Directed by:
Martin ScorseseCinematography:
Michael BallhausComposer:
Elmer BernsteinCast:
Daniel Day-Lewis, Michelle Pfeiffer, Winona Ryder, Richard E. Grant, Alec McCowen, Geraldine Chaplin, Mary Beth Hurt, Stuart Wilson, Howard Erskine (more)VOD (2)
Plots(1)
The Age of Innocence tells the story of Newland Archer (Daniel Day-Lewis), whose engagement to an innocent socialite (Winona Ryder) binds him to the codes and rituals of his upbringing. But when her cousin (Michelle Pfeiffer) arrives in town on a wave of scandal after separating from her husband, she ignites passions in Newland he never knew existed. Swelling with exquisite period detail, this film is an alternately heartbreaking and satirical look at the brutality of old-world America. (Criterion)
(more)Videos (1)
Reviews (9)
A historical costume melodrama about the unfulfilled love of two members of New York's high society in the second half of the 19th century. Although there are objections in the comments regarding its length and "emptiness and dullness," I personally don't think that the weakness of the film lies in the quality of the screenplay and its execution. In fact, such careful psychological characterization and well-thought-out story structure are certainly not often seen. Thanks to the budget and Scorsese's directorial skills, The Age of Innocence is a truly impressive depiction of the life of the bourgeois elite, starting with the ladies' wardrobe and ending with the grandeur of bourgeois residences. Yes, this film does not rush anywhere, and you must look for adventure, eroticism, or tension in other genres and titles. But this is not Scorsese's or his team's fault. My detachment and more modest evaluation are rather of an "ideological" nature. I simply don't feel well among those chatty snobs, hypocrites, and manipulators. I have no sympathy for the central couple either, who ultimately decided their own fate. If you decide to sell yourself for a noble title and meet the expectations of your family and social conventions, you must also sacrifice something, at least personal freedom and emotional fulfillment. They both had a choice, no doubt about it, but they couldn't overcome the limits of their social class. They sold themselves, and it apparently didn't hurt Newland much. Scorsese looks at his calculating bourgeois characters with a kind understanding rather than stabbing and biting, as social-critical authors would. In his interpretation, it is more of a romantic story of unhappy love than a social drama about period-class morality. I would gladly watch this story again but in the style of Guy de Maupassant... Overall impression: 65%.
()
"The Age of Innocence" is a film about a man who already has his place in society certain, he is popular and respected. Partly, it is because of where and when he was born. He lives in a society where a woman is the one who is in charge of the household, or she is the one who is obedient and, as a good Christian, gets married soon and stays in that marriage. However, the main character, Newland Archer (played convincingly by Daniel Day-Lewis), has slightly different views on society and, unlike other men, sees women as equals. Perhaps that's why Ellen Olenska (Michelle Pfeiffer) impresses him. She has divorced, after all. So here we have another woman who stands against fate, against society, but this time it is the man we focus on. He is actually the weak one, he is the one who submits to society. Even though he loves another woman, he made a promise to someone else and will marry her, even though she will never be loved as she deserves. This time it is the man who is the weak hero, he is the one who can be considered - feminized. In this direction, Scorsese shows how society has changed, how roles intertwine and are quite unstable. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2013/03/vek-nevinnosti-1993-80.html
()
It is clear to me why this film from Martin Scorsese’s filmography is not talked about much. In terms of its story, The Age of Innocence is unbelievably boring, and the only thing that salvages it is the way Scorsese filmed it. Michelle Pfeiffer’s story might have been the most interesting thing in the whole movie. But that’s still not enough to turn this into a good film. Just imagine that the movie you’re watching is not set in New York but in the English countryside and the level of its blandness becomes clear. This movie aspired to give me a visual brain lobotomy.
()
Formally precise, but reprehensibly shallow and uninteresting in content. Lewis and Pfeiffer have a lot of feeling, as do masters Scorsese and Bernstein, but due to its emotional coldness and excessive runtime, I unfortunately can't view the film as anything other than an educational glimpse into the lives of the social elite of the 18th century. And the fact that it is a very believable and visually impressive glimpse doesn't change that. Not even the best director could have saved this romance. 65%
()
Though Martin Scorsese had never dabbled in the genre of sad romance, either before or since, he did a great job with this period piece. The dialogue between the main trio is both painful and uplifting, and if it wasn't for the slow pace, which is a bit too generous, this drifting ship would have sailed even further.
()
Ads