Welcome to another “meeting” of the Jane Austen Movie Club! This is where like-minded folk gather to discuss, debate, and dissect every adaptation of Jane Austen that we can get our hands on.
Today we’re talking about the new adaptation of Mansfield Park.
To aid the discussion, here are the major credits, with a few notes on some of the people involved.
DIRECTOR: Iain B. MacDonald
SCREENPLAY: Maggie Wadey
Maggie Wadey wrote the screenplay for the 1986 (creepy Tilney) adaptation of Northanger Abbey! She also wrote the 1991 Adam Bede and the 1995 Buccaneers.
CAST:
Douglas Hodge — Sir Thomas Bertram
Maggie O’Neill — Mrs. Norris
Jemma Redgrave — Lady Bertram
In case anyone was wondering exactly what the relationships are, Jemma Redgrave is the daughter of Corin Redgrave (who played Sir Walter Elliot in the 1995 Persuasion), the niece of Lynn Redgrave and Vanessa Redgrave, and cousin to Natasha and Joely Richardson.
Billie Piper — Fanny Price
Billie Piper, of course, is famous for Doctor Who. She also played Sally Lockhart in the adaptation of the Victorian-set Philip Pullman novel The Ruby in the Smoke, and its sequel, The Shadow in the North (which also featured Northanger Abbey‘s J J Feild).
Blake Ritson — Edmund Bertram
Does Blake Ritson look familiar? He played Cedric Diggory in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.
Catherine Steadman — Julia Bertram
James D’Arcy — Tom Bertram
James D’Arcy is certainly a familiar face — he was First Lieutenant Tom Pullings in Master and Commander, Blifil in the 1997 Tom Jones, and Nicholas Nickleby in the 2001 adaptation of the same name.
Michelle Ryan — Maria Bertram
Michelle Ryan, in case you didn’t recognize her face from a million adverts and billboards, is the new Bionic Woman.
Rory Kinnear — Rushworth
Joseph Morgan — William Price
Joseph Morgan has played a sailor before — though his previous character had a less happy outcome. His William Warley, captain of the mizzen-top, didn’t end well in Master and Commander.
Hayley Atwell — Mary Crawford
Hayley Atwell played alongside Billie Piper in The Ruby in the Smoke and The Shadow in the North.
Joseph Beattie — Henry Crawford
So…what did you think???
All comments welcome!
Cara
Cara King, who will give a puppy from Pug’s next litter to whoever can say what country dances they were doing
I really liked this adaptation. While Fanny was untidier and gigglier and livelier than the written version, she beat the dull Fanny of the earilier movie.
Edmund Bertram reminded me of Matthew McFadyen in his earnest moments and also in his soaking wet moments.
The story moved really fast and there was no introduction to the characters or the story. So, if I didn’t know anything about Jane Austen or Mansfield Park, I would be bored with the film.
Sigh Cara, where do I start? This adaptation fell so far off the mark that it actually made me long for the 1999 movie! Whatever progress was made with the Northanger Abbey adaptation, this one took 10 steps back. While I thought that Edmund and Fanny in this adaptation had a lovely chemistry, the plot moved entirely too fast. Where were the scenes in Portsmouth, where Fanny gets to see what her life would have been like if she hadn’t gone to live with the Bertrams? And this Henry Crawford was entirely too creepy. The beauty of Alessandro Nivola’s performance was that you actually believed that he might have fallen in love with Fanny, plus he had those angelic blond good looks. And what was up with Lady Bertram playing matchmaker? And the scene at the end where Edmund and Fanny are waltzing, and she remarks that they’ve learned a new dance? More running by Fanny and Edmund in this version. Mrs. Norris was defanged and almost nice. Not to mention there seemed to be not a smidgen of Austen’s own dialogue in this at all. And I think that Gillian Anderson as the host is dreadful.
Wow, differing opinions. Makes me more upset that I missed this one (a kid with a sinus infection, a house guest and I just lost track). Wah! I’ll have to catch it on Netflix or something.
Have to say I think Fanny is the hardest Austen heroine to sell to a modern audience. Maybe that’s what’s behind some of these deviations? For the record I enjoyed the 1999 movie on second viewing, once I’d gotten over that it was only very loosely based on the book.
Oh, ugh. Tan lines, bleached hair. Shrieking. No Portsmouth! No ball, picnic! Creepy men! I’m reduced to incoherence.
I did like the dog, though.
