is persuasion the worst jane austen adaptation ever? 📖🙄🐰 (persuasion 2022 review) 

That's not a line from the original austen novel, in my opinion the keira knightly pride & prejudice its a perfect example of an adaptation which slightly modernizes the dialogue whilst still sounding historical and not out of place for the period. Austen can sometimes sound very formal and slightly stuffy for a modern audience, so I understand why filmmakers want to change the dialogue slightly but this Persuasion adaptation goes way too far. That kind of hyper modern dialogue destroys all the romance which is kinda the whole point of period dramas, romance and fantasy and escapism. If I wanted to watch people speak like modern people I'd watch euphoria or something lol

They probably saw that Dickinson worked well and tried to do the same, except they chose the absolutely wrong source material

People tend to forger that this is not a line from the book - which shows that the language suits the times and audiences love it.

Right 😩

Yes! 🙄

austen about to haunt these damn filmmakers

@@monharris28 I sure hope she does!

🤣🤣🤣

I’d agree with you, but her bones have been dust since 2005 Darcy stomped moodily through a meadow in his pajamas 🙄

@@kmb6296 🤣🤣🤣🤣👍👍👍

For some reason we've hit a point where adaptations are regularly and blatantly disregarding the authors intentions. For example I know people shit on it a lot but the 2005 P&P is a respectfully modernised adaptation even if often compared unfavourably to a TV series with 3 times the length of the movie. You can't tell me Jane Austen aged that well for hundreds of years but in the 17 years since that movie that was a box office hit and kept the feel of the Jane Austen dialogue we have to reduce Persuasion, my favourite book of hers, to this.

I minded it in Bridgerton because it was more extreme than the books in its everything. I was left with the impression that the author allowed and defended all of the ridiculousness because of a fat netflix check. So in the end it did seem like a cheap wish fulfillment fanfic.

Agreed! The thing I like about Bridgerton is that it has a good balance. And the characters stayed constant to what they were like in the book. Anne? They butchered her.

Darling, it IS genuine disrespect for a literary classic😂😂😂😂!!!

🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯

Yeah. As someone in the TikTok generation, if they really had to make an adaption like this, they should’ve gone with Northanger Abbey. It’s probably Austen’s funniest novel and Catherine is more qualified to break the fourth wall. The modernization should be kept to a minimum tho or completely cut out.

The thing is every time someone says that I immideatly distrust them. I've never met someone who said: I'm an empath who wasn't a narcissist in disguise.

@@TheMissileHappy Then I guess in a weird way it served its purpose since Mary is self-centered 😂

No kidding.

@@TheMissileHappy Honestly, you totally should distrust them. Speaking as someone who has hyperempathy as part of my autism (the stereotype is low to no empathy at all, but hyperempathy is also very common) it's extremely unpleasant to be this sensitive. It's inconvenient, annoying, and tiring, if you have issues with emotional regulation it makes handling them even harder, and it's led to emotional burnout. I don't think it's ever made communication easier for me, but it's sure as hell made life harder. If anyone ever tries to portray themselves as more understanding or whatever because they're 'an empath', they're either mistaken or lying. Knowing what you're feeling is not at all the same as understanding you.

yes that irks me a lot. I used to be irritated not only with the language of "pride and prejudice" (the novel) but the story as well. I was a bit younger, but now I get it. Sometimes it takes a bit of learning or growing to "understand" a novel but that's the beauty of it. This movie just straight up skips over the whole experience by assuming that the audience won't "get" it. Kind of a waste

I agree. It's obviously a play to hook in young viewers with the 'Jane Austen vibe' and 'aesthetic' despite totally disregarding the narrative themes of the original story. I imagine that the only viewers who enjoyed the film were a scattered few who have never read the original novel nor Jane Austin in general, and don't like to have intellectual engagement while consuming media. Such a shame.

I read Jane Austen as a teenager and English is my second language. Part of the appeal to me was the artful dialogue. Way to ruin the fun...

I agree. Why not do something like Clueless if you need to modernize a classic. It drives me crazy when so many of these period pieces force modern sensibilities into them. It completely takes me out of the world.

