MP07: what's the verdict?
We got about a squillion hits tonight from people looking for more information about the film, Billie Piper, Blake Ritson, yada yada, so somebody must have liked it, though AustenBlog readers we’ve heard from so far were not impressed. The owner of the Cricket Cluebat of Janeite Righteousness, Kathleen, sent an e-mail stating she could barely finish watching it. We are hoping for a longer review.
Alert Janeite Caroline sent us a link to a review in The Herald; the reviewer liked the film, much to his astonishment, because after all bodice-rippers and Mills and Boon-type films are not his style. What such might have in common with Jane Austen we’re sure we do not know, but one can guess from the reviewer’s comments his general familiarity with the source material.
So go ahead, let us know what you thought. Let us know if you are familiar with the novel as well.
ETA: There’s a pinned thread at Molland’s for ongoing discussion. A lot of folks on this side of the pond will join in once their DVDs arrive, we dare say.
Comments are closed.
I am re-reading the novel (having finished re-reading NA) and still eagerly awaiting a decent adaptation. Granted the BBC one from the 1980s covered the book well, but I prefer more modern production quality.
You all know I haven’t seen this one so I won’t bore you with my opinion. Though if anyone really wants me to, I’ll be happy to fabricate a review. With enough adjectives you can get around not actually knowing the subject matter.
Jane Austen’s sparkling prose and dialogue was evidently not enough for the scriptwriter of this travesty performance of Mansfield Park. Politically correct asides such as the slavery question and comments on Nelson’s morals added nothing to the original work and spoiled it for those who know and love it. Billie Piper was totally miscast as Fanny Price. Her modern, mulish, untidy look, complete with Demon King eyebrows – is entirely inappropriate for an Austen heroine. Why was she the only cast member not wearing their hair in a period style? Fashion details such as the extremely low decolletage were historically incorrect and the entire production smacked of a 6th Form production gone mad with money. Despite having looked forward to this series for weeks – lured by its constants trailers – I could not watch it through to the end. At 10.15 I switched off before I inadvertently put my foot through the screen.
I enjoyed it. I admit that I expected the worst when it started and Fanny Price – the girl who couldn’t walk to the end of the rose garden – was galloping around on horseback with a silly hairstyle. But I carried on with it, and (aside from the now obligatory references to the slave trade) I felt that it got better, and more faithful to the book as it went on.
The changes (woes! instead of being sent to a frantic, dirty house full of too many people + not a moment to herself and work work work, to think over the advantages of marrying Henry, she was left alone in Mansfield Park to enjoy the kind of solitary walks a girl like Fanny might have killed for) made no real sense. I couldn’t see the point of them, unless her reaction to the squalor of her birth family is seen as making her too unpleasant a person.
But I felt the main thrust of the story still came through, and that was interesting enough to keep me watching despite everything. It wasn’t *so* very painful that I had to stop watching, as with P&P 2005.
Oh, but the waltz was very unnecessary, I felt.
I very much enjoyed ITV’s adaptation of Mansfield Park. My mum and I found ourselves shouting at the television set at points and we really got into the story. I think any production that can make you want to read the original book (I haven’t read it yet) is amazing and this adaptation of Mansfield Park was certainly amazing! I loved it! I cried, I laughed, I got angry, I melted and more. I would certainly recommend it to anyone.
Let’s hope Northanger Abbey and Persuasion are better. Mansfield Park suffered from a mediocre adaptation (sometimes worse than mediocre), ill-conceived deviations from the novel, seasickness-inducing hand-held camera, and annoying anachronisms (although I beg to differ with Mary—in the novel, Fanny does ask Sir Thomas about slavery in the West Indies). Completely wrong, for example, was her complicity in the theatricals. Her objections in the novel are clearer and stronger, and important for her character and her relationship with Sir Thomas. MP07 bungled that. I do like Billie Piper, but she was completely wrong for this part. The director tried to liven up Fanny’s character by making her run around laughing all the time, which seemed to me entirely wrong-headed. You get no sense of her patience, her observation of the others, her isolating sense of morality. I happen to love Fanny in the novel, and I think it’s brilliant how Jane Austen creates a main character who is completely marginalized. In a way, Fanny is like the reader, transported into the book: able to observe and to judge, but for most of the novel unable to act. (Perhaps, as a male reader, I find it easier to identify with Fanny because I’m not distracted by falling in love with her.) In any case, MP07 fell completely flat for me. It turned a masterpiece into a forgettable middle-brow costume drama.