You’re right, though, Elizabeth–at least the Rozema version had Alessandro Nivola. I never thought I’d defend that version, but here it is. I feel almost wistful for it. ๐
I agree with you Elena that Fanny is the hardest of Jane Austen’s heroines to relate too. However, there has to be a middle ground somewhere between making her a Jane Austen clone and making her a kittenish, giggly hoyden with dark eyebrows and lots of heaving cleavage. I’ve always seen Fanny as more along the lines of Anne Elliott.
However, Pug the dog, gave an excellent performance very true to the novel.
“However, Pug the dog, gave an excellent performance very true to the novel.”
Maybe JASNA will come up with soemthing for her! An award for Maintaining Standards in Austen Adaptations. ๐
I’m definitely in the minority. . . because, well, I liked it. ๐ Yes, absoultely, it was short, no question. But when I watched it last year, I read the book then watched the 99 one, then this one right after. And the first two things that I remember thinking were here, they remembered she had a brother and that there was scenes about a necklace. And not going back to a visit home, yeah, they did that, but still, it worked for me — maybe in the end it was because I just couldn’t stand the other movie’s version of it. LOL But still. . . so yeah, okay, with it’s shortness and long hair and major changes, I liked it. ๐
Lois
A few comments, but I’ll be back later.
1) I agree the dog was an excellent actor.
2) What was with Fanny’s hair? I really and truly detested it. (Isn’t that the same hairstyle she wears for Doctor Who???)
3) This may seem silly, but I couldn’t tell Tom and Henry Crawford apart much of the time! They both had that long hair. Only at the very end did I clue in that Henry’s hair was curlier… Sigh… (Maybe on rewatching I wouldn’t have this trouble, but…really!)
4) I liked Edmund.
5) Why do they always have to make Sir Thomas some sort of jerk, villain, or creep? Is it so hard to convey a character who is thoroughly good, but not always perceptive, and occasionally neglectful — or overreliant on those he mistakes for competent (Lady Bertram) or kind (Mrs. Norris)?
6) I thought bits of the plot & characterization would have been much easier with even a 2-hour length… (For example, in this version, Henry kind of leaps from “I’m going to make Fanny fall in love with me” to a proposal…no time to see any change in him.)
So… What was wrong with ITV, that they required them all to be 1 1/2 hours??? Makes it a million times harder on the writers…
Okay, more later!
Cara
Here’s a comment from my friend Jean, whose browser does not play well with blogger…
I watched “Mansfield Park” rather unenthusiastically. It is not my Austen favorite; Fanny annoys me, and after last week’s Northanger Abbey, she and Edmund were a pair of drips in comparison to Catherine and Henry.
When he peeked in, Jack griped about Tom and Henry’s hair styles; I found myself tuning out often. I hope you enjoyed it much more than I did. The actor who played the Bertram dad was familiar and after a bit of lookup, I realized he portrayed Dr. Lydgate in “Middlemarch”, which I had thoroughly enjoyed, so I ended up daydreaming about that show for a while.
And then Jean and I had a discussion in which we tried to identify any of the country dances…with no success. (I suspect they weren’t actually doing any country dances, just random moves, but they showed so little of the actual figures, it’s hard to tell!)
Cara (and Jean)
Well, I’m certainly not the most discriminating of viewers, but,I join Keira and Lois in liking it.
Again, it isn’t entirely Austen’s story, but it worked for me as a romance. I loved the house and the grounds, the riding horses, the flavor of a wealthy landowner’s country life.
It’s been a long time since I read the book, but it did bother me that she never went back to her family in Portsmouth. And I didn’t buy that Edmund’s parents would be in favor of a match between Edmund and Fanny.
But I thought it showcased Regency themes very well.
And the pug, of course, was the star of the show! (but no match for any of my cats)
Elena: You can catch another showing of the movie next Sunday before the movie-of-the-week Jane Austen Regrets.
Ammanda: Your summation was hilarious!
I would’ve liked to have seen Fanny return to her home and ponder on what she’d lost. Also makes for good tugging of viewers’ heartstrings. A little more of her working under Edmund’s mother’s thumb would’ve been good.
However, I did like the playful bit, especially the ones which make Henry and Edmund smile. The Fanny of the last movie was simply too dull.
Like Diane, I’m hardly a discerning viewer, but this story worked for me.
