Terrible Narration

I thought she did very well. Wharton's prose was written to be read, not spoken.

I love the film, and think it's one of Scorsese's best, and most underrated works.

The narration is, in my opinion, well done, and fits the mood Scorsese is looking for. It gives us background information about the society, and adds much to the general appreciation of the film.

"Sometimes you have to take the bull by the tail, and face the truth" - G. Marx

I respectfullly disagree... I love this movie because of the narration....her voice is so moving!
Proud to be an American! - Don't hate us 'cause you ain't us!

If you ever read the book it becomes apparent why there is a need for such narration. Much of the novel is not spoken, much like the way people in this society related to each other. Therefore the viewer/reader needs someone to fill in the gaps and better the understanding. I thought Ms. Woodward did a marvelous job. I like to pretend it is Wharton herself reading us her portrayal of love, societal pressure and independence in the late 19th century prestigious New York.

That's funny because I'm watching the movie right now and the narration is really irritating me. I guess it's necessary for explanation but I really find it annoying so far.

As I wrote elsewhere, her voice spoiled the movie for me with her southern accent which did not reflect the time and place, and which she still hasn't rid herself of after 50 years in showbiz. Additionally, I would have preferred a mans voice for the movie in order to represent the viewpoint of either Newland Archer or his son.

Narration is an art in itself. It doesn't always work well, especially in fictional film. Just because you're an actor doesn't mean you can do it well either. Arguably, some viewers just don't like narration period, although it is a must in documentaries and for the most part those hired to narrate docs do a far better job of it.



Ignoranus-someone who is both stupid and an ass---e.

From MENSA

It somehow didn´t sound right during the early stretches of the film when it had that hushed yet giggly tone to it, but improved its ways considerably later on (same can be said of the entire film as it took a while for it to establish a firm handed perspective; Scorsese obviously went for coolly detached sensibility here yet his naturally jazzed-up style kept sneaking through early on). Still, as is the case with Casino, there´s arguably too much of it.



"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

I don't know if it's Joanne or just the narration in general but it was irritating to me. Unfortunately, I know nothing about 1870s New York social culture so I suppose it was helpful.

That said I feel like narrating in general in films is general and undermines the viewer and any visceral response they might have to the film without it.







Even if it means me taking a chubby, I will suck it up! - Tobias Funke