I did not the version with Billie Piper. Her looks were wrong (wrong hairstyle, wrong clothes), her behaviour was wrong (running around laughing and chasing Edmund??? Surely not our Fanny!) and too much of the film was inaccurate. The first 10 minutes or so covered something like the first 2 hours of the far superior (if somewhat wooden) performance with Sylvestra le Touzel). Sir Thomas appeared sinister, rather than superior; Mrs Norris only showed occasional nastiness towards Fanny – who (totally against character) answered back cheekily once or twice. Lady Bertram was far from the indolent character she was in the book. No mention was made of Julia’s eventual beau, and to my horror, the whole filming was done with just one set – Mansfield Park. No shots of Plymouth, or Rushworth’s estate. Rushworth himself did not appear as stupid in the film as he was supposed to be, Maria was ok but the infatuation with Henry was not fully explored; Tom was a dark character, but lacked the sense of regret; Mary was playful, but not indicing enough. Henry was ok, but too much was left out of the film to show the development of his feeling towards Fanny. Lastly, Edmund…. Of all the cast I prefered him to the original Sylvestra Le Touzel adaptation, but then again, Edmund is such a wimp in that film, that anyone could improve on him. All in all, if I had not known the book and never had seen any adaption before, I may have liked it…. but for any Austen film I want it to be faithful to the original story line, and what I watched last night was far from it. In future, I will continue to watch the earlier adapation, and just hope that the next ITV productions will be a little more faithful. Erika
I think the main problem that I will always have with Mansfield Park as a story is that I am Mary Crawford. There isn’t a thing she says that I don’t agree with – I firmly believe that Henry wouldn’t have run off with Maria if Fanny hadn’t rejected him. So, as a result, I don’t like Fanny and Edmund.
But, I adored the acting of every character in this. I found myself warming to Fanny because of Billie Piper, who, while not being like Fanny in looks or personality, was not unlike her either. Blake Ritson made me soften to Edmund until the end – what was with the ‘realisation’ scene. Ugh, that was terrible. And, of course, the Crawfords were made of awesome. (Sorry for the degeneration to fangirl speech, but it’s the best way to get it across!)
The story was changed, of course, and a lot of little bits that give it its heart were gone. Of course, the lack of any Portsmouth scene was glaring, but for a casual viewer I would imagine it would not grate. There were lines I recognised exactly from the book, which is always a good thing.
I can tell this is going to be pretty much universally torn apart. But this Janeite enjoyed it for what it was.
Not living in the UK, I still haven’t seen it yet (DVD should arrive sometime this week though). But someone whose blog I read does, and this is what she posted while watching the thing:
I’m apparently watching ITV’s Mansfield Park. Hah. As 90mph Austen it rivals the atrocious Pride and Prejudice film. And Bille Piper is not a BonnetActress. At least Edmund has a good jawline. And this is my least favourite Austen novel. May they not murder Northanger Abbey and Persuasion over the next few weeks.
And erm, Edmund just woke up to Fanny over purple embroidery silk. WTF? And now he’s likely to propose whilst she washes her hair. Bizarro-Austen. No, wait, he just loves the room. OK then. They’re going riding instead. Possibly.
Auntie Bertram is setting them up over Lavender picking. And Edmund’s doing lots of running around after her. Is this meant to be a metaphor? Most unsubtle. ITV grow up. Piano playing is for metaphors. Also, stop reusing the Emma OST.
