2022- it’s not Anne. I was offended by the idea that a modern woman can not be gentle mannered and introverted. There is a modern idea that women are now the aggressors and dominant. Fine! Go make that movie. But don’t pretend it’s in 19th century and get rid of all the beautiful nuances. As if Jane Austin is no longer worthy and old fashioned. Boo!!! I’m sorry, other than the basic plot line 2022 is NOT Persuasion. In my world Jane Austin’s writings and characters are so important and relevant for today.
Special place in my heart for the 2007 version. And one of the most sweet, enduring kiss scenes. But I’m also a very musically driven person and the high crescendo notes of the 2007 scenes just give me chills in all the right ways
The 2022 version did a total disservice to Jane Austin. These types of new total Woke appeasement versions of stories and novels nowadays of Authors frictional literature are total BS. This story in this version WOULD OF NEVER OF HAPPENED In the early 1800s. England was 99.9+% of White people AND Black people were never in these kinds of positions or relationships back then, even if they were free and not slaves, even in England. And yet White authors stories and novels just have to be changed, making them even 100xs more HUGLY fictional then they ever were. Not only that but the characters themselves and Austin's descriptions of them were NEVER like this. Anne was NOT a "sassy and joking woman". She was quiet and refined. And not some pseudo feminist like she is in this 2022 version.
I agree that they didn't understand or honor Anne Elliott's character. But the blind-casting is not about trying to rewrite Austen. It's been happening for decades, even longer than that, in theater and movies - it's about casting and recognizing that we live in a diverse society. Adaptations of classics can stand up to all kinds of changes - in venue, time, even planets! This particular version did not do it well.
I think Emma is the most challenging of Austen’s works to adapt. It’s challenging for people in the modern era to see Emma as anything other than a self-absorbed snob. Emma is a caged bird. Clever & beautiful but she isn’t allowed to walk alone off her own property. She was homeschooled. Is only allowed to socialize with people of a certain standing in society. She’s has never been places (even nearby ones like Box Hill or London) even to visit her sister. She started managing the family household at age 12. She’s not resentful of her father and tries her best to make him and all his friends/guests comfortable. She lives a lot in her imagination because she has never really had an equal companion. Some relationships are forced on her (the Eltons) as a social responsibility…she has little control over her world but exerts it where she can. It’s very hard to build that depth in an adaptation. Elizabeth is much more relatable as a character. She isn’t set apart from society. She has outlets for her wit and gaiety
When I first read this book about 20 years ago it intrigued and haunted me. It couldn’t hold a candle to Emma or PP or Persuasion. But it was a fascinating character study, and I seemed to connect with Fanny deep inside. I was always so proud of her for never falling for Henry. I felt her complacency toward her lack of self worth in my very own bones. It wasn’t until recently when I picked up the book again that I realized the connection. Two decades later, and I (who had been through a lot of my own therapy) realized I was reading the story of a young woman who had suffered complex and chronic child abuse. Not the child abuse of beatings and bruises and visits from the police, but rather the insidious child abuse of neglect, emotional and mental cruelty. The kind one certainly as a child and even as an adult can’t quite put their finger on. A young woman who doesn’t crumple into a catatonic, bipolar, narcissistic, or BPD mess is a strong woman (and a very lucky woman). And that is who Fanny Price is. In the end her awareness and care makes her the savior of the weak adopted-family members.
Yes, it's interesting that Jane Austen was describing a girl/woman who we would now identify (correctly) as having childhood trauma. And I agree, it makes her resiliency and strength all that much more impressive.
