Terence Davies' "The House of Mirth" - Classic or Dud?

"A 'hat movie'" -- Richard Roeper

Love it (especially Linney), of course.

Scorsese's TAOI wasn't guilty at all of "tasteful lit adap" shit -- as he said, it's Goodfellas by other means. All that great stuff he did w/ lighting, irises, slo-mo etc.

feminism = trendiness ???

Dr. M - i like the film, but visual tricks are always part of his act, i guess he just used more genteel ones in this instance. it's been ages since i've seen it, but i remember the narration as being a bit too much at times.

I'm not sure what Wharton would have made of it, but I'm not absolutely convinced that she wouldn't have approved. Scorcese, otoh, made the unforgiveable mistake of casting Winona Ryder in his film.

I kept imagining Sigourney Weaver in the part.

Really surprised to see no other thread on The Long Day Closes or indeed the new film, OF TIME AND THE CITY. I haven't seen his others, just this new one, tonight. It's been hailed as the beautiful elegaic work of Britain's greatest surviving auteur, or something, etc.

Guess what?

It's pretty terrible !!!

aye DISTANT VOICES, STILL LIVES = the best british movie of the last 20-odd years.

Bored me rigid, I'm afraid.

My favourite British movie of the last 20 years - Prospero's Books, though I freely admit I'm probably alone in holding that view.

Yes, OT&TC was disappointingly drab I thought, and I think reviewers are talking it up in the hope that TD might get a more substantial commission as a result of the hype. Davies himself is very good value however! (Though someone should have stopped him from doing the voiceover of his own film. He should take a leaf out of Chris Marker's book.) The screening I saw, they practically had to drag him offstage from the after-screening Q&A, he was such a relentlessly charming ham. He managed to proposition a member of the audience and recite a substantial chunk of the Four Quartets within the first 5 minutes!

Disappointing to hear these negative reports; sounded like it was right up my street. Perhaps literally. Back when it was all cobbles and you could leave yr door open.

But, I'm unlikely to see it (or anything else) in the cinema at the moment so, unless Terry D gets that CSI: Guinea Gap Baths commission from Five I'll just have to painstakingly work my way through DVSL, a frame at a time, until they rebuild the Gaumont and send the ghost of Bill Dean round in a Ford Zephyr to take me there.

CSI: Guinea Gap Baths !!!

There is a sequence in the new film showing, I think, a ferry trip (though there's very little about the ferry) to a day out on the beach at New Brighton. I'm not sure but perhaps that's the closest it gets to Mike's street?

Given the direness of this new film, I don't see that much reason to hope that TD gets a more substantial commission. I'd rather someone buried him under a dilapidated terraced house.

As for reciting Four Quartets: well, he recites a substantial chunk of it in the film too, so this seems a bit like Mel Gibson going out to promote a film and impressing people by reciting dialogue from it. The use of that poem seemed to me lazy and fairly inapt - but still superior to most of the rest of the script, which was remarkably awful.

The fact is, and it is indeed, I shouldn't wonder, a fact, that if you took the visual element of this film and asked Steady Mike to write and record a voiceover for it, in whatever mixture of moods (elegy, comedy, etc) he chose, the result would be about one hundred times better. Or eighty times? Or two hundred or five hundred times? An awful lot better, anyway - I mean it, an almost unimaginable amount better.

someone should have shouted out "oi terry who done miss you bow wow then? hyuk hyuk"

I think the problem with OT&TC is largely that it was made on a miniscule budget, and I imagine to a very particular City of Culture brief. I'm sure if a studio or even an enlightened BBC4 gave one of his projects proper backing, he could still amaze. For Distant Voices, Still Lives and The Long Day Closes, he is, still, the most brilliantly lyrical British director since Humphrey Jennings, I think.

Patrick Keillor's films aren't exactly high budget but there's more than enough imagination to make up for that.

If it was made to a "very particular City of Culture brief" I'm surprised that he gets away with skipping over the Beatles so firmly.

I think the problem with OT&TC is that it was made by a self-satisfied bore. Let me expand for a moment on the extraordinary poverty of this acclaimed film.

Maybe we should be warned by the portentous title (it’s really not much of a city film – but that 'of'!), and by the lazy strapline 'a love song and a memory' – this is not good. From the small audience watching it alongside me, some walk out midway. Archive footage, pretty average, nothing you couldn’t see elsewhere. The most standout footage is of young people at clubs and bars today – again, nothing too special, but more appealing and moving to me than any other pictures here. Davies’ narrating voice (carrying no trace of Liverpool - which may be an original twist, more surprising than having Ringo or Michael Angelis do it in a sense, but also rather distances you from the city which never comes alive in this picture anyway) is obnoxious, full of histrionic spitting which I suppose is supposed to be funny – but it never is funny, for the self-satisfied script is so dreadfully banal and ill-written.

