The reviews roll in
Decidedly mixed among AustenBlog readers; it doesn’t seem that anyone hates it particularly, but most seem to have wished for a little more. But we must prim up our mouths and turn the other cheek and show everyone what sweet, civil little Janeites we can be, because if ITV and the BBC and PBS are kind enough to serve it up for us, we must clean our plates and not ask for more! Like maybe a few laughs, and a few less What The Frank Churchill moments. Or maybe a couple of hours where we don’t find ourselves reaching for the Official AustenBlog Titanium Spork™ at least once.
The views from the press seem rather similar, with the writers trying very hard to either love it or hate it and finding themselves unable to muster much enthusiasm either way. Maybe they are still a bit hung over from New Year’s Eve.
Alert Janeite Lisa passed on a bit of editorializing (editorialising?) from The Telegraph, which is notable not so much for the fluffy Agh-we’re-so-bloody-sick-of-Austen message as for the hilarious comments.
“What is about the viewing public and
Jane Austen?” the editorial asks. And
why is the BBC, other networks and motion-picture organizations going
back to her classics and similar gothic genres that entralled previous
generations. I know why. But, you may
disagree. Because, here, sarcasm and humor always intertwine with realism.I would suggest that, maybe, the
viewing public and the networks are
getting tired with sleaze, smut and
tabloid sensationalism we have seen
much of lately. But, they reflect our
tastes, lifestyles, priorities and
distractions for so long. Maybe, realism is finally settling in. But, I doubt it.
We assume the returns were purposeful and it is meant to be read as free verse. Isn’t it?
My secondary wish to banish Andrew Davies arises not so much that he is the arch perpetrator of this freeloading genre (I don’t begrudge anyone earning a crust), rather that his enormous ego (just watch any interview he gives) has him believe that leeching off another’s creativity and original inspiration makes him a great literary figure in his own right.
And yet we are called snarky. Justice, we cry, justice for AustenBlog!
Serena Davies in The Telegraph trots out the old canard about it being “faithful to the spirit of the book.” (Dickie Dunn, where are you? And a thousand points that don’t mean anything to the first Alert Janeite to get that reference.)
Yesterday’s first of a three-parter was faithful to the spirit of the book and wonderfully alive to Austen’s subtleties and humour.
As Alert Janeite Laurel Ann, who sent us this article, commented, “When King Henry the VIII wanted to be faithful to the spirit of the Catholic Church, he was excommunicated by the Pope, and had to form his new religion!” Just saying.
Nancy Banks-Smith snarks in The Guardian,
Leaping flames. Soft flesh. Urgent fingers undoing the ribbons of a schoolgirl’s shift. Then a man on a white horse galloping away. Andrew Davies has spotted the one instance of sexual shenanigans in Sense and Sensibility (BBC1) and given it due prominence before the opening credits. (Where his name, I notice, is in larger type than Jane Austen’s.)
There’s a shocker.
He is following a well-worn journalistic principle. Make the first paragraph gripping, the last paragraph memorable and the bit in between short. So the book is condensed into three parts. Girls meet boys. Girls lose boys. Girls get boys back. Or, at least, a perfectly adequate substitute.
Snark aside, the overall feeling is more positive than negative, which we are glad to see. But we wouldn’t dream of disappointing our readers by withholding our snark. 
January 3rd, 2008 at 1:06 am
From the Telegraph:
“Not that it is Jane Austen by the time it reaches the screen, especially after Andrew Davies has had a go at it.”
Tee-hee, snarky-snark-snark.
Wow, that’s quite a long list of comments the Telegraph got.
January 3rd, 2008 at 4:42 am
I also noticed that AD’s name appeared in huge letters on the screen, whereas Jane Austen’s name appeared in very small letters under the title of the series. Not that it really matters A LOT, but still. Oh well, I’m sure they had a reason for it…
January 3rd, 2008 at 11:46 am
“Yesterday’s first of a three-parter was faithful to the spirit of the book and wonderfully alive to Austen’s subtleties and humour.”
I can’t believe they were watching the same adaptation I was! I noticed as much subtlety as a sledgehammer and didn’t laugh once. He must have tried so hard to make S&S so desperately unfunny. As for being faithful to the spirit of the book, I didn’t notice much of that either. Elinor (a drab, serious, boring person put in the worst possible clothes for her sad lack of bust) is relegated to the back burner so that Marianne (frightfully modern face, like Keira Knightley) can flit around with men who gallop around the countryside on white horses. As I understand S&S the novel, the love interest men simply aren’t as interesting as the two sisters are and are not meant to be. To relegate S&S to a busoms heaving boy-meets-girl plot is to simplify it terribly.