It makes sense with the success of Bridgerton, though. The costumes and casting were modern and it was a success. They’re just following the money.

Add on the list resentful and judgemental.

This is an insult to emos

@@tinymxnticore how an 80 yr old man would write a female emo 🤷‍♀️

I couldn't have put it better!

they turned her into a 'clingy ex-girlfriend' in this adaptation 🤦🏻‍♀️

and of any other Jane Austen novel.

Amen

Why are you so upset about it? Just don't watch. They will get the message sooner or later when they keep losing money.

@samantha smith ksmssbmslskdkdd

if they ever do that, i'll just watch the 1995 bbc version on repeat to cleanse my soul.

It makes the whole production look 'illiterate' so to speak.

there is one reason and its profiting off the success of other period dramas and appeal to that very specific dark and light academia aesthetic everyone on tiktok is obsessed with. I really cant see this movie as anything else but Austen through a tiktok lense

@@mailys9475 in a vague sense yes. I don't think the producers are young or hip enough to really understand tiktok culture. it's like maybe they scrolled through a social media feed once and decided that since "the youth" like historical fashion and self-aware media, they thought that smashing the two together without any consideration for the source material would be a huge success.

@@neconeconeco I agree! its like "oh so the kids joke about wanting a love relationship like in the old books let's make a film about that but with slang so they enjoy it"

🎯🎯🎯🎯

definitely.

They're trying to ride on the coattails of Emma (2020)

The somber and mature book that was actively critiqued for the modernism of the main character and the representation of romantic poetry...

Also I don't get how you call persuasion her most somber and mature book when Mansfield Park literally speaks on the subject of slavery and colonialism

​@@welza001 Because even though it speaks on slavery, Mansfield Park is almost always received as a morally wholesome social comedy with one of Austen's most ambitious love triangles before it is received as a text making important statements about slavery. After Northanger Abbey, Mansfield Park is probably one of Austen's most moralistic works, but moralistic doesn't always mean sombre.

Emma was so goood

Exactly, totally-a-spy! I don't mind when beloved classics are modernized, but commit to the modernization and set it during modern times. When I want to watch a period piece, I want to watch a period piece - and the best thing about Austin's writing was her dialogue and characters which were completely changed in this stinker! I'll read the book or watch the older version (1995 with yummy yummy Ciarán Hinds) any day.

Agreed. If you attend a school that has British Literature in its curriculum, it's generally first introduced by the 10th grade. Modernizing the story to place it in contemporary times is one thing (and not offensive), but dumbing down the dialog with modern slang while everyone is running around in period dress just sullies the beauty of Austen's writing.

Taken that teenagers on TikTok make fun of ‘film bros’ or ‘book elitists’ and brag about consuming media mindlessly, I’m not even suprised anymore. There’s truly something so anti intellectual about time we live in.

@Laura Exactly! I was reading books like Pride and Prejudice, Les Miserables, Count of Monte Cristo, Jane Eyre, Tale of Two Cities, and Brothers Karamozov starting when I was eleven or twelve, and did not need any of them dumbed down or translated into "modern speak" just for me to understand them. (I mean, there were obviously some concepts in these books that flew over my head when I first read them but that was due to my age and naivety, not due to the fact that I was born hundreds of years after these novels were written.) Sometimes the style of language takes some getting used to, but these screenwriters and directors who tell us "you won't understand it, so we'll Urban Dictionary it up for you" are really just insulting both us and these books by saying "you'll never get it, let us just explain it to you" rather than trusting in the power and relatability of these classic works of fiction that have already stood the test of time for centuries.

This

It's worth watching just be judgemental of it honestly!

@@isabelleer7501 I need to watch it with a friend so we can both mock it. 😂

@BroadBand Rework by morgan g. thank you! Maybe it will still be worth a look.

@@isabelleer7501 😆 Okay…

I don’t want to watch it, in case it encourages some other director to make a sh!tty adaptation 😭

I could totally see Emma Woodhouse breaking the 4th wall. Especially to rant about Jane Farefax.