This is a reply to Robert Hardy’s excellent review. Yes, I am aware that Austen included a passing remark concerning the slave trade in Mansfield Park; viz:
“But I do talk to him more than I used. I am sure I do. Did not you hear me ask him about the slave-trade last night?”
“I did — and was in hopes the question would be followed by others. It would have pleased your uncle to be inquired of farther.”
My point was to the inevitable PC spin put on Fanny’s question by the scriptwriter in this latest Mansfield Park. Austen’s later books contain well-known references to the slavery question, but that’s a whole ‘nother subject, as they say!
I too hope that the forthcoming productions in this series are an improvement on this first one.
Well, I enjoyed it. But I think the way it was split up into six parts with commercials in between ruined it. The acting was good and as much as I do like Billie Piper, I do think she was miscast. The film should have been longer and more detailed. I have to watch it again on DVD for a better liking of it.
OH, but Joseph Beattie was certainly a nice Henry Crawford.
I am a graduate in Eng Lit at London University, and a passionate lover of Austen’s work. Last night’s Mansfield Park left me angry enough to trawl the web until I found your site – I needed to express my rage.
First, Jane Austen’s writing (as we saw most memorably in the BBC P&P) transfers effortlessly to the screen as dialogue, second – British TV viewers CAN understand Jane Asuten without it being dumbed down, and third – Mansfield Park is a novel about the supreme importance of moral virtue beneath the veneer of 19th century social manners.
Fanny Price is the best example in Austen’s work of a heroine uncompromised by social pressure, or by the power of money. Her aspirations are family love and a pure heart.
So what did ITV1 give us last night? First – a script that I would be embarassed to submit for an NVQ level 1 assessment in screen-writing, second – a down so dumbed that I cringed every few moments, and third, a modern piece that had lost every hint of moral purpose, value or craft.
And budget constraints abounded. A ball was replaced with a sunny picnic where full-bosomed girls danced on the grass, Portsmouth was axed so that Fanny could pull a few simpering expressions in the National Trust Garden, and the plot … actually what plot?
The shy and overlooked Fanny Price was heard challenging Sir Thomas about abolition of slavery at the dinner table, (the same Sir Thonas who was most forgiving when he found his home converted into a theatre performing a play of decidedly loose morals) ..
Oh Jane, what price we are paying for falling TV ratings, modern manners, and modern morals? Come BBC, come Andrew Davies. Give us a Mansfield Park Jane would be proud of.
It was painful. It would have been even more painful, but I managed to stop shouting at the television, and so my wife didn’t hit me with the remote control. If this is ITV’s return to period drama, I rather wish they hadn’t bothered. Miscast, ill-written, and mangled. I suspect anyone venturing near Miss Austen’s tomb at the moment will hear a strange revolving noise… Fanny was such a travesty, one cannot think she would have approved. We had no real clue as to F’s motivation or moral position. And why did Lady B suddenly wake up? The only saving grace is that it may encourage a few people to read the book for the first time.
Utter Utter rubbish and disappointing to the core. It might as well have been a different book that they were adapting. Having rushed through the first half of the book in half an hour without having established any of the characters and leaving you little able to care about any of them I wondered what they were going to fill the next 11/2 hours with. They managed to do so but utterly painfully.
Main gripes
1. Billie Piper as Fanny Price NO NO and NO again. Mary I might have believed – Fanny no way. Fanny was quiet and a little plain with a silent determination. Billie was none of these (and generally I rate her as an actress).
2. The relationship between Edmund and Mary. How confused could they have made this!! There was no establishment of the relationship. It appeared quite odd that Edmund would even be attracted to this Mary. And the fact that he announced within 10 minutes of meeting her that he was committed to the clergy was absurd. The point was that Mary and Edmund grew attracted to each other and then he drops the bombshell. Mary’s feelings are too engaged to let go entirely. She would never have allowed herself to become close to Edmund had she known straight off.
