Emma 2009 clip up at BBC
July 10, 2009
Yes, we are slipshod and late at updating. Thanks to the many, many Alert Janeites, apparently concerned that we were wallowing in ignorance rather than sloth, who wrote with much urgency to tell us about it: Sylvia M., Cinthia, Maria L., Marian, and Karenlee.
The BBC has posted clips of some of its upcoming stuff, including Emma. Flip through the “carousel” until you get to Emma. Or, just watch it on YouTube:
For those who need a link to YouTube for their mobile devices, like the Editrix’s gorgeous new Palm Pre, we are happy to oblige.
We have to say we’re no longer one bit excited about this miniseries. Sigh.
Leave a Comment
Comments are closed.
This does not bode well at all…
Yes, it looks as if some fell hand has felt the need to “improve” the dialogue….
Well, other than the fact that Emma, Mrs. Weston, and Knightley all look pretty much the same age, Mrs. Elton appears to be on Prozac, Emma seems to need some, and Jonny Lee Miller is DREADFULLY MISCAST–it looks just about perfect to me
I know, I know, it’s only a minute clip, still…
Romola Garai will, I fear, always be Teenage!Briony (from Atonement) to me, which makes this WEIRD.
Especially since Dumbledore is her father? O_o
Besides that, this just looks… meh. I dunno about this…
I also don’t get the feeling watching the trailer that this will be one of the fantastic adaptations. Harriet Smith seems too old, Mr Knightly not old enough and I’m catching quite a few false notes in acting and/or character behaviour. Knightly should not be looking at Emma with calf-like eyes at the Crown dance, and what’s this with hysterical Emma towards the end? The only one who seems to me to be someone I’d enjoy watching go through their paces is Mrs Elton, although that ‘languid’ air of hers is also off – she was much more of a bustling ‘busybody’ a la Mrs Norris. I find the music a bit namby-pamby as well. But of course it’s only a very brief trailer. I could be (and am hoping I am) proved wrong!
It did achieve something: it gave me the urge to re-read Emma to see how off they are.
I thought Romola was terrific in “Amazing Grace,” so I was looking forward to her portrayal of “Emma”. However, this clip was kind of dull- too many blondes, uninteresting music… How picky I have become!
I’m surprised to read so many negative reactions! Romola Garai is a great actress, and I think she’ll make a wonderful Emma. And I wasn’t sure whether Jonny Lee Miller was well cast as Mr Knightley, but I have to say, he really looks the part, in my opinion. I’m still really looking forward to this new adaptation!
I don’t think it will be snarkable precisely, but not exciting either. I kind of hope I’m wrong. The good thing about lowering one’s expectations is that it increases the odds of being pleasantly surprised.
The music may not be from the film. Don’t these companies frequently use common pieces of music for their trailers that aren’t part of the actual film? I’m looking forward to this and think my favorite character will be Romola Garai as Emma. I don’t particularly like the messed up script, but I think that can be expected since we’ve already seen <i<Jane Eyre 2006 with its simple english script. By the way. How many times can the word suitor or suitors be used in one film? Hopefully, it won’t be like E1 Harriet with her many “Yes, Miss Woodhouse” phrases. All in all, I will probably still like E3 with Kate Beckinsale and Mark Strong the best. E1 is good because it has most of the whole book in it, but over all it’s E3 for me. E2 is well……….the fairy tale version?
For those on Twitter, let’s use the hashtag #emma09 when we tweet about it.
To repeat what I wrote there: JLM has a rather odd reading on the one bit that’s actually in the book.
“Nonsensical girl!” was his reply, but not at all in anger.
Not that he was angry, but I would read it as he should be finding it amusing, not that finger-shaking confused schoolmaster bit. Where have you gone, Jeremy Northam?
Also, I suspect we will find Mr. and Mrs. Elton to be delightfully hissable villains. They’re usually played clownishly, but it seems here they are played more Crawfordish. It remains to be seen if that is a good thing or not. We might have to kind of go with the flow on this one.
I beg to differ. He didn’t look schoolmaster at all to me. Smiling and slightly joking to me.
I liked Mark Strong’s “Nonsensical” comment. He certainly was amused.
To me Jonny Lee Miller’s Knightley sounded more put out/frustrated than angry or amused.
Once again, I agree with you, Mags. Unfortunately, this does not even seem snarkable, instead it makes me complain.
Indeed, we know it is barely a minute of footage and we should wait to see the whole to judge, but this sample seems only to conffirm the worse fears some already have regarding casting and writing.