I agree that AD’s “enormous ego” seems to be the greatest thing on show in this adaptation, which is sad. I liked P&P95 and NA07 very much indeed.
January 3rd, 2008 at 12:02 pm
“I can’t believe they were watching the same adaptation I was! I noticed as much subtlety as a sledgehammer and didn’t laugh once. He must have tried so hard to make S&S so desperately unfunny. As for being faithful to the spirit of the book, I didn’t notice much of that either.”
That is funny. I’ve heard alot of people say this same thing about NA07. They say they didn’t laugh once at it either.
Well, I for one am looking forward to this adaptation. Did you all think S&S95 was funny? I don’t remember any really funny lines from the book being included in it either. Actually, I probably like S&S 1980 better then 1995 because it includes everyone from the book, except Margaret who I wish would have been included.
January 3rd, 2008 at 12:10 pm
Yes, opinions are mixed on NA07. I think it certainly could have been funnier but I did enjoy it and I thought Catherine and Henry were perfect which really offsets a lot of faults. I didn’t think S&S95 was particularly funny but I haven’t seen it for ages. Re-reading the book this summer I was surprised by how witty it was and how witty Eleanor was, things which just haven’t come over in the recent productions. Ah well. I will look out for the 1980 one: not seen that yet!
January 3rd, 2008 at 12:43 pm
I didn’t like NA07–but then I’m very particular.
As far as S&S95 being funny–I still laugh at the “VIPER IN MY BOSOM!” scene. That’s not in the book, of course, but what about Hugh Laurie? “I came into Devonshire with no other view.” That is definitely in the book. But Edward in the book is rather funnier.
January 3rd, 2008 at 2:04 pm
I agree. Edward, in the book, does have a kind of dry, sense of humour and comes up with some witty remarks when you don’t expect it. Actually, Elinor says many funny things in the book. That’s probably why she and Edward get along so well. They both have that quiet, dry sense of humour that’s really funny.
Which part was that “VIPER IN MY BOSOM” scene in the 1995 version? I just watched that a couple of days ago and don’t remember that part.
January 3rd, 2008 at 2:07 pm
The ‘VIPER IN MY BOSOM’ scene is the scene where Lucy tells Fanny Dashwood about her secret engagement to Edward.
January 3rd, 2008 at 2:19 pm
I’ve been re-reading S&S in preparation for this new adaptation. Since everyone keeps saying that this Edward isn’t shy and awkward at all I thought I’d take some notes on Edward from the book. Here are some things that stood out to me.
* first sight his address is not striking
* His eyes are uncommonly good. (Dan Stevens certainly has eyes like that!)
* general sweetness of his countenance
* Elinor thinks him really handsome.
* a gentleman-like, pleasing young man
* no particular graces of person or address (I take this to mean he’s just a normal person.)
* not handsome (Dan Stevens is certainly handsome, but then so is Anthony Calf and Col. Fitzwilliam isn’t supposed to be handsome either. I never hear complaints about that one!)
* When his natural shyness was overcome, his behaviour gave every indication of an open and affectionate heart.
* His manners required intamacy to make them pleasing.
* quiet and unobtrusive
* Mrs. Dashwood’s manners were attaching and soon banished all reserve.
* [Elinor]engaged him often enough in unreserved conversation.
* shyness which too often keeps him silent.
January 3rd, 2008 at 2:20 pm
Franka Says:
January 3rd, 2008 at 2:07 pm
The ‘VIPER IN MY BOSOM’ scene is the scene where Lucy tells Fanny Dashwood about her secret engagement to Edward.
Oh, OK! Obviously I remember that. I don’t ever remember it being called that before.
January 3rd, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Here I am again. I found this PICSPAM done by lady_grace over at this website. It’s really great. I love reading this kind of thing. There are screencaps with her own version of the film being told alongside them.
http://lady-grace.livejournal.com/304988.html#cutid1
January 3rd, 2008 at 3:07 pm
When Lucy tells Fanny she’s engaged to Edward (after being specifically invited to tell all about her secret love affair), Fanny shrieks, “VIPER IN MY BOSOM!” and starts beating on Lucy. Too funny. I love how Lucy sort of waves her hands in front of her. It’s such a chick fight. Though one wonders what happened to the little dog.
January 3rd, 2008 at 4:43 pm
Oh wow, somebody already found my picspam! I’m glad you enjoyed it Sylvia M.!
January 3rd, 2008 at 5:39 pm
There were lots of amusing scenes in S&S95 Just to mention the one hour eqivalent of S&S08 in S&S95;
The scenes with Margaret were amusing, the one in the library.
I also liked the one when Margaret is told to talk about the weather when she doesn’t know what to say, and she does talk of weather with a very funny response from Edward.LOL!!
