspx.jpeg

For example, her cousin Grace Julia Stepney (Johdi May), who lives with her and their widowed Aunt Julia Peniston (Eleanor Bron), envies Lily’s beauty and covets everything Lily expects to gain with ease, most especially Lawrence and the bulk of Aunt Julia’s estate on her death. Grace goes to work on her aunt’s opinion of Lily when Lily is seen sitting with Gus Trenor and Jewish social climber Sim Rosedale (Anthony LaPaglia) at the opera, setting up a confrontation that forces Lily to confess she has gambling debts and causing Aunt Julia to change her will in favor of Grace.

GetAttachment-6.aspx.jpeg

Lily also is victimized by Gus, who gives her money under the pretense of making shrewd investments for her and then expects her to pay him back with sex. Gus says, “You know the rules, Lily. Now you have to pay.” But, of course, Lily is as poor at playing social games as she is at cards. Panicked for her physical well-being as well as her reputation, she nonetheless refuses. “You owe me $9,000,” says Gus in disgust. “I will pay you,” she says as she flees his home.

GetAttachment-5.aspx.jpeg

Worst of all, she crosses Bertha, of whom Judy Trenor tells Lily, “Of course I’m fond of Bertha. It’s safer to be fond of Bertha.” Bertha, who has been cheating on her husband George (Terry Kinney) for years, asks Lily to cruise the Mediterranean on the Dorsets’ massive yacht to keep George occupied while Bertha dallies with a new amour, a replacement for Lawrence, who has thrown her over. Bertha tries to deny what she’s been up to, and Lily unwisely contradicts her and defends herself against Bertha’s insults. Bertha announces during a dinner party on shore that Lily will not be returning to the yacht. The scene takes place in Monte Carlo, but it might as well have been Palermo, with a Mafia don giving a foot soldier the kiss of death. Lily’s fall is slow and painful, and even when an opportunity to be restored to her former position is made plain to her by the refreshingly frank Mr. Rosedale, she refuses it in order to shield Lawrence from scandal.

Edith Wharton was an insider in New York high society and adhered to many of the snobbish, condescending views of her social set. Yet in choosing the title, The House of Mirth, she leaves the reader to complete the adage for themselves (“and madness”) to understand the tragedy of the situation that remains hidden in the shadows of the riches so many of us are dazzled by and covet.

GetAttachment-2.aspx.jpeg

Terence Davies produces a film less witty than Wharton’s book (though he has his moments, particularly in depicting the ridiculous Grace), trying to achieve a certain lightness with very mannered behavior in the first act that misses the mark. What the film lacks in wit, it makes up for in soulfulness. Gillian Anderson is perfect, depicting an ordinary woman who has learned imperfectly what it takes to realize other people’s ambitions for her and who never achieves anything for herself but to maintain her self-respect. Her natural beauty emerges briefly in a human tableau that earns the admiration even of Grace, who comments that she likes Lily best when she carries herself simply. This is the true Lily, Grace and Lawrence agree. When Rosedale runs into Lily, who is ill and addicted to laudanum, he escorts her to her furnished flat in a working-class neighborhood. She is quite unashamed of where she lives and her attempts to earn a living as a milliner. It’s honest, at least. The only thing she confesses to be ashamed of is that she would have been content to live a more humble life with Lawrence and that shame kept her from accepting his profession of love.

GetAttachment-8.aspx.jpeg

The cast of the film is rather eccentrically chosen, with Stoltz and Linney giving me the most trouble as being perhaps too lightweight for their roles as a playboy and a shrew. After repeated viewings, I am finally won over. Linney pulls out all the claws swiftly and economically in Bertha’s quarrel with Lily, and Stoltz and Anderson work well together, even in their more artificial moments. I was delighted to see Elizabeth McGovern, of whom I’ve been fond since her earliest days, as Mrs. Carrie Fisher, a widow who maintains herself as a social secretary.

GetAttachment.aspx.jpeg

The film is evocatively lit and breathtakingly beautiful. You can practically feel a pleasurable warmth when Lily is lounging in the garden at Belmont, her eyes fluttering, her frame relaxing. The final image of Lily and Lawrence resembles a Rossetti painting, and fades almost to nothing under the closing credits. When the credits end, we are left with a nearly white screen, a ghostly image of the pair just barely visible. Exquisite.

“I thought that I could manage my own life, but I have been foolish, foolish to the point of being compromised,” Lily says at one point, but what beautiful woman who is encouraged to be an ornament ever really manages her own life? Society compromised her well before her innocent missteps finished the job.

