The Complete Jane Austen on PBS

PBS starts is doing the six books in the canon plus something called "Miss Austen Regrets."

Obviously, we'll need a thread over here so we can talk about how the adaptations measure up to the books.

Fortunately, they're not trying to remake the Colin Firth version, which is almost taken from the page verbatim.

First up tomorrow night is "Persuasion."

I hope they don't try to gussy these up and make them so romantic that they omit the great minor characters and humor.

I never thought that anything would be altered or changed for PBS. They better not cut the movie to fit the time, I'll scream!!!

Please let me know if this is happening since I have never watched Persuasion before and wouldn't know if it was edited.

I have really been looking forward to this series! At the end, sometime in May, they are also airing Elizabeth Gaskell's Cranford, which I've heard very good things about.

I believe Persuasion and Sense and Sensibility are new adaptations. I'm looking forward to seeing them although I am rather fond of the Persuasion with Amanda Root.

I was horrified to see in the most recent PBS catalog an adaptation of Mansfield Park with that blonde Brit with the toothy smile that was Dr. Who's sidekick in the first of the latest redos of the series.

avaland, is the version of Persuasion you are talking about the one with Ciaran Hinds as Capt.Wentworth? I have it on VHS and love it!

>4 avaland:, avaland - Agree, agree! That's Billie Piper and I just cannot see her as Fanny Price! Too modern! I even preferred it when she left Dr. Who - Freema Agyeman was such a better actress and her character was so much more interesting. She wasn't such a weepy little girl all the time. I hope that they find a way to keep her associated with the series or with Torchwood even though she has been replaced as the Doctor's main companion. She also made the show a little less white, which I think was appropriate.

"Sense" will have to be awfully good to top Emma Thompson's "Sense and Sensibility." It's my favorite Austen, even though the movie version doesn't have the dishy Firth.

And, yes, I like the Ciaran Hinds version of "Persuasion," too. Fiona Shaw plays the Captain's wife; small part, but she does a lovely job. I love her.

In any case, this is a story about mature people, and one of the ones I hope they don't "pretty up." Anne and Captain Wentworth are supposed to be pretty much over the hill.

"Persuasion" was Austen's last novel I believe, so they're not doing them in order.

I agree, nohrt, it will have to be awfully good, but I might enjoy a longer adaptation, if that is indeed what they have made. My daughter, who adores the Kira Knightly P&P (which I didn't), and I argued over the length of adaptations once. She claimed that the story didn't need to be hours and hours long, that they were only cutting out shots of Lizzie walking from here to there, or excessive dance scenes . . .etc. My argument was that the hollywood version was so damn compressed. Rush, rush, rush. The things they cut out to compress so, were the things that really gave one the sense of the period and the rhythms of life during that time.

Did anyone watch "Regency House Party" when it was on? I learned some interesting things in that. We do so tend to romanticize the period.

>7 nohrt4me: - I'm not sure you are getting the new version of S&S which is currently showing on BBC (it finishes tonight). Is it better than the film? The tv series has had a couple of ropey moments but it is very good - they have moved the age of the whole cast downwards (i.e. Elinor is no longer in her mid-30's - I thought that was a problem with Emma Thompson). It has a great soundtrack.

Re Billie Piper - she is wrong in the remake of MP. Freema A was 'removed' from DW because she wasn't very good (according to the producers) although they are going to give her guest appearances in both the new series of DW and 'Torchwood'. The new assistant has disaster written all over her - Catherine Tate has her own comedy show in the UK, and unfortunately when she acts she sounds like some of her characters.

The new version of NA is very good though - the best of the ITV productions. Interestingly, it was adapted by Andrew Davies who adapted the BBC version of P&P, and the new version of S&S.

avaland, don't get me STARTED on everything that was wrong with Hollywood P&P, including that Deputy Dawg looking Mr. Darcy and scrawny Kiera Knightley.

The mother wasn't screechy enough, and Donald Sutherland as the father was too wacky.

Yes, loved "Regency House Party." Everytime you had a baby, you had a 50/50 percent chance of dying, or something like that. People having to use each other's bathwater. Chamber pots behind screens in the dining room.

And the number of bad hair days due to lack of shampoo! Eeek!

thanks, Jargoneer, for the updates & tips. I'm glad they've moved the age downward. While Emma acted well, I thought the age thing was a bit to overcome in my mind. Loved Alan Rickman in that also, but again, the age.

Did realize there is a new Northanger Abbey also? Although I did see one in the PBS catalog and wondered (sometimes they look new but are only new to me:-)

nohrt, I really should rewatch that and rerecord from VHS to DVD.

Correcting myself, you may be getting the new version of S&S since BBC have just started advertising "Miss Austen Regrets" over here. It's a drama based on the her final years - and yes, it turns out Jane's passions are ignited one last time. The first big question is why do producers feel like they have to cast beautiful actresses as Jane - first we had Anne Hathaway and now Olivia Williams. From what we know she was relatively plain, not a Hollywood beauty who wouldn't have had any time to write because there would have been a queue of suitors banging on her door night and day.
The second big question is why do writers think the only interesting part of Jane's life is her, or lack of, love-life.

Because my dear jargoneer (and you know the answers to your own questions), this is what Hollywood and its imitators do! And they wouldn't focus on her lack of love-life if 'we' didn't want to know about it.

I can't believe I am the first to post since Persuasion was aired tonight. It has been 20 min already. Well, I thought it was too short. I loved it, her twists and turns really heated up at the end. All the rumor and miscommunication are fabulous. I did not care for the staring into the camera shots, but that is just me. The long walks were beautiful. And I loved Ann's hallucinations of Capt Wentworth. I know them well. The actor who played the father did a great job as well. I also love the petty family bickering behind closed doors. As for the costumes, Ann had beautiful toned down understated dresses compared to the more flambouyant characters. though she had a gorgeous shade of green in one dress.

I had to sleep on this, but IMO, this was the equivalent of the Cliff's Notes movie version of the book.

