Film Adaptations

[Ohiopirate02]

11 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

I really, really, really like, even love, the 2005 Pride and Prejudice, but everyone's points are completely spot on  and I'm not even going to try to dispute them. Here's the thing: the 1995 P&P is, IMO, sheer and utter perfection in every single respect, and it is #1 in my heart forever and ever. My affection for the 2005 version is how beautifully flawed it is (and it is flawed, make no mistake). I love the cinematography, the direction (when it works), and holy shit, the score! The music is out of this world!

But, yes, everyone's arguments are absolutely right: it's not for Jane Austen purists, and Austen herself would probably find it appalling.

Speaking of Ms. Austen, I doubt she'd find any adaptation of Mansfield Park satisfactory, especially the 2007 version (I like Billie Piper, but Fanny Price she ain't).

I really enjoyed this year's Emma. Anya Taylor-Joy gives a unique interpretation of Emma Woodhouse, and Mia Goth puts a surprisingly melancholy spin on the usually ditzy and comical Harriet Smith. The 1996 version is still my favorite (though I understand why others don't like it).

 

Yeah, Jane would have had issues with  all of the adaptations of Mansfield Park.  I haven't seen the Billie Piper version because I don't care for her as an actress.  But, I have watched the 1999 version a few times and have read the book more than once.  In the book Henry Crawford is short and ugly, words I would never use to describe Alessandro Nivola.  By casting a handsome actor, the whole tone of the second half of the movie changes.  I don't think Jane ever wanted her reader to seriously consider Henry as a possible husband for Fanny let alone Fanny.  Then you have the issue with book Fanny being quite frankly boring and judgmental.  Qualities no one wants in their heroine, and most adaptations make her too lively.  All that being said, Hugh Bonneville really nails the ridiculous Mr. Rushworth, and Embeth Davidtz shines as Mary Crawford.

[Wiendish Fitch]

3 minutes ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

Yeah, Jane would have had issues with  all of the adaptations of Mansfield Park.  I haven't seen the Billie Piper version because I don't care for her as an actress.  But, I have watched the 1999 version a few times and have read the book more than once.  In the book Henry Crawford is short and ugly, words I would never use to describe Alessandro Nivola.  By casting a handsome actor, the whole tone of the second half of the movie changes.  I don't think Jane ever wanted her reader to seriously consider Henry as a possible husband for Fanny let alone Fanny.  Then you have the issue with book Fanny being quite frankly boring and judgmental.  Qualities no one wants in their heroine, and most adaptations make her too lively.  All that being said, Hugh Bonneville really nails the ridiculous Mr. Rushworth, and Embeth Davidtz shines as Mary Crawford.

I still like the 1999 version of Mansfield Park but, again, it's not a very faithful adaptation. 

[VCRTracking]

15 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

I really, really, really like, even love, the 2005 Pride and Prejudice, but everyone's points are completely spot on  and I'm not even going to try to dispute them. Here's the thing: the 1995 P&P is, IMO, sheer and utter perfection in every single respect, and it is #1 in my heart forever and ever. My affection for the 2005 version is how beautifully flawed it is (and it is flawed, make no mistake). I love the cinematography, the direction (when it works), and holy shit, the score! The music is out of this world!

But, yes, everyone's arguments are absolutely right: it's not for Jane Austen purists, and Austen herself would probably find it appalling.

Yeah I like 2005 Pride and Prejudice too despite the flaws pointed out by others here. I have more affection for this Bennet family and I don't care I'm not supposed to find them ideal. I like that the house feels like the Weasleys Burrow! I like that Mrs Bennet is depicted more sympathetically and that Mr. Bennet is a loving father to all the girls not just Lizzie. He made a mistake but not because he doesnt care. Charlotte's speech(though making her  desperate as opposed to aromantic) is important because it shows girls today the reality of the times. I like that it's set in 1797, the year Austen was Lizzie's age and you see the transition from Georgian style to Regency.  Agree with you Wiendish completely on the camera work, direction and music. I love the  long tracking shot at Netherfield ball and the continuous shot of Lizzie and Darcy dancing. It's so nice to see a director who started out in British television who actually knows how to frame properly unlike others.*cough* Tom Hooper *cough* .Director Joe Wright said he he grew up watching high school movies from America in the 80s so that's what influenced his take and that's what I see the movie as, a period teen movie. Bingley's sister serving Mean Girl shade in all her scenes was fun. Also Tom Hollander as Mr. Collins reminds me so much of 60s era Dudley Moore, especially when he's giving a sermon.

