I have been really busy of late, so though I have been watching this thread with interest, I haven't really been able to comment until now. This is quite sad, as being a lover of classic literature as well as a bit of a cinephile, period drama films definitely serve as one of my guilty pleasures!
At the bottom of this post I'll try to assemble my own list of favorites, but first I'm going to respond to some of the preceding posts, many of them about the new
Emma.
kotwcs wrote:Miss Bates was toned down a whole lot for some reason.^^
Yeah, I know. From the interviews and commentaries I've read, it seems as though Sandy Welch (whose work continues to drive me to distraction) thinks of Miss Bates as a tragic character, who tries to cover up the disappointments life has thrown her with incessant chatter. While her circumstances are regrettable (we learn later in the novel that she used to be wealthy and is now poor), Austen does not portray her as at all tragic: "and yet she was a happy woman, and a woman whom no one named without good-will. It was her own universal good-will and contented temper which worked such wonders. She loved every body, was interested in every body's happiness, quicksighted to every body's merits; thought herself a most fortunate creature, [etc.]"
daughter of the King wrote:Little Women--the little-known '70s miniseries with Greer Garson as Aunt March and William Shatner as Professor Baer. It was the best adaptation ever and William Shatner is the only Professor that I really like.
I'd love to see Greer Garson as Aunt March, and production values of that miniseries are supposed to be
very high (Edith Head did the costumes, and I believe the music was by Elmer Bernstein), but William Shatner? As the Professor? That just sounds scary. I'm afraid I couldn't even begin to take him seriously.
And do you really think the new
Emma feels rushed? It has many faults, but I don't think that's one of them - after all, they got 4 hours to tell the story, as opposed to the 2 granted it in the two 90s films.
Fanny, I think you've come to the root of the problem with this new
Emma - it's way too modern in its sensibilities. Not just the waltzing and the laying of heads in laps (though those might be the most obvious of the bunch), but also all the stooping, waving, and general lack of propriety. Some critics have said that most of the time everyone looks like modern people wandering around in period costumes, and I agree. Compare the way the characters interact here to some of the better Austen films. There is a distinct social and physical vocabulary to this time period, and I think this was just glossed over in this instance in the interests of "relatability." As to your other points, I
do think this Knightley rather close to the book, even though I didn't find him all that interesting - he made for a good balance between Knightley's good-nature and his censorious treatment of Emma. Harriet's a bit too giggly for my tastes; I prefer Samantha Morton in the Kate Beckinsale version. And I think the Frank would have been
perfect if he hadn't been so outright rude. Again, a fault of the screenplay.
Gotta disagree that the new Mr. Woodhouse and Jane are the best yet. Gambon way too healthy-looking for his role, and anyway Welch seems determined on making an out-and-out tyrant out of him. Gah. The Jane was fine, but I preferred Olivia Williams in the Beckinsale version.
Fanny wrote:As for over-the-top (and since we're comparing), I'd have to say that I find sometimes the way Garai's Emma was written, especially with her facial expressions, to be too much for me sometimes, too expressed, maybe almost as if she was trying too hard to be witty/funny/clever/etc. Not exactly weird, but just it feels out of place for a period film (even one that they've tried to make feel more modern) and even border line annoying.
While I'd like to fault the writing for this fault, I'm afraid the blame belongs entirely to Garai and the director. I love Romola - she's one of my favorite actresses - but sort of like Bette Davis, she can be very overexpressive and theatrical when there's not a strong director to reign her in. This is especially the case with the more comic scenes. Otherwise, I think you're right on the dot. Her expressions and gestures are often totally unconvincing as a young gentlewoman of the late 18th/early 19th century. A pity, because I've been hoping Romola would play this role for years.
Glenstorm wrote:It was a little much, but I do think this version had it down better than the Paltrow version (which had too much/cheesy comedy) and the Beckinsale version (which had hardly anything at all...)
Why is it that everyone finds the Beckinsale so utterly humorless? I think it's quite witty. "Six good hens, and now Miss Taylor."
I do think I should say in passing the things I
do like about the new
Emma, as most of my comments heretofore have been negative. First, I thought Johdi May was
perfect as Mrs. Weston, Christina Cole and Blake Ritson (as the Eltons) made a deliciously evil couple, and I liked Dan Freedenburgh as the "other" Mr. Knightley. The ball scene was
awesome, even though they omitted the brother-and-sister lines between Emma and Knightley (
). And the scene in which the gauze is removed from Emma's eyes is magnificently acted by Garai, as are several other of the more introspective scenes - if only she had played the whole role so sensitively!