Allison T said:
it looks as if some fell hand has felt the need to “improve” the dialogue.
Exactly so, and that I had already feared, Welch felt need to improve the ending of N&S, I would not have mind that much if what I like best of Gaskell’s final dialogue had remained, but no. Then we have the 2006 Jane Eyre miniseries which hardly left any of Charlotte’s Bronte’s original dialogue. If I could notice those instances, in this case things have gone worse. Though I cannot quote as Reeba does (and I am looking forward to read her comments on this trailer) I can place exactly where some scenes would be and know many of Emma and Mr. Knigthley exchanges of which Jane Austen gave us the direct dialogue, so Welch would only have been required to copy and paste from the novel. But it is obvious she had not done so, and here we have at least samples of what should be dialogue from chapters 38 (The ball at The Crown), chapter 8 (their row about the Harriet Smith / Robert Martin courtship), chapter 26 (the arrival at the Coles) and what outrages me more, that unecessary dramatic scene with an Emma crying and shrieking at Mr. Knightley with that “You know I love you and I always will but we can never marry. That’s all”, completely invented by Welch, since neither chapters 53 and 55 have anything like that, it is almost as if Emma had never learnt from her mistakes.
So, yes, a fell hand has taken charge and if that was terrible, both Karenlee and Mags have again been extremely accurate. The acting and delivery of lines seems off-key even with what it was originally written by Jane Austen. That “Nonsensical girl” lacks the tone in which should have been said. It is dreadful. Even MS’s delivery (and I am not fond of his Mr. Knightley) rings perfect.
I agree with all the casting mistakes pointed out, in particular ages, and may I add that another thing in which JLM remains miscast is his height. I know that in E2, JN did not seem much taller than GP, JN is a tall man but GP is also a tall woman, but at least he never seemed shorter and in the very few shots we have, Romola seems definitely taller than JLM.
I love E2, I know it is not perfect but to me it is closer to the spirit of the novel, some as Sylvia see it fairy-tale like, give me that any day. Neither E3 IMHO was perfect, too shadowy IMHO, I have never agree with Andrew Davies dark vision of the novel. But their scripts combined was what IMHO was the ideal and what we so far hear does not improve, it is a backward step.
As to where Jeremy has gone, he is in Miami, Miami Trauma. (Sorry, Mags, I couldn’t resist) >:)
It’s not just JLM’s tone that’s wrong, but his voice itself. It’s most noticeable to me when you don’t actally see him speaking – in that section where it’s just a VoiceOver querying Emma about other suitors she may have in mind. It’s too… light, thin, rapid. Not our wise, mature, manly Mr K. at all.
I’m going to reserve judgment until I actually see the whole thing, not just the clip. Took me a couple times with the latest Sense & Sensibility before I liked it, so maybe some of the concern here is a bit hasty?
Or maybe I just have a thing for Jonny Lee Miller.
I’m so sad that Eli Stone’s last episode is on tomorrow. Guess I’ll have to pull out Hackers and Mansfield Park to fill the gap!
I agree with Rebecca–seems that this clip is too small to use to trash the whole thing. My pattern tends to be to be excited about a new production, defending it to the end, then I watch it and am usually, but not always, disappointed. Hope springs eternal, and I am hoping for a new, great Emma.
Oh, I wouldn’t call this ‘trashing the whole thing’, just expressing concern about the bits we’ve seen that don’t seem right. Of course you must reserve overall judgement until you’ve seen the whole thing in context. And, like Mags said, the good thing about lowering one’s expectations is that it increases the odds of being pleasantly surprised.
Well, it’s no fun to sit here and say, “Oh, look. A new adaptation.” *crickets*
Like I said, there’s nothing really snarkable about it. It’s just that I was excited about it, and now I’m not.
It seems so dull and boring…yeah! why they add new words to wonderful original words? And Knightley is so Un-Knightley, and everybody seems so teen, I don’t get it and the colour. And I say this when my favorite version is Beckinsale and Strong one. Romola doesn’t seem to be Emma at all…I know no one ever will have Alicia Silverstone’s Emma spirit, but this version…yes
Oh, a new adaptation! And Welch has changed the end again! Thanks, I haven’t suffered enough with N&S lack of original end…why didn’t they made that extra scene with Richard and Daniela in London, and he telling ‘Margaret, Margaret…’, and hysterical Emma now…I am really sad.
I’m going to be the odd woman out here and say I think it looks good!