Edited May 13, 2020 by VCRTracking

[Ohiopirate02]

As we are talking about Jane Austen adaptations, one day I would love to see one where the older characters are played by actors who are closer in age to the written characters.  Most adaptations cast actors far older than the character.  Mrs. Bennett in the book is somewhere between 40 and 45, and Lady Catherine should be somewhere between 45 and 50.  Mrs. Dashwood in Sense and Sensibility is only 40 and has a 10 year-old daughter.  

[VCRTracking]

50 minutes ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

As we are talking about Jane Austen adaptations, one day I would love to see one where the older characters are played by actors who are closer in age to the written characters.  Most adaptations cast actors far older than the character.  Mrs. Bennett in the book is somewhere between 40 and 45, and Lady Catherine should be somewhere between 45 and 50.  Mrs. Dashwood in Sense and Sensibility is only 40 and has a 10 year-old daughter.  

Yeah watching the 2005 P&P with Judi Dench playing her you think "Did Lady Catherine have her daughter when she was in her 50s?"

 

[Conotocarious]

4 hours ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

As we are talking about Jane Austen adaptations, one day I would love to see one where the older characters are played by actors who are closer in age to the written characters.  Most adaptations cast actors far older than the character.  Mrs. Bennett in the book is somewhere between 40 and 45, and Lady Catherine should be somewhere between 45 and 50.  Mrs. Dashwood in Sense and Sensibility is only 40 and has a 10 year-old daughter.  

Margaret is 13, not 10.

[Ohiopirate02]

1 hour ago, Conotocarious said:

Margaret is 13, not 10.

I couldn't remember her age, I only remembered she was still a girl and not out.  But. Mrs. Dashwood still is supposed to be 40, only five years older than Colonel Brandon.  She still is young enough to marry again if she chose.

[methodwriter85]

I really enjoyed the 2020 Emma. I liked that they didn't shy away from making Emma a total bitch at points, thought Harriet was well done, felt swoony over Callum Turner, and enjoyed Mr. Knightley. I even kind of loved his adorable feathered hair. The costumes were on-point and it was just a fun concoction. I think Austin herself would have enjoyed it.

Edited May 17, 2020 by methodwriter85

[VCRTracking]

I decided to put this video essay here after briefly considering put it in the villains thread. I had not seen the 2012 animated version of The Lorax and I barely remember the book which I only know had an environmental message. I did not know how they changed the character of the book's villain the "Onceler" and how it resulted in him having an obsessed fandom of mostly young women!

 

 

 

 

Edited June 2, 2020 by VCRTracking

[Ambrosefolly]

In a lot of ways, The Devil Wears Prada greatly improved on the book. However, to this day, I don't know why they couldn't keep Andy's boyfriend a teacher. It would make him look less like a hypocrite if he was helping inner city kids learn instead of feeding rich people at his own intense yet equally superficial job. It would also explain why they were living together since I could chalk them both meeting at Northwestern. 

[Ohiopirate02]

7 minutes ago, Ambrosefolly said:

In a lot of ways, The Devil Wears Prada greatly improved on the book. However, to this day, I don't know why they couldn't keep Andy's boyfriend a teacher. It would make him look less like a hypocrite if he was helping inner city kids learn instead of feeding rich people at his own intense yet equally superficial job. It would also explain why they were living together since I could chalk them both meeting at Northwestern. 

I agree.  Nate and all of their friends were working superficial jobs just like her, but for some reason hers was the one always being questioned.  I also liked that the movie omitted Andy's Wall Street roommates who were also working 80 hours a week for little to no pay.  Book Andy was so whiny about having to work a demanding job at the ripe old age of 22.  A job where she had clear path to something better after only one year of hell.  

[methodwriter85]

On 5/13/2020 at 1:12 PM, Ohiopirate02 said:

As we are talking about Jane Austen adaptations, one day I would love to see one where the older characters are played by actors who are closer in age to the written characters.  Most adaptations cast actors far older than the character.  Mrs. Bennett in the book is somewhere between 40 and 45, and Lady Catherine should be somewhere between 45 and 50.  Mrs. Dashwood in Sense and Sensibility is only 40 and has a 10 year-old daughter.  

You get this in Love and Friendship, which was based on the short novella Lady Susan. Kate Beckinsale plays a recently widowed woman who schemes to match herself as well as her daughter.

Of course in that case they had to cast her as someone actually in her 40's instead of a 50-something because her character 

Spoiler

winds up happily married and pregnant at the end.

I feel like the success of Bridgerton means we're going to see a lot of "re-imagined" Austen adaptions. They already announced a modern adaption of Persuasion with Dakota Johnson.