@@atinyevil1383 honestly, I thought Autumn DeWilde’s 2020 adaptation of Emma worked brilliantly by playing up the comedy and giving it sort of a modern sensibility, while still keeping it very grounded to the time period. But honestly, I’d have loved if they made it more fourth wall break-y and quip-y, mainly because Anya Taylor Joy would have sold the absolute hell out of that

“Regency Era Fleabag” absolutely sounds like something that would be a blast to watch, but it would have to be an original story/characters, NOT adapting something as well loved and established as Jane Austen

@@erikdaniels0n she definitely would have. But I honestly think Anya Taylor-Joy could pull off anything.

Exactly! I adore the idea, but why use a character who has been established to be more mature, withdrawn and introspective for it? I'm so frustrated by the choices they made for this film 😭

Omg, is that the storyline??? Sounds amazing!

@@strawberrylime33 It is based partly in Bath and it's social whirl, but it's a beautiful very young couple, who's journey is to grow up and come out of their families shadows into their own. The romantic lead is a handsome, sweet man, but with a very sinister family, who live in a huge gothic Abbey, a rake, and seducer of an older brother, a terrifying father, and Catherine ends up thinking his father murdered the mother. It's also got a wild carriage ride, like in Dracula. Catherine is also loveably scatty like Brigit Jones.

This would be such an amazing modernization with a good writer (or a fun "modernized" version like they intended with this Persuasion)

This book is probably the least regarded of all her works. Apart from the highly original storyline, it is also a parody and critique of the gothic novel genre, which was in vogue when Jane was a young girl. It draws a great parallel between the issues dealt with by this genre, notably vampirism, and how it plays out in real life within individuals. Not to mention the fact that it deals with some pretty scandalous themes for the time (like eroticism). The 2007 version is getting a bit dated even though I think it's very accurate, but I'd love to see the story get more exposure and appreciation without becoming a lame teen movie because the issues in the novel are not necessarily obvious to understand. And also the main character is very goofy and refreshing, quite unique comparing to all of her other ones!!

@@strawberrylime33 it was supposed to be a satire of those kind of books, yes. It's also pretty funny; the main male character is the most charming, in my opinion; and the movie version from abt 15 years ago is pretty good. (But I might be biased: I can never decide if Northanger Abbey, Persuasion, or Pride&Prejudice are my favorite even though they're all quite different from each other:)

Exactly, I'm 14 and a huge Jane Austen fan and everytime I see people defending this movie because "it caters to a younger audience" I just want to scream! I hated this movie and it's dialogue, it felt so patronising.

it is patronizing to assume they have to modify an original story so younger people will "understand" it. Love is something anyone can understand

I am literally old enough to be your mother (my own son and daughter are 14 and a half and 13) and I absolutely hate how the media patronizes the younger generations and thinks they don't understand, or can't relate to a classic the way even just their parents could. They're called "classics" for a reason: they transcend time and speak to everyone, their messages, vibe and themes are eternal. My 13-year-old daughter is attracted to the style, music and stories of the 1940s and 50s, for instance, which is really weird because those decades came long before even my time. But we're all individuals, whatever our age - and that's precisely the beauty of it!

Honestly do they think we are idiots or what

I needed the modernization 💀

SPOT ON 😭

Excatly. I thought at times they would go as far as change the ending since they already ruined the story anyway 😅

@@Liskafm352 Haha Exactly! They should have let Anne marry Mr. Elliot lol

This is what I was thinking when they reunited. No chemistry at all.

I actually felt like Wentworth didn’t long for Anne as much tbh!

And like modern == witty. Not in this case.

The glaring problem was that the film utterly failed at "witty."

Which I think the recent Emma adaptation proved... And did so much better at!

😂😂😂😂😂

T

I felt she looked very feminine and simple. I actually liked the way she was portrayed.

Never in my life did I think “she looks like she knows what a phone is” could sound so insulting but here we are 😂

With a diverse cast you really can’t complain that she looks modern 🙄 what we can’t stand is the modern way they speak and not the J Austin style

Literally 2 unnecessary expositions intertwined

I might not have minded the modernization of the dialogue or the complete change of tone had it not been for Anne narrating the entire story to us. Just really lazy writing and assuming your audience is too dumb to understand the interactions between characters.