I think with all the other versions out there that cast people too old we need to remember the book ages. In the book Mr. Elton is 25. I would assume Mrs. Elton is of a similar age. All three of the other versions have cast women of about 40 years. Emma is 20 going on 21. Harriet is probably 18 or 19. Frank is 24 to 25 and Jane is about Emma’s age. Most of these people are in their early twenties so it makes sense if they look like teenagers. All the older adults refer to them as “young people”.
*is confused* Did anyone say they look too young, except Mrs. Weston and Mr. Knightley?
Mags,yes, Carmen at #20 said they all look so teen.
It looks…not good. But I’ll watch it anyway.
Oh dear, what have they done to my little Harriet? *sigh* No offense to the actress, but she could be Emma’s mother, not 16!
I am still excited to see it, and will give it every opportunity to charm me, hopefully!
It’s a very strange clip. I don’t think anyone but Austen fans would be able to follow it. Because the sneak peak is so choppy, I will reserve judgement. I will admit that I am pretty easy to please, though. It would have to be pretty awful for me to be totally disappointed (ahem, ITV), and considering the talent surrounding the movie, I doubt I’ll end the night in the cups.
Is that supposed to be a trailer? It’s very strange. It looks several years old and pretty boring. I’ve always thought Romola Garai’s acting was way over the top in each role she’s been given and have never been able to say if it’s coming from her or the part. I have the same problem with her acting, here. Well, let’s hope it’s going to be better than this.
All I could think of when I heard JLM’s delivery of “Nonsensical girl” was: that’s exactly how Edmund Bertram would say it. Bland, bland, bland.
Oh, my poor nerves!!
Well, I’ve never seen MP99 so don’t have any Edmund memories to go on. This will be the first JLM film I’ve ever seen.
To quote “dear” Mrs. Norris, this is not a very promising beginning.
I do believe I’m in the minority, but I felt that it would be at least an okay adaptation, judging from the minute we saw. I do so love the cast that has been put together, so I’m really hoping they pull it off…
But what, praise Jane, was with Romola Garai smiling every five seconds?
I think they just wanted to show that she’s happy and clever with nothing to vex her. Maybe they got scared by Anne’s many teary episodes in Persuasion 2007 that they decided to go quite the opposite with this one. Excepting that next to the last scene in the library with the pent up flood of tears.
Jonny Lee Miller cannot be Mr. Knightly! He’s Edmund Bertram!
I hope this gets better by watching the whole thing.
It seems off to me.
I’m with Victoria (28) – I’m easy to please, so it would have to be pretty darn bad for me to not like it at all. Even if it’s complete crap I’ll enjoy checking out all the gorgeous costumes. JLM may not be right as Mr. Knightly, but he does look good in a pair of breeches!! Maybe I’ll just turn the volume down and enjoy the eye candy!
Personally, it was the Northam/Paltrow version that introduced me as a young girl to Jane Austen and opened the door to her for me. Perhaps I, and quite a few others, I think, feel a great deal of debt towards that version and I don’t think it will ever be toppped, at least not for my generation. I keep thinking of JLM as Sick Boy in Trainspotting… a great actor yes, but not up to the caliber of Jeremy Northam’s Mr. Knightly. He not only looked really very fine in period costume, but he WAS Mr. Knightly.
I would also add that his audiobook version of Emma was the first actual Austen book my sisters and I ever were exposed to. That’s a great listen as well!
I’m sorry, but what is this? I love ‘Emma’ but I didn’t recognize there anything but the names! It’s like a completely different book that they’ve made into film!
Jonny Lee Miller’s name on the cast list does not inspire confidence, but it seems that casting directors see him as an Austen type since they have cast him twice in productions of Mansfield Park.
I’ll certainly watch it, but agree with most on here that it doesn’t look very promising.
With the other excerpts, I fully agree, we do not have enough context to tell whether they’re very much off or not, but what is with Wailing!Emma? Mr Knightley’s proposal is such a perfect scene, why would anyone change it??? And ‘I love you, but we can never marry’ makes no sense at all.
Oh well. Here’s hoping it’s mayhap a dream sequence.
I do think that Mr Knightley looks the part, even if I’ve not yet decided whether I like his voice. He certainly has better hair than Mr Strong.
Well, I’m guessing that Wailing Emma has to do with her not wanting to marry and leave Hartfield, but of course that is all worked out. Taken out of context, I can see that scene being attractive to a trailer-maker.
