When this was on tv last year, I kept forgetting about it, so only caught a small part of it. But as a big fan of (most) Jane Austen film adaptations, I purchased it anyway. And then, put it on my shelf, and forgot I owned it.
Until the other day - and, I just watched the end of it. Aside from Romola Garai's portrayal of Emma as an unrestrained young woman, more immature than previous versions show her, I was able to overcome my initial dislike because it really developed the characters in a way the other films could not, being twice as long as the others. And I like the others (I'm thinking of Kate Beckinsale's and Gwyneth Paltrow's Emmas), but this one is so well done - I'm quite surprised at it. This Emma grew on me, because everything else about the production was so wonderful, and I guess I'll have to read the book again to see if I'm being picky about the way Ms. Garai played her, or if there's a possibility Emma could really have been this way.
It was less like an entertainment, and more like a story of human nature unfolding before you - if that makes any sense. And I really recommend it.
Emma is my absolutly favorite movie and book. It really is a close second to Pride and Prejudice for me. I often think the book is over looked. ~ I had the same feelings about the movie as you did.
ReplyDeleteAh! I'm glad to read your comments - how I love Jane Austen. It's funny - "Emma" is the longest of her books, right? But the story is not as complicated as "Pride & Prejudice", for example. And, proof of that is the film with Keira Knightley - they had to leave out almost all of the Wickham business, because 2 hours just wasn't long enough to deal with the whole thing. Although I thought it was an excellent movie, all the same; well done in other respects.
ReplyDeleteBut, back to "Emma" - the other two versions have their good points and I never thought it could be improved upon or enlarged in any way. However, the extra time allowed for a deepening of the characters - Mr. Woodhouse, for example, was really well done, and Mr. Knightley, too - Jonny Lee Miller was terrific. He played it in an understated way, but you could see him falling in love with Emma - perhaps even before he was aware of it himself. And you got to see Emma's sister and her husband more, too. As for the other characters, I think the other adaptations dealt with them probably as well as this one, except maybe Frank Churchill - I think all three Franks are good portrayals.
Well, enough rambling!
Sorry - I'm just catching up on your blog, so leaving comments right, left and centre!
ReplyDeleteI saw the first episode of this when it was aired on the BBC a couple of years ago. I have to say, I didn't warm to it because of Romola Garai's portrayal of Emma and so didn't watch the subsequent episodes - it sounds like I should have persevered!
I think you should - I am still surprised that I got used to her portrayal; but I know she's a very talented actress. I saw her in "Nicholas Nickleby" and "Daniel Deronda", at least. I'm not entirely sure how I felt about the girl who played Harriet - I'll have to watch it again to decide. Watch it again, Rachel!!
ReplyDeleteI remember being extremely disappointed in Mr. Elton’s proposal to Emma in this movie. The scene in Kate’s movie had me in giggle. I came very close to turning it off and thinking “if they can’t get that right what else are they going to do.” I believe that what kept me glued to the tv was simply that I liked the opening where they showed how all of them started out in the community and then were dispersed due to their circumstances. I am glad that I saw it through until the end some of the scenes really were magnificently done.
ReplyDeleteYou are right about Mr. Elton - this fellow was the most unpleasant of the three. And, if I hadn't seen him first as Edmund Bertram in "Mansfield Park" (and did a good job, too) I would have to be hating him forever - his Mr. E. was so revolting. And yes, the one in Kate Beckinsale's version was the best; the most normal Mr. Elton, who after all is just a social-climbing snob; unfortunate especially in a clergyman.
ReplyDeleteThe way they emphasized that two of the local children had been shipped away is one of the things which made it seem more human to me, and more serious - less like a light-hearted romance.
Everyone who stuck with it seems to say they ended up liking it!
I unfortunately am not familiar with the book - we don't have it at home and the Austens in the local library are constantly away from the shelves! :-)
ReplyDeleteBut I liked this version a lot. I really liked that one had time to get to know the characters. In that way, this is similar to the 1995 Pride and Prejudice.
The book is a longer one, but the story isn't so complex - there's a lot of description in it.
ReplyDelete