100%! Hit us over the head with it!

@Day I think people get the impression she's a good actress because she doesn't look like a typical bombshell actress, she looks like an indie actress but doesn't deliver.

​@@c.w.8200 She was great in "All That Glitters". I have a strong feeling that directors pften forget she's still a fairly new actress and don't provide the correct amount of direction. Even if you have A-list skills, C-list directing isn't going to get those to show, especially if have D-list amounts of experience.

Savy point

I wish this was mentioned because I found it a little weird to point out during a part I thought was about Austen's writing. It's a good line that works and crediting Austen felt untrue to Austen's writing AND unfair to the writers who adapted pride and prejudice for the big screen.

Also, I am not sure the book version of Mr. Darcy would have ever said anything like this to Eliza…even as he pleaded his case…he was too shy. But the writing of his character as more verbally-expressive and the backdrop of that misty moor for the 2005 film got us there as an audience, still.

@@marisacrabtree8353 Exactly. He's diffident and uncertain of what words to use. "Dearest, loveliest Elizabeth" is about as far as he was ever going to go.

@@marisacrabtree8353 Yep! I don't think it's true to Austens characterization of him, but this slight reinterpretation of his character totally works for the film.

Thissss

my thoughts exactly

Exactly. just said this on another podcast.

I’d love a version of this like Clueless or Bridget Jone’s Diary.

Clueless was so well done!!! One of my faves.

Static electricity has been known since the 18th century and was quite fascinating for people at the time. Mary Shelley's Frankenstein is from the same year as this novel, and there, the monster is brought to life with electricity.

there was static electricity actually

@@fruzsimih7214 Ahhh but it was feared to the point of demonization! That’s exactly why Mary Shelly wrote Frankenstein, she was appalled, just like everyone else, at the idea of electricity. There weren’t many common uses for electricity yet, it was still a new discovery, and one of the main studies was done on corpses and the corpses would “move”. Horrible! Playing GOD! So this would never be something people would say. It goes against the time. Same can be said about her playing at the French Revolution and saying “let them eat cake”. That’s like re-enacting the fall of the twin towers for fun. People of her status would have been terrified of what was happening in France and Jane herself had a family member who had to flee France at the time.

LMFAO

the word was actually around at the time though (obv the syntax is still off for the time)

My mom was watching this movie next to me and the second I saw him I immediately sat down to watch with her, he’s so handsome

I agree with everything you've said.

I've heard somewhere (but I cannot confirm it, might have been a rumour) that Golding was offered Wentworth's role but preferred Mr Elliott as it was a more interesting character... and seeing how the script turned out, I can't say I blame him. Wentworth has nothing remotely interesting to say or do in this version! Having said that, I do think that Golding would've been able to squeeze more out of that role so the bad writing would've been easier to overlook...

Right?!

Horrible idea

I actually laughed out loud at how ludicrous it was and rolled my eyes. It was at that point I knew I was going to hate it but figured I'd at least finish it before making a complete judgement.

That's a kind of joke we would come up with in middle school while adapting a historical play for school theatre. Sure seemed funny in seventh grade.

I hated it. It was weird and awkward and not funny.

Yes, I agree! We want to modernize everything, but our modern culture has very little class

Elly. You are so right. So damn right.

@@CatholicForever1 "class" is not a good thing. It's a disgusting, elitist idea.