  • Sam Juliano spoke:
    10th/04/2009 to 6:15 pm

    Another Marilyn Ferdinand ‘film review gem’ of a film that I also adore. It’s one of 2000’s best films, along with DANCER IN THE DARK, WERCKMEISTER HARMONIES, IN THE MOOD FOR LOVE and YI YI, and it’s further proof in retro, that Terrence Davies deservedly ranks with Ken Loach and Mike Leigh as one of Britain’s three most pre-eminant filmmakers of the past few decades. I just saw TIME AND THE CITY yesterday and I was completely blown away by it. I do agree that Davis didn’t transcribe Wharton’s wit in this adaptation, which as you rightly state, is more ‘soulful.’
    Yes the film is beautifully lit, Gillian Anderson is simply ‘perfect’ and the cast is solid throughout, although unlike you I was not won over by Linney’s performance, even on reviewing.

  • Marilyn spoke:
    10th/04/2009 to 7:17 pm

    Thanks, Sam. This film has been one I’ve been deeply attached to ever since I saw it. Davies has my undying gratitude for making it.
    I saw Time and the City back in October, but it just didn’t resonate with me. Gorgeous images – I would expect nothing less – but it felt too personal to Davies’ remembrances of his home town to reach me. I was rather bewildered by it.

  • Pat spoke:
    10th/04/2009 to 9:41 pm

    Marilyn – A lovely summation of a wonderful film. I love the book,too, and while the film isn’t a strictly faithful adaptation, it is a very successful one. Gillian Anderson was superb- you heart just breaks for her as her situation becomes more and more desperate.
    We don’t see enough of Elizabeth McGovern anymore. I just watched “The Handmaid’s Tale” again today, and she gives a wonderful supporting performance in that film as well.

  • Marilyn spoke:
    10th/04/2009 to 9:53 pm

    Pat – We agree on this film 100%. McGovern became a presence for me in Ordinary People, a really exceptional film. I saw her on stage at the Goodman not long thereafter, and she really lit up the theatre.

  • Sam Juliano spoke:
    10th/04/2009 to 10:36 pm

    Marilyn: I just watched TIME AND THE CITY a second time with my wife and older cousin, who is roughly the same age as Davies. I am 54 years old myself. I mention age here, because I’m am trying to connect the mutual essence of the film, despite the diverse setting. The indellible memories that we all cherish, the universality of love, nostalgia, displacement and ‘becoming an alien in your own backyard’ was quite the fabric of the film, which on second viewing lost not an ounce. Yet, I believe your reaction makes quite a bit of sense, as I am mentally placing myself in your shoes so to speak. I guess it all comes down to differing perceptions and tastes. I was ravished by teh stunning use of classical, choral and popular music, and the lierary references and quotations seem to support the thematic essence of the film quite persuasively.
    The various cultural happenings/events like the storming of the Beatles, the inductions at Buckingham Palace, and Liverpool losing it’s identity were perfectly conveyed.
    But again, if Davies was unable to transcribe the ‘personal’ to the ‘universal’, well then this won’t and doesn’t work. Seems my wife is on your side here, and my cousin is with me. I want to see what some others think, but this DVD is a Region 2, so I can’t make copies that will play on Region 1 players.

  • Marilyn spoke:
    11th/04/2009 to 2:28 am

    Sam, I am also nearly 54, so the remembrance of things past theme certainly resonates for me. But I’m not terribly sentimental about the past and tend to accept changes in my physical and personal landscape without much resistance or sense of loss. What can one do? It is right that one generation should give way to another – that is nature’s way. Not having any sense of Liverpool either past or present, it’s even harder for me to relate to Davies’ sense of loss and displacement. I’m already displaced by sheer ignorance. However, I know quite a few people who feel as you do about the film, so, yes, this is just one of those differences in perception and taste.

  • Sam Juliano spoke:
    11th/04/2009 to 8:52 am

    Telling and insightful response here Marilyn. Thank You.

Leave your comment






(*)mandatory fields.

What others say about us

"You put a lot of love into your blog." – Roger Ebert, Roger Ebert's Journal
"Marilyn and Roderick … always raising the tone." – Farran Smith Nehme, The Self-Styled Siren
"Honestly, you both have made me aware of films I've never seen, from every era. Mega enriching." – Donna Hill, Strictly Vintage Hollywood




Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Blogs

Chicago Resources

General Film Resources

Categories

Archives