I’m with Mags – I don’t think the wailing is the proposal scene, but afterwards when she’s started thinking about it and realises she can’t leave her father. But still…
I never looked at it that way … well, it’s still over-the-top for me, but it makes it much better. I hope you’re right
While I do agree that the dialogue in the wailing scene Welch might have taken it from chapter 51, in the novel it is a reported speech. So I still think Welch had no need to modify the words nor change the context. In that moment, Emma is not hysterical. It seems too dramatic for my taste, as if she had not learnt anything from her mistakes. I do NOT like it.
I’m still pondering over that wailing scene:
It seems to me that Welch perhaps took it from capter 50:
As long as Mr. Knightley remained with them, Emma’s fever continued; but when he was gone, she began to be a little tranquillised and subdued–and in the course of the sleepless night, which was the tax for such an evening, she found one or two such very serious points to consider, as made her feel, that even her happiness must have some alloy. Her father–and Harriet. She could not be alone without feeling the full weight of their separate claims; and how to guard the comfort of both to the utmost, was the question. With respect to her father, it was a question soon answered. She hardly knew yet what Mr. Knightley would ask; but a very short parley with her own heart produced the most solemn resolution of never quitting her father.–She even wept over the idea of it, as a sin of thought. While he lived, it must be only an engagement; but she flattered herself, that if divested of the danger of drawing her away, it might become an increase of comfort to him.
So Welch read it as if Emma was wepping, but she forgot the entire context, this takes place in the night, while Emma is alone with her own thoughts.
So in chapter 51, after Mr. Knightley has read Frank Churchill’s letter, comes the subject of what are they (Mr. Knightley and Emma) are going to do about their own situation. It is not a dramatic over-the-top moment. Both have previously given their seriours thought as to what to do and in a civilized way:
The subject followed; it was in plain, unaffected, gentlemanlike English, such as Mr. Knightley used even to the woman he was in love with, how to be able to ask her to marry him, without attacking the happiness of her father.
And
Emma’s answer was ready at the first word. “While her dear father lived, any change of condition must be impossible for her. She could never quit him.”
There was no need to such wailing.
Yes, I guess she probably was combining chapters 50 and 51 by making Emma cry as she’s telling Mr. Knightley.
But a very bad combination since it is a complete outsburt, nothing about paused thinking. What we can see is Romola Garai quickly entering the room say her hysteric Welch-invented speech and dash out. Nothing else. I do not think it has been edited and some had been cut in between entrance and exit.
Romola is hysterical in the scene…if Knightley has proposed her, it would be dumb…if not dumber.
PS: I meant teen look. I meant that they are young, as they should be, but I can’t see them as Regency Young people but XXI century young people. And don’t get me started about that Not Knightley…
Well, my worries regarding Welch’s “improving” the dialogue have mostly been confirmed. I think I’m going to love Romola Garai, but am confused why her hair looks like a lollipop or birdnest. And the directing is probably my biggest annoyance – I didn’t like the script for E2, but thought the directing was quite imaginiative. And while I love the script and cast for E3, the directing was very pedestrian (I blame Diarmuid Lawrence for that, since I’ve watched about four of his films since then, and all seem very mediocre visually). But this one seems to have very static camera (not moving to provide energy or contrast), terribly dull, square framing, rather unattractive makeup/hair/costuming, and a general lack of excitement.
I will, of course, watch and almost certainly buy it. But I wish they’d put John Alexander (S&S08) or Dearbla Walsh (Little Dorrit’s first director) on this project. They had very cool visual ideas.
Oh, and imdb.com says it’s coming out in October. Is there any more info on the airing dates?
If one reads further the quote from the book by Cinthia, we see that she cries *not* because she can’t marry, but because she even thought about such a thing.
“She even wept over the idea of it, as a sin of thought.”
Emma was very strong in her conviction about not marrying as long as her father needed her, and this silly, feeble loud wailing destroys the whole belief of Emma.
Like everyone I too feel the ‘Nonsensical girl’ comment is strangely said and acted out.
As for asking Emma to dance, I hope that he repeated “we are not really so much brother and sister …” comment before that.
The colours look dull.
I am easily pleased as long as Emma Woodhouse comes out well. The reason I like Gwenyth Paltrow better than Kate W.
I’m taking consolation from the fact that if they had cooked up a trailer of P&P95 with a shrieking Mrs Bennet, a Wickham-searching Darcy in London, A Darcy diving into the pond, taking a bath etc etc we would have found it very unauthentic.
That gives me hope.
I love the actor who played Knightley but yes, he looks too young. I thought he was an American actor. I wonder how soon will we get to see it in Oz.