“I loved the house and the grounds,”
Oh, I liked the house, too! And Edmund wasn’t bad. There, I’ve found 3 good things about it. ๐ Obviously I’m not a high stickler–I loved the Knightley P&P. But there was something about this one (and the new Persuasion, too) that just deeply bothers me. I can’t entirely out my finger on it (though I know the frowsy Fanny was a big part of it in MP. Couldn’t she at least brush her hair for her wedding??). Hopefully I’ll like the new S&S…
I watched half an hour before giving up. I’ve recorded it so may get to it tonight. However:
Fanny looked liked she’d been dragged through a hedge by her bosom and then by her hair.
She was also one of the many contenders for the most wooden style of acting.
They didn’t have the return to Portsmouth ??!! Please tell me they kept the scene with the gate.
I liked the 1999 MP. It went over the top but it had something to say which this lackluster effort didn’t.
And gawd isn’t Gillian Anderson pathetic, altho I like the update of the Masterpiece Theater “look.”
Okay, I thought of something else I liked (sort of. Can you tell it’s a slow day at work?). I laughed SO hard at Edmund’s big epiphany at the end — “I love her because she chose purple!!! Isn’t she just the most wonderfulest girl in the world?”
I wonder if this started as an episode of “Dr. Who”? Like the one where they met Madame de Pompadour. Rose gets turned into Fanny, and the Doctor has to rescue her. ๐
Iโm at a disadvantage because Iโve never read the book, and Iโve only watched the โ99 version once. That being said, I donโt remember the โ99 version capturing me the way this rendition did. I remember it being much darker, for some reason, and a bit odd at the end. I liked the lighter tone of this movie, the cast and the settingโit all worked together wonderfully.
โI was blind, forgive me.โ I loved that line. So sweet.
Kate
I missed it Sunday night and now I have no clue if I want to watch it before Miss Austen Regrets or not!! Fell out of my chair at Janet’s “dragged through a hedge by her bosom” remark. Apparently it had moments of brilliance surrounded by hours of … something. I may have to watch it, however, if only to see the pug!!! My brother’s two pugs – Elvis and Priscilla – made me fall in love with the breed! Elvis has since passed away (18 years old)but Priscilla is still with us and she is a hoot!! Pug’s definitely have the ability to steal the show. Don’t know if it is enough to make a bad Mansfield Park palatable. I happened to like the novel.
I love it Amanda. All they needed was for David Tennant to show up as Henry Crawford! I too thought that Edmund’s epiphany over Fanny’s love of purple was a little bizarre. For 88 minutes, he treats her like a piece of furniture, but then she tells his mother of her love of purple, and his eyes get all wide, and we’re back to the running in the garden.
I loved the house too. In fact, I would love it even more if the Bertrams were not living in it, and I was with James Purefoy who played Tom in the MP movie. The Tom who actually washed his hair.
I didn’t make it to the ball scene so I guess I can’t win a pug. *sigh* I was bored silly and turned the show off during the rehearsal for the play. Like EKM I found myself thinking fondly of the 1999 version (and up until now I’d loathed that film. LOL!
“I loved the house too. In fact, I would love it even more if the Bertrams were not living in it, and I was with James Purefoy who played Tom in the MP movie.”
LOL! I would like to live there with David Tennant, I think. ๐ As for the purple thing, I’m sure it’s meant to symbolize his realization that she’s important to his family/kind to his kookie mother, etc, but it just came off as so funny.
Doglady, my own Pug, Victoria (now almost 8 and not nearly as lively as Pug!) slept through the whole show. But my Poodle, who always barks when animals appear on TV, or when people run or dance, had a great old time.
Kalen, there was no ball at all. They made it into a picnic. Where everyone danced around on the grass. ๐
What a wonderful variety of opinions here!
Elizabeth Kerri Mahon wrote: The Tom who actually washed his hair.
LOL! There was some strange hair in this version…
Okay, a few more random comments. Then maybe later I’ll be more orderly, and say what all I did and didn’t like.
As for the casting: I think I’m one of the few who didn’t much care for Alessandro Nivola as the movie (Rozema) Crawford…I found him bland, and not particularly charismatic. So though this current one didn’t do much for me either, it’s certainly not because I’ve seen it done better. ๐
Casting I liked: Maria, Lady Bertram, Edmund, Mary Crawford.
Casting I disliked: Fanny.
Casting I don’t have a strong opinion of: Henry Crawford, Tom, Julia, Sir Thomas, Mrs. Norris.