@@rini9325 perhaps by “class” they weren’t attempting to make a statement about elitism but were rather lamenting the fact that this society doesn’t think people are capable of understanding and learning from challenging artistic presentations. Having a group of people who decide what the mass will be able to understand is a bit more elitist than this comment. Though I understand the word choice perhaps reflected an idea that is by nature exclusionary. Jane Austen’s work is beautiful, difficult and timeless. To present in a way that’s true to its original presentation asserts that the audience is capable of understanding something challenging (which they are!) I think it was less to do with elitism and more about the issue of not honoring and unearthing the beautiful works of the past (as with austen’s work it is always timeless and so a recontextualization into modern day can uphold an interesting mirror to our modern society when done well). I get it, it’s not an easy thing to make 200 year old art accessible to a lot of people, but Jane Austen’s work never looked down on others but rather brings you up with her. I wish we had a movie which reflects this mindset

@@rini9325 It seems that by 'class' they're referring more towards the notion of manners not a class divide. I can't say I totally agree, it's pretty apparent in Jane Austin novels and historical evidence that people during the decade of the regency period (and much of the time surrounding it) were just as cynical, rude and self-centered as they are today. However their form of etiquette created a sense of 'polish' to their behavior that isn't often seen today, especially with the anonymity of the internet. Good hearted and sour people existed then just as they do now. All that being said, this film was an appalling adaptation of an engaging literary piece which showcased the wide variety of differing personalities and interpersonal relationships, turning it into a rom-com, obtusely humored and poorly written, forgettable film.

Exactly, she's smiling even when she's recalling something sad or hurtful. She's like posing... Not acting

Couldn't agree more!!!

He is just way more captivating right?

Diverse casting generally just means checking off a list, not actually being willing to cast starring characters as asian or black even if makes perfect sense. No offense to the guy playing Wentworth, but they made it painfully clear that they could've done better.

for real i did NOT understand why they didn't cast Henry golding as the main love interest. He had way more charisma than Cosmo Jarvis

Asian men are generally second fiddle to a white male lead

I don't know, I feel like Amazon's Love and Friendship should be taken into consideration for worst.

100% agreed

Completely agree. The idea of 'making it accessible to a younger modern audience' is so patronising. I was a young teen when I saw my first Austen adaptation and had no issues at all with the dialogue or following the romance, it was beautifully - and faithfully! - adapted from the book. The idea you have to dumb everything down to make a new audience appreciate it, is clearly ridiculous. The books have been selling for over 200 years. They didn't need to be translated into modern language to sell and be enjoyed. And actually, I disagree with the colourblind casting. It irks as yet another historical inaccuracy. At least Bridgerton says hey this is an alternate universe, and what Britain might look like if King George had married a woman of colour, etc., but to change an Austen book in so many historically inaccurate ways, and then act like it's fine, 'it's just fiction', takes away the importance of these works in teaching people about history. Much of my knowledge of the French Revolution, of the rules of etiquette, of the British class system of the past, and the way society worked and looked during the 1800s, all came first from enjoying regency novels and their faithful adaptations. Throwing that all away, so that the only thing making a story historical is the removal of electricity and cars, to the point where even the costumes are not correct (why was she wearing black gloves in that clip?! Who had died???), people begin to forget our real history. When Enid Blyton books are removed from school libraries because the language is 'dated', when Austen adaptations are modernised to the point of being unrecognisable, we take away the opportunity to learn our past through entertainment. It's incredibly disappointing.

The girlbossification of Anne Elliot 🤦🏻‍♀️

@@isawhat8712 How? Love & Friendship is pretty faithful to the novella.

haha yesssss the playlist and frowny face were tolerated modern pokes I tolerated

Yes! Also “he’s a ten. I don’t trust a ten” 😂

And name it Persuaded

@@marinapeli9478 oh my goodness...

What about the octopus line lmao

As for Wentworth and colorblind casting, I thought Cosmo Jarvis is black, tho light-skinned. He has looked black in other roles and here he is playing against another light skinned but darker black actor for a number of scenes (Louisa).

@@marysmith5003 I haven’t watched it. I’ve only seen and read the reactions on this adaptation,enough to know I don’t want to see it and get worked up about it. I am personally not against casting actors with an other skin colour as long if it’s believable or functional or gives the role more depth, not just for the sake of being woke. (I got a job in the past because they needed more people with a foreign background and I got the job for that reason, not for my skills. It felt insulting to me)

@@carmenm.4091 As for why you got that job that you feel you got because of the color of your skin, how did you do? Did you perform well? With any given job, high or low or medium or however you want to categorize them, multiple candidates exist who could perform effectively. In the past, and it continues now in significant numbers I suspect, the potential candidates pool has excluded those from certain racial or ethnic backgrounds or who were considered inappropriate for reasons not material to real job requirements.

