Next up: Nudehanger Abbey
Giving credit where credit is due: Alert Janeite Mandy N for the new film title.
Upon opening the morning’s mail, we were greeted with NAKED! and SO HOT! and immediately assumed the spam filter was broken. Silly, out-of-touch Janeite! A closer look revealed (get it?) the latest press for Northanger Abbey.
It would take longer for us to describe these tiny bits than to read the articles themselves as there’s not much to them, and nothing we haven’t already seen. Although Miss Jones is fortunate that her bathe took place in the 21st century, assisted by an enthusiastic film crew and plenty of hot water, as Catherine Morland would have known better than to (1) linger in the tub (2) without wearing a shift (3) outdoors.
While waiting for our Region 2 DVDs to arrive, we, at least, will leave our gloves on and confine our remarks as best we can: given the subtlety and “less is more” approach characteristic of Jane Austen’s work, we view such exhibitions with a mixture of pity and regret, and attribute them to a lapse in judgment, as when our 91 year-old great-uncle chose to wear a thong to the community hot tub.
March 19th, 2007 at 1:15 pm
“I always look for excuses to get actors out of their clothes.”
That’s it, Mr. Davies! Put down the Austen novel and step away slowly.
March 19th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
Oh dear, I guess I will not be watching this one with my father. Thanks Mr. Davies :o(.
March 19th, 2007 at 2:13 pm
I was thinking that while watching the preview–how in the world would they have hauled and heated up all that water so Miss Morland can relax in a very full tub? And how would it have been kept warm enough, in a building with no central heating, for her to sit there dreaming of Not!DaMan coming to seduce her without developing pneumonia? I’m just saying.
March 19th, 2007 at 2:33 pm
Well sheesh! No one complained about the added bathtub scene when it was Darcy in it! (okay, not many complained.)
Just saying! ;D
March 19th, 2007 at 2:37 pm
Heh, heh… well, there they had an old retainer running up to pour pitchers of hot water over his back and head.
March 19th, 2007 at 3:00 pm
Mr. Darcy didn’t climb out of the tub when Lizzy entered the room, either.
Mr. Tilney’s appearance may be a hallucination. I’ve heard that happens in the early stages of hypothermia.
March 19th, 2007 at 3:09 pm
Lol! Oh dear, oh dear! Worries, worries…
I must admit, though, that I absolutely LOVE Andrew Davies’ work and I totally trust him, but after seeing that bathing scene in the NA preview some days ago, I started to worry a bit… Oh well, I’m sure he has done his work brilliantly again! It’s just the press which likes to make such a fuss of it, and apparently Davies loves getting this kind of attention in the press, making those “I always look for excuses to get actors out of their clothes”-quotes in purpose…
March 19th, 2007 at 3:23 pm
From the preview I saw of the tub it was very obvious that it was Catherine imagining a scene from one of the novels she read. Do you think they could possibly release an edited version without these scenes? I’m sure a good portion of the population would appreciate that better personally as well as it being OK for a family film.
March 19th, 2007 at 4:06 pm
Considering how much of the book is already missing, a Bowdlerized version of the film might only be about ten minutes long.
March 19th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
P.S. I know many won’t agree with me, but the nudity itself doesn’t really bother me, it’s the lameness of the scene and the fact that it takes time from scenes actually in the book that could have been so much better onscreen.
March 19th, 2007 at 5:05 pm
I totally agree with you, Mags.
March 19th, 2007 at 5:08 pm
Oh, and I do think this movie will be family-friendly. If it’s just the bathing scene we’ve seen before, it’s not going to be really shocking or anything… Luckily!
March 19th, 2007 at 5:08 pm
Me too.
March 19th, 2007 at 5:16 pm
The average channel-surfer who tunes in Sunday night to be titillated is going to be disappointed, because there are only a couple of scenes and if the BBC clip is any indication, we don’t see much. I agree with Mags; the nudity per se doesn’t bother me, either. There are authors and books where it would be appropriate to include it in a filmed version. But nudity wasn’t considered necessary to attract an audience to the new Mansfield Park or Persuasion films and I’ve been sorry to see that emphasis in the Northanger Abbey publicity. It will be a shame if the film replaces relationship-developing scenes like the hyacinths or the visit to Woodston with his-and-hers bathing scenes.
Between the steamy bathtubs, and turning John Thorpe into an equal suitor with Henry Tilney, I have to wonder if we’re in for an episode of Jane Austen’s ElimiDATE. (Not that I ever watch that.)
March 19th, 2007 at 5:55 pm
LOL Heather.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:37 pm
Between the steamy bathtubs, and turning John Thorpe into an equal suitor with Henry Tilney…
I heard that Mr. Davies was actually pushing for a threesome bathtub scene. Hey, the guy might not be that bad after all…
March 19th, 2007 at 6:43 pm
Is it possible that the location of the tub as well is in Catherine’s imagination?