Edited April 30, 2021 by methodwriter85

[VCRTracking]

Interesting thread.

 

[Trini]

So I got the 1995 Persuasion movie from the library, and I liked that it was a faithful adaptation; I just was not especially impressed with Amanda Root as Anne. I didn't really warm up to her (or she didn't really warm up) until near about the 'third act.'

I haven't seen the 2007 version since it aired on PBS back then, but I'm going to try and watch it again to compare. And I might attempt watching the latest Netflix version, even though I know there are things I don't like - we'll see!

[Ohiopirate02]

9 hours ago, Trini said:

So I got the 1995 Persuasion movie from the library, and I liked that it was a faithful adaptation; I just was not especially impressed with Amanda Root as Anne. I didn't really warm up to her (or she didn't really warm up) until near about the 'third act.'

I haven't seen the 2007 version since it aired on PBS back then, but I'm going to try and watch it again to compare. And I might attempt watching the latest Netflix version, even though I know there are things I don't like - we'll see!

I really liked Sally Hawkins as Anne.  She has the ability to use her body and face to convey the complex emotions bubbling under the surface that is Anne Elliott.  My only complaint is how that adaption handles Anne and Frederick finally getting together.  It shifts some things around Anne's conversation with Harville happens earlier in the film than in the book, and well the half-marathon Anne runs in Bath.  

I can't remember if the 1995 version gets my favorite scenes in the book correctly.  I think the scenes in the book are perfect, and I want to see an adaptation follow them to the letter.  What Austen writes is utter perfection--a crowded drawing room full of friends, Wentworth at the desk writing a letter to his sister, Anne and Harville having a conversation with heavy subtext in earshot of Wentworth, Wentworth getting all awkward hearing the subtext in Anne's words as he gets agitated and decides to bare his soul in a letter to Anne, Anne picks up at his agitation but still remains the perfect lady talking to Harville, Wentworth gets all passive-aggressive as he leaves the room but forgets his gloves, Wentworth coming back and giving Anne the letter, Anne gracefully leaves in order to read the missive, and Wentworth staying close by to "accidentally" run into Anne.  

[Wiendish Fitch]

I thought Amanda Root and Sally Hawkins were both damn near flawless as Anne Elliot. Root has this wounded animal quality that makes a lot of sense for the character and her crippling regret (Root reminds me a little of Sally Field in this way). Hawkins is just wonderful, as always, and captures Anne's inner turmoil and eventual rejuvenation. 

From what I've heard and seen of the new Netflix version of Persuasion, it can go piss in the ocean. While it's not the worst idea to have Anne Elliot be funny (hey, I'd use humor to cope if I were in her shoes), it would make way more sense if her humor was more subtle, dry, and self-deprecating, not Fleabag-style snark-fests aimed at everyone but herself.

What makes Anne sympathetic and compelling is that she never, ever, ever plays the victim. She blames herself 100%  and doesn't let her regret snowball into bitterness. She lives day to day the best she can, so we root for her to seize her second chance when it's finally presented. 

[Trini]

7 hours ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

I can't remember if the 1995 version gets my favorite scenes in the book correctly.  I think the scenes in the book are perfect, and I want to see an adaptation follow them to the letter.  What Austen writes is utter perfection--a crowded drawing room full of friends, Wentworth at the desk writing a letter to his sister, Anne and Harville having a conversation with heavy subtext in earshot of Wentworth, Wentworth getting all awkward hearing the subtext in Anne's words as he gets agitated and decides to bare his soul in a letter to Anne, Anne picks up at his agitation but still remains the perfect lady talking to Harville, Wentworth gets all passive-aggressive as he leaves the room but forgets his gloves, Wentworth coming back and giving Anne the letter, Anne gracefully leaves in order to read the missive, and Wentworth staying close by to "accidentally" run into Anne.  

The '95 version is almost the same, except that there are fewer people; there are only five (or four?) characters in the scene. Wentworth doesn't leave and come back, but when he leaves he makes sure Anne sees the letter he left for her.

But yes, that reveal in the book is so good! It's rare that I gasp out loud at a book (but maybe I should read more, LOL). THat's why the "Bath marathon" in the '07 version was so disappointing.

[Trini]

On 7/22/2022 at 1:20 AM, Trini said:

So I got the 1995 Persuasion movie from the library, and I liked that it was a faithful adaptation; I just was not especially impressed with Amanda Root as Anne. I didn't really warm up to her (or she didn't really warm up) until near about the 'third act.'