It missed a lot of the humor and lightness from the book, and I hope it does not presage what's to come from the rest of the adaptations.

One of my favorite parts in the book is when Anne visits sister Mary (whose ticcy performance made me want to take a Klonopin), asks Anne to get the in-laws to let up on the kids' discipline, while the in-laws take her aside and complain about the way Mary's bringing up the kids. Anne's friendship with Charles is also missing, though they tried to imply it.

In any case, Anne's role as the intermediary, solver of problems, and source of sense and strength in the family was more or less sacrificed to the romantic plot.

yareader2, I agree that the costumery and hairdos were nicely done, and symbolic of the characters personalities.

Acting was pretty good, though Mary seemed actually deranged rather than just spoiled and manipulative.

They also took a lot of the dialogue and language from the book; the script was good.

And the biz about cousin Elliot and Mrs. Clay was revealed bit by bit in the book. Harriet and Nurse Rook are among my favorite minor Austen characters. Harriet's the invalid with the lively brain and Nurse hears all the gossip, and together they figure out everything that's going on in Bath. Sadly, in this version, Harriet suddenly regains her legs to run in and reveal all to Anne at the very end.

Another 15 minutes would have made this a lot better.

nohrt, I'm with you (my husband called this 'speed dating with Jane Austen').

While the adaptation had a more updated feel to it, I could not help compare how various characters were presented. The father is played more nasty in this one, imo (not just snobbish). I agree with what you said, nohrt, about Mary. And Anne seemed more insecure, a bit of a wuss, imo. You got a better sense from the previous adaptation that she was exceeding capable and an anchor for everyone else.

The over-dramatized bits made both my husband and I laugh. The tear falling on the page while she writes, the extended quivering lip kiss there at the end. Dramatically running after him after reading the letter doesn't happen in the book, I believe. Oh, and of course there is that bumpy, handheld camera thing so popular these days.

That kiss! Ugh! I found it idiotic that they spent about 10 seconds getting to the clinch (I'll have to time it later because I taped it) and then cut out some of the best parts of the book.

Everybody's trying to sex up Jane Austen since "Pride and Prej," which actually IS a very sexy book, but they don't all have that same level of passion.

Loved your husband's comment! But somehow I think this is the way storytelling on screen gets done now for modern brains that multi-task and don't want a lot of walks in the park and dancing like your daughter.

nohrt4me: I know humor was missing. All the biting quips I am used to from Jane Austen. I did get the sense of it from Mary and Ann. Mary was very manipulative with her tantrum about staying with her son after he was hurt and again wanting Ann to go along in case MAry needed her. But that is how I felt to much editing was done. I saw all the appropriate points, but only for a moment and the story went on. The father was a snob, but the meanness was lost.

Harriet WHO? She was less then minor, she was almost a bystander on the sidewalk. Same with Nurse Rook. I just remember the look on the servants face when Ann says she is going to visit Mrs. Smith and that is how I figured the nurse obtained her information.

Charles seemed like an idiot and just as spoiled as Mary. They seemed like a good couple actually. But nothing came through about him liking Ann until it was spoken.

Ann came through as very strong and even her father relied on her wisdom now and then. I wouldn't call her wimpy, she made all the wrong conclusions/assumptions and that held her back. She didn't go for it, because she felt he had moved on. There were looks, but she thought she was mistaken and just a dreamer. It took the ray of light from the note to lift the fog.

But somehow I think this is the way storytelling on screen gets done now for modern brains that multi-task...

I agree. The microwaveable Jane Austen, the fast food Austen...

My husband timed the quivering lip kiss to 27 seconds but I'm not sure what is his actual starting point:-)

The kiss starts after the soulful eye-looking, when the heads actually start to move. Maybe your husband can re-time that, avaland, because my video copy did not come out at all.

Hey! There are two endings to this novel! (I just re-read the both, and had forgotten the alternate version.)

The TV adaptation, interestingly, borrows elements and dialogue from both. But it stays pretty faithful to the flurry-flutter crescendo of the book's ending, what with letters and Anne trying to catch up with Captain Wentworth. In the original novel ending, Anne is simply thrown together with him alone during a visit to the Crofts (as in the first ending).

Two oddball events in the adaptation I had to check out in the book: Anne and Capt. Wentworth kiss in the street, and Captain Wentworth appears to give Anne Kellynch Hall as a wedding present. In the novel, there is no kiss (in either ending), though Anne and Captain Wentworth take a deserted gravel walk to talk over old times and the future (in the second ending). Moreover, the estate is entailed, so one has to assume that Wentworth has only rented it.

Or maybe it wasn't Kellynch Hall? They didn't really show you enough of it to know for sure.

We had that discussion about the hall at the end. I thought it someplace different.

Will have him re-time.

Hmmm. forgot about the two endings also, good point.

OK, next up is "Northanger Abbey," which is funny and charming, but in memory strikes me as having less substance than the other six novels in the canon.

I'm re-reading this BEFORE Sunday (so I can be REALLY disappointed if "Persuasion" was an indication of things to come.)

I've been debating whether to watch NA. I have read P&P, S&S, Emma, and NA and agree with nohrt4me's comment that NA has less substance. If Persuasion was fluffed up, what will they do to NA? On the other hand, it's a much shorter book so perhaps it can fit into the time more easily.

NA is easily the best of new ITV adaptations - changes the book slightly but keeps to it's spirit.

Yes, I thought the nature of the book - which is meant to poke fun at the gothic novel (all the rage back then) - would actually lend itself to adaptation, so I had high hopes for this new version.

I read that it is all new productions of Persuasion, Northanger Abbey, Mansfield Park, and Sense and Sensibility. Emma and Pride and Prejudice are the award winning shows. P&P is shown over two weeks with 2 hours each, so I think that will be played in its entirety. Phew!

OK, tonight is "Northanger Abbey." Anybody got favorite bits from the book they hope make it onto the screen?

