---
title: "Metropolitan"
year: 1990
kind: "film"
canonical: "https://film.one/film/metropolitan"
fi1m_id: "metropolitan"
imdb_id: "tt0100142"
tmdb_id: 15389
wikidata_id: "Q3855743"
fi1m_score: 82
critics_score: 83
critics_reviews: 7
published: "2026-09-13"
updated: "2026-09-18T08:37:49.951282+00:00"
region: "AZ"
licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL."
---

# Metropolitan (1990)

Directed by Whit Stillman · 1h 39m · Comedy, Drama, Romance

## Identity

Metropolitan

- **Canonical:** https://film.one/film/metropolitan
- **Type:** Film
- **Fi1m ID:** metropolitan
- **IMDb ID:** tt0100142
- **TMDB ID:** 15389
- **Wikidata ID:** Q3855743
- **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0100142/, https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/15389, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3855743

**Fi1m score: 82** · Critics 83 from 7 reviews

*In a sentence:* Young people in formal wear discuss their declining social importance; we regret to report that they are excellent company

> Whit Stillman’s debut is a funny, affectionate comedy about privileged young New Yorkers with plenty to say about themselves. Its later romantic plotting feels forced, but the dialogue and ensemble make it well worth an evening.

## Synopsis

During the Christmas holidays, a circle of university-age New Yorkers moves between debutante balls and the conversations that follow them. Outsider Tom Townsend (Edward Clements) enters this old-money social scene, where questions of class and belonging occupy much of the talk. Among the young people around him are Nick Smith (Chris Eigeman), Charlie Black (Taylor Nichols) and Audrey Rouget (Carolyn Farina). As the group negotiates friendships, romantic interests and its uncertain social future, Tom gets to know the people behind the formal occasions. Whit Stillman writes and directs this comedy-drama about a season in their company.

## Review

The privileged young New Yorkers in *Metropolitan* are worried about their place in society, and Whit Stillman takes the worry seriously. His debut is a warm, sharply written comedy, and we recommend it despite the strained romance that develops later on. During Manhattan’s Christmas debutante season, the characters attend balls and then talk, with an earnestness that would be easier to bear if they were discussing somebody else. The surprise is how much pleasure there is in listening to them.

Edward Clements’s Tom Townsend provides a useful way into this circle: he is an outsider, and the film lets us find our bearings alongside him. Clements’s mannered delivery suits a young man trying to work out how to behave among people whose habits he does not share. Stillman’s screenplay is alert to the awkwardness of joining a group that already knows how its conversations go. It does not require us to mistake social confidence for intelligence, or to assume that uncertainty makes Tom wiser.

Chris Eigeman’s Nick Smith and Taylor Nichols’s Charlie Black are especially funny, though the pleasure lies as much in delivery as in the lines themselves. Eigeman gives the talk a brisk certainty; Nichols makes the effort of sounding certain more apparent. We laughed at the solemnity with which these young people discuss the future of their class. Their concern is real, but so is their assumption that it deserves everyone’s attention, and Stillman allows both to be audible.

John Thomas’s largely static camerawork gives those performances space, allowing us to watch the speakers rather than continually redirecting our attention. It works because a remark can land, and the person delivering it can remain there, responsible for having said it. Christopher Tellefsen’s editing gives the dialogue a rhythm without trying to disguise how much of the film consists of people talking. At 99 minutes, the film has time to establish the group’s habits and let us grow familiar with its members.

Mary Jane Fort’s costumes make the formal occasions feel slightly too grown-up for the people attending them. The clothes suit their social position better than their age, which is part of the comedy. The music credited to Mark Suozzo and Tom Judson adds a welcome lightness without competing with the dialogue. The restraint works, because the voices already give us plenty to attend to.

The trouble comes when Stillman asks the romantic complications to carry more of the film. His writing is so precise about how these people talk that its more forced plotting becomes conspicuous: we start noticing the effort to give them something to do. The mannered acting, usually an advantage, also has less to offer when the story asks for a more immediate response. Nothing here undoes the affection already established, but the second half is less consistently persuasive than the conversations that introduce the group.

A comedy of manners can make its audience feel comfortably superior to everyone on screen, and Stillman has little interest in providing that service. He notices the vanity of these young socialites without pretending it cancels their capacity for embarrassment or affection. That generosity makes the humour last longer than a simple attack on their privilege would. Come for the talk, and allow a little patience for the romance.