There are a lot of amusing things and the way they are said and acted out;
for example when Edward comes to say goodbye in the stable, and tells Elinor he has to tell her something and then stammers on to say - he wants to tell her about his education, the way Elinor repeats, ‘your education???
I thought that was very funny.
Mariann’s scene with Edward reading at Norland.
The part where Fanny Dashwood brings down the amount for Mrs Dashwood and the girls to ‘game and poultry(?) now and then ‘was wittily done.
Of course I love S&S80(?). There is more of the book in it and is longer.
I hope I have been able to draw attention to some amusing scenes in S&S95 in just the same length of time as the recent episode.
January 3rd, 2008 at 5:47 pm
oops the weather scene is enacted towards the end, though it was told to her after the first visit to Barton Park.
I also missed out the scene between the two sisters in the bedroom when Elinor talks about liking, esteeming Edward.
January 3rd, 2008 at 6:57 pm
Well, I remember most of those scenes you are referring to from S&S2, but most if not all of those were Emma Thompson invented lines. Not Jane Austen wit and humour. I thought that was what people meant with what they are looking for in this adaptation.
January 3rd, 2008 at 6:57 pm
Oops…I forgot to type my name in the previous message.
January 3rd, 2008 at 7:32 pm
S&S ‘95 is half-Austen half-Thompson, yes, but it’s a wonderful wonderful film in its own right, and the performances are golden. Kate Winslet nailed Marianne, the minor characters were appropriately awful, and with the exception of H-h-h-hhugh Grant, the men smouldered appropriately for their roles.
January 3rd, 2008 at 9:34 pm
Here is the first episode that I found on tudou.com.
http://so.tudou.com/isearch.do?kw=BBC+08
It is the first two thumbnails that appear on the page.
The best thing to do that I have found for this website is to start the beginning of the film and put it on pause. Put it down to the bottom of the screen and let it sit there until the whole thing is done downloading. If you don’t it will stop to download every two seconds. While that one is at the bottom of the screen do the same thing to the other one so you can watch the two together with no interruptions. You may want to plan something to do while you are waiting or you’ll be there awhile.
January 4th, 2008 at 1:23 am
>Dickie Dunn, where are you?
Okay, I’m ignorant. What’s the reference?
January 4th, 2008 at 2:36 am
Well, I just finished watching the first episode and all I can say is it’s rather odd. There’s almost a hauntedness about it like Andrew Davies still had NA on his mind or is treating this like a mystery. In some ways I like it, but in other ways….
Elinor is wonderful and Edward is good too except his shyness was taken away entirely. Margaret is done well and Mrs. Dashwood also.
Charity Wakefield is a good choice for Marianne, but the script hasn’t developed her personality or something and she hasn’t been given some of her book lines to help her out. She didn’t cry at all when they left Norland. Actually, so far, the only time I’ve seen tears is once at the beginning after her father died. She also hasn’t been much offended at anyone. There was a little offense with Fanny, but other then that she seems like a generic teenager.
Col. Brandon is well done and I guess in a way he’s serious and silent like he’s supposed to be.
By the way. It’s extremely obvious that Willoughby is a decoy and Col. Brandon is meant to be Marianne’s hero.
Over all I get the feeling that this is focusing in on Elinor and Col. Brandon as the main characters instead of Elinor and Marianne.
What was with the look that Brandon gave Willoughby? He doesn’t know anything yet that Willoughby has done. Was he just seeing him strictly as a rival? Speaking of Willoughby. He looks much better/handsomer while talking and moving about on screen then he does in the still pictures I have seen of him.
Mrs. Jennings is saying the lines she’s supposed to, but needs to be a little more jolly. Maybe she will be after the Miss Steeles and Charlotte arrive. Oh, I cannot forget John, Fanny and Henry Dashwood . They were perfect. It’s only been at their home that I sort of felt like I was in a Jane Austen novel.
I am looking forward to seeing the rest even though this one had a slight Bronte, creepy feeling to it.
Actually, the colors reminded me of the new Persuasion. Everything is purple and gray.
I do wish he would have left more of the book dialogue in.
January 4th, 2008 at 2:51 am
based on stills it looks like some costumes from SS95 and PP05 is resused, including a blue stopped dressed worn by Kate Winslet. Likewise in MP06 Billie Pipers wears at least onne costume from SS95, Emma Thompsons black,white dress. Do you think it is deliberate choose to hire the same costumes
January 4th, 2008 at 5:41 am
@Anonymous,
I was pointing out humour in S&S95 and not whether it is JA’s or Emma Thomson’s.
Since AD rewrites everything, I wanted to say he could have included humour like ET.
