It is currently Sun Feb 18, 2018 11:35 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: 913 The Age of Innocence
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 5:24 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT
The Age of Innocence

Image Image

No filmmaker captures the grandeur and energy of New York like Martin Scorsese. With this sumptuous romance, he meticulously adapted the work of another great New York artist, Edith Wharton, bringing to life her tragic novel of the cloistered world of Gilded Age Manhattan. 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.

DIRECTOR-APPROVED SPECIAL EDITION:

• New, restored 4K digital transfer, approved by director Martin Scorsese, with 5.1 surround DTS-HD Master Audio soundtrack on the Blu-ray
• New interviews with Scorsese, coscreenwriter Jay Cocks, production designer Dante Ferretti, and costume designer Gabriella Pescucci
Innocence and Experience, a 1993 documentary on the making of the film
• Trailer
• PLUS: An essay by critic Geoffrey O'Brien


Top
 Profile  
 

PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 5:40 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2013 12:26 pm
Hah! Not much of a special edition for this feeble and precious film!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 6:19 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC
Feeble my ass, this is a flat-out masterpiece, a great adaptation of a great novel, even if Michelle Pfeiffer feels a little miscast.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 6:56 pm 

Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2010 5:10 pm
Indicator releases Sony films, don't they?
I wonder if this could be released by them!

if yes, I could hold on a bit more for this most favourite film of mine!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 7:26 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 6:10 pm
Costa wrote:
Indicator releases Sony films, don't they?
I wonder if this could be released by them!

if yes, I could hold on a bit more for this most favourite film of mine!

Yes and no. Indicator hasn't released any title that Criterion has released. I fully expect Criterion will release this in the UK.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 7:59 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 11:27 pm
hearthesilence wrote:
Feeble my ass, this is a flat-out masterpiece, a great adaptation of a great novel, even if Michelle Pfeiffer feels a little miscast.

I'm with you. Achingly romantic and heartbreaking. I can't get through the last 15 minutes without feeling like an emotional wreck.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 6:06 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
dwk wrote:
Costa wrote:
Indicator releases Sony films, don't they?
I wonder if this could be released by them!

if yes, I could hold on a bit more for this most favourite film of mine!

Yes and no. Indicator hasn't released any title that Criterion has released. I fully expect Criterion will release this in the UK.


Criterion UK is essentially a Sony operation (hence the huge bias towards Sony titles), and I suspect with any acquisitions since Criterion UK was formed they’ll have cleared the rights to both territories upfront.

Put it like this: I doubt I’m breaking any professional confidences when I confirm that it’s not on Indicator’s current slate, which presently goes up to Q1 2019.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 7:52 pm 

Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2010 5:10 pm
MichaelB wrote:
dwk wrote:
Costa wrote:
Indicator releases Sony films, don't they?
I wonder if this could be released by them!

if yes, I could hold on a bit more for this most favourite film of mine!

Yes and no. Indicator hasn't released any title that Criterion has released. I fully expect Criterion will release this in the UK.


Criterion UK is essentially a Sony operation (hence the huge bias towards Sony titles), and I suspect with any acquisitions since Criterion UK was formed they’ll have cleared the rights to both territories upfront.

Put it like this: I doubt I’m breaking any professional confidences when I confirm that it’s not on Indicator’s current slate, which presently goes up to Q1 2019.