*Fi1m score 82, published 13 September 2026.*

## What the critics say

The reviews are favourable without exception, and the praise gathers almost entirely around Whit Stillman’s screenplay. Critic after critic singles out the dialogue, described variously as chiselled, glittering, quotable and musical, and most note the affection in the observation: a comedy of manners that ribs its privileged young New Yorkers without belittling them. The ensemble is admired too, with Taylor Nichols and Christopher Eigeman picked out as the funniest performers and the outsider Tom as the sharpest piece of characterisation.

The spread of scores is narrow and the reservations are mild. Empire finds the second half drifting from astringent social comedy into somewhat forced romance. The Los Angeles Times admits that sympathy for the very rich and rather dim is tested before the film’s quiet observation wins it round, and Eye for Film recommends it despite rather than because of its Park Avenue setting. Nobody is hostile; the only question is how much patience the milieu asks of the viewer.

## Straight answers

**Is Metropolitan worth watching?**

*Metropolitan* is worth watching for anyone who enjoys a comedy of manners built almost entirely on conversation, and we scored it 82. Whit Stillman's debut gives its privileged young New Yorkers dialogue that is funny and unexpectedly affectionate, and the ensemble delivers it well. The romantic plotting in the second half feels forced, so come for the talk and allow the romance some patience.

**How long is Metropolitan, and what is it rated?**

*Metropolitan* runs 1h 39m. It is a comedy and drama film.

**Where can I watch Metropolitan in Azerbaijan?**

*Metropolitan* is not on any streaming or rental service in Azerbaijan at the moment. It is available in 5 other countries; change your country at the top of the page to see where. Availability is checked daily.

**How does Metropolitan compare to The Rules of the Game?**

*Metropolitan* is gentler and more affectionate than [*The Rules of the Game*](https://film.one/film/the-rules-of-the-game), which is the greater and more unsettling film. Stillman watches his young socialites talk about their declining importance with warmth; Renoir's house party lets good manners barely contain bad behaviour, and the effect is funnier and darker. Choose *Metropolitan* for an easy, talkative evening, and Renoir when you have the concentration his busy opening demands.

**What should I watch after Metropolitan?**

After *Metropolitan*, try [*The Rules of the Game*](https://film.one/film/the-rules-of-the-game) (1939, Fi1m 91): For another gathering where good manners do little to contain bad behaviour. Then [*Late Spring*](https://film.one/film/late-spring) (1949, Fi1m 92): Family expectations and quiet conversations make choosing a future painfully complicated; and [*The Souvenir*](https://film.one/film/the-souvenir) (2019, Fi1m 84): Young adulthood and privilege again, with less laughter and more painful mistakes.