BTW there is a lot of humour in those chapters of episode1.
It is all in the witty dialogue which one could just use directly, and the actors could say it appropriately and the work is done
The part where Fanny Dashwood and Henry Dashwood are discussing money is a classic and a very witty passage very well brought on to screen by previous adaptations except this one. It was sort of underplayed, and Henry Dashwood shown as the reason for it spoilt it all. Poor Henry!!
January 4th, 2008 at 9:18 am
Having seen this, I also felt that much of the hoopla over the movie is due to the wretched trailer-producer people, rather than to Davies et al. The movie was ok, but I found it to be almost embarassingly reminiscent of the Thompson/Lee version, from dialogue (well, of course, some of it is JA’s herself’s), to casting, to actual shots and camera angles. I mean, how “new” is it to have this Margaret also be an under-the-bed-tree-climber curly-haired sort of tomboy? This is not a “new” production–so far, I see nothing to like more than the T/L version other than the fact that this Elinor is a little younger than Thompson (tho’ not yet so skilled an actor). So far I’ll keep my money on Thompson.
In terms of historical/novelistic oddities, found it odd that the 4 Dashwood women would walk on foot behind the hearse (when Cassandra and Mrs A didn’t attend JA’s funeral at all); found it odd that Barton Cottage is set in very Irish-looking sea scenery, when there is no mention of the sea in the novel; found it inexplicable that Col. Brandon & W seem to have met previously and that W. addresses him very rudely.
The biggest nit to pick,however, is that the essence of JA’s novel is that Marianne longs for Romantic Drama to occur, but nothing really romantic happens to her, other than her almost suicidal depression, because she is not in fact a Gothick Heroine, but a denizen of A Modern Age. So all the shots of galloping horses, crashing waves and waving trees, all set to minor music rising to great crescendos indeed represents Marianne’s fervid imagination, but Austen gave her the reality of living in a pleasant cottage in prosaic farm country, with a few families who call on each other, a starter boyfriend who seizes the main chance, and a middle-aged true love who wears flannel waistcoats. JA didn’t show us Marianne living amongst the crashing waves, etc., but among quotidian details. To focus as BBC has here on the romantic trappings is to miss the actual joke itself.
In other words, Mr D et al.–you MISSED THE POINT AND FLUNKED THE COURSE!
Plus, S&S is indeed funny. What about Elinor’s line, when thinking of visiting Lady Middleton’s horrid children, that she never thinks of tame and quiet children with any abhorence? What about the line, when Lady M is miffed at Sir John for holding an impromptu party in London, that, being a well-bred woman, she forebore to remind him of his mistake above four or five times a day? There are many more.
January 4th, 2008 at 10:08 am
The line about tame and quiet children occurs in a conversation with the Miss Steeles. They say that they love children with such boistrous spirits. That conversation may still yet occur.
January 4th, 2008 at 7:05 pm
I miss Kate Winslet.
January 4th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
26 comments is a long thread. My comment shall make it 27. I wonder what the longest comment thread is on AustenBlog?
The reviews may be in, but it’s still to debut in the US. S&S95 is in the top two in my list for favorite Jane Austen adaptations so considering all of these bad expectations I’m being given, I think I will enjoy judging the quality of AD’s cinematic ego romp.
January 4th, 2008 at 9:20 pm
The entry of January 1 has 38 comments, but I’ve seen more in at least one previous entry.
January 5th, 2008 at 5:51 am
P&P05 generated some pretty long threads, as did the ITV broadcasts last year. Also I think I suggested Richard Armitage to play Captain Wentworth (a long time ago, obviously) and the Armitage Army had a field day. That’s another long thread.
ETA: Ha ha, here it is. I originally wrote that to tease my friend Karen, who likes John Hannah. We have some fun back and forth in the comments. We were both very much taken by Gerard Butler’s red velvet breeches in Phantom, as you will be able to tell. There are some fun casting suggestions for all these upcoming films, especially now in retrospect.
January 6th, 2008 at 10:53 am
Okay, just to round things out a bit, here’s a quick observation from a (straight) male perspective: Hattie Moran’s Elinor is very attractive. More attractive than Marianne, I think. Which is the wrong way around, right?
Emma Thompson was wonderful (and I loved Ang Lee’s movie), but I always thought she was just a wee bit too old for the role. Moran’s Elinor and Winslett’s Marianne is a combination I’d like to see: the right sort of ages, and the right sort of beauty distributed in the right ways.
January 6th, 2008 at 10:55 am
Sorry - that should have been Morahan not Moran! Must read before pressing submit.
January 6th, 2008 at 10:56 am
Erm, and Winslet, not Winslett.