I actually always thought that Lizzie saying the opening line is a great insight and introduction into her character. As I recall, she IS in fact painted as being intelligent, well-read, and detached enough to see the silliness of the way all the girls (including herself) chase after a good husband. She DOES play the game, but she knows she's playing it. I think the 1995 version is easily the best, as it has the time to really paint a good portrait of the nature and personality of each character. In all other ways, I totally agree with your analysis of all the pitfalls! Unlike what seems like _all_ my fellow GenZers, I actually don't like the 2007 version very much. I think they went SO moody and "candid" with it, and made the characters -- especially Lizzie -- SO bold and modern, that they lost all the etiquette and formality of the era. And that plays a HUGE part in the romantic tension, to me. It's the fact that no one will say how they feel plainly that makes the tension so delicious. But modern Austen adaptions seem to all be so keen on making the main characters "girlboss" and "quirky" and "feminist" and "not-like-the-other-girls", that they are far too bold, and completely speak their mind, and lose all of that tension of unspoken longing.
I agree, 1995 hands down. And I accept the viewpoint that it was appropriate to have Lizzie say the opening line. I don't like it but I see how it works. Thank you for sharing your perspective!
I grew up with Sense and Sensibility (Alan Rickman and Emma Thompson), and the BBC miniseries of Pride and Prejudice, but I had never seen anything of this story, until now, at 24! I just finished the 1995 version, and I'm listening to the audiobook. What a lovely, melancholy, soft story. And I love your analysis of it! I'll give the 2007 version a watch too, because I LOVE Sally Hawkins in Paddington and The Shape of Water. I doubt I'll ever bother with the 2022 version, unless I wish to laugh and mock something. 😂 Even from the brief clips I've seen of the 2022 version, I can already tell that it _completely_ misses the mark on both the general mood of the story and, most importantly, the personality of its heroine. Anne is everything modern overly-feminist "girl boss" women are not: modest, quiet, humble, yielding, and completely unselfish and un-self-centered. I don't know if one of today's "girlboss" women could play her well if they tried, without inserting some "main character It Girl" vibes into it. Furthermore, in the book and the 1995 version, it's pretty clear that Anne suffers depression because of giving up the Captain. That's absolutely 100% absent in the 2022 from the clips you showed, which takes away SO much from the nature of both the character and the story! Looks silly to me.
Thank you! And yes, 1995 and the 2007 versions are worth seeing. Very different from each other but each satisfying in its own way. I love Sally Hawkins, too!
I agree with you and would add that Edmund, priggish and clueless, just blunders into a marriage to Fanny whom he in no way deserves. This makes the ending less satisfying for me than other ja
In defense of Fanny, her position in the family means she has to be obedient and meek. She knows her place and Aunt Norris reminds her of it often. But when William comes to visit she can be herself. 'Fanny had never known so much felicity in her life, as in this unchecked, equal, fearless intercourse with the brother and friend' 'ready to think of every member of that home as she directed, or differing only by a less scrupulous opinion, and more noisy abuse of their Aunt Norris, ' Crawford saw how she came to life , her true personality shone through when William was around and this was the Fanny he fell in love with 'Her affections were evidently strong. To see her with her brother! What could more delightfully prove that the warmth of her heart was equal to its gentleness' If only Jane wrote more dialog between Fanny and William, maybe more people would warm to Fanny.
Yes, I see this. Thank you for sharing your perspective. One thing - Fanny's sister Susan takes her place after Fanny gets married and Jane Austen does say that Susan's personality was maybe better suited to standing up for herself. (I really should look up the quote but it's something like that.) It makes me wonder what would have happened if Susan had been sent instead. Alternate universe!
@@beckybruhn Yes, Susan had the stronger personality, but she was also older than what Fanny was when she joined the family, she was also forewarned about what to expect from Mrs Norris. She didn't have to put up with Mrs Norris for long anyway, she soon went into self exile with Maria, and Sir Thomas had softened incredibly since Antigua. This novel is one of my favourites. There's so much depth to the characters that it takes multiple readings to take it all in. I'd love to read some alternate universe fan fics of this novel. I had incredible fun reading the Pride and Prejudice and Zombies series of books.