### Reviews we read (12)

- **The AV Club**, Mike D'Angelo (A): The critic calls the film a hilarious yet warmly affectionate portrait of New York’s debutante-ball subculture that remains a fascinating cinematic oddity. He singles out the plethora of quotable lines and the superb ensemble delivering them for praise. [Read](https://www.avclub.com/whit-stillman-s-hilarious-high-society-comedy-metropoli-1798184548)
- **Film Comment**, Jonathan Romney (80/100, inferred): The critic views Metropolitan as a melancholic yet appreciative elegy for a class of anachronistic young socialites whose charm and self-awareness make the film enduring. He singles out the film's elegant, perceptive dialogue and aperçus for particular praise. [Read](https://www.filmcomment.com/film-of-the-week-metropolitan/)
- **The Guardian** (80/100, inferred): Whit Stillman’s directorial debut confidently immerses viewers in an improbable but believable hothouse world of privileged Manhattan youth. The critic singles out the beautifully chiselled dialogue, paired with near-static camerawork and mannered performances, as the film’s chief attraction. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2006/may/19/comedy.drama)
- **The Independent** (80/100, inferred): Whit Stillman's first film from 1990 is a wryly sympathetic portrait of aristocratic college students attending nightly balls in Manhattan over Christmas. It features glittering dialogue and lovely New York scenery, evoking what Woody Allen might have made if born rich. [Read](https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/reviews/metropolitan-15-479128.html)
- **Time Out**, Jessica Winter (80/100, inferred): Stillman’s semi-autobiographical debut follows the university-age scions of New York’s old-money Upper East Side during Christmas vacation debutante balls and after-parties. The critic praises the dry, affable humour that ribs the characters’ vanities without belittling them and highlights the sharp characterisation, especially of the outsider stand-in Tom. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/metropolitan)
- **Empire**, Angie Errigo: This small, gentle first feature shows Stillman's literary background to good effect with sound cinematic instincts and affectionate, witty observation of young New York socialites. The second half shifts from astringent social comedy to somewhat forced romantic nonsense. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/metropolitan-review/)
- **Los Angeles Times**, Sheila Benson: The critic notes that compassion for the very rich and rather dim may be tested but appreciates the gentle irony and the director's gift for quiet, scrupulous observation that grows on the viewer. Stillman understands caste, class and deportment as perfectly as Jane Austen. [Read](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-08-10-ca-399-story.html)
- **Slant Magazine**, Jaime N. Christley: The critic finds Stillman’s portrait of the urban haute bourgeoisie redeemed by the filmmaker’s affectionate custody of their idiosyncrasies and flaws. The review singles out the musical quality of the dialogue and the bittersweet evocation of a vanished youthful milieu for praise. [Read](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/metropolitan/)
- **The New York Times**, Vincent Canby: The critic calls it a comedy of manners of a very high order with unparochial wit and sense of fun. The film places its privileged young characters in context with alertness and intelligence, with particularly funny performances from Taylor Nichols and Christopher Eigeman. [Read](https://www.nytimes.com/1990/08/03/arts/review-film-whit-stillman-s-metropolitan-a-modern-comedy-of-manners.html)
- **Variety**, Amy Dawes: Whit Stillman makes a strikingly original debut with a glib, ironic portrait of the vulnerable young heirs to Manhattan’s disappearing debutante scene, offering rich, sparkling dialog, distinct characters and an intriguing peek into a seldom seen milieu. [Read](https://variety.com/1990/film/reviews/metropolitan-1200428333/)
- **Collider**, Andre Dellamorte (85/100, inferred): The film is a nuanced and original portrait of crumbling preppy aristocracy that humanizes its privileged characters through witty dialogue and intellectual banter. It stands out as one of the most elegant and intelligent debuts of its generation. [Read](https://collider.com/metropolitan-criterion-blu-ray-review/)
- **Eye for Film**, Angus Wolfe Murray (80/100, inferred): The critic finds Whit Stillman's debut worth seeing despite its focus on Park Avenue debutantes and their escorts. The screenplay stands out for its tact, wit and modesty in portraying the group's entertaining, hypocritical banter without easy mockery. [Read](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/metropolitan-film-review-by-angus-wolfe-murray)

## Details

- **Director:** Whit Stillman
- **Director:** Whit Stillman
- **Writer:** Whit Stillman
- **Cinematography:** John Thomas
- **Editor:** Christopher Tellefsen
- **Music:** Tom Judson, Mark Suozzo
- **Costume design:** Mary Jane Fort
- **Producer:** Whit Stillman, Jose Luis García
- **Cast:** Edward Clements as Tom Townsend; Chris Eigeman as Nick Smith; Taylor Nichols as Charlie Black; Carolyn Farina as Audrey Rouget; Isabel Gillies as Cynthia McLean; Dylan Hundley as Sally Fowler; Allison Parisi as Jane Clarke; Bryan Leder as Fred Neff
- **Runtime:** 1h 39m
- **First release (the US):** 20 January 1990
- **Genres:** Comedy, Drama, Romance
- **Budget:** $225,000
- **Box office:** $3 million
- **Trailer:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_spYUaPcRp4

## Where to watch in Azerbaijan

Not streaming, renting or buying in Azerbaijan at the last check.

Also available in: CA, FI, GB, SE, US. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country.

## Awards

- Academy Awards 1991: Best Writing, Original Screenplay (nominated)

## If you liked this

- *The Rules of the Game* (1939), Fi1m 91: For another gathering where good manners do little to contain bad behaviour. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-rules-of-the-game.md)
- *Late Spring* (1949), Fi1m 92: Family expectations and quiet conversations make choosing a future painfully complicated. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/late-spring.md)
- *The Green Ray* (1986): More talkative holiday company, with a sharper ache of loneliness underneath.
- *The Last Days of Disco* (1998): Stillman follows another social circle through talk, attraction and anxious self-examination.
- *The Souvenir* (2019), Fi1m 84: Young adulthood and privilege again, with less laughter and more painful mistakes. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-souvenir.md)

---
© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/metropolitan