And while I'm talking in positives, here's the list I promised. I hope I'm not omitting anything! (They're in no particular order.)
Daniel Deronda - A brilliant adaptation of the George Eliot novel, and possibly my favorite miniseries of all time. I might even like it better than the book! Everything that's in there is, everything that shouldn't isn't (well, with the exception of two unnecessarily sensual scenes), it's all splendidly crafted and acted. Hugh Dancy actually makes David interesting, and at only eighteen years of age, Romola Garai turns in a bravura performance. A glance at the cast list will reveal such miraculous talent filling the piece from top to bottom - why, Amanda Root plays Gwendolen's mother!
Persuasion (1995) - Speaking of Amanda Root, she and Ciaran Hinds give some of the most wonderful performances in period drama here. What they can communicate with even a single glance is breathtaking. This is probably my favorite Jane Austen novel, and it's mind-blowing how well the screenwriter, director, cast, and crew were able to translate the tone of the novel to film. Avoid the most recent adaptation; it's just silly.
Les Misérables (1998) - One of my favorite movies ever, period. Unsurprisingly considering the size of the original novel, it streamlines much of its source material, but what is left is pretty true to the book. The first half of the film is particularly satisfying, and I love the soundtrack. Geoffrey Rush's Javert looks like he stepped right out from the pages of the book, and while Liam Neeson's Valjean isn't quite as I pictured him physically, he has the character down pat.
Amazing Grace - What "Christian filmmaking" should be. This is a beautiful, moving, truth-filled movie. It's the story that really draws me to this one, a fascinating true tale, but
just look at that cast: Ioan Gruffud, Rufus Sewell, Ciaran Hinds, Romola Garai, Michael Gambon, Albert Finney - and all of them great, too.
Sense and Sensibility (1995) - This is the movie that got me into Jane Austen books and movies in the first place (yes, I watched it before I read the book!
), the latter of course being a staple of the period drama genre. I still love it. Emma Thompson proves her worth both as an actress and a screenwriter, Ang Lee frames his subjects gorgeously, Patrick Doyle provides one of his most bewitching scores, and Kate Winslet just
is Marianne Dashwood.
A Christmas Carol (1951) - Also known as
Scrooge, this is by far the best version of the classic story. Alistair Sims plays the role to the hilt: I swear, he's one of the only actors I know of who can make you roll on the floor one minute and have you tearing up the next. Great stuff. Also watch out for a young Michael Hordern as the ghost of Jacob Marley.
Miss Austen Regrets - A wonderful Jane Austen biopic, and my favorite Austen-related film of this decade. Olivia Williams is absolutely wonderful as Jane, as are Phyllida Law, Greta Scaachi, and Imogen Poots as her mother, sister, and niece respectively. This one gave me goosebumps. Highly recommended.
Jane Eyre (1944) - As long as you can ignore the whole Dr. Rivers subplot, what you have here (as in
Les Misérables, many of the supporting characters were sacked) is a very deft and exciting adaptation of the classic novel. This film shows old Hollywood at its best, with
gorgeous B&W photography and classic performances form Joan Fontaine and Orson Welles.
David Copperfield (2000) - Though I very much like the popular BBC adaptation of the previous year (and, to lesser extents, the old MGM film and the 60s British film), the changes made for this TNT film make it even stronger as a piece of filmic art, in my opinion. And it has by far the most charismatic David in Hugh Dancy; the role is usually played as a schmuck.
The Picture of Dorian Gray (1945) - I enjoyed this even more than the Oscar Wilde novel. Like the '44 JE, it's old Hollywood at its best, although unfortunately it does not have as strong a lead as JE: Hurd Hatfield is just
wooden in the title role. But along with the wonderful writing, direction, and cinematography, this is worth viewing for the performances of Angela Lansbury and George Sanders alone, which are among the best of their very good careers.
Robin Hood (1938) - If
Mel can count it, well, so can I! Great old swashbuckling fun, in gorgeous Technicolor! And who can resist a movie with Errol Flynn, the beautiful Olivia de Havilland, Basil Rathbone, and Claude Raines? "Why, you speak treason!" "Fluently."
The Count of Monte Cristo (2002) - Another one that's a bit of a swashbuckler, quite unlike the book, but wonderfully entertaining all the same. One of my family's favorite popcorn flicks.
I caught the second hour of 
I reread it not that long ago. In any case, I thought Jeremy Northam looked a very young 37. I would not have wanted him to look any younger. In fact, he could have done with a judicious sprinkling of gray.