3. Fanny doesn’t go to Portsmouth. Big Big mistake. This is a part in the book where you realise how different her life could have been and its here that Henry almost redeems himself. Henry, hitherto having behaved appalingly in coming to Portsmouth and behaving with gentility towards Fanny’s impoverished family redeems himself in Fanny’s eyes to a point. In fact it appears that Fanny is almost tempted to tie herself to this Henry. She is his redemption. Where was any of this in the adaptation? The adaptation went no further than making Henry appear as if he was quite into her and then when she wouldn’t play he goes off to get Mariah. Totally not the point.
I could probably point out another dozen areas of this adaptation which meant that the script writer had entirely missed Austen’s point. Her strength lies in the relationships between people and how their characters can be formed or reformed by these relationships. The only strength in this adaptation was the pretty location.
Nodding my head in agreement with all who disliked this adaptation. A Janeite friend emailed me just after the broadcast: “I need to go lie down with a handkercheif dampened with cold gin over my eyes…I think Pug was the best actor in the whole sherbang!”
Truely ghastly. Plot completely gone to pot. Dreadful dialogue I can’t really review it since I was groaning within 10 minutes and started to work on my laptop and do other stuff as it rumbled on. Fanny runs around giggling (and talking back to Mrs Norris! Eeek!), not in the least bit shy or demure (‘Lover Vows’ becomes completely pointless) and apart from getting asked to give Mariah a parasol, her position in the house was not clear. Both Crawfords were rather flat in my opinion, and it was rather hard to how Edmund was attracted to Mary. Where was Portsmouth? And the Rushworth’s house? And can someone tell me what decade it was set in? Or what century? Arggggg. And of course ends with Edmund and Fanny, that notable wild avant-garde pair, introducing waltzing. I despair, I really do.
Passing around the Cricket Cluebat of Janeite Righteousness if needed.
Living outside the UK, I am yet to view MP3. These are interesting responses, my overall impression is MP3 veers to the erh,…not so good. Is Billy Piper’s lively portrayal closer to Fanny than say, Francis O’Conner ? Or both very miscast ? I am all astonishment at no visit to Portsmouth ! I agree the 1990s’ JA adaptations had better production values but I enjoy MP 1. Does this film have any redeeming features or performances ? Well, Pug Bertram always was my fave charecter
Sigh ! I thought they looked cute in that castcall pic, like an ’80′s rock group- esp. James D’arcy. 
Sorry to post this here but the trailer for Northanger Abbey only is now online via the homepage of the Jane Austen Season ( can’t believe how exposed Isabella’s – well, Carey’s, really – bosom is ). Looks very Andrew Davies to me !
Sorry to all those caught in the spam filter–I think the outpouring of commentary freaked it out a little!
Looks very Andrew Davies to me !
Well, the Dirty Old Man himself is the author of the adaptation, so we shouldn’t be surprised if it’s sexed up.
Thank you, Mary Lovell, for your clarification. I agree that the brief dinner table exchange on slavery between Fanny and Sir Thomas felt, in this production, like a throw-away attempt to establish political correctness (and perhaps, belatedly and sketchily, to establish the altered relationship between Fanny and Sir Thomas). This literarily- and historically-confused production left out Sotherton, Portsmouth, character motivation, and several inches from every neckline, but it clumsily managed to leave in that reference.
I started a new post in IMDB to gauge the reactions of the viewers and here is what we’ve got so far:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0847182/board/flat/69607088
In general, lots of disappointed viewers; the Billie Piper issue seems divided among those who were critical of her and while others thought she did a fine job.