Lmaoo

Same thing with historical kdrama where I didn’t like it if they put upbeat songs that dont fit the time period.

Agreed, I believe that this is Dakota's first foray into a period piece, and that she might not have much experience with them, but she seemed to be rather uncomfortable in the role, compared to some of the other actors.

Mostly her hair and costuming, it’s like they intentionally made her more modern than the other characters???

She has a face that knows about smart phones

Mary>>> Anne honestly mary's character stole the show for me i loved her

@@ThatPazuzu lmaoo

I had to immediately watch 1995 Persuasion to cleanse myself.

I did the same thing!

I just googled it and first off, the director is actually a woman and based on her IMDB she's not a very experienced director (7 movies she directed), compared to Autumn de Wilde who had directed 30 movies for like 17 years.

@@LeniTjahjadi Actually "Emma." was Autimn's first feature film, but she had a lot of directing experiencia prior to the movie bc she had directed music videos. Plus she is a photographer and the style is impeccable

Pride and Prejudice 2005 is a good example for simplification of a story to make it more understandable. Did they change dialogues and cut some parts? Absolutely, but I can perfectly understand, for example, why they had Charlotte explaining that being 27 and unmarried (and not rich) was a problem at the time.

i agree I'm getting pretty sick of it too. if they wanted a spunky heroine they couldve adapted literally anything else

I agree it’s a matter of wrong story to adapt. Tbh, Anne isn’t that far from certain modern tropes: the shy girl who has been heartbroken in the past, an outwardly calm and collected heroine who nurses an inner brokenness, etc. Making her spunky made her into something unrecognizable. If Anne’s essence became a modern woman, she would not have been spunky I’m sure.

Because modern feminism has turned a woman and femininity into a caricature and costume to try on, by each and every individuals personal interpretation. Welcome to the woke age, where everything needs to be non offensive and inclusive, for the sake of not offending anyone. Women need to hold swords and be "warriors" to be strong, and spunky to be intelligent and ressilient. Because apparanrtly feminine atributes like patience and timid temperaments are seen as oppressive now lmaoooooo. This is the true misoginy, not the feminist kind, the real kind.

@@cyano741 the most recent female protagonist i can think of that was on the gentle/meek side and non-spunky was Ana de Armas's character in knives out. Proof that you can have a nice, timid character and still have a satisfying character arc.

@@lucyhannah1227 That's a great example! Now I really want to see this movie with that character.

Very well said. I agree with your sentiments on relating to Anne.

@camoumilecamoflage8875 I haven’t read the novel or watched this movie thanks god. But your comment about how you related to persuasion made me really want to pick the book up and read it! I’m only 21 but I do sometimes get scared to of ending up being too old and don’t find anybody. I hope you have found the one 🌹❤️

Exactly she was a shy and reserved person but I disagree with the term "depressive" that is used to describe her

Agreed. It is ridiculous that they managed to get Anne so wrong here, that Dakota's character in Fifty Shades is somehow closer to resemble Anne, than her actual portrayal of Anne. Anastasia Steele would still be far from a good Anne mind you, but at least she shares Anne's shyness if nothing else. With good writing and directing Dakota could have made a decent Anne. Instead we got this travesty

@Day No? I didn't claim anything about her acting abilities. Nor will I, because while I can tell when someone is acting very very poorly, that's as pretty much it. I'm bad with faces in general, both in recognizing and reading them, and so acting isn't really something I feel I can judge. What I did mean in my original reply is that regardless of actual acting skills, the judgemental and condescending lines, the smirking at the camera etc were probably decisions made by the writing and directing. I doubt they let the actor just give the character whatever personality she wanted, and the personality change is what I take issue with. So I think Dakota could have been a much better Anne with different writing and directing, I think my original wording was that she could be a decent Anne? This feel like a very clumsy and rambling way to explain that I'm a dumbdumb about acting, but I don't know how to explain it better or more succinctly, I'm sorry. I will leave those discussions to people like you who seem to know far more about it

I don’t know if you have seen bbc Miranda it’s a comedy where she does this. It’s very funny bit it’s now overused back in 2009 it wasn’t so it was new again. I always thought fleabag copied it as it came out afterwards.