I think the core of the story is about the impacts of emotional abuse and structural disempowerment, and the difficulty of standing up for what you believe in the face of that. The drama of an adaptation needs to focus on the pressure Fanny is under, and what she has observed that justifies her behaviour in the eyes of the audience. MP is, in my opinion, the best justification for feminism of all Jane Austen's novels. Fanny's growth is that she gains the confidence to stand up for herself and to hold out for long enough that others recognise she is right. Otherwise she can come across as priggish. The main difference between Anne Elliot and Fanny Price is that FP has no social status, and is therefore vulnerable to outright abuse, not just being taken for granted.
I didnt do it with persuasion. im happy to know that im not the only one that gets sick and hyperfocus’ on every adaption of a medium xD for me it was the secret garden. I reas the book and then watched like 5 adaptions in the span of two weeks hahaha
Just based on the one scene the 2022 version is really terrible and unwatchable. Everything about it is 21 century sitcom. It's ok to adapt the story to modern times but you cannot have period customs and scenes with modern sensibilities and characters! I only expect a product like this from Netflix, modern day garbage is their speciality. I'd like the same director to make Anna Karenina and I make sure never to watch it. I have seen only 1995 Persuasion and think is excellent.
I think it would have been better if they HAD brought the story to modern times. It was the strange hybrid that made it really difficult. (In my opinion, of course.)
What about an adaptation that is super faithful to the book, but at the end Fanny gets over Edmund 😤, meets someone else and leaves Mansfield in her past? I don't have a problem with Fanny, maybe she's a little judgy but she stands up for what she thinks is right. I also think there's something to be said for characters that endure. Elinor Dashwood for example doesn't really change, she survives & takes care of her people until circumstances change. My problem is all with Edmund, who is a hypocrit, lacking in self knowledge, but ready to condemn others. Loath him. I mean think about how things went down with Mary Crawfor from the perspective of the time. Mary didn't change or say anything really new, he just finally saw her as she had been the whole time. Willoghby is bad because (among other more serious crimes) he lead Marianne on then bailed when he thought he needed more money. Wentworth thought he might have to marry Louisa because he had acted in a way that made everyone expect it, spen a few months away waiting to see if that could cool things off & was massively relieved when he heard she was engaged to Bewick (little dissappointed in Bewick, but still happy). Edwards is honor bound to keep his engagement with Lucy Steel, even though she's awful. This was serious stuff. The book doesn't hold Edmund to the same standard. It almost seems like Austen herself wasn't thrilled with them as a couple though, because nothing happens between them until the epilogue.
Yeah, Edmund, big problem. Weak, unworthy of Fanny, blinded by his libido. I do wonder, since you say it, how much Jane Austen really did like Edmund. Or Edmund and Fanny as a couple. I mean, he pales in comparison to her other male leads. I sure wish I could ask her!
@@beckybruhn I'm not sure. On the one hand he is not condemned the way other characheters were for very similar actions, on the other hand she says something like, no one minds getting what's too good for them and it happens in the epilogue. I mean Miss Austen is never one for gooey stuff and will gennerally just summarize the conversation until they start talking about other things. About the only time she really writes the mushy stuff is Persuasion. Secondary leads like Marianne might get their happily ever afters in the epilogue. But to have her main charachter get come to an understanding with her "love" in the summing up of what happened to everyone is pretty weird.
I'd love to see a movie that adapted the story faithfully, but just changed the perspective to make it a tragedy instead of a happy romance. Because I think it's really easy to ready the story that way as a modern reader. Fanny Price is stuck in a toxic situation, but it is overall the best situation she could hope to be in for her social status. It requires her to be quiet and humble and never complain. These traits read as her being morally righteous if you think about from the perspective of the regency era, but as a modern reader all I could see was a young girl who had been forced to become a people pleaser, to hide her true thoughts & opinions (her true personality), in order to stay safe and survive. From a modern perspective, Mary Crawford feels like the character who would make Fanny open up and grow. They're perfect foils of one another. They form a strange friendship over the course of the book where Fanny seems equal parts fascinated and horrified by Mary. Mary's flaws do not seem that horrible from a modern perspective, but they are damning if looked at through the eyes of the time the book was written. When the book was written, readers were supposed to see that Mary could have been as good as Fanny if she had had a better upbringing. But modern readers see the opposite. Fanny could have been as confident in herself and happy if she had been brought up by people who didn't stifle her. This is a regency story, and it's not going to follow the tropes modern audiences are used to for a character like Fanny. Fanny does not get to escape Mansfield Park. She does not get to develop her own personality separate from being pleasing to others. She loses the only companion who challenged her, and she marries a man who only thought of her after he lost the woman he was really in love with, and who only wants to be with her because she's such a humble people pleaser (also Edmund has a backbone made out of string cheese. He's probably my least favorite Austen Male Lead). I don't want an adaption that changes any of these things, I want an adaption that leans into how tragic it is from a modern perspective that this is the ending that was the happiest for Fanny.