Bargain with the Devil
As for asking Emma to dance, I hope that he repeated “we are not really so much brother and sister …” comment before that.
Perhaps he says it in conversation on the way to the dance floor right after he takes her hand.
Who knows. The one unforgivable thing about N&S was that Sandy Welch left out John Thornton’s confession of love to Margaret while she was in a faint after the rioting. That was a romantic moment in the book that should have been left in the film.
“Emma was very strong in her conviction about not marrying as long as her father needed her, and this silly, feeble loud wailing destroys the whole belief of Emma.”
Yes, throughout the book Emma is mistaken, misguided, overconfident and meddlesome, but she is never dramatic or emotionally weak, nor does she ever indulge in feeling sorry for herself. She is really very strong, which makes a scene like that completely out of character. After she’s shed her private tears for even thinking about leaving her father, her discussion of the matter with Mr Knightly is serious, but calm. After watching the trailer a few more times, I think Welch may have honed in on the ‘flighty’ tendencies of Emma’s imagination (which she certainly had) and extended them to her behaviour as well. Made her more ‘excitable’, if you know what I mean. It would explain all that eager glancing around and eternal smiling.
Ah yes, I meant to write ‘after that’ and not ‘before that’.
Yes, if important and notable features of the book get left out or changed it is quite unforgivable.
I hope it can pass that test, though IMO this part about Emma, not wanting to marry and leaving Hartfield, is notable and has been changed. Minus one already – from a one minute trailer!!
Oh, man! Someone on C19 said that the perfect Emma and Knightley would have been Gregory Peck and Audrey Hepburn! Augh!!!! Why couldn’t they have been?
http://www.movielists.biz/comedies/roman_holiday.jpg
http://www.doctormacro1.info/Images/Hepburn,%20Audrey/Annex/Annex%20-%20Hepburn,%20Audrey%20(Roman%20Holiday)_04.jpg
http://www.short-hairstyles.biz/gallery/d/476-2/audrey_hepburn_roman_holiday.jpg
http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTMzNTM3MDI5NF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTYwMTEzMjM2._V1._SX450_SY319_.jpg
Sibylle described exactly what I felt when I watched the video first, “Is that supposed to be a trailer? It’s very strange. It looks several years old and pretty boring.”
I sincerely hope I am wrong, but this is not Emma, not the Emma I have read/understood. Well, I think we must wait…
Chorus with Mags! “Where have you gone, Jeremy Northam?”
Well, all other issues aside, consider this:
Bad editing can completely ruin what would otherwise be perfectly lovely film, and that goes double for trailers. (This is one of the reasons I despise most trailers.)
Let us hope that this was more a case of badly chosen, badly edited scenes for their preview, and not so much of an accurate depiction of the final product.
It is sad that despite the way the trailer looks, I still want to see it?
I don’t think it’s sad ’cause I want to see it as well. As previously stated, though, I’m a JLM fan.
(Also love Jeremy Northam as Knightley, btw.)
There is no doubt in my mind that Romola Garay is a “natural” Austen lead actress, but based on the trailer, it does not look promising all the way round. It does not look to have a specific aestetic tone like S&S2(Winslet), Persuation (Film version) or P&P (film version) Instead hairstyle and costumes look messy rather than carefully designed and selected. Neither does it look like tthere has been considerate casting principles as stakes. Mr. Elton though not a buffon like Mr. Collins would demand a character actors skills, Mrs Elton all the more so. Jonny Lee Miller is too modern in look and fo not ozze the Country squire. It is not like that casting should follow the book slavishly. A few wxample of inspred castings are Phoebi Nicolls as elizabeth Elliot, Normanaly you would cast a tall, imposing figure for Elizabeth but the film choses an almost childlike actess emphatizing that Elizabeth is a spoilt immature brat. Same production give us a stout Captain Benwick, where we would rather suspect a delicate man of poetry. I like the Hepburn /Peck association. That have been stop on casting
I see from Carmen’s messages that SHE’s tired of the “teen” look in the recent movie adaptations of JA’s novels, too! I COULD rant and rave about the differences between early 19th century young people, and early 21st century young people…but I won’t. (You can’t imagine how THAT pains me…LOL)
I’m also tired of people complaining about how OLD some actors are in the movie adaptations (being about 4 or 5 years older than JA’s characters should be). From my study, early 19th century people WERE more mature than early 21st century people, and thus actors being 4 or 5 years older fits quite well with the “look” of that time, in my humble opinion, anyway. (I have to agree that being 15 or 20 years older is more than a stretch, however!) OOPs! I wasn’t going to do this…Oh well…
I’m not thrilled with what the trailer shows, but I’ll hold my opinion until the movie comes out. Here’s hoping. (Ever the optimist!)