Mine is when Catherine breaks open the mysterious cupboard and finds--horrors!--a laundry list!

nohrt4me

I don't remember the story well, I mix a couple of them up in the details and I thought it would be fun to watch it and see the impression it makes and then reread the novel. Just changing things around. I already know the book will be better though. P&P is the only movie that will be shown and equals the impact I get from the book.

yareader2, I am intrigued by the trailers for tonight's episode.

I like the hopping back and forth between Catherine's gothic fantasies and reality; it looks like it'll be fun.

Well, I liked the adaptation of Northanger Abbey. Somehow, because of the nature of the novel itself perhaps, I didn't feel the need to run to the book and check on discrepancies. Some readers have trouble with this novel usually because they can't quite see what she is trying to do, so I think the adaptation shows her overexcited imagination quite beautifully. Her excursions into fantasy were quite funny.

BUT, one can never read too many novels (although I'm tempted to say that one can read too many novels of the same ilk).

I agree avaland, I liked the adaptation as well. I did not care much for the book when I read it last year. The adaptation made the "excursions into fantasy" obvious and brought out the humor of it.

Count me among those who enjoyed this adaptation. I also read the book last year, and this version made it much more fun. It was sometimes hard toremember while reading just how young Catherine is--which explains many of her seemingly illogical mistakes.

Yes, great bit of casting with Catherine. I really enjoyed the satire of the gothic in the book, and how it came out in this adaptation.

Kudos on this one!

I have never quite been able to "buy" the notion that the dishy and witty Mr. Tilney falls for Catherine. She'll make a great vicar's wife and mother, of course, but I'm always afraid that she'll never be quite as good a conversationalist as Henry would want.

Also loved the touches about the pump room at Bath as a kind of Regency hook-up joint--which it apparently was in those days.

mess 33

Why wouldn't she be as good a conversationalist as Henry? She spoke about nature ( walking in the woods and talking about France) and cities with him. Her knowledge came from books because she had ot travelled much, is that the reason? She was so young and was eager to go and try new things.

Ooops, hit post before I'd proofed this.

yareader2, you make a good point.

Probably just my age and jaded view of romance preventing me from seeing how that marriage might work as well as you do.

I suppose, having grown up with a scheming and cynical father and brother, Henry finds Catherine honest and unspoiled.

Like avaland, I didn't feel the need to run back to the text, but I was interested in that exchange about vampirism between Henry and Catherine. If it was invented, it was awfully damn good.

But then Andrew Davies, who has done Austen before, including the Firth/Ely version did the screenplay, so he must have her voice down pretty well.

I have just finished watching the previous adaptation of Persuasion (again!) which I put on while cutting some fabric. It is amazing how much more is included and communicated, including the Austen wit, in this adaptation. It is by far superior to the contemporary adaptation in almost every way. The characters are played somewhat older, Amanda Root and Ciaran Hinds seem more like people in their 30s than their late 20s, but I thought the 'older' actress helped convey the fact that she, in particular, was past prime marriageable age.

I saw the previews for Mansfield Park and I'm filled with trepidation. . .

I just watched the film version of Mansfield Park--the one with Frances O'Connor--a few weeks ago and thought it was quite good. I had the same reaction as avaland to the previews for the new version.

*cough, cough, sputter, sputter*

ok, so I went into this one prepared to be disappointed but not this disappointed! Unlike the delightful Northanger Abbey, this adaptation made me want to run to the novel just to get this version out of my head.

The characters were only barely recognizable, imo. Too many heaving bosoms and cleavage shots (that bit 'o lace, fanny dear, goes horizontally, not vertically) and what's with her hair down and disheveled much of the time? That scene where Edmund comes into Fanny's room while she is washing her hair...(my husband said he looked like a puppy about to do something on the carpet!). OK, and we made fun of the last kiss of this one also.

Just had to vent, sorry. I'm off tomorrow, will think on this some more and perhaps post again when I get back.

btw, Mr. Bertram is the actor who plays Dr. Lydgate in Middlemarch, and isn't Tom the actor who played Steerpike in Gormengast?

Never having watched a film of this book I decided to watch it while being online with more experienced Austen fans and did they set me straight. And I see avaland agrees with what I thinking. My, thoses ladies were well-endowed.

And that last kiss, was it a kiss?, the way they were panning around them it flew right by as well.

Avaland, I love your husband's comment that Edmund looked like a puppy about to do something on the carpet! HAHAHAHAH

Maybe they had push-up corsets or "wonder" corsets. We started laughing when Fanny came into Tom's sick room and set the tea tray down s-l-o-w-l-y...

oops, gotta run. . .

Yes, hideous, truncated, perfunctory disaster.

Fanny's visit back home midway through the book was ditched entirely--and underscores how she belongs neither to Mansfield Park or Porthsmouth. She's been placed in a kind of limbo, with no future except finding Lady Bertram's scissors and nursing her unrequited love for Edmund. It's the one episode that makes Fanny a sympathetic and understandable character in a somewhat problematic book. To leave it out was a travesty.

Edmund didn't go into Fanny's bedroom; she had the old schoolroom as a visiting parlor. Plus, I thought he was going to feel her up during that game of Blind Man's Bluff. Yeesh! And him a clergyman!

Poor Mrs. Norris, all dressed up with no lines to say, just meaningful looks that, even if you read the book, didn't make sense.

Was she supposed to be enjoying living vicariously as a libertine through "darling Julia"? That would have been an interesting idea, especially since her husband was a minister (if I remember rightly).

But there were so few ideas in this treatment.

And Lady Bertram as the deus ex machina who brings it all together at the end is utterly weird. This is an incredibly shallow, selfish and lazy woman, who would be utterly clueless about anyone's feelings, much less be the agent which brings Fanny and Edmund together.

Crawfords and Sir Thomas had dimension going in, but the whole thing fizzled out at the end.

And I liked Tom asking Fanny to read him the racing form.

But, overall, I thought the film showed nothing but that the producers didn't really like MP and just wanted to get it out of the way.