Oh my gosh, yes! And what great insight into the differences between the modern reader and the "original" audience. The way you describe her circumstances really helps explain why we are uncomfortable with this story in the first place! I do think that adaptation would still have the problem of the plot NOT centering on Fanny Price. But it would make more sense.
That was a really nice story. It feels like you're someone I know telling me a piece of their life, and there's no burden on me to give any input. Just listen.
I love all versions. But 2007 is my preference. Sometimes its what you see 1st that becomes dear to you. I saw 2007 1st, then watched the 1995 version and 2007 remains dear to me. 2022, I like but would not recommend to watch first. I have yet to read the book, which was gifted to me by my sister. I will someday.
Have you watched From Mansfield with Love webseries? (Completely biased because I produced and was on the writers team) We made it 10 years ago, and whilst it is nowhere near film/TV production quality - we were mostly students - I feel we really tried to get across Fanny's personality, but also stay faithful to the story. It's all still on RU-vid!
I have been watching that, yes! Kudos to you and your team! I really like the idea of bringing Jane Austen characters into modern day settings and situations, especially with a younger perspective. Nicely done!
Oh my gosh, this is fabulous, thank you. While I'm fond of the book, I'd stopped assessing the whole "why can't this become a decent movie" question with "well Fanny is kind of boring." But I never dug into _why_ she's boring. Lack of change! Aha! That does make for rather a non existent character arc. If you take requests, Lady Susan is my current favorite of the Austen books ;)
I think I agree with you. It is my least favorite of her novels, but according to Austen her friends and family loved it - many loved it even more than P&P. Which says to me that something is lost on us in the modern age about Fanny and the storyline. It doesn't resonate with us much someone being so passive and in her head all the time. At least Anne Elliot is more active with her life, shows explicit determination, has a growth arc, etc. I think the 1983 version is a good starting point for those trying to understand the plot. I didn't like the 1999 version because they were sexually explicit on screen about Maria and Henry and that's NOT what I'm looking for in an Austen adaptation. I also didn't like them merging Fanny into a Jane Austen type (and when Edward quotes Jane's father "In a style entirely new..." about Fanny's writing I cringed. It felt SO forced). I haven't finished the 2007 version. I just couldn't take Fanny running around with her hair down all the time and being carefree and bubbly and stopped watching. LOL.
Yes, I can see why the readers at the time enjoyed it. They were probably reading it as a family in evening sessions and there is a lot of good fun in the book. And yes, the nudity in the 1999 version was startling. I don't think there's been another adaptation with that in it? Maybe Lydia and Wickham lolling around in their pjs but that's all I remember! LOL!
Smart remarks aside, I think anyone adapting Mansfield Park is faced with a choice - try to make a good adaptation, or a faithful one. But this text ain't letting them do both.
@beckybruhn and ignore if I'm just mansplaining. It was the best advice I got before I went to France the first time, and has served me well on every trip there since. And there have been several return trips. F**k, I ❤️ France 🥰🥰🥰
@@RobKristjansson It's great advice. A lot of what holds me back is being too timid in French, when I am not timid in English! ("F**k, I [heart] France" should probably be a t-shirt.)
@ebxlive well, I wasn't really trying to recommend. I guess I'd say the osmo is probably better for vlogging but I do still use the x3 for b-roll. The footage is very clean.
