Yesterday DH surprised me with a date to see the latest version of Sense and Sensibility. Knowing that I love everything pre-1920s and particularly Jane Austen, it was a thoughtful act on his part. (Although he readily admitted he almost fell asleep during the movie, I can't help but love him for his sacrifice on my behalf!).
There were many things to love about the movie such as the pastoral scenery, the dimly lit interiors of the various homes (although this did sometimes make it difficult to make out the scenes), the more age-appropriate Elinor and Marianne (as opposed to the 1995 version where both appeared to be well past coming-out age), George MacKay as Edward Ferrars (it's not that I'm not a fan of Hugh Grant - I just don't think he did his portrayal of Edward justice) and Herbert Nordrum as Colonel Brandon (I loved his brooding presence), Chloe Pirrie as Lady Middleton (she was absent in the 1995 version), and Ceara Coveney as Lucy Steele (easy to see how Edward could have fallen for her charms when he had no occupation to keep his mind busy).
However, there were also some things I didn't love, and two, in particular that irked me to no end. The first of these was Marianne's stringy hair. The majority of the time it was down and looked dirty and unkempt, not at all what one would expect from the daughter of a gentleman, even if dispossesed of her home.
The second was the dancing. The first dance resembled a wild country hop. Again, not what one would expect someone of Marianne's station to attend. The second dance can be described as nothing else than risqué.
As to the other things I found jarring: Elinor and Marianne lacked the sisterly connection that is so obvious - and beautiful - in the 1995 version; the frequent straying of the script from Jane Austen's novel or, worse, inserting Austen's words into the wrong scenes (although I did enjoy the duel that is so not Austen); Willoughby (give me Greg Wise as Willoughby any day), and the way everything had to be explained (Lucy was described as "manipulative" when we should have been able to work that out from what was shown; Lucy and Edward's engagement had to be explained [although it also strayed from the novel], and several other instances where both Austen and the 1995 version trusted the intelligence of the reader/viewer to work things out).
Overall, it was a pleasant way to spend two hours but I doubt I'll be watching the 2026 version again and again as I do with the 1995 version. There's more to love in the earlier version than there is to hate.
Just my 2cents worth.
Image from pexels.
Comments