Cara
Okay, here are some things I disliked about this adaptation (I’ll talk about things I liked later):
1) The storytelling was muddy. For example: it was unclear when, or even if, Henry Crawford’s feelings for Fanny changed from mischief to love; it was unclear why Crawford ran away with Maria (and, to a certain extent, unclear even why she ran away with him.) Sir Thomas’s change of heart towards Fanny wasn’t explained. Fanny resists being in the play, then joins in — leading us to think…what? Not sure.
It seemed to me that someone unfamiliar with the story would have trouble understanding what was going on…
Of course, 1 1/2 hours makes it very hard to tell the story, but it still doesn’t need to be so slapdash.
2) I hated Fanny’s hair, and her clothes. Why was she wearing clothes that were 30 or so years behind her cousins? I mean, sure, five years maybe, but it was bizarre. And couldn’t she at least have worn a fichu or something? She was showing a *lot* of flesh. That seemed out of character as well as anachronistic…
And the hair, the hair… I’m going to have nightmares about her hair…
3) A bit similar to #2 – I felt the creators really didn’t respect their audience. What, can’t we relate to a heroine who doesn’t have a modern hairstyle? Can’t we understand a Sir Thomas who’s good but flawed, rather than this jerk (who suddenly turns nice at the end)?
4) I understand why one would change the Fanny of the book — she’s hard enough for a period novel fan to like, but for those who are primarily TV watchers used to spunky, kick-ass heroines, a physically weak, timid Fanny might be especially hard to make sympathetic. (Though I’d love to try!)
So I can understand why they decided to make the difference between her & her cousins be something that could be described as: town vs country, or sophistication vs natural behavior, or polished opulence vs outdoors…
(Fanny was always outdoors or wanting to be outdoors, running, hair down and messy, big smile and laugh, etc…)
Fine. But it seems to me the core of Fanny — her absolute moral sense, and her amazing moral courage in sticking to what she knows is right despite huge pressure — shouldn’t be changed.
But change it they did. In this version, Fanny does join in the play eventually — and Sir Thomas sees her on stage. And it wasn’t clear why she didn’t want Crawford — his earlier behavior and morals? Or just her love for Edmund?
And Sir Thomas’s change of heart about Fanny in the book — when Maria runs away (and Julia elopes), he decides that a woman with impeccable morals is worth far more than a fortune — helps clarify Fanny’s steadfast nature. But, again, I think the muddiness here dulls the meaning…
Cara
I must confess that I haven’t seen it yet. It’s been recorded but I do have to say that the commercials with Fanny looking like she was a bar wench made me frown. ‘Mansfield Park’ has never been a favorite of mine and I don’t think this one’s going to change my mind.
I would have to say that I thought the elements of this adaptation were good. In particular, I liked most of the actors, even Fanny (though she was not the Fanny of the book). The house was pretty. The script didn’t make me cringe with every word (though see below).
The real problem, I think, was that they took a long and complex story and tried to tell it in 90 minutes. Why does one do such things? It worked OK for Northanger Abbey, which is a much shorter book, but not for Mansfield Park!
Some have complained about the hair and costumes; I’m not so into that, so perhaps they bothered me less. I do think the male actors deserve a special commendation for putting in a serious effort while being surrounded by so much cleavage. (Including bionic cleavage!)
So, I think I could have liked it if they’d made a better effort. But as it was, I thought it was no more than OK, and that a viewer who was unfamiliar with the book would have a hard time following it.
There were a few things they did that I found simply puzzling:
1. When Fanny’s brother William was scheduled to leave the next day, Sir Thomas says “We’ll have to throw a ball for Fanny before you go!” Throwing a ball in one day?!! Even a modern viewer must find that bizarre. And then they have a picnic instead. Why?!
2. Why did they have Fanny agree (at least implicitly) to act, when that’s the one thing she never does in the book?
3. Since they could easily have included a scene or two showing why Crawford eloped with Maria, why didn’t they?
4. At the end, suddenly Lady Bertram undergoes a brain transplant and becomes Super Matchmaker. Completely inconsistent with the rest of the film, let alone the book. And why the waltz?
To sum up: Actors mostly good, cleavage excellent, adaptation far too compressed, and random oddities.
Todd-who-sums-up-summarily
And just one word in defense of Gillian Anderson, whom I have adored even longer than Jennifer Ehle: I’m sure she doesn’t write the stuff they give her to say on Masterpiece. It does boggle my mind why they don’t find someone who actually knows something about Jane Austen to do it, though.
OK, that was actually sixty-six words, including the signature.