Sad sad.

So far Northanger Abbey was the least disappointing of the recent adaptations. Mansfield Park was all wrong. I felt no sympathy for Fanny, and didn't think she was as annoyingly proper as she should have been. Mrs. Norris' part should have been left out entirely - she's an obnoxious bossy busybody b---- in the book and you hardly feel that in this adaptation. Bertram only seemed slightly annoyed about the playacting, and Mary Crawford was tepid. The pug was the most lively character.

Yes, thank God for Pug!

Good news, though. Andrew Davies, who did the six-part Firth/Ely P&P and the latest NA, is also doing Emma and S&S.

So perhaps the best is yet to come.

yes, did you hear the pug snoring?

Now I would have to reread the book, but wasn't our Fanny just a bit more pious? And doesn't that very part of her character make some of the things that happen in the book all the more interesting?

And I seem to remember in the book that she comes much closer to falling for Crawford than this adaptation would indicate. Do correct me, if I am wrong.

I actually just reread Mansfield Park a few weeks ago (I haven't seen the Masterpiece take on it yet--we've only watched Persuasion so far and I'm still trying to get over my horror at the PDA). Fanny is extremely pious. And yes, she does waver fairly close to Crawford, denying it to herself all the way. But I do think if he'd come back one more time, she would have tipped over. (In my opinion, she should have ended up with Henry, rather than her to-all-purposes brother, but don't get me started!)

I think, because of its so-called flaws or character problems, MP is one of the most interesting books to talk about.

The characters could be played any number of ways. Fanny's hoydenish appearance in this treatment reflected the lack of care that anybody in the family felt for her except as a "gofer."

There are also indications that Fanny isn't in good health in the book--though she looks pretty robust in the movie).

Henry truly does love Fanny, or is at least smitten by her in ways even he cannot understand. Some of the tension in the book is whether she should sacrifice her purity to redeem him--and whether he can be redeemed.

Austen had a fairly dubious notion of the redemptability of scoundrels (see Wickham and Willoughby).

Added to the tension is uncle Sir Thomas's insistence that she take up the proposal, all of which begins to make her ill.

She is unable to withstand much stress, caves in a lot (the two necklaces, the divided heart, a nice symbol that got lost in the movie).

And Edmund, in the book, turns to Fanny only after a time of getting over Miss Crawford.

A sequel to MP would almost certainly have Edmund having to deal with wife in ill-health, and Fanny dying of consumption or in childbirth, and Henry going around feeling guilty that he did not love her quite enough--until he found is real true love.

I will let Dan Ackroyd's old SNL character of the movie reviewer, Leonard Pinth Garnell, sum up my feelings on the new MP: "Dreadful. Simply putrid."

nohrt & Carola, you both make good points. MP is considered most moral of all her novels.

What was that bit that Gillian Anderson said about Austen creating Mary Crawford as a bit more sexed up version of herself? Is there any read evidence of that? I thought Anderson might do well as a host (based on her performances in Bleak House and House of Mirth) but she's lifeless. . .

and isn't Mrs. Bertram addicted to laudanum? The more I think of this adaptation, the more it infuriates me (I expect more of the British, damn it!). I have some quilting to do, I think I'll put the older version on the TV to flush this one out of my head.

The following might be of interest to whom lives in New York or nearby.

I just learnt that on Monday, February 4, at 3:30 p.m., at the Gershwin Theater, Brooklyn College Campus (2900 Bedford Avenue - Subway from Manhattan #2 local or #5 express to Flatbush Ave./Nostrand Ave. Station. The Hillel Gate on campus is a very short walk away. For info 718/951-5000), following the screening of Persuasion, Ciaran Hinds (in person!) will discuss the film.
No charge and no reservation required.

You lucky New Yorkers!

I will not be able to go, Cariola, so not much luck here...:-((

bummer for me also. I do have to be in the state the following morning to vote;-)

I don't think MP is moral so much as exploring that morality with utmost delicacy--such that you might think, well, there's a dud of a book.

Edmund has high ideas. So high that he's willing to round up his sister and rusticate her for life with the insufferable Mrs. Norris. The brief description of how they grate on each other, locked up in their country house is really quite hideous--almost reminiscent of those gothic novels where women get locked up in nunneries, which parallel I don't think is an accident.

There was plenty of the "gothic" in real life, as Austen was aware.

Mary has more practical ideas, willing to plan the societal rehabilitation of Julia and Henry, who have done the unthinkable.

Who is more heartless here? A brother willing to sacrifice his sister to his own standing as a clergyman? Or Mary Crawford who wants Edmund to lower his standards and collude in allowing Julia and Henry to have their fling and be gradually brought back to social acceptance?

What did Austen think? Lydia and Wickham, whose circumstances are similar, are accepted back by their families, however reluctantly, and certainly with no delusions that they will change much for the better.

Mr. Collins, who comes to triumph over their shame in the guise of condoling with them as a clergyman, seems far more despicable than Lydia's family who have accepted her back.

Well, one could have a whole discussion on Austen's attitude towards clergymen as evidenced in her work, couldn't we? :-)

And military men!

Oh, the officers! Sigh.

Not sure what to make of "Miss Austen Regrets" last night (for those who weren't watching the Super Bowl). On my TV, the music track drowned out half the conversation.

I liked the idea of Austen dancing and flirting right into her 40s, and having such a lively sense of fun and wit--and how could she not have had it and not write those books?

I was also moved by her fierceness, not wanting to be pitied, wanting to be paid for her writing, and not wanting to be haunted by regrets.

Maybe somebody who knows more about Austen's life could step in here and rate it for accuracy as a short biopic?

I don't know about accuracy, but I thought it was interesting, for a change, to see a focus on Austen's later years instead of fantasizing about how her life inspired her characters. I also liked that she was given some spirit; usually she is depicted as shy and retiring, happy to be locked away in her cottage with no one but her sister.