Let’s hope “Northanger Abbey” is an improvement. Speaking of which, the trailer to next Sunday’s feature is now up!!
http://janeausten.itv.com/mpu.php?mpu_result=elliot#/Northanger_Abbey/Trailer/
A very insightful review by someone who is currently researching a PhD thesis on the transformative and interpretative processes involved in text-to-screen adaptations. If this doesn’t open onto the review of Mansfield Park, you’ll be able to find it by scrolling down to the navigation on the lower right hand of the screen.
http://screenstories.blogspot.com/
Sorry but what a load of rubbish! They totally messed with the book and i hated it! Billie Piper as Fanny Price! erm, i don’t think so! she was totally wrong for the part. The only person they did cast right was Henry Crawford! They missed out far to much from the book including the fact Fanny was sent away to her parents in Portsmouth for 3 months! I mean if you are going to do an adaptation of a Jane Austen novel they could atleast have taken a leaf out of the BBC’S book and done it properly! Crikey O’riley! With those novels you really need to invest more than 2 hours, like P&P They should have done 4-6 1 hour episodes and got it right. I have seen a clip for next weeks Northanger Abbey which looks a bit better however they have cast Rupert Penry-Jones as Captain Wentworth! in their version of Persusion. I think an actor like Richard Armitage would have been far better for the roll. god give me strength! Well thats ITV for you.
I felt that Billy Piper acted really, really well, according to how the writers and directors wanted her to portray the character. As an actress, she clearly felt that they had a point.
What I’m trying to say is that, although how she portrayed Fanny as a character could have, as many of you rightly pointed out, been closer to the book (more patience, a greater sense of her isolating morality etc.), her acting was up to her usual fine standards. I rather liked what they did with the character, they made her more lively without losing Fanny’s sweetness, and she wasn’t, as Zoe said before, completely unlike Fanny. As for the outrage over how she looked, I wasn’t particularly fussed by it. Shouldn’t you all be more concerned with how well the actors act? I really don’t like it when people moan about how an actor isn’t right for the part simply because they don’t “look” right.
I’m not saying that it’s all you people have complained about, but from what I’ve read of these comments so far, it’s one of your main gripes! As far as costume went, I did think that her dresses were a bit too low.
Edmund was loooovely! Here starts my campaign for Blake Ritson to be in more TV shows and films, though I must agree, his ‘realisation’ scene was done terribly. More dialogue showing off Fanny’s goodness and a less ‘stunned’ face from Blake would have made it slightly more bearable.
And yes, much, much more of Jane’s original dialogue should have been included. The Crawfords were great.
It could have been better, I agree, but it wasn’t the utter travesty that so many of you are howling about. A mediocre version is far better than a bad one.
OMG! How to trash a Jane Austen novel in 2 hours! That was truely painful to watch. Badly cast, sexed up and with half the book missing?? I mean what where they thinking?? You could hardly pass that off as Austen’s work. Fingers crossed for the next two, though after that i don’t hold out much hope. Rupert-PJ as Wentworth, don’t make me laugh. Someone should have their head on a platter after last nights hash.
They need not look any further than the BBC’s P&P for some inspiration.
It really was almost as bad as that hideous Keira Knightly hollywood attempt at an Austen!
Such a shame!
Closer to Mills and Boon than Austin. Insipid, lacked integrity and insite. Just a load of 21st cetury actors in fancy dress
When films and tv dramas/series are made of Jane Austin’s or anyone else’s period set books, one would hope that the powers that be would research not only the dress and hairstyles of that period but also the morals and manners too. This did not seem to happen in last night’s Mansfield Park.
It was published around 1814, however in the ITV drama the waistlines of the ladies dresses were all over the place. Although necklines were low, especially for evening wear, during the day women usually wore fischues to cover the low neckline (a small thin decorative scarf). Some of the ladies in the drama wore these, but Fanny didn’t. As a young lady of 18 years of age, she would have worn her hair up, not untidely down. There were two main types of women’s hairstyles; either short, cropped and curly, or worn piled up on the head in various ways.
Gentlemen NEVER left off their jackets and went around in their shirt sleeves, as both Tom and Mr Crawford did in the drama, not even in front of their families and certainly not when receiving visitors as Tom was last night. A man’s shirt was classed as an undergarment and as such a man was considered undressed if not wearing a jacket. Nor did they wear their shirts open at the neck as Tom did, for the same reason. This period was very formal in manners. (The now famous Darcy drama scene when he wades out of the lake in his shirt, got away with it as Darcy thought that he was alone.)