Davies can work wonders when he’s working with producers who can handle him. Aside from being a dirty old man, he is quite talented.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:45 pm
LOL. Shame on you, Tony! What would Jane say?
March 19th, 2007 at 6:50 pm
LOL! Tony!
A naked bum (or two) does not make a film family “unfriendly”, but as Mags says, when it steals away precious screen time, those additions are most unfortunate.
March 19th, 2007 at 7:27 pm
Shame on you, Tony! What would Jane say?
Ina I think it would be okay with Jane. After all James McAvoy said:
I really saw a lot of possibilities in the script, a lot of possibility to show or tell something about Jane Austen’s life that we are not used to hearing - which she may actually have been a human and maybe she wasn’t the figure of celibacy that we maybe assumed she was.
See? Jane wasn’t some starched up spinster…
March 19th, 2007 at 7:31 pm
but as Mags says, when it steals away precious screen time, those additions are most unfortunate.
That’s why Davies was petitioning for this to be a 2- or 3-part miniseries.
March 19th, 2007 at 9:18 pm
The bath thing doesn’t bother me as much as making a total idiot like John Thorpe into somebody considered “dashing.” I’m currently re-reading the novel, and I keep finding passage after passage of how Catherine just does not like John Thorpe at all. This whole “love triangle” possibility makes me kind of nervous.
“To escape, and, as she believed, so narrowly escape John Thorpe, and to be asked, so immediately on his joining her, asked by Mr. Tilney, as if he had sought her on purpose! — it did not appear to her that life could supply any greater felicity.”
Love triangle, indeed.
March 19th, 2007 at 10:57 pm
I think Davies does better when he has more time to unwind and take his little side trips into the Land of the Noncanonical. But I was given a copy of the script some four or five years ago and it was 90 pages (meaning about a 90-minute film) and as far as I can tell made it to screen with few changes. Both bathing scenes are in it. If he knew he wouldn’t have enough time for the story, why insert this goofy stuff that will just irritate Janeites and mislead non-Janeites?
Elaina–not to be all shameless self-promoting, but oh, what the heck–one of the illustrations in my book is more or less supposed to be Catherine hiding from John Thorpe at the Rooms. No Henry in view, though…it’s the How to Avoid Dancing With a Disagreeable Partner scenario. “Hide from him” is one of the steps, and the editor thought it would be funny to have it illustrated, and asked me to describe a similar scene from one of JA’s novels for the artist, and I imagined Catherine cowering behind a stately matron, hiding her face with her fan–but the best part of the illustration is seeing this dorky-looking guy with a pointy head (really!) looking for her. It is too funny and one of my favorites in the book.
And yes, she didn’t like him a bit–just put up with him because he was her brother’s friend and her friend’s brother. Boors like Thorpe don’t need much in the way of encouragement, unfortunately.
March 19th, 2007 at 11:54 pm
Actually, I’ve been looking forward to getting your books, Mags - now you’ve just given me another reason!
I’m glad you found the script pretty close to the book; artistic license is fine (some of it, if well done, I like) but totally changing the makeup of the story is another.
March 19th, 2007 at 11:56 pm
Haha, just meant that one book, although if you have more than one coming out…
March 20th, 2007 at 1:24 am
Andrew Davies admits it’s not ‘putting in’ what Jane Austen had to leave out- it’s just getting actors erh, nude. Hardly seems to spirit or letter of Austen ! Elaina, not certain, but I believe Mags meant AD’s script made it to the sceen with few changes… Golly Heather, this is infamy
March 20th, 2007 at 1:28 am
Yes, I meant that the script doesn’t seem to have changed from the one I have to the one that was filmed. I wouldn’t call it especially faithful to the novel, even taking into consideration the changes and contractions that must be made to bring a novel to film. It will be interesting to see what viewers think.
March 20th, 2007 at 1:30 am
LOL ! I find the love tiangle a a quizz. But three in the bath ? Rather a crowded scene, yes ?
March 20th, 2007 at 5:59 am
I just wish Davies would write his own stuff and leave adapting other people’s work to writers who actually understand the material and don’t see sex everywhere.
I liked “To serve them all my days,” “House of cards” and “BJD” but that’s really about it. I have problems with pretty much everything else he’s done. The fact that he’s a dirty old man is only part of it.
March 20th, 2007 at 6:34 am
that is HORRIBLE. i mean, nowadays, i’m embarassed to watch these ‘classics’ with my family.
March 20th, 2007 at 6:37 am
Aw, c’mon Julie - you can’t say he doesn’t understand the material judging by his script for the P&P miniseries? The very few issues I had with it were extremely minor and thought - as a devoted Janeite - that he did a truly remarkable job and couldn’t imagine anyone feeling otherwise. Did you not like it?