I have read in several bios that she had absolutely no desire to meet the Prince of Wales. It took some arm twisting.

Well, "Miss Austen Regrets" was much better than I had anticipated.
I agree, I like the spirited Austen instead of the 'shy, retiring' Austen usually put forward. I recognized bits of her own words in there too, so it sounds like they tried hard. Generally, the big things were accurate. She was very fond of Fanny, had many brothers...etc. I chuckled at the comment that Lizzie only changes her mind about Darcy after she sees how big his house is. And yes, Cariola, I also have read the same about her & the Prince and that she didn't want to dedicate her book to him. . .(even in this presentation, it suggests she did it to expedite the book's publication and thus provide the financial security she is looking for).

I think the actor who played the gentleman who had proposed to her years ago, played the rich jerk in Daniel Deronda...sometimes it takes a bit to shake the previous character off (at least I think it was DD).

And last night I got sidetracked and skimmed through Mansfield Park again. The adaptation is even worse than I imagined.

I had the same problem with the music track drowning out some of the conversation in "Miss Austen Regrets," but still I quite enjoyed it. I do like to think of her as that spirited, whether she was or not. It's hard to imagine that the inner Austen wasn't at least that spirited and charming, given her writing. But I do know many writers who deliver on the page much more interestingly than in person.

Avaland, I too absolutely loved the line about Lizzie only changing her mind about Darcy when she saw his estate.

Miss Austen Regrets left me uneasy. She may have flirted with the man/ the friend she turned down, but I believe she was very shy, withdrawn even and gave all her passion to her writing.

I have re-watched the 1980 version of Mansfield Park which is a delight and is much closer to the book (and a wonderful 4 hours). I just had to erase that current awful adaptation from my mind. Meanwhile, my daughter emailed me to tell me how much she liked the new one (however, she admits to never having read the book!).
Although the 1980s adaptation has a somewhat staged presentation, I think it still fares well now more than 25 years later.

Hi, all ~ Though I have not yet read the book, I watched Persuasion, the first of the adaptations, and did not enjoy it at all. I'm told that the book is really wonderful, but I'm afraid it may be a bit spoiled for me now.

Therefore, having read only Pride and Prejudice so far, and not wanting to ruin the reading of the others by watching filmed adaptations of them first, I decided to watch only P&P when it's shown (I think tonight & the following two Sun. nights). (Actually, I saw this version of P&P, with Firth and Ehle, before I read the novel, but it was so wonderful, it made me long to read it.)

I missed P&P last night. Just 15 min before the program started the power went out! :( It was off 3 hours. Where did they leave off?

I watched it and am trying to remember. The departure of Mr. Collins, I think.

We recorded it and I will relish watching it sometime this week. It's my favorite P&P adaptation, although I think the 1985 (?) version is also good (David Rintoul is just no Colin Firth, I suppose).

Storeetllr - If you watched the new version of Persuasion they just showed on PBS, I think you will find the book so vastly different (because they only seem to have paid a very little amount of attention to the original material) that you will be able to enjoy it. It is one of my favorites! So don't let the bad tv version keep you from reading it.

The reason the 1980s versions of Austen appear staged is that they were cheap productions that BBC used to broadcast on a Sunday teatime. As part of it's educational remit the BBC used to broadcast serials of the classics at this time for years. As incredible as it seems now, they were aimed as much at children as adults. If the BBC was spending money on costume drama it was as likely to spend it on more 'popular' dramas such as 'The Onedin Line' or 'Poldark' (not that they look particularly expensive now).

#49: What was that bit that Gillian Anderson said about Austen creating Mary Crawford as a bit more sexed up version of herself? Is there any read evidence of that?
---------

Hi again, Avaland. I remember coming across this in some critical commentary last year when I studied Mansfield Park. It took me by surprise too. I also read that Mary Crawford was considered another version of Elizabeth Bennet, which I totally disagree with.

If everyone here hasn't had enough of these conversations, come over to the I Love Jane Austen group for more. I know many of you belong to both groups, but for those of you who don't . . .

Welcome, Nickelini!

I've noticed a "recycling" of certain character traits, I think you could say that Mary and Lizzie are similar types. Both are vivacious, witty, enjoy exercise and are physically desirable. Both are rather blind to the faults of their beloved brother and sister, respectively. Neither has any illusions about the importance of money to happiness and comfort.

Frankly, I think Mary is more honestly in love with Edmund--or at least more desperate, as she's older than Lizzie. Lizzie loves the "Darcy package deal."

Mr. Collins and Edward Ferrars also have similar traits--both are diffident clergymen who are very clumsy lovers (and the actors who play them in the movie versions do a great job conveying that with body language; I've always loved the way Hugh Grant ties his cravat really tight and tippy toes around.) Both are also cowed by mother figures who control their economic futures.

Mr. Collins remains stunted and comic, even after he finds love (of a sort) with Charlotte, because he continues to be bossed around by Lady Catherine de B.

Edward Ferrars' also remains cowed by his mother, sister, and Lucy, though he manages to break free of mother/sister axis by honoring his engagement to Lucy.

Were it not for Lucy's happy transfer of affections, however, Edward would have married Lucy. And possibly become nearly as clownish as Mr. Collins.

Reminder for those not watching the Academy Awards: This is the last installment of P&P.

Like many of you, I'm sure, I have the tapes and have watched all six hours straight through at least three or four times.

Any new insights/thoughts as you watched it this time around on the "installment plan"?

I'm finding that I'm less distracted by the lovely and talented Colin Firth and appreciating the minor characters and the absolutely brilliant acting that went into those roles--even Miss Anne de Bourgh and her paid companion who have no speaking roles at all.

I went for the last segment of P&P. I like another version of the movie better. The passion here was too subdued. They didn't have to jump into each others arms, but their tone of voice did not express the feeling I get when I read it.