Amending my previous comments after a watching a second time: I appreciate Root's Anne more now; but I do feel she was better about halfway through. I really liked they ended it with Anne on a ship with Wentworth.

On 7/22/2022 at 6:35 PM, Trini said:

The '95 version is almost the same, except that there are fewer people; there are only five (or four?) characters in the scene. Wentworth doesn't leave and come back, but when he leaves he makes sure Anne sees the letter he left for her.

Actually, Wentworth does leave and come back; sorry.

I did like the production design of the '95 film. Besides costumes and settings, I was really impressed at one scene where there was a table centerpiece arranged out of pineapples!

---

Also I caught Modern Persuasion on Prime Video; which is exactly what it sounds like. I don't know if this ever aired on Hallmark/Lifetime, or any other channel that has similar movies, but it had the same TV rom-com tone as those.

Notable things: one character has a ridiculous, fake pregnancy belly for most of the movie; and the leads actually reference Austen's book.

---

And since I'm apparently going all in* with adaptations, my library had a 1971 BBC production, as well as the 2007 version. I'm about one third through - it's about twice as long as the '95 version; so there's more dialogue/exposition from the book, and longer scenes in general. To me, it mostly seems arranged/directed/scripted (sorry, I suck with words...) like a stage play, although the outdoor scenes are there as well. I find this version's Wentworth more charming than Hinds'.

--

*Also I consulted with tumblr (LOL), and decided not to give Neflix any hate watch 'points'.

[LilWharveyGal]

I actually really like the 1971 version on Persuasion.  Yes, the production values are non-existent and some of the hair and wardrobe choices are way too '70's, but it's very true to the story IMO.

[proserpina65]

Quote

I call it Wuthering Prejudice.

I'm going to steal this.

On 5/12/2020 at 9:02 PM, Wiendish Fitch said:

I really enjoyed this year's Emma. Anya Taylor-Joy gives a unique interpretation of Emma Woodhouse, and Mia Goth puts a surprisingly melancholy spin on the usually ditzy and comical Harriet Smith.

I should try to make myself watch this one, but I can't stand Anya Taylor-Joy's face.  (Not her fault, but I just can't look at her.)

[Trini]

7 hours ago, LilWharveyGal said:

I actually really like the 1971 version on Persuasion.  Yes, the production values are non-existent and some of the hair and wardrobe choices are way too '70's, but it's very true to the story IMO.

Aw, considering their small budget, I actually did like most of the costumes. But yes, this one sticks pretty close to the book. I thought the actors for Anne and Wentworth were a good match for each other.

[katha]

On 5/13/2020 at 3:02 AM, Wiendish Fitch said:

I really enjoyed this year's Emma. Anya Taylor-Joy gives a unique interpretation of Emma Woodhouse, and Mia Goth puts a surprisingly melancholy spin on the usually ditzy and comical Harriet Smith. The 1996 version is still my favorite (though I understand why others don't like it).

I haven't watched the newest one, but that makes sense IMO. The Andrew Davies adaptation went in a similar direction with Samantha Morton, who was very good with this sort of wide-eyed innocence and totally without guile. And you understood that Emma is preying on Harriet and manipulating her, it's fun and games for Emma, but she's effectively ruining Harriet's life without meaning to. Olivia Williams as Jane Fairfax was also great. There's a shot in that version where Jane runs through the fields crying and Robert Martin sees her, looking resigned and frustrated himself. Yeah, it was sledgehammer symbolism, but basically a presentation of the human cost of Emma being bored and trying to treat people like puppets. 

Edited July 30, 2022 by katha

[Trini]

Re-watched the 2007, Sally Hawkins, Persuasion. 'Bath marathon' -- still terrible. This version is very condensed in general, but I wish they had just let the film be 15 minutes longer (or a two-parter?*) so that we didn't have to literally sprint through the climax. Because before that, the film was doing really well.

What this version does well is show Anne's thoughts and feelings - she even breaks the fourth wall a few times! Also Wentworth's, to a lesser degree. The production values are good, but I didn't like the choice to desaturate everything. That made it unnecessarily dreary. Some handheld camera shots were distracting at times.

Compared to the other adaptations I watched, we hardly spend time with the supporting characters, or the side plots. And most of the comedy is cut; relatedly, Anne's father comes across as mean and uncaring, rather than vain.

I did really like Hawkins' Anne. She's my favorite of the different actresses. This Wentworth was fine; good-looking, but otherwise not remarkable.

Not sure how I'd rank the various versions; they all have their strengths and weaknesses. I think they're all worth a look if you like the book.

*(I can't remember if PBS aired this over two nights; probably?)