Todd-who-counts
I’ve got this one on Tivo but haven’t had time to watch it yet…and maybe I won’t. Billie Piper has been a favorite of mine ever since Doctor Who (and I’m still more of an Eccleston fan–he’s got such a yummy accent and intense presence, while I’m “meh” about Tennant), and I wouldn’t want to spoil my fandom.
Wow, so much to say!
For starters, my friend Jean has pointed out to me that Blake Ritson did not (as I said) play Cedric Diggory in the fourth Harry Potter movie — but instead played him for the *videogame* of Goblet of Fire. (Careless of me!)
Okay, I need to add a few more things I didn’t like:
First — not the fault of the film, but of PBS — I *hated* that commentary. It was so wrong, but wasn’t content just to be wrong, but to deliver its wrongness while saying things like “obviously” — bad enough to use that word when you’re right, but incredibly annoying when you’re wrong!
But Gillian Anderson doesn’t write her own commentary, so I don’t blame her for it. And I’m fine with her delivery of it. ๐
Now for more things I official dislike about the new MP:
5) Fanny is half-naked and when someone knocks on her door she says come in??? And Edmund does??? And stays??? So wrong. Just like her hair, this made me think they didn’t even *try* to stick to the least bit of period rules or behavior. (Makes me think even more strongly that they think we’re stupid. Sorry, but when I was *nine* I would have thought that looked wrong.)
6) I agree with those who’ve said Lady Bertram changed right at the end. I didn’t really mind the performance, or the interpretation at the beginning or at the end (provided she was still lazy), but there were at least two Lady Bertrams.
7) Did I mention Fanny’s hair? I did? Okay, then how about Mary Crawford hiking up her skirt and Edmund staring in fascination — they really thought we wouldn’t have understood anything more subtle, didn’t they?
8) Okay, Austen fans can be picky, though I think I’m only middling myself…(I, too, liked the Keira Knightley P&P! And the Paltrow Emma!)…but I think anything that’s so ridiculous that it makes both me and Todd laugh out loud at the same moment in disbelief must be pretty bad.
In the recent Persuasion, it was when, having run all the way to the Pump Room, she turned around to run all the way back…
And here, in addition to the “come in and see me wash my hair!” moment, there was the “let’s throw you a ball tomorrow” moment. Just too ridiculous.
Okay, good things coming next!
(Oh, and LOL for Amanda’s idea that it started as an episode of Doctor Who! And another LOL for Santa’s “bar wench” comment!)
Cara
Okay, don’t know if anyone will read all these comments! But in case anyone does, here were things I liked about this MP:
1) The actors playing Mary Crawford, Edmund, Lady Bertram, and Maria.
2) Maria’s going-away dress: gorgeous!
3) The moment when Fanny is watching the three couples: Maria is paired with Rushworth, and Henry Crawford is paired with Julia, but Fanny notices that Maria and Henry are looking at each other… (Lovely subtle moment — wish there’d been more such…)
4) Mary’s statement to Henry at the beginning about the marriages they’d seen — worked for me, both as exposition and as character & dialogue. And it was witty. Nice.
5) William Price’s exuberance, in contrast to the demeanor of the others…and he wins them over with it, just as he does in the book.
Now, neither positive or negative: I do wonder if they were doing this MP on a very tight budget. They didn’t go to Portsmouth, or to Rushworth’s. And they played an *awful* lot of scenes outdoors. How many of these choices were done to save money???
Cara
I agree with you Elena that Fanny is the hardest of Jane Austen’s heroines to relate too.
Wow, I disagree. But then, I was a shy child and the black sheep of my family, so I really identified with Fanny. I even shared her experience of observing bad behavior (that others apparently missed) and therefore refusing to share the general good opinion of particular people, and being excoriated for rejecting persons who were considered family favorites.
I don’t think Fanny needs to be updated at all, just played sympathetically. In a sense she’s a complete feminist: she wants the right to decide for herself how to live her life, who to marry and what ethics to have.
I don’t think Fanny needs to be updated at all, just played sympathetically. In a sense she’s a complete feminist: she wants the right to decide for herself how to live her life, who to marry and what ethics to have.
The issue with this is that modern audiences may want a heroine who is going to go out and do something about her situation. Fanny’s courage is less in what she does but what she chooses not to do.
It’s a different sort of courage but I think it would take some strong and yet understated acting to bring that across. I think the role actually could be somewhat like Jane Eyre, full of suppressed emotion.
Kai Jones wrote:
In a sense she’s a complete feminist: she wants the right to decide for herself how to live her life, who to marry and what ethics to have.