What Academy Awards? :-)

>72 nohrt4me:, I agree, each time I rewatch this (and it had been quite a while as one of the tapes got stuck in the VCR years ago) I see more 'beyond' the 'lovely and talented Colin Firth', as you say. I think they do a good job slipping in some of the explanations needed to understand the period; such as entailment and the very real social effects of Lydia's dalliance with Mr. Wickham (we get a bit of this in Mansfield Park with Mariah's behavior but I think it was 'shown' better in this P&P).

My husband watched this with me and loved it (he has read the book, though not all the Austen novels). He howled at the first Darcy proposal where he paces and fidgets, and then says the stupidest things...

While we're awaiting "Emma" next week, you can go here and find out which Austen character you resemble most.

http://www.quizilla.com/users/merriefuller/quizzes/Which%20Jane%20Austen%20Chara...

I've taken a number of these quizzes and I always test out as Mr. Darcy. For all his hidden good qualities, I'm sure ...

Surprisingly, I turned out to be Lizzie.

>76 avaland: Hm. . . me too!

OMG I'm Lydia!

I was so afraid I'd be Mary or, worse, Mrs. Bennett, but thank goodness that didn't happen. I also turned out to be Lizzie, astonishingly!

I am Eliza Bennett!!!!! I would have never imagined that!

"You are Eliza Bennett from Pride and Prejudice! Yay, you! Perhaps the brightest and best character in all of English literature, you are intelligent, lively, lovely-- in short, you are the best of company. Your only foibles are that you stick with your first impressions... and your family is quite intolerable."

Well, I'm starting to think this is heavily skewed toward Lizzie. Or else we all know our Austen well enough to answer the questions.

Either it's heavily skewed or this group attracts the brightest--the intelligent, lively and lovely. I'll choose to believe the latter. :)

Elinor? I am Elinor? If I were a man I would be a combination of Mr. Knightly and Col. Brandon? Oh heavens this pragmatism and sensibility of mine will out. But I want to be Lizzie!
And now we have a long wait to Emma.

83> I am also either Elinor or a combo of Col. Brandon and Mr. Knightley. Frankly, taking the three of them together, I find that rather nice (maturity, strength, sensibility, restraint, compassion, learning and wit are formidable qualities when joined together) and am not at all unhappy with the combined result.

Let us sincerely hope that there are few Emmas or, heaven forbid!, Lydias and Kittys among us ;-)

I seem to be Eliza Bennet as well. I would have LOVED being a combination of Col. Brandon and Mr. Knightley! I think it was the "how RUDE" one which nailed me.

Emma begins tomorrow.

>86 avaland:, avaland, do you know if this is a new Emma or one of the previous ones?

Anyone know when Sense & Sensibility airs?

Fannyprice -- the complete details on all the shows and the schedule are on the Masterpiece website:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/masterpiece/

I don't know if this is a new Emma or not, but it doesn't look familiar to me. However, the only one that I remember is the Gwyneth Paltrow version. Sense and Sensibility is on March 30th and April 6th, and it isn't the Emma Thompson version. I don't recognize it, so it's another one that's new to me. Does anyone know if these two movies are new?

>88 Nickelini:, ah yes, thanks! I forgot about this site. I think the S&S is new, but the Emma is the old one with Kate Beckinsale. I liked it WAAAAAY better than the one with Gwyneth Paltrow - I just couldn't believe her in the role. Too distracting.

Oooo, Jane Austen tomorrow, how wonderful!

Nickelini, yes, they're all new except for the "P&P." Andrew Davies, screenwriter for P&P has done "Emma" and "S&S." He also did "Northanger Abbey," which consensus seems to indicate is the best so far of the new offerings. So I have high hopes for the two remaining installments.

If you don't want spoilers about what's in the screenplays, DO NOT read the interviews with Davies on your PBS TV Web sites.

The "Emma" with Kate Beckinsale is from 1996, not new. I have not seen this one though and look forward to it. Looks like we'll be recording it to DVD tonight and watching tomorrow (too tired to stay up tonight). Geesh, it's only 107 minutes.

We watched the "Emma" from DVD last night. I loved it, it was certainly as good, if not better, than the Hollywood production. I liked the fact that Emma and Mr. Knightly were cast at the ages they probably were in the book (she very young, he probably 35 or so); although I'd have to review the book to confirm that. While watching it, I realized that I had seen it before; must've been ages ago.

What did you all think?

EDITED FOR TYPOS:

My favorite adaptation of "Emma" is still "Clueless," which I think captures the kind of benevolent and smug meddling with people's lives that only the very rich and influential can truly achieve. Alicia Silverstone manages to be sweet and make you cringe at her plots to hook everybody up. No mean feat.

"Emma" is my second-favorite Austen (after "Sense and Sensibility"). I absolutely love the way Austen takes you to the brink of do-gooding-gone-horribly-wrong and then fixes it up so nicely and neatly at the end that you know that SHE knows that the same situations in real life would all have ended with a lot of real damage done.

I also wonder if Austen could not bear to ruin poor Harriet, who is truly an innocent, in the same way she seemed happy to leave Mary Crawford boyfriend-less and even to ruin vain, heartless girls like Maria Bertram and Lydia Bennett.

I thought Mr. Elton ought to have been fatter and more vain, possibly reminiscent of the Prince Regent Austen so disliked.

Mrs. Elton was great, but where did that accent come from? It wasn't quite American, but she didn't drop her r's, and she and brayed like so many Americans conceived by Brits do.

And Mr. Woodhouse walked right out of my head and onto the TV exactly as I've always pictured him.

Mr. Knightley's big hoe-down for his tenants, where everyone meets on more or less egalitarian terms, struck me as a wrong note. In the book, as I recall, Emma and Harriet more or less seem destined to move out of each other's spheres.

On the whole, though, a better effort that the Gwyneth Paltrow version. I've never been a fan of Paltrow's, and I agree that her Mr. Knightley (Jeremy Northam) wasn't nearly old enough.

Saw the first half of S&S last night. I was impressed. Again, they have the actors playing the characters at roughly the ages they are in the book which I like. We'll see how it holds up after the second part next weekend.