Effy: as I said to Laurel Ann on Twitter, things have come to a pretty pass when Mr. Knightley is chewing the scenery and Mr. Elton is not.
I like JN a lot as Mr. Knightley mainly because he gets my interpretation of Mr. Knightley’s sense of humor. It’s quiet but it’s very definite. To me the proper reading of “Nonsensical girl!” would be kind of a quiet growl and a half-grin. He should be trying not to laugh (because it would encourage Emma in her silliness) but at the same time, he IS amused and Emma knows it. I admit it is a bit much for the actors to understand my direction via brain-waves, but at the same time it’s kind of jarring for me.
That’s the point Cathy A. I think that as teen audience is a target, the adaptations try to be close to this target, so characters go as XXI century teenagers, instead from their period. They can be young, but they must look like Regency people. For the other, we have Clueless and modern adaptations
. But you know, Joe Wright opened the door completley to this new model of adaptations.
I understand and agree, Carmen, sadly. THAT (odious) version of P&P, and the latest version of Mansfield Park are the only DVD’s I’ve given away; they are simply too 21st century, IMHO. I’ve never seen the ’99 MP version, and don’t want to, from what I’ve read about it. With this new Emma, I plan to see it, and will probably buy it. We’ll see if I keep it or not…
The almost-hysterical crying scene in the trailer, too, is so very much a 21st century thing. I’m disappointed; “No longer looking forward to it,” as Mags said. I hope film-makers wise up, and stops this “New model of adaptations” — SOON!
I’m sure some people think it’s nuts to fret over how JLM or any other actor utters the words “Nonsensical girl” in an Emma adaptation, but those two words IMO say a lot about Knightley’s relationship with Emma. To me they underscore the fact that throughout the story, no matter how irritated, frustrated, or even angry he may get with Emma at times, Knightley ultimately gets a real kick out of her. Emma is probably the most fun Knightley has ever had or ever will have–and he knows it. As Mags and others have pointed out, for an actor to throw away that line (or even worse, misinterpret it) shows that he or the director, or both, are missing something important in the story and in the character. And that makes me wonder if the rest of the interpretation is going to be “off” also……
And IMO it’s too bad the preceding dialogue in that scene between Emma and Knightley gets curtailed because it’s really playful, and Emma comes across as very sassy with him. It’s no wonder that pefect gentleman is besotted….
I hope film-makers wise up, and stops this “New model of adaptations” — SOON!
Cathy, with respect–if you keep buying the DVDs, whether or not you keep them, they will keep thinking people like them. I’m just saying.
There is no earthly reason for filmmakers to stop doing whatever they want in regards to Jane Austen. We keep watching and buying it no matter what. We have no filter, we Janeites. And even the bad stuff (for instance, MP08 and Becoming Jane were nearly universally reviled within the fandom) still gets viewers OUTSIDE the fandom who are fascinated with the pretty people and pretty costumes and don’t care that the story either makes no sense or outrageously violates both history and the original that it purports to be adapting.
And when academic papers are being written on Lost in Austen, as in the latest issue of Persuasions (not a negative paper, may I add), I am quite in despair. Of course academics don’t read fan fiction (well, most of them) and are therefore not conversant with the principle of the Mary Sue, nor why it is the sort of story that makes many of us want to spork out our eyes.
*turns off Pompous Filter, steps down from soapbox*
I think though that some might argue that the door to this “new trend” was opened in 1995, with bathing Darcy, fencing Darcy, and especially Darcy in the pond. These are the scenes that inspired Bridget Jones and all those discussions at water coolers. Wet Darcy inspired a wider fandom of P&P and Austen, and since these are the scenes that get most of the press (even today), it’s no wonder the adaptations have turned all angsty and emo.
. Some might argue that the new trend in JA adaptations began with Darcy getting wet. 
Maisy, that was the moment, along with S&S2, that Austen became a pop icon, and it could be used by all people, janeites or not. And it was not bad at all.
The problem came when everybody thought that ‘they could have their share in the conversation’, making money without troubling with the original text. They say, it’s the spirit for today’s people, and that’s wrong, because nowadays people is, in the end, like Regency people. And they can do things without love to the original text or fidelity to the period. The biggest moment was P&P3, the rebirth of Austenmania, and we have to behave with zombies, vampires and many more things now, especially because we buy everything. And I don’t really mind if they mix Austen and other things, but if they do it wisely. By example, Lost in Austen is not an adaptation, but a more or less fun enterteinment, but they didn’t try to adapt with fidelity, although you can see better gowns than in Becoming Jane or MP3, so I can respect it in certain way. Anyway, it isn’t Rosecranzt and Guilderstern.