@@natasha8966 fleabag is breaking the fourth wall bc it was originally a play, so it was taken from there more then from other tv stuff

oh god yes.

Ooh excellent point! I guess...somebody's playing a fortepiano in a different room and Anne's...alone in her room listening through the walls? 🙃

Same! Lol. Like, elaborate please

She's made a "playlist" on her ipod 😆

She's another nepotism child with mediocre acting skills (like Lily Collins, for example)

She was cringey in 50 shades too

I guess she's a classic case of nepo baby, then - not a very good actress, when it comes down to it. Not awful perhaps, but not that great, either. Which is a shame, since somewhere out there, a very talented young actress who isn't the daughter of Don Johnson and Melanie Griffith will probably never make it as big as Dakota.

Dakota was the wrong choice for this role. She’s too “modern”. It’s like she’s a 21st century girl who was transplanted into the Regency era. I half-expected her to pull out an iPhone and post on Twitter. Also, her accent was terrible. I’ve seen American actors do pretty convincing performances as British characters (eg Scarlett Johansson and Natalie Portman in Other Boleyn Girl, and Robin Wright as Buttercup in Princess Bride), but her performance was awful and unconvincing.

@khfan4life365 Agreed 👍 When I found out Dakota is playing Anne for Persuasion movie I just knew it will not be good. She is for some reason too modern. All these Victorian era clothes look like a costume on her - It’s not convincing. Her makeup is also very modern if you take a close look at it. It’s just like a wrong puzzle piece you have put in a wrong section.

To be fair, if they'd actually gone the Fleabag route, they could have used it as a clever device to emphasise her loneliness.

The love story would be good as part of a thriller as it's very psychological.

Agreed. The Lake House was a much better loosely modernized version of Persuasion for me compared to this one.

Mary didn't care that much for her son; she didn't want to miss the party.

I agree. It’s the only modern line that actually reflects the character of the speaker. If you have to modernise the characters and dialogue (I don’t think they need to in anyway unless they were making a Bridget Jones style adaptation) then making Mary over dramatic and self obsessed is an acceptable step.

I agree, she was my favourite Anne and Hinds was my favourite Wentworth. Wonderful movie. I haven't seen the 2007 version, to be honest, but have seen snippets and I'm not sure Sally Hawkins convinces me as much in the role of Anne. But then, Dakota Johnson convinces me even less! So, Amanda Root all the way.

Sally Hawkins is very good as Anne

@samantha smith not a big deal for me.

@samantha smith sure who cares as long as you do it right and the costumes are accurate. You sound as if something like that has never happened before. The geisha in memoirs of a geisha isn't even Japanese lol and its still a good movie. The last samurai is a white kid self insert fiction. And it's still a decent movie. Plus period pieces gets endlessly produced so if u want to see an entirely white cast, then feel free to watch any previously existing work???

@samantha smith I'm just saying it doesn't matter. There never have been accurate casting 100% and there never will be and we need to live with that. There will always be plenty of movies on the same book produced ever so often because surprise surprise, there can be more than one type of movie on the same period genre or the same story itself. Bridgerton don't take itself seriously, neither does Malcom's list. Its supposed to be for all people to be able to self insert into said period like how white kids want to be a samurai so that's why the Last Samurai was produced. It's silly to even care like how u expect me to be mad that you'd turn black panther white. Just like how one movie with black cinderella doesn't affect the hundreds of cinderella or cinderella inspired films, one or two mixed cast period films doesn't affect the hundreds of period films. One white panther flim won't matter to me cos black panther movies won't disappear just because a white panther movie is released. As long as the costumes are near accurate and well researched and flattering and the script and lines respectful of the actual culture portrayed, I don't care if its Asian, African, European, Australian, North or South American. This is exactly the reason Persuasion flopped because it's an actual classic and the movie didn't take it seriously and added modern lines to cheapen and dilute it's impact. Context matters.