He smugly attributes lines to writers like Joyce and Chekhov – but they’re lines that don’t reflect those writers’ talent at all. He quotes great chunks of Four Quartets: OK, it’s about Time, but what a lazy way to talk about time - to fill time, indeed, to kill screen time; and what does TSE have to do with Liverpool, la? He goes on about Catholicism, protesting his atheism – ok, so why keep going on about it? Don't tell me: once a Catholic, always a Catholic, or some BS like that. Well, Steady Mike refreshingly told me that was false about a decade ago; but in any case, TD's relation to religion, or anything, is just NOT INTERESTING, no more worth putting on screen than anyone else's.

His payoffs, punchlines and would-be wit are painful. He actually enunciates ‘all the fun of the fair’ over a shot of a fairground; he talks of Suez as a last hurrah for Victorian Empire when much of the map was red (should that be pink?). These lines are meant to be redeemed by irony somehow - but they float nowhere, they make the author seem a wheezing windbag who hasn't coined a phrase of his own in decades. It all lacks any purchase, any incision on the material; it’s desperately flailing. The obvious formal comparison for me is Keiller -- but how much Keiller shows and talks about reality, how little he gets lost in his own uninteresting head, and how interested he is in the present day – as well as the history that has gone into it.

He plays 'He Ain't Heavy' at some length over shots of soldiers in the 1950s, cos his brother was a soldier. The main interest here for me is just to listen to the structure of that Hollies track, hear the circulation of the chords: I don't need Terence Davies to make me do this, Dale Winton could cue it more amiably. He plays 'The Folks Who Live On The Hill' over shots of tower blocks: what bludgeoning, ill-wielded sarcasm, getting us nowhere near a real analysis of what did and didn't work about such reconstruction. All this was at least a lot more briskly done in The Rock & Roll Years about 25 years ago. He even dares to sneer at the Beatles: yes, this unprolific artist whose current claims to artistry are entirely undermined by this lame film has the nerve to sniff at the greatest, most dazzlingly productive artistic talent Britain has produced since Virginia Woolf. 'Yeah yeah yeah' he gurns over some footage of them. No, no, no.

Maybe you should see some of his proper films before dismissing him as a self-satisfied bore?

See, THIS is the sort of criticism I want to read in Guardian Film & Music.

If he doesn't think this is a proper film, why is he releasing it in cinemas, and why is it being hailed as 'one of the cinematic events of the year'? If he doesn't rate it or think it represents his talent properly, then he could have suppressed it.

But yes, I'm sure his other films must, indeed, be better than this.

where has this film been "acclaimed" as "one of the cinematic events of the year", and by whom?

Just to save everyone else a lot of time and money:

Distant Voices, Still Lives - bullying, half-dead dad, tell me something I don't know. I knew Bill Douglas. Tel, you're no Bill Douglas.

The Long Day Closes - dead from the neck down David Thomson-friendly cack which invites us to think that sitting in front of a cinema screen watching films constitutes cinema (see also Cinema Paradiso).

The Neon Bible - a grave insult to John Kennedy O'Toole.

The House Of Mirth - a graver insult to Edith Wharton.

It has been acclaimed as 'undoubtedly one of the cinematic events of the year' by an anonymous writer of publicity materials for it.

Patrick Keillor's films aren't exactly high budget but there's more than enough imagination to make up for that.

Good comparison! London and Robinson in Space mange to be moving without descending into mawkishness, and manage (on a low budget, as you say) to make London look like an alien, deserted wasteland better than, for example, 28 Days Later ever did.

Nothing in Cannes has given me as much pleasure as Terence Davies' glorious Of Time and the City, showing out of competition as a "special screening". A personal meditation on the postwar Liverpool of his 1950s childhood, the film is a collage of newsreel footage, video and still images of the city past and present, edited together with exacting aesthetic judgement, transfigured by Davies's musical choices and accompanied by his own ringing narration. It is by turns tender, lyrical, angry, shrewd and, above all, funny. This tough, unsentimental film refuses to use cliches and it got enormous, deserved laughs from festival-goers of all nationalities.

Terence Davies' voice itself is a revelation, as mellifluous as an old-school Shakespearean, sharp as a whip, with fruity top notes of camp, a little like a more contemplative Uncle Monty or a highbrow Kenneth Williams (whose sly, queeny dialogue from Round the Horne is one of many madeleines which launch Davies back into the past). He boldly quotes familiar lines of verse, Housman and Eliot, and builds into them poetic reveries of his own. His aperçus and jokes are too numerous to quote here, but the tone turns on a sixpence from compassion, to gentleness, to rage. He is full of pure love for the working men and women who lived tough lives with hardly a complaint, and Liverpool's forgotten generation of servicemen who went off to fight in the Korean war - one of many profoundly moving sequences.