PS: if you haven’t seen MP2, you are not losing anything, but a bad period film IMO.
Ah, Mags, you’ve done it AGAIN! You’ve got me laughing out loud, and yelling out loud “RIGHT!” and, of course, you ARE! (heh — I’m at WORK, too!)
I’m shocked, SHOCKED, I say, about Persuasions and “Lost in Austen” Oh well, I suppose I would have encountered it sooner or later…
*taking over your soapbox from you* (only my Pompous filter has no OFF, sorry!)
Maisy and Carmen — that’s why I still like the “ones” (from the ’70′s and ’80′s) best!
‘Nonsensical girl’ is really really a very important cog in the wheel of Emma and Mr Knightley’s relationship. I’m all for Mags’ interpretation of it. I think the way the director makes the actor do this scene sets the stage for how he handles their relationship, and that’s why I’m disappointed with this scene.
On principle, I shall endeavor not to make any judgments of this adaptation or its faithfulness until I have seen the whole of it, but I can decidedly say, as an editor, that this promo was atrociously assembled. I also earnestly hope that it is not indicative of the final aspect ratio, sound, and color correction (but it probably isn’t since they’ve still got a few months before release).
I love film and literature, and have always endeavored to value them as separate entities, each with their own merits (this philosophy has allowed me to love MP2 – I don’t care what anyone says, it’s breathtakingly beautiful – but one that has failed me when it comes to P&P3, which I detest, even though it is, technically, a “good” film).
That said, I suppose if Emma 2009 captures the spirit of the book in a pleasing and cinematic manner, then I shall have to be content. At the very least, it will offer several hours of diversion of a more superior quality than what is generally seen on television today.
I think there is a lot of truth in everybody want to get on the Austen Bandwagon and make money. To me the low point was the 3 ITV adaptations which was underwritten, undercast and underdirected. The BBC S&S was uninspired and did not produce a new or even slightly original take on the story. Where the two film version S&S and P&P have their strong point is in the casting where the budget stretches to cast every role from the top. There is a wast difference in getting Tom Hollander as Mr. Collins. etc. Depending on personal preferences one can applaud the inclusion of box office draws in the cast. For a tv production on a smaller budget, the budget may not strecth to the top names, but there i no reason not to cast sharply and innovative. Instead of a poor version of Kate Winslet, make an original choise. Find new ways to refuel the difficult persons/cenes. F.instance Fanny Price in Mansfield Park, where it could be a good idea to shift the balance from Fanny to the pas de quatre of Fanny, Henry, Mary and Edmund. And most of all be ambitious. Instead of making A Austen adaptation why not aim for The Austen adaptation and begin with a high quality script written by someone who really understands the finess of Austens writing
Okay, I shall try to leaven my sense of apprehension with a comment on one of the things I get the feeling they did get right, and that’s the sense of smug complicity between Mr and Mrs Elton. Although she’s more ‘languid’ than my idea of Mrs E, I get the feeling she may be more seriously hateful – rather than just stupid and ridiculous – than we’ve previously seen her. I already want to stick the lady’s fan up her nose. Which is a Good Sign.
Well, at least Mr Miller has dialled back on the lipstick since he played Edmund Bertram.
I hope they haven’t turned all the fun parts of the book upside down.
Mrs Elton ought not to incite hate.
We should be laughing at her exactly like JA does in the book.
Yes, at least we don’t get a pink lipped Mr. Knightley!! ugghhh!! That phrase does sound horrible.
I don’t think Jane Fairfax could bring up much humour or laughter over the way Mrs Elton so rudely kept trying to force her do things against her will. And neither Mr Knightly nor Emma (or I) thought it was all that amusing the way she was sniggering with her husband over his insult to Harriet Smith. Maybe ‘hate’ is too strong a word, but at the bottom, she is a self-centered, insensitive, mean-spirited woman. I can easily laugh at Miss Bates, but not at her.
I think there is room to see different aspects in Mrs. E. There is certainly enough to laugh about with her airs, her “caro sposos”, and her obsession with her nouveau riche Suckling relatives….but Mrs. Elton’s (and Mr. E’s) treatment of a vulnerable young woman like Harriet is really malevolent and not to be laughed at. I don’t think Mr. Knightley found it at all amusing and I don’t believe Austen meant for us to find it so either. Moreover, Mrs. Elton’s officious meddling with Jane Fairfax really amounts to emotional torture at times. The lady is indeed a buffoon, but a wicked one nonetheless I think….