March 20th, 2007 at 10:45 am
Frankly, the more people bashed the 2005 movie, the more closely I examined the 1995 series, and the less I like it.
Without wasting time going into all the things I have problems with, I’ll just say that, primarily, I don’t like all the “extra” Darcy. We’ve got fencing Darcy, bathing Darcy, quick-change Darcy, swan-dive Darcy, wet-shirt Darcy, etc. What’s the point, other than to titillate? (and we all know how much Davies likes that)
I also don’t like how Davies ruined the plot twists by telling us things that JA wanted to save for later. Telling us these things early helps take away from the aura of mystery surrounding Darcy. He’s no longer quite as much of an enigma. And JA’s Darcy is nothing if not an enigma. 1995 is referred to as “the Colin Firth version,” and Ehle is an afterthought. But P&P is Elizabeth’s story, and Elizabeth Bennet should never be an afterthought.
Bash the 2005 movie all you want, but Moggach told the story from Elizabeth’s POV, which is the way JA told it.
And, when all is said and done, I still like 1980 best.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:04 pm
Julie P., I agree with you completely about the 1980 version. Most true to the novel, just not as flashy. Too often overlooked and underappreciated.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:26 pm
Julie, I see your point but at the same time I always call it the Firth/Ehle version. Yes, CF is a good Darcy (IMO) but Jennifer Ehle deserves as much credit for her portrayal of Lizzy. It’s unfortunate that she hasn’t received it but I don’t think that’s so much her fault or CF’s fault, or Andrew Davies’ fault, or the director’s fault. CF is a much more well-known actor now and so he tends to overshadow her in the general consciousness but that’s not to say that she doesn’t have her fans.
March 20th, 2007 at 5:15 pm
Maureen, I have problems with Ehle too. But those are not necessarily Davies’ fault (other than his emphasis on Darcy).
March 20th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
Colin Firth did a great job, but he was not my Darcy. I have yet to see my Darcy. I thought Elizabeth Garvie was brilliant as Lizzy and much better cast than Ehle who was better looking than their Jane (big no no). There’s just no topping Benjamin Whitrow as Mr. Bennet. If I could mix up the existing P&P adaptations for casts, and maybe add some new people, I’d have a perfect version for my mind.
I very much liked Davies’ Emma though it was far too short and I could not stand their Knightley (give me Jeremy Northam any day!).
And I much prefer Davies’ adaptation of Dr. Zhivago to that insipid ’60s version. In truth I haven’t read the book. I just didn’t like the original film as a film.
I stand by my assertion that with the right producers he can be brilliant.
And perhaps the bathing scenes were his protest of it’s being far too short. (ok, I know that’s not true, but I’m trying to access my inner Jane Bennet)
March 21st, 2007 at 10:29 am
Like NA to be screened on Sunday, AD spoilt the novel Emma for me in E3 with a bafoon of a Mr. Woodhouse, and a strange Emma, who was neither anything like having a ‘happy disposition’, or ‘natural cheerfulness’. And oh so fashionable, when we all know that Emma didn’t care much for personal vanity,the one who instead of going through fashion catalogues and clothes at Ford’s while Harriet shops, just gazes out of the door on to a sleepy lazy Highbury.
E3 Emma was wierd - and any Emma adaptation has to have a good Emma.
In short, AD has the power of the pen to express what *he* wants. If he loves P&P - good it’ll be. He dislikes the book Emma, and especially Emma and Mr. Woodhouse, so we see a very negatively told story.
NO!! No!! I don’t trust him one bit. Especially now that he seems to have mangled my other favourite book, NA.
March 21st, 2007 at 2:00 pm
I have to say, Davies appears to shift Austen’s female orienatation on the story to a male focus…In NA, Catherine prefers Mrs Radcliffe; she has an aversion to history as ‘hardly any women at all’ and misquotes male authors- weird how AD has her read The Monk !
Any thoughts on ‘Postcards from Dublin’ by Charles Elton ? I am still reeling over the reason NA2 was not shot on location in Bath is Mr Elton has ‘already seen Bath’ but wanted to see Ireland. Gah !
March 21st, 2007 at 2:22 pm
I have to agree with Reeba. If Davies likes a book, he tends to do a better job with his adaptations. And I remember reading one of his interviews (way back when Miramax still owned his NA2 script) where he admitted he didn’t like Henry Tilney much and wanted to tone down his playfulness. He thought Henry came across as condescending…the main statement made by anyone who doesn’t get the novel. I won’t even go into his comments on hormones.
Thank goodness for people like Lynn Marie Macy, who does get NA and has proven that’s it’s possible to adapt the story into a live-action performance people will truly love. (I’m referring to her stage adaptation which is near perfect).
March 21st, 2007 at 5:38 pm
And he has said in some interview that he loves P&P and reads it once every other year.