Thank you MichaelB.
Yes, I figured too that since noone else has released this in UK till now, it will be Criterion.
Pity because I would love this film with the excellent encoding I see in Indicator blurays.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 4:45 am 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:41 am
Location: Berlin, Germany
For me this film was always overshadowed by Terence Davis’ The House of Mirth, a far superior Wharton adaptation at a fraction of the budget. Gillian Anderson, looking like a John Singer Sargent painting come to life, broke my heart in that film. Wished it would come out on Blu-ray, it’s one of my favourite films of the turn of the millennium.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:44 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 10:06 pm
I agree completely: I found The Age of Innocence quite hard to watch after seeing The House of Mirth. There are lots of good things in it of course, especially the two central performances, but Scorsese's flamboyant style and (I'm sorry to say, because I'm usually a fan) Elmer Bernstein's overbearing score seem inappropriate to the subject matter, especially when placed alongside Davies' leisurely, subtle use of the camera, and his unerringly brilliant choice of music. The earlier novel is much more scathing and brutal, of course, whereas The Age of Innocence has a more affectionate attitude to the society being portrayed - so I guess it demands a brighter, livelier approach. I just found Scorsese's take on it a bit grating. And yes, it would be wonderful to see the Davies film on blu-ray.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 4:15 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 12:56 am
I felt that House of Mirth was crippled even more by poor casting (Eric Stoltz? Dan Ackroyd?) though it had many things going for it. FWIW Davies himself is a great admirer of Scorsese's Age of Innocence, and I doubt his admitting so was just professional courtesy after several critics compared it unfavorably to his film.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 6:06 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 10:06 pm
whaleallright wrote:
I felt that House of Mirth was crippled even more by poor casting (Eric Stoltz? Dan Ackroyd?) though it had many things going for it. FWIW Davies himself is a great admirer of Scorsese's Age of Innocence, and I doubt his admitting so was just professional courtesy after several critics compared it unfavorably to his film.
Personally I don't think Scorsese's film is miscast at all. I agree about Aykroyd's embarrassing, moustache-twirling performance in the Davies film, but I've never quite understood the objections to Stoltz. It feels like people expected him to provide something that isn't there in the character of Lawrence Selden, or in the relationship between him and Lily.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:46 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm
Blu-ray


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 12, 2018 2:57 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC
I've seen the 4k DCP so not surprisingly this looks excellent. FWIW, they had the matte painting for this shot displayed at the Scorsese exhibit at MoMI and it's pretty cool to see how impressionistic the details look up close. (Basically the landscape, the sky and the houses.)

I once talked to the prop master for this film. It really gave me an appreciation for what prop masters do, especially on a film like this, because even decades after it was over, he still sounded traumatized by it - he kept saying "I don't know how I did it." He pointed out that this was done before the internet became widely used, which meant doing a hell of a lot of research via printed material and literally knocking on countless doors just to track down the right objects. It wasn't just physical material research, he actually studied the history and social mores of that era, just to get a real understanding of what every object meant to the people seen in the story.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 12, 2018 3:12 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 2:30 am
Location: Philadelphia via Chicago
You definitely get a sense of that in this movie. There’s always interesting business with objects like the pen he uses, cigar accessories, the parasols, the gentleman’s hats in the wind, etc. Much more so than the Davies production.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 12, 2018 3:25 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 12:02 am
I was a bit worried about the seemingly modest amount of special features for what is sure to be a tent pole title for Criterion, but from the review, the few there seem to be lengthy and substantive.

I am terribly excited for this release. I am more moved by this film every single time I see it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 12, 2018 3:30 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city
hearthesilence wrote:
...FWIW, they had the matte painting for this shot displayed at the Scorsese exhibit at MoMI and it's pretty cool to see how impressionistic the details look up close. (Basically the landscape, the sky and the houses.)...

I believe this approach was fairly standard for matte painting work done throughout the 20th century. It was either Peter Ellenshaw or Albert Whitlock (or both) who said that finely-detailed paintings looked less realistic on camera than ones that were more impressionistic.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 12, 2018 3:33 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC
Roger Ryan wrote:
hearthesilence wrote:
...FWIW, they had the matte painting for this shot displayed at the Scorsese exhibit at MoMI and it's pretty cool to see how impressionistic the details look up close. (Basically the landscape, the sky and the houses.)...

I believe this approach was fairly standard for matte painting work done throughout the 20th century. It was either Peter Ellenshaw or Albert Whitlock (or both) who said that finely-detailed paintings looked less realistic on camera than ones that were more impressionistic.

They actually covered this in Criterion's extras for Rebecca (which I bought months after I saw the Scorsese exhibit). In that film, you'll notice the mattes are more illustrative, not impressionistic, and I think they mentioned this was reflective of the era - that is, studio departments would soon adopt a more impressionistic approach for the reasons mentioned by Ellenshaw and Whitlock.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 7:53 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm
Beaver


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot]


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group




This site is not affiliated with The Criterion Collection