Even though Edmund and Fanny were cousins, there was no way that at 18 she would sit with him alone in her bedchamber, or that he would stride into her chamber while she was washing her hair. They would be severly compromised and obliged to marry forthwith. Young women were chaperoned at all times.
Staging ‘theatricals’ was quite a common practice for families in the Regency period and would not have been classed as unseemly, providing the play was acceptable of course.
All the above may seem to be nit-picking, but if you are going to do, then do it right!
My feelings of the film were slightly more positive than average, but I do echo the horrors of “atheletic” Fanny and not going to Portsmouth.
Piece of absurd trivia: remember in P&P95, when a piece of the shrubbery got caught in Elizabeth’s bosom after the wedding, then mysteriously disappears in the next cut? An eerily similar thing happened to Fanny, only it was apparently a flower petal.
Well my intelligent sister had no clue as to what was going on and I spent the first ten minutes explaining who was who, finding it easier to refer to the actresses rather than the characters (Eastenders girl, Dr Who’s bint, guy-with-silly hair numbers 1-5), so it didn’t get off to a flying start. Half the book was, in fact, skipped, and the sisters were disposed of quickly – too quickly. The whole thing was rushed, and the script was actually the thing that let it down bigtime. I couldn’t work out who Mrs Norris was, if she was there, and the dog out-acted the mother by quite a long way. Billie Piper is a very watchable actress, but all in all, an acceptable cast was let down by a shoddy script. Hayley Atwell was great, though.
Can anyone tell me, do Edmund and Fanny get together in the book?
Daniella, since you asked, the asnwer is yes. Now do please read the novel. It’s wonderful!
“Can anyone tell me, do Edmund and Fanny get together in the book?”
Yes, I’m sure many of us could tell you that … but then that would spoil your reading of the book, wouldn’t it?
too much adverts it was very annoying to keep stopping and starting. i think that they should have made less but longer parts.i dont know why they made a new mansfield park because the old one was a classic.
Which old one, Vicky? Do you mean the one made by BBC?
Yes, I love that one too. Very much indeed.
I am beginning to feel this latest one is just a better version of Rosema’s Mansfield Park made much after the BBC one.
Thanks Daisy! I loved that part so much. It was perfect. Deb. R and Daisy, I am definately going to read the book. I have fallen in love with this story. It is beautiful.
That’s why, I know people said it wasn’t near the standard of the book, but I think these contemporary productions of classic novels are good because they whet your appetite for such books. I can’t wait to purchase it and read it now! Just come at the right time because I have just finished the book I was reading
Zoe, I too have opinions in common with Mary Crawford. Not all, but some. And I can see the point that Henry might not have run off with Maria if Fanny had accepted him. But if he had really wanted to change he would have. Her refusal of him didn’t turn him into the cad he was. And Jane did say that if he had only kept it up a bit longer he might have gained Fanny in the end. So it’s really not fair to blame Fanny for Henry’s weak will and lack of morals. It was by no means her job to prevent the affair.
All of what I’ve read about MP07 puts me in mind of The Real World: Mansfield Park.
Lud, I’ve only gotten through it half-way and I’m already horribly diappointed. So much of it has been cut that when something does happen, it seems totally random (case in point: Henry’s proposal). This movie is so disjointed and all over the place plot-wise; did anyone read the book beforehand? Not to mention that the camera crap is extremely irritating. And Fanny is so un-Fanny that it’s almost funny. Fanny running around all the time, Fanny with her hair down and her boobies popping out of her bodice, Fanny being rambunctious…etc. Good lord, Jane must be laughing so hard at such a pathetic “adaptation” of her book. And I haven’t even finished the movie yet! This is very sad news, indeed.
The pug is cute, though.