Yes, I liked the fact that the principle characters didn't all look 35, and it's an enjoyable version, but not up to the Emma Thompson/Ang Lee version, at least so far.

So much of Austen lies in those minor characters. Mrs. Jennings and Mrs. Dashwood don't measure up. Nice job with the little sister, though she and Fanny seem pretty similar to their movie versions. Loved little Henry, though, with his specs and Little Lord Fauntleroy get-up.

Elinor comes off as such a bossy boots in the TV version. And Willoughby looks more like a pug than a stud. Why Marianne would find him preferable to Col. Hot and Smoldering Brandon is beyond me. Alan Rickman (movie version) played Brandon as more diffident.

And I don't recall that Willoughby and Marianne actually went into Allenham on their drive. I think that was an attempt to sex things up a bit.

#85 and immediately above: I just took the "Which Austen Character Are You?" quiz.

Much to my surprise, I am Mr. Darcy!

hmmmm.....Mr. Cariola Darcy........;-))

nohrt, you had me on the flooring laughing with your response above! I think my assessment will be kinder to this Elinor. I like the fact that they haven't been using 'stars' in the roles who come with all their celebrity baggage (good and bad). What did you think of the Byronic setting?

Cariola! Yay! Another "Mr. Darcy"! Are you by chance a Virgo? I don't really believe in that stuff, but the other "Mr. Darcys" of my acquaintance are Virgos like me, and there is a kind of uber-Virgo quality to Mr. D. himself.

Avaland, wouldn't old Jane have loved it that the Dashwoods were in that Byronic cottage arguing about the price of beef and sugar instead of dying of consumption? Interesting that she made sure Marianne caught her fever (strep throat?) at a nice comfy house by walking around in the rain when she could have been drinking hot tea by the fire.

#100 Yes, I AM a Virgo! This is really creepy . . .

#82 christiguc, I was just catching up on posts and saw your response to my post on the which-austen-character-are-you poll (skewed toward Lizzie) and wanted to say I heartily agree!

And I am so enjoyed the I'm-Mr.-Darcy discussion. Do Pemberly and 10,000 a year come with it? It might be worth it, even if you did have to endure your name being Fitzwilliam!

>102 megwaiteclayton: in today's dollars, that £10,000 is either $6 - 800,000 or 3 million US, depending on how it's figured (some economist actually did this!)(that would be about 6 million in sterling, wouldn't it?). And that's just his dividends. . .

re: Sense & Sensibility. While, as nohrt has mentioned, it's tough to beat the Hollywood adapation on this one, but there were some things about this one I enjoyed more. While I love Alan Rickman, I liked the way this new guy played Colonel Brandon. I also think I like the way the post-Willoughby Marianne is played in the new one. Seems in the Hollywood version she had a complete nervous breakdown and was a shadow of her former self (but I'd have to rewatch it to be sure). This new adaptation didn't do anything to put me on the defensive (as did the Persuasion and Mansfield Park did), so I was able to relax and enjoy it.

As an older man, perhaps it's not a big surprise that Andrew Davies (screen writer) made Col. Brandon so much more attractive than Willoughby, who hardly seemed to have much of a part except to show up and behave badly then bug out. When he showed up after Marianne's illness with his euphemisms about the baby he fathered, I was hoping she'd bitch slap him.

Lots of people have accused Austin of "making" Marianne succumb to sense by marrying Col. Brandon as her mother and Elinor wanted her to.

I think Davies perhaps was answering that in having Marianne clearly make up her own mind. Though how hard would it be to transfer your affections from spoiled brat loser with buggy eyes and no visible means of support vs. strong, silent guy with independent income and own house who looks great in a fencing shirt. Duh.

I also liked the cordial-drinking business--Mrs. Jennings brings up a drink for Marianne in the throes of disappointment over Willoughby's engagement, but Elinor chugs it. It's actually in the book, and a nice little touch that shows how much stress Elinor's under.

All in all a really enjoyable adaptation, I thought.

Nohrt, I howled when Elinor did that! And I remember it in the book too.

I think Austen was all for romantic love - but - without losing one's common sense.

I'm currently rereading Sense and Sensibility and confess I miss the scene where Margaret is under the table with the atlas and Edward lures her out. Even though I usually do prefer books to movies.

#104: nohrt, I am choking on my coke at "Though how hard would it be to transfer your affections from spoiled brat loser with buggy eyes and no visible means of support vs. strong, silent guy with independent income and own house who looks great in a fencing shirt." Very funny!

104, 106 I agree--I could find little attractive about this Willowby.

Oh, and his eyes weren't so much buggy as on the sides of his head. Kind of like Marty Feldman.

Goodness, megwaiteclayton! I hope you didn't hurt yourself choking on that coke!

Yes, Margaret is a great minor character. The novel, told from Elinor's POV, is critical of Margaret for being a hoyden, but I think Jane Herself meant for us to like her spunkiness.

ack! my daughter has been seduced by an internet Willoughby! He is not the man he has been passing himself off to be. Where is Colonel Brandon when ones needs one, eh?

Is any man what he tries to pass himself off to be?

Seriously, was there any harm done? I hope not! The Internet social networks are a scary place if you ask me.

Anybody see "Bride and Prejudice," the Bollywood version of PP? Before I leave this thread want to recommend it. A very sweet movie!

>Where is Colonel Brandon when ones needs one, eh?

I fear the problem is he is there and we just don't see him until we mature.

Did anyone else see 'Miss Austen Regrets' ?

Saw (and own) Bride and Prejudice. It was very sweet.

Also saw "Miss Austen Regrets" - I admit to having liked, although I wondered about having her drinking so much. However, I am all for reminding ourselves that all of these authors who we have made icons out of were very human.

I have not seen the movie about Austen ..."Becoming Jane".

>meg, you are, of course, correct. My 25 year old daughter would never be attracted to a Colonel Brandon or a Mr. Knightly at this point in her life. It's a Willoughby ...or perhaps a Mr. Bingley.