Elena wrote:
The issue with this is that modern audiences may want a heroine who is going to go out and do something about her situation.
I think the two of you bring up some very interesting points.
Elena, as to your point, I don’t disagree with you — though I always liked Fanny, I’ve met plenty of readers who dislike her for her perceived passivity. However, given her situation and the rules of the time, I think many of those readers may want her to be not only acting out of character, but anachronistically.
It’s easy to say “oh, Lizzy Bennet is spirited and wouldn’t behave like Fanny” etc etc — but where does her spirit come out? In discussions with Darcy.
But does she tell off her mother? Or her father? No. In fact, when Lydia wants to go off to Brighton, she begs her father to forbid it — because she has no power within the family except that of persuasion.
And those are her parents. So why do people expect Fanny, a charity case, to start scolding the relatives who’ve done her and her family a great favor? Or correcting their behavior?
But I think, raised on spunky Disney heroines and the like, that’s what a lot of people would rather Fanny do…
My problem with the book is a little different than most people’s…I like Fanny fine, but she’s so unhappy for so much of the book that I found it, overall, somewhat dreary. (Though very funny.)
I do think the most interesting thing about it is the behavior of Fanny: someone who in some ways is so obedient, so willing to please, that she’ll make herself sick in the sun and never complain…and yet who never doubts that she has the utter right to do what she thinks is the moral thing.
No wonder all her relatives are astonished at her! They must feel the way Scrooge did when his doorknocker started talking to him…
Cara
There were things I liked and things I didn’t, but I my favorite scene was breakfast. Edmund was played brilliantly; the excitement and anticipation, then downcast that he might have to accompany his father, and finally delighted thrill at being allowed to join Fanny. Blake Ritson’s facial expressions and body language was spot on for what was being portrayed. Love it!
I quite like it in regard to being an enjoyable waste of time – my husband liked it too.
I agree far too fast moving which made it seem a bit clumsy, also it needed portsmouth.
I had trouble with the Tom/Henry being very similar except for Henry being very creepy an a bit of a stalker LOL
What I did like was Mary Crawford’s riding jacket !!! Can anyone tell me where or how to get a photograph of it – I have to get one made !!
Nadja — I agree about Mary Crawford’s riding jacket! Her whole wardrobe was fab. Unfortunately, I have no idea where to get any photos of it — though if you have a DVD of the production and a computer that it will play on, you can make a series of screen captures that might work… Good luck!
Cara
Does Blake Ritson look familiar? He played Cedric Diggory in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.
Actually, Robert Pattison from the “TWILIGHT” movies had portrayed Cedric Diggory in “THE GOBLET OF FIRE”.
I’m afraid that Fanny Price is not one of my favorite characters. Her so-called “strong moral center” has a tinge of hypocrisy about it. She is not afraid to look down upon most of her cousins and the Crawfords for their moral ambiguity and flaws. Yet, she failed to acknowledge her own flaws and turned a blind eye to Edmund’s flaws, due to her feelings for him.
I have nothing against have a strong moral compass. But when it comes at the expense of refusing to acknowledge one’s flaws or the flaws of a loved one, my tolerance goes out of the window. And this is the main reason why Fanny Price will never be a favorite character of mine.
I’ve seen the 1983 miniseries, which is a lot closer to the original novel – but not completely. And quite honestly, I found it a chore to watch at times.
Rosie P, you are absolutely right about Cedric Diggory being played by Robert Pattison!
Yes, thanks for the correction, RosieP! (If this post had been written after Twilight came out, BTW, I’d never have made that error!)
Speaking of which, I checked, and apparently I made the mistake because Ritson voiced Diggory in the Harry Potter 4 video game. (blush)
And I agree with you on the 1983 miniseries! I found it dreary, dreary, dreary… Definitely hard-going. Mansfield Park is the only Austen novel that hasn’t a single adaptation that I like…
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, BTW!
Cara
Edmund was not in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire!!
In fact he was Mr. Elton in Emma (2009 version)
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
I thought the camera work was awful! When the characters walked the entire picture bobbed up and down with them and even in long shots the camera couldn’t stay still.
I found it hard to believe that Crawford actually liked Fanny as this aspect was severely played down.
The ending with Mrs Bertram was not at all faithful to the book.
Although they excluded certain parts of the book I suppose this was done for time reasons and is therefore somewhat forgivable.
What happened to Mr Yates?
And Edmund’s hair was perpetually greasy. ew!