Edited August 1, 2022 by Trini

[Ohiopirate02]

11 hours ago, Trini said:

Re-watched the 2007, Sally Hawkins, Persuasion. 'Bath marathon' -- still terrible. This version is very condensed in general, but I wish they had just let the film be 15 minutes longer (or a two-parter?*) so that we didn't have to literally sprint through the climax. Because before that, the film was doing really well.

The Bath marathon will always be terrible.  I get what the creators were trying to do and also how their 21st century ideas contributed to it.  They were trying to show Anne exerting agency and choosing Wentworth.  Anne is not going to be persuaded a second time when it comes to who she marries.  A real "girl power" moment as it were.  Which is what happens in the novel.  It's just in Austen's time a lady would never do anything so crass as run through a major city chasing a man.  She may want to do that, but she's still a lady.  So, Anne does what any lady would do--be in his presence and drop hints.  Ladies are passive-aggressive not aggressive-aggressive.  The problem is modern filmmakers do not trust their audiences when it comes to period pieces.  They would rather make historical characters behave in modern ways instead of trusting their audience to understand it was a different time.  They also erroneously believe every romance needs big romantic gestures when it comes to the HEA moment.  Which is the exact opposite of how Jane Austen operated.  

[Trini]

3 hours ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

The Bath marathon will always be terrible.  I get what the creators were trying to do and also how their 21st century ideas contributed to it.  They were trying to show Anne exerting agency and choosing Wentworth.  Anne is not going to be persuaded a second time when it comes to who she marries.  A real "girl power" moment as it were.  Which is what happens in the novel.  It's just in Austen's time a lady would never do anything so crass as run through a major city chasing a man.  She may want to do that, but she's still a lady.  ...

Even if I agreed with the idea, they way they had the scenes play out was bad. (Did they have to cut for time last minute??) I think I could have handled one running scene, but as it is, they had Anne running to three locations. And it made no sense that apparently, Wentworth had left, wrote the letter, gave it to someone else to give to Anne, and then was coming back to see Anne anyway?? While Anne was running in the space of 10? minutes. Not to mention the ridiculous info dump from Mrs. Smith.

3 hours ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

They also erroneously believe every romance needs big romantic gestures when it comes to the HEA moment. 

The letter WAS the big gesture! gaaaahhh!

But anyway, I still like the other 90% of the '07 version.

The '95 version did the 'big romantic gesture' well when Wentworth comes to the party and announces he's marrying Anne in front of everyone.

[Ohiopirate02]

1 hour ago, Trini said:

The letter WAS the big gesture! gaaaahhh!

The Letter is the single most romantic gesture in all of Austen's work.  Jane abhorred grand gestures and flowery proposals.  When they do appear in her novels, it is for them to be mocked.  Her HEAs are anti-climatic.  They happen in act 4 of her novels after the scandalous event that ends act 3.  Her characters learn and grow before meeting back up to quietly discuss their futures.  

[andromeda331]

On 8/1/2022 at 1:56 PM, Ohiopirate02 said:

The Letter is the single most romantic gesture in all of Austen's work.  Jane abhorred grand gestures and flowery proposals.  When they do appear in her novels, it is for them to be mocked.  Her HEAs are anti-climatic.  They happen in act 4 of her novels after the scandalous event that ends act 3.  

It's amazing she didn't. One of my favorite grand gestures is all Darcy did to for Lydia and Wickham was all for Lizzy.  He didn't even tell her nor did he want anyone tell her or expect anything for doing it. He just wanted to make Lizzy happy.   

Quote

Her characters learn and grow before meeting back up to quietly discuss their futures.  

That's my favorite when it comes to stories. I love watching or reading characters grow and learn especially in romance. Jane did it the best.

[Crs97]

The 1995 Persuasion is just about perfect.  All others can take a long walk off a short pier IMO.  I need Hollywood to stop trying to “improve” Jane Austen’s work for modern audiences.  

[elle]

On 8/1/2022 at 8:45 AM, Ohiopirate02 said:

The Bath marathon will always be terrible.  I get what the creators were trying to do and also how their 21st century ideas contributed to it.  They were trying to show Anne exerting agency and choosing Wentworth.  Anne is not going to be persuaded a second time when it comes to who she marries.  A real "girl power" moment as it were.  Which is what happens in the novel.  It's just in Austen's time a lady would never do anything so crass as run through a major city chasing a man.  She may want to do that, but she's still a lady.

What seems to escape them is the part where Wentworth appears to be waiting for, hoping for Anne to come after him.   It can not be a coincidence that he just happens to be there when Anne and Charles walk out to the street.