So he comes up with a script that proved popular. *That* was the secret of the script. Though he did denigrate the novel by saying it is all about sex and money.
I wonder if likes S&S.
I wonder if he likes JA at all.
He keeps changing things in her novels that it makes me think he’s either jealous of her popularity (he knows no one will think of him in another few years) or he thinks he knows better than her - OR he imagines he knows her so well that he is able to read in between the lines. He even knows that JA actually wanted to make Catherine read ‘The Monk’.
He makes me so ill!!!!!
March 22nd, 2007 at 11:45 am
My main problem with the bathing scene is that I cannot believe Catherine would imagine herself and Mr. Tilney in such a position. In the book she seemed too innocent and good to have such thoughts. Even though the scene is a fantasy, it does not cast a good light on Mr. Tilney with him encouraging Catherine to not be ashamed bah bah bah.
Mr. Davies does not like Emma? I wonder then why he wrote a script for it.
All these posts are starting to make me quite nervous about S&S. :-/
March 22nd, 2007 at 12:34 pm
I liked the added Darcy scenes in P&P2. It gave him more of a personality. To me they were just filler scenes to flesh out his character. I also liked how we found out about Mr. Darcy’s part in the Lydia/Wickham deal. Sure it wasn’t a surprise to us, but it did happen in the book behind the scenes. When it is done like that we are already prepared so we concentrate more on Elizabeth’s facial expressions and reactions. I read in an article somewhere that he’s planning to do similar scenes with Col. Brandon and Edward Ferrars in S&S3. I’m looking forward to that adaptation very much. I have very much enjoyed P&P2 and E3 and this one is no exception. I wasn’t really happy with S&S2. S&S1 is pretty good except Margaret is gone and I felt absolutely nothing with Col. Brandon. I warmed up a little bit to Edward, but Col. Brandon….no.
March 22nd, 2007 at 12:40 pm
I was unaware of his dislike of Emma. I would say he wrote the script because they paid him to do it. It does make sense that any person will do a better job working on a story they love than one they dislike.
Reeba, I think he thinks he knows better. A sad delusion that many people have with regard to themselves.
If it makes the E3 detractors happy, I still think there is a definitive version out there somewhere begging to be filmed. I liked the casting of E3 better than that of E2, except for Knightly. I don’t know whether to blame the actor or the director for that performance. Whoever got the idea that a gentleman of Mr. Knightly’s stamp would ever raise his voice in the presence of a lady? And I did wonder why they cut Mrs. Weston’s pregnancy. But didn’t they do that in E2 as well?
So as far as Emma goes…still waiting!
March 22nd, 2007 at 6:29 pm
Don’t wait, Ina!! Watch E1. The best ever and my favourite
Mr. Knightley looks a bit old, but he acts so well, that you forget his age and just love his dialogue delivery and his interaction with Emma etc.
March 22nd, 2007 at 9:31 pm
Reeba, if you mean the one BBC did in the 70s, I’m afraid I can’t agree with you. Though their Knightly was wonderful, I couldn’t sit through even the first half. My sister refers to that one as the Senior Citizen’s Emma because the entire cast was far too old for the parts.
If you mean another version of whose existence I’m unaware, I would love more info so I can try to get ahold of it.
I’ve been thinking about the questions of production quality as to watchability. I think I’m just spoiled by modern technology.
March 23rd, 2007 at 6:05 am
Actually Emma in that was the youngest, and the right age - 21, while the others were 23 and 24.
Frank Churchill was mischevious and playfull as I imagine him, and Mrs. Elton here is also my favourite, as is Mr. Woodhouse.
Everyone’s dialogue delivery is superb.
Well, Ina, I think we differ in taste very much here
I am a great fan of all those earlier BBc adaptations.
**They respected the book, and that’s enough for me.**
Though there were a few changes in them I agree.
March 23rd, 2007 at 5:54 pm
I suppose we shall just have to agree to disagree. If you wish you may suspect my age to be the culprit.
March 23rd, 2007 at 10:02 pm
I can forgive the weak production values in P&P1, but I have a tougher time with the other “1s.” P1’s (in)famous green plaid dress, E1’s horrible wigs (some of them look like roadkill), etc. manage to take away from my enjoyment of the films.
I could only get through the first half of E1. John Carson’s costume made him look as if he were wearing a girdle. I can hardly write for laughing at the memory. I own the boxed set of “1s” and I do plan to (re-)watch them all some day.
March 24th, 2007 at 3:43 pm
It seems I stand alone
March 24th, 2007 at 7:04 pm
Which one are you calling P&P1? The 1940 with Olivier?
March 25th, 2007 at 12:03 pm
Reeba, you are not the only one who likes it. Just the only one posting here who likes it.
I really didn’t know that their Emma was the right age. She looked much older, but I suppose that could have been problems with lighting and makeup.