I like Dakota Johnson, but, in my opinion, the 2022 movie took away Anne's softness, depth and quiet resolve - characteristics I love most about her. With the 1995 and 2007 versions, you could feel that deep-seated sadness of the love lost, which the 2022 lacked. Instead, it was a story about "how to get over your ex". I'd rather watch Austenland for a fun and quirky movie inspired by Jane Austen but written for a more modern audience instead of trashing the much-loved classic with silly behaviour and cringe dialogue.
I like Dakota Johnson, too! She might have made an interesting Anne in a different adaptation. I haven't seen Austenland. I'm going to have to check that out.
Thank you so much for this video. I just discovered Polo Reacts last night, and basically didn't sleep. I couldn't get enough of the joy of watching his reactions as he experienced an incredibly diverse selection of songs. (And in the wee hours I came across a few videos of his reactions to some comedians like Rodney Dangerfield, Don Rickles, and George Carlin. That was delightful too.) Your comments mirrored many of my own thoughts as I watched him. In particular your comment that seeing his reaction to In the Air Tonight caused you to feel somewhat like you were hearing the song anew. I was particularly tickled watching your anticipation of the moment when he would realize that Phil Collins was going to play the drums. Your comment, "He doesn't know! He doesn't know!" had me grinning from ear to ear because that was exactly the way I felt when I watched that part. And then, having watched a few of his reaction videos by that point, there was no doubt in my mind that he would have an intense reaction to such a powerful drum solo, and his reaction did not disappoint! I don't know if I will manage to express this to you in a way that makes sense, but I want to say that I feel like it's human nature to want to be connected to others in some way, and when we love something we want to see that reflected back at us. There was a time when my husband would have enjoyed this as much as I have, but he has moderate dementia now, and he couldn't quite comprehend what was happening or stay focused. I believe that not having him to share it with contributed to my delight in watching your reaction video. So thank you for that. So that's enough of my blither blather. As usual, God forbid I should say in a couple of sentences what I can stretch out into several paragraphs. 😳
@ednlible I enjoyed reading your comment, thank you for writing it. I think you are right that a shared memory of music connects people. And it is truly one of the reasons I like PoloReacts . I didn't realize he had also done some comedians as well! I'm glad we were able to share in each other's joy around In the Air Tonight - and Polo's delighted reaction!
1995 is superbly compact, Amanda Root and Ciarán Hinds plus-perfectly heading an ideal cast that registers character essence with cinematic immediacy. 2007 is more teleadaptive, with Sally Hawkins and Rupert Penry-Jones, like their colleagues, given to subtleties that are emotionally telegraphic in the medium's manner. The less said about 2022, the better.
Good video. Pretty pricey investment for getting less than a minute of effects that you'd only want to use a couple times in your video production life. They are cool, but if used in every video one made, I'd cease watching. Reminds me of an old car I had. I spent several hours repairing one thing or another every other day. Eventually I realized that I spent more time fixing this or that than actually driving the car! Thanks for showing the pitfalls of these units.
Credo che ogni regista possa dare la sua versione di qualunque libro. Pero' deve essere un'azione "onesta". Cioe', se non gli piace rispettare il testo originale e vuole dare una "sua" versione diversa, faccia pure ma abbia l'onesta' intellettuale di cambiare il titolo. E sto pensando a molte versioni di P&P, ma anche all'ultimo Persuasion o all'ultima Emma. Non dico che siano brutti in toto ma non sono il libro originale ed e' meglio non fare i "furbetti" solo per catturare pubblico. Mi scuso se scrivo in italiano ma temevo che il mio inglese non fosse adeguato
Yes, I agree with you. And if it were only a matter of storytelling and artistry, I think that's how it would be. But money, ego, and the popularity of Jane Austen adaptations interferes and we end up with versions like 2022 Persuasion that go in a completely different direction but call themselves a Jane Austen adaptation. And as you said, they're not completely bad but it is dishonest. I hold out hope that the next adaptation will be better! (Always.)