“Mrs. Elton’s officious meddling with Jane Fairfax really amounts to emotional torture at times”
Exactly – you phrased it perfectly. And yes, I suppose you can laugh at her pretentious airs and ‘graces’, but there is not a single likeable thing about her. Miss Bates, at least, has her eternal good nature and warm heart.
I find (and surely JA too) even her meddling/ forcefully offering Jane Fairfax a position quite funny, with her “..candle wax in the schoolroom..” etc.
She seemed too involved with her other woes to worry about Mrs Elton it seems to me. I don’t think Mrs Elton had that kind of power over her, even if Mrs Elton wanted to imagine she did.
Yes, the Harriet incidence was cruel.
But the overall impression of Mrs Elton is still that of one giving much amusement – or perhaps I’m easily amused by her kind of behaviour.
I’m with you, Reeba. I can easily laugh AT Mrs. Elton. I know she is spiteful but I can appreciate that comic side of hers that JA depicts. By contrast, although Miss Bates is more clearly a comic character, my conscience does not allow me to laugh at her that much, I prefer to think that I laugh WITH her.
It’s been long since I last saw E1 (the 1972 miniseries) but E2 and E3 though laughing at Mrs. Elton, have not included the scene where I most laugh at her.
In chapter 36, there is something like a parrot competition between Mrs. Elton and Mr. Weston, and at certain point, after much of her showing off about the Sucklings she exclaims:
“Oh! Mr. Weston, do not mistake me. Selina is no fine lady, I assure you. Do not run away with such an idea.”
I cannot but ROTFLOL at her. She is not even conscious of what she says. If I had been in the room, I’m afraid I would have been extremely unladylike by snorting.
And it gets even better… if I remember correctly, Mr Weston assures her that he is sure her sister is no such thing, upon wich Mrs Elton becomes rather flustered to think that he doesn’t think she is a fine lady. Yes, you’re right. You can laugh at her sometimes.
Capital! Capital!
Thanks for posting the you tube video:-)It seems to be another Jane Austen film delight!
I hope that one day a production would use Mrs. Eltons ideas of Her, Jane and Mrs Bates arriving at Donwell Abbey on donkeys!! In Mrs. Elton JA creates a fine portrait of an upstart and bully and someone who is very good to use the politeness of others and push herself forward. She is a nasty, funny and cunning piece of work. Well done Jane, But I do not think I have the ultimate interpretation of her allthough the 1971 came close. The difficulty with a modern audience is to conway in a suptile way that was Mrs Eltons says about her sister and family is not true and that herown behaveour is out of line. The same problem is with Lucy Steele, how does one conway to a modern audience that her poverty is different from the Dashwoods poverty. Gentility and lack of Gentility is difficult to conway,
I think this production will be very good. Better than the Gwyneth Paltrow and Toni Collette. The only good thing about that version was Jeremy Northam.
At least this version they have british actors and not American and Australian. But why have they cast a blonde a Emma, surely in the book she is dark haired.
>surely in the book she is dark haired.
Hair colour is not mentioned in the book, though the hazel colour of her eyes has been mentioned. Perhaps a combination of hazel eyes and blonde hair is more common than any other. At least two of the earlier three versions had a blonde Emma.
Well, I, for one, am excited. The trailer is poorly edited, but I don’t see any deal breakers, and I’m not expecting 100% fidelity to the novel. As an Austen nerd, I’m still ready to enjoy it: I very much enjoyed North & South and Jane Eyre, despite my Gaskell and Bronte nerdery. As a person dissatisfied with both the most recent Emma’s, I am wild to get my hands on an Emma I find charming in the slightest!
I don’t know what it is but I don’t seem to care anymore that an Austen movie isn’t exactly the way most extreme Janeites want it to be. I think this movie looks fun, it has some great actors in it and I am excited to see it. Maybe it was Lost In Austen being so ridiculous yet so enjoyable at the same time that changed my views or maybe I am too busy with real concerns to care how JLM says a particular line. I think he is, um, a pleasure to watch. I am looking forward to the new ways the book is presented and the new scenes not yet done in previous adaptations.
(Open-minded but hopefully not silly)
And it is sad when Knightley is now in my generation. JLM is only one year older (36). A good age for Knightley; it is Emma that is too old (27).