Sorry to have such a rant, but I have to agree with some (almost all!) of the insightful comments given. I had high hopes that the itv austen season would put period drama back in the spotlight, but in fact it has highlighted all the worst stereotypes that people despise in such drama – giggling girls, polite inane conversation, heaving busoms – it had echoes of Catherine Cookson! This drama never made its mind up as to its purpose, but as some have suggested I don’t think it had one… I can only believe that, as Billy Piper has stressed in her interviews, that they wanted to make this story have modern relevance. Did this mean they had to dumb down the language, add cheesy music to direct us as to where to be emotionally stirred (I wasn’t) and add well-known faces?
Contrary to what this adaptation might suggest, Austen is funny and makes many cutting remarks on the selfish nature of humanity – at least the recent film version had wit and engaged with the intellectual and darker subtexts of Mansfield Park. ITV’s version gave me no great insights. Its main flaw were the contradictions it created… The language was neither energetic and fresh nor faithful to the text. Some of the scenes were excruciatingly predictable yet implausible – Crawford ‘falling’ for Fanny’s childlike antics – it is her unattainability that he finds such an attractive challenge…
The 2 hour timeframe was inadequate for a novel in which small incidents have great significance – the necklace, Crwaford’s pursuit of Fanny, Fanny’s refusal to join the play. These are key moments that both test Fanny’s strength of character and drive the plot. They were passed over.
We are left with no emotional engagement with Fanny because we have no idea what she truly stands for – Austen’s Fanny may be too moral for today’s standards, but she has integrity. Piper’s character was never allowed to gain our respect mainly due to plot changes – she joins in the morally questionable ‘Lovers Vows’, she is never faced with the choice between Mansfield and the poverty of Portsmouth etc… All we see is a sweet girl of no substance – Piper did her best.
The only characters I engaged with were the Crawfords, both subtly and skilfully played – though given better material they could have been given a darker edge.
It actually made me embarrassed to be an Austen fan! Hopefully Northanger Abbey and Persuasion will restore my faith, but ITV have only four hours to persuade me… Am willing to be persuaded though!
Meh. I haven’t read the book… It is pretty, at least. It just seemed really obvious. Anyone conventional should have Snively Whiplash moustaches to stroke malignantly.
Love, and a bit with a dog (and a silly lady). That’s what the people want!
Loved it to bits.
Makes you want to dress up.
Cheers
Robson Danton Green.
What a dreadful adaptatain of a really great novel. How can anyone who read the book like this drivel. It is more Mills and Boon than Austen.
I often wonder why writers such as Austen are dumbed down;those who have read and enjoyed her books will watch and those who don`t will not,so it can`t be to attract the latter group who will find something else to their taste to view.A few plunging necklines will not be enough to hold anyone`s attention when so much more is available on the internet.It seems to me pointless to alter the story and ethos of a novel when a new one could be written instead.
I have to confess that I did not stay the course with this production;after ten minutes,half the book was over with Fanny doing some narration and then tableau-like scenes presented, and to change Fanny`s character deviates too much from the original.She is arguably the least appealing of Austen`s heroines, being priggish and long-suffering so the actress playing the part was both wrong and badly directed.I suspect,that, like a lot of television nowadays,the actress was chosen and a part found rather than the other way round.It is also becoming popular to put modern day values onto an historical commentry,hence the obsession with political correctness.
Appalling, but I’m glad I watched to the end just in order to fall off my chair laughing at the anachronistic waltzing on the lawn. BRILLIANT way to end!
I thought it was really very good, however my freind disliked it, i though the acting and the casting was good. I havent read mansfeild park as yet but i look forward to reading it once i can gather some time from my studys..i always find watching something and then reading it more enjoyable as you cannot be at all dissapointed
Ming, sometimes the criticism of an actor not looking the part is valid. Jane Austen generally gave very little physical description for her characters, leaving much to the imagination. But one prime example is the trend of casting brunette Bertram sisters. Although they aren’t specifically described for themselves, it is mentioned that they are not jealous of Mary Crawford because she is not tall and fair, which implies that they are both blond and Mary is not only not blond, but also short.