#113 - Also saw "Miss Austen Regrets" - I admit to having liked, although I wondered about having her drinking so much. However, I am all for reminding ourselves that all of these authors who we have made icons out of were very human.

----------------

I saw it too, and liked it. I especially liked how they made Jane seem like a real, flawed person--not just some perfect icon.

Yes I really liked Miss Austen Regrets and thought it really inspired me to rethink her and I am sure I will view her in a more questionning, less iconic way than previously.

Admittedly, the 'iconic-reduction' issue came up when I was reading Joyce Carol Oates's new collection Wild Nights!, she really plays (and I do mean play) with the five iconic American authors in her stories. I chuckled through most of them (except there is an attempted rape of a Emily Dickinson robotic replica that was a little disturbing), though some of the stories were better than others. And she wrote the stories using the authors' own styles or some part of them. Not quite the same thing as what's going on in "Miss Austen Regrets".

I think I said this before (ignore me if I repeat myself; everyone does), but I couldn't hear half of "Miss Austen Regrets," though what I could get I liked.

However, I have to admit that while I like, honor and esteem Jane (to rip off her own language), reading her is more like a trip to an astute, moral and astringent mental therapist.

My true literary soulmate is George Eliot. I can't read "The Choir Invisible" without bawling--and hoping I make it to heaven to see her.

I've never liked Oates, but "Wild Nights" sounds intriguing! Who are the other four authors. Let me guess and tell me if I'm right! Umm. Let's see. Hemingway, Faulkner, Stein, Hawthorne, Twain. OK, that's five but I bet I get three of them right.

BTW, am reading Lady Susan, a minor epistolary novel by Austen. I am enjoying it immensely. It is very dark, and, I suspect, a very honest account of the kind of marital shenanigans that went on in pursuit of money, comfort and prestige. I hope somebody dramatizes that some time.

>117 nohrt4me: Sorry, only two! Dickinson, Twain, James, Hemingway, Poe. I liked the Hemingway story the least, probably because I'm not much of a Hemingway fan to begin with. I was snorting all the way through the Henry James one. . .

I would say that I'm more of an Eliot fan than an Austen also. "True literary soulmate" - hmm, that gives me an idea for a new fun thread...thanks!

Could James HAVE a wild night? If faced with the proposition, it strikes me he'd go off to a quiet room and think it to pieces by himself.

Even though I love James.

Ah, yes, Poe! There's a wild-nighter. And let me guess: Hemingway felt the earth move. Or didn't.

Now I'm going to run out to the bookstore and see if I can find it over my lunch hour!

James volunteers at a wartime casuality hospital - he is so totally ill-equipped in every way possible for the endeavor. Ah, but he finds passion in his last days;-)

>120 avaland: - reminds me of a story I read years ago a story in Asimov's about Henry and William James revenging the death of Jesse James. Unfortunately I can't remember the author (dukedom with his knowledge may know) - nice concept though.

Isn't it strange how much fiction has been written about James in the last few years.

oh dear, we have slipped off the Girlybooks bandwagon, haven't we? Mea Culpa!

btw, the recent adaptation of Cranford begins this weekend on PBS, I think.

Oh Avaland - I loved the Cranford adaptation - it has already been screened here in the UK.

The next Austen adaptation is Pride and Prejudice but with a difference - it is called Jane Austen Handheld, and it a comedic fly on the wall documentary based on P&P. The cast includes Stephen Fry & Carrie Fisher as Mr & Mrs Bennett; Goran Visnjic (Luka from ER) as Darcy; Lily Allen (very annoying British popstar) as Lydia; and, Russell Brand as Wickham.

OMG is this tonight?, PBS?

Steve Coogan did something like this with Tristram Shandy, and it was pretty funny. Stephen Fry was in that, too.

Frankly, I think they should do a P&P in drag with Stephen Fry as Mrs. Bennett and Hugh Laurie as Mr. Bennett.

I'm sure Jane would insist that something be added to my already considerable time in Purgatory for even suggesting such a thing, but it'd be worth it.

Edited due to spelling errors in the original which made me look like a moron.

yareader2, no, tonight "Cranford" continues. I set up a discussion thread last week on that. But it would be fun if they would run it!

jargoneer, you're going to just drop that and run? More, please! Is this in production or being aired in the UK or what? (what a tease. . .)

Jane Austen Handheld is currently being filmed and not set to be aired in the UK until early 2009, I believe. Now, when it will make it to the US, I don't know.

We watched "The Jane Austen BookClub" last night. Both my husband and I read the book and are generally Karen Joy Fowler fans. While we both thought there were some great scenes and lines in the movie, we didn't think the whole thing held together that well. It took me a few minutes to figure out the actor playing Grigg, played Daniel Deronda . . . Of course, my husband and I are also both fans of good science fiction, so enjoyed the references.

avaland, that would be Hugh Dancy, who was extremely hot as Essex in HBO's Elizabeth series with Helen Mirren.

Yes, that's who. I like him, not the usual cookie-cutter Hollywood type. I should keep "Elizabeth" in mind then:-)

#113 avaland: well, Bingley wouldn't be so bad. I think my oldest son is a Bingley. Or would be if he had the fortune!

I recently watch "The Jane Austen Book Club" too. Admittedly my expectations were low as I'd heard the movie wasn't that good. But I quite enjoyed it! I wonder if it was easier to follow if you'd read the book, as I had.

I enjoyed most of the adaptations- Persuasion and NA being my favorites. Mansfield Park was dull, except for the extremely good looking Edmund Bertram! "The Jane Austen Book Club", both the book and the movie, pretty much define my life. My favorite part of the movie is when Prudie is about to cross the street to be with her student/lover and the walk signal changes to "What Would Jane Do?" Perfect- the ideology of my life!

Coming to a screen next week in the UK - Lost in Austen.

Thanks for the reminder! I'll be watching it!