Popular Culture Review Vol. 10, No. 2, August 1999 | Page 34

28

Popular Culture Review

steal the letters from Juliana once he realizes that Lewis, in good conscience, will
not. Although Charles and Lewis both seek the Ashton letters, motives are mainly
what separate them. Charles’s motive for stealing the letters is personal monetary
gain, but Lewis hopes to gain permission to publish the letters so that the world
can simply appreciate the “shadow and glow” of the poet’s words as he does. To
clear himself, Lewis even tells Charles that financial gain is not what motivates
him: “Whatever money may come of this will go to those who are entitled to it—
to Juliana perhaps.”
An undeveloped and extra-textual mystery surrounding the death of Jef
frey Ashton appears in the confusing finale. In a struggle, Tina attempts to strangle
Juliana in order to get Ashton’s letters. As her life is threatened, the aunt suddenly
explains her secret to Tina and Lewis, who is listening from a distance; the secret is
that Juliana herself actually killed the poet Jeffrey long ago when he tried to leave
her. When the murder occurred, Juliana’s father, Ashton’s portrait painter, Martin
Bordereau, buried Ashton’s body in the garden on the premises, and this secret is
why, apparently, the house is cursed. In this strange film script, Bercovici’s hurried
explanation of the mystery was unsatisfying to many viewers. Variety
the
resolution “cryptic” and “undeveloped,” and the reviewer for the BFIMonthly Film
Bulletin review agrees: “This film leaves too much unexplained.” Finding prob
lems with the script, pace, and casting, the critical reception to The Lost Moment
was mixed at best. In praise of the film, Philip Hartung of Commonweal writes, it
“appeal(s) to the head as well as the eye and heart”; he also counters the objections
that he anticipates from Jamesian purists: “Members of the Henry James cult may
object to the changes...but adult moviegoers will welcome this fine Walter Wanger
production” (256). In other words, Hartung suggests that the film retains a certain
class appeal, even if it may not appeal to Jamesians who expect fidelity to the
source. Other critics responded to Hayward’s performance, such as Alton Cook of
the New York World-Telegram, who calls her a “beautiful lunatic” but finds the film
itself to be “ponderous, majestic, and thoroughly dull” (MoMA).
In an era when TheAspern Papers w as not as “world-famed” as the lobby
card claimed it was, the problems with Bercovici’s plot were often attributed to
James by reviewers who claimed some familiarity with James but who actually
conflated the tale’s and film’s plots. The reviewer for Film Daily, for instance,
acknowledges that James’s fiction was not widely read by the masses, but he un
wittingly lumps himself in that same category when he mistakenly assumes that
the literary source explores the niece’s mental illness: “Like a number of other
James works with which the general film going public is not too conversant, it
{TheAspern Papers) deals with abnormal psychological phenomena” (6). James’s
reputation among the masses for being unread was reinforced by critics them
selves who had not read him either.