I was reminded of Philip Larkin's request that his poems should be read aloud as simply as if giving directions in the street: Davies' poetic cinema has precisely this clarity and force. If I had my way, he would get a special Coeur d'Or for this movie, which should be showing in Cannes' biggest cinema on a 24-hour loop.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2008/may/20/cannesfilmfestival.festivals1

Terence Davies' new film, his first for eight years, is a heartfelt and even ecstatic study of Liverpool, the home town of his 1950s boyhood. The movie is brashly emotional and sentimental - sometimes angry, more often hilarious. Nothing has given me more pleasure this year: the sweetness of its temper, the unfashionable seriousness of its design and its mixture of worldliness and innocence make for something sublime. It has something of Humphrey Jennings's Listen to Britain and something more of Noël Coward, the Coward of This Happy Breed or Brief Encounter. Like Coward, Davies revels in the potency of cheap music.

Of Time and the City Release: 2008 Country: UK Cert (UK): 12A Runtime: 72 mins Directors: Terence Davies More on this film Of Time and the City was made possible by a modest grant from a number of public bodies, including Liverpool's Digital Departures project. The result is miraculous. It has ended the director's unhappy professional drought, returned him to the wellspring of his early autobiographical inspiration, and done so in such a way as to create new perspectives on the unholy trinity of class, sexuality and Catholicism. The movie might even inaugurate a new "late" period for this director: one showing him making peace with himself and with his past, but still laying painfully bare the cost of this process.

The form is simple enough: a relatively short (at 72 minutes) docu-collage of video and film footage about the Liverpool of today and yesterday, accompanied by the director's own choices from the classics and the pre-pop Light Programme numbers that moved him as a child. Davies' voiceover narration is as rich and dark and fruity as Dundee cake laced with mescaline. You haven't heard anything like it since Richard Griffiths' Uncle Monty. Davies' voice - indeed, his whole movie - is a plangent, baritone aria. In younger, lighter form, this same off-camera voice is to be heard reciting the service for the burial of the dead in the Death and Transfiguration section of Davies' trilogy from the early 1980s.

Its effects are forthright and arguably unsubtle. Davies hits you with Housman and Eliot. His musical choices are familiar, and the images and newsreels he selects are not novel in any strict sense of archival discovery. But the juxtapositions deliver an intravenous jolt of rapture and sorrow, all at once. Davies is incensed by postwar Britain's caste system; he is fizzing with scorn and rage on behalf of Liverpool's resourceful, creative working class, imprisoned in brutal housing and patronised by the better-off. But he is also scornful and enraged at them - and at himself - for allowing this to happen for so long. Davies sees a long, rotten, miserable time in British history, as chokingly dull and sexless as an eternal Sunday afternoon, and he sees this period as starting well before the Chatterley ban and ending well after the Beatles' first LP, if indeed it has finished at all.

Which brings me to the film's cheekiest coup: Davies' cheerful denigration of the Beatles. In theory, Liverpool's greatest sons delivered exactly the death blow to pompous, class-bound Britain for which Davies was yearning. Yet their cultural earthquake arrived at precisely the moment when the young Davies fell poignantly in love with Bruckner, performed in genteel concert halls in which there was no opportunity for copping off with anyone. We see the Beatles in full swing, playing Hippy Hippy Shake - though Davies dubs over the superior version by the Swinging Blue Jeans, perhaps as a subtle slight, or perhaps because rights clearance for the Fab Four was too pricey. The kids duly get into the Beatles in the Cavern Club, but Davies removes the pop soundtrack and replaces it with an unhurried, swooning orchestral score from the 19th century. The zeitgeist-malfunction is bizarre and brilliantly wrong in the way real life always is.

All Davies fans know the scene from his trilogy in which a gloomy church interior is inspected while we listen to the agonised narrator on the phone, begging someone to tattoo his scrotum, a procedure for which he will need to be as "hard as a biscuit". Davies shows these same churches in 2008 as deconsecrated, transfigured into trendy wine bars, clubs and eateries. You can hear the relief in his voice and see it on the screen. Goodbye to all that guilt, thank God.

But there is something else there, too: bafflement and pain at the spectacle of a city he no longer recognises. Miseries have been swept away, but certainties also. When he surveys young people thronging the streets on a Friday night, with money to spend, they do not appear to have the "white working class" label as clearly as their forebears. What are their loyalties? What is their identity? If consumerism has abolished the shackle of class and, consequently, the aspirational escape route of education and culture, then what now are their challenges, their private pains? Davies appears to be asking himself if he can understand them at all, but even this admission of weakness as an artist is bold and even thrilling.

It could be that, like Philip Roth, or even like Proust, Davies will find his own youth is a rich seam that he has come nowhere near to exhausting - even that the act of creative exploration creates new, undreamed-of reserves of raw material. What a lovely film this is, and what a welcome comeback for one of Britain's greatest film-makers.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2008/oct/31/of-time-and-the-city

I am certainly not inventing the acclaim.