In many cases I would agree that looks are not the main point. But sometimes the physical description of a character is an important part of the story, not so much for looks as for symbolism. As a writer, if someone took my red-headed villainess and cast some little blond in the role, I’d be upset.
Eve, the book is much better than any adaptation I’ve seen. But then books usually are.
Dear Billie,
Great performance throughout Mansfield Park07 and a very enjoyable performance from the start! I will be ordering the DVD 3-set for another look as soon as I can! see it’s on Amazon from the 26th March-07. Please keep up the novels as this is a great move from your Dr. Who days! I am in the Royal Berkshire Hospital with cancer as I write this, so I have plenty of time now to look at TV & Video!
Good luck with your future career and I will be watching out for everything you do!
I don’t think some of the above comments are justified, so please keep going at all costs!!
Lots of love Jeremy (Newbury)
Jeremy, although I’m not sure Billie reads this site I thank you for posting. We all love to instruct though we can only teach that which is not worth knowing. Please do not be offended by opinions. Sorry about your cancer. Hope you get better. And I’m glad this film brought you some joy.
As much as I love the book, please be reminded of what happened when the BBC tried to make a faithful adaptation of MP in the 1980′s – which I have to say was absolutely dreadful (Remember the not so subtle wigs, wooden acting, the annoying Lady Bertram, peculiar music, cheap looking sets? etc etc). So from my point of view, I had anticipated ITV to make a more contemporary and albeit ‘dumned down’ version of MP to appeal to the masses, and I think it worked. The dialogue was sharper and more modern, Lady Bertram was actually quite likeable, Edmund was played by a very handsome and younger looking actor, and finally Fanny has a personality! She has always been one of Austen’s least favourite heroines due to her quiet nature and probably the fact that in the novel she tends to observe rather than take part in much of the events so I for one (and I hope I am not alone in saying this) really enjoyed watching Billie Piper play the part of Fanny.
Yes I accept that they butchered the novel and added in a lot of dodgy scenes such as the Waltz and Realisation scenes that did seem odd to those who have read the book, and yes the editor was a bit over-keen to say the least – resulting in the film being rather jumpy and hard to follow for those who have never read the book. However, I think the whole point of a TV adaptation is surely to entertain and amuse the masses and perhaps even to whet their appetite for the novel. Judging by some of the above comments, I believe that it may be a case of mission accomplished as many viewers have said they will buy the book. Now, to all the Austen fans out there. Can you really say that if you had seen the dreadful 80′s BBC version of MP before reading the book – would you really have rushed out to the shops to purchase your copy?
Finally, judging by her work, I believe that Austen had a great sense of humour, so if she had seen MP on Sunday night I’m sure she would have laughed along at ITV’s ‘take’ of her novel
The dialogue was sharper??
Can any dialogue be sharper than JA’s?’
Amanda, I saw that awful 1999 version of MP first and it did not in any way dampen my desire to read the novel. But I do admit to my being a very odd duck.
OK maybe that comment about the dialogue being sharper was slightly generous but I guess ITV were trying to bring MP up to date and at least with the dialogue and cast, I feel they achieved that. Ina, I haven’t seen the 1999 version of MP, but as a fellow (and rather curious) odd duck, I will give it a go! Not sure if you saw the earlier BBC version, but I’m guessing it can’t be any worse!?
I will probably get slated for saying this, but I watched the 2007 version of MP again the other day and I think it is growing on me (I find it hilarious)…..but surely we’re all allowed to own a few guilty pleasures!? shhh don’t tell anyone
To those who liked this production–well, I’m glad you enjoyed it, but it was NOT a livelier, sharper, updated, or in any sense deserving of the title even of Mansfield Park. Fanny taking part in the theatricals??!! No, no, a thousand times NO!! The whole, blessed point and logic of not only Fanny’s character, but the entire novel, is utterly destroyed by that particular travesty done to Austen’s story. It’s like having Lizzy decide she’s going to marry Mr. Collins after all, to hell with holding out for love over security…
just, no.