'a rapturous film'

http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/video/2008/oct/31/of-time-and-the-city

Davies’ narrating voice (carrying no trace of Liverpool

I have no grounds to take issue with anything else you've written specifically about this film, cos I haven't seen it, but this doesn't ring true. There's certainly a Scouse twang to Davies' speech. I hear no trace of Scouse with, say, Tom Baker or Simon Rattle, but TD definitely has it.

Maybe the Council should have given the gig to Tarbuck.

Distant Voices Still Lives is one of my favourite films. I would kill for a decent copy.

― admrl, Tuesday, April 24, 2007 Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
British cinema is so frustrating because I'm sure that we could have more films like this if someone sorted out all the funding issues.

― admrl, Tuesday, April 24, 2007 Bookmark

Caught a screening of DVSL recently and yeah magical experience and all that but has it really been a case of 'funding'? I mean DVSL doesn't look at all expensive in the first place. No concrete ideas but it strikes me as a lot more than just a simple funding thing.

Incredibly 'singular' tho': I suppose it captures that very way in which voices, lives and songs intermingled in a er just-before-mass-record-consumption era, using music like almost nothing else.

On the British film classics tip has anyone got a copy of the DVD issue of 'Radio On'? The BFI put a really good effort on the booklet, for a change.

I liked Terence on Newsnight Review a few weeks ago. Something different, to say the least.

Radio On is an incredibly bad film. The best thing in it is a cameo from Sting. It says something about cinema that this is readily considered a classic. But what exactly it says, we'll have to return to later, as in the meantime Tranmere have to defend this corner.

I reread The Custom of the Country 10 days ago to remind myself of how merciless she can be. Please read her.

Wharton is absolutely amazing. Please do.

xpost yes, Alfred. It's merciless and humane at the same time. There's nothing like it. I don't think even James made a character as ruthless as Lily Bart that you care about and root for.

That Davis carried that off in his adaptation is a big achievement

I love the neon Bible but I think everyone hates that movie

I've never seen it but everyone hates it, yes. I've hated Davis films that were well received but Distant Voices, Still Lives is all-time great, top 5, at times top 1, for me. I had to stop watching the Dickinson film because I was embarrassed for him, that he put that put there, so I'm all over the place with him.

Yeah distant voices is amazing. I basically had a nervous breakdown the first time I saw it

Neon Bible shares aspects of it s staginess and the very mannered idealised refraction through a child's memories. It's sort of too weird to 'fail' imo whereas the later stuff looks atrocious. I feel like mirth is the only time he managed to do a ,'straight' film well. Gillian Anderson is excellent in it, I like her in theory but this is the only thing I've seen her in that I thought she was amazing in, she gets the messiness of the character over so well

Yes.

xps

I thought the Dickinson film was brilliant as well tbh. But I recall you not liking Sunset Song either, Jed - which also I liked! I think I might have to overcome my hatred of Tom Hiddlestone and get round to watching Deep Blue Sea soonish.

yeah Gillian Anderson is burning bright in HoM. Amazing performance.

amazing direction from TD as well. Her transition from arch-socialite playing the game to realising the game is finished is done without any mawkish nonsense. Which makes it all the more powerful.

I did but I don't really want to get into it :)

GA has been brilliant, at times, and is VERY good in this. I think she's a bit too pleased with herself now and that gets in the way. Helen Mirren is the same, like she can't get over herself.

xpost

There wasn't anything wrong with Dan Ackroyd's performance, it just seemed to me that he was trying very hard to Be Serious and it came across as stilted.
Otherwise this was great, although with a little less mirth than advertised.

laura linney is also quite a force in this

i had a crush on eric stolz in this film lol

i recall a particularly beautiful scene where we see a garden pond being rained on for a solid minute or so? i should really watch this again soon but i'm afraid i don't have the heart for this kind of story anymore, i'm too fragile now lol.

Yes, it blends very slowly into a shot of the house with the furniture covered with dust-sheets.

The fade-in showing the bow of the ship from which Lily's eventually banished is just....

Terence Davies' "The House of Mirth" - Classic or Dud?

Heh, sorry meant to put on the POLL thread

inspired by discussion here, tried to watch last night on Paramount+ and the image quality was so poor I had to bail (local libraries don't own, unfortunately)(watched Cop Land instead, sticking with a New York story, lol)

Laura Linney's smile would stop bullets.

lol

Was wondering about that Paramount+ copy

Eleanor Bron audiobook seems good

this screen at moving image this past weekend in 35mm, sorry to have missed it!

Yeah, luckily I saw the reminder on the other thread. I went on Sunday so I missed the Koresky intro but I’ll live.