@samantha smith I don't watch bridgerton or malcom's list for historical accuracy, I watched the malcom's list short for Gemma chan in a gorgeous empire waist like dress. And she's gorgeous, thank you. I watch Bridgerton for obvious reasons called Simon Basset. Same way a bunch of samurai sword collecting kids don't watch the last samurai for accuracy. They just wanna look cool with...​ A samurai sword. Or that no body cares that Karate kid is learning Kung Fu and that these two arts are from different countries. If you want accuracy so much then there's plenty of other movies like every iteration of Pride and Prejudice, every iteration of Emma including 2020 one, Great Expectations, Jane Eyre... The list goes on.

Same. I never read Persuasion so I wasn't attached to what the characters were supposed to be like. The movie was still hard to watch. I was thrown off as soon as the dialog started.

My sister doesn't read or care about Austen novels and she watched this movie and hated it lol

Right? So unrelatable. We could have gotten a great modern adaptation with a 37 yo Anne in rural britain and got this soon to be forgotten nonsense

yeah i think she's too good looking to play anne, the casting is f up

This

Agreed. Anne's complexity lies in being highly intelligent and this contributing to self doubt and susceptibility to being persuaded by people who have a misplaced confidence in their simple worldviews. Whereas this leaves Anne with nowhere to grow just five minutes in. The 1997 film was so good in articulating the unpleasant sense of being stuck because of the thoughts of others swamping you.

Also, if I remember correctly, her older sister was supposed to be quite beautiful... At least prettier than Anne... I haven't watched the movie yet (and now I'm not sure I want to) but, judging from this video, Anne is actually the prettiest...

Sounds like you’re projecting your own insecurities into the movie. No they don’t need to cast someone you specifically deem unattractive so you can feel better about yourself while you watch. Looks are subjective anyway so that’s neither here or there.

She ate Anne up period

Her voice is so good! She could go from clueless to self aware without changing facial muscles. Phenomenal!

a lot of people hated her "im an empath" line, but it genuinely made me laugh. she was hilarious all throughout

I was excited about her. She was in one episode of the Witcher and I always wished it was possible to see more of her because she was so good.

But I hated that the gave her modern language when things like self care and empaths just didn't exist.

Your comment is beautifully poetic! "Seemingly impassable gulf"- sheer romance!!!

I support this!

Love this comment

fellow introvert here, and agree

Yesss we never get introverted heroines who win at love. Anne was our representation and I was so sad they made her a typical quirky sarcastic girl boss! - irl this person is just an asshole aswell

Elizabeth Bennet wouldn't act this way. I don't know why everyone keeps saying this. For all of Elizabeth's outspoken ways, she knew and understood how to navigate society properly.

Absolutely agree. A hero to all those who feel overlooked and unheard. She has always been my favourite Austen heroine.

@@pippiecarr9378 absolutely! This Anne was downright rude and inappropriate in public - Elizabeth was *always* polite and correct in public, even when she was seeing the humor in a situation. If anything, this version made Anne into Lydia.

I concur, and I have seen (and appreciated) some obscure and not very popular versions- Doran Godwin will always be Emma to me (many Janeites may not have seen it, but I'll bet you a monkey that Ang and Gwyneth have).

i read this as a person from the times watching improper behaviour and being horrified at unchaperoned time alone

Right?! Like they would ever say “exes” 🙄🙄🙄

My moment when I was just done was when they had Anne peeing in the woods while eavesdropping on Captain Wentworth… just no!

@@kimberlymba9065 I was done at when she said here's the playlist he made me...

@@cat_96 I know, why do they constantly feel the need to make historical characters into modern women. I’m sorry they are not going to write it better than the original that has been read and loved for over 200 years. And half the time they change it in a way that makes it where the story no longer makes any sense. That character was no longer Anne Elliot, she was not the woman that would have been pressured and influenced to give up her true love. I heard that this was the director’s favorite book!?!? How do you do that to your favorite book!!! That shocked me because frankly I thought they never even read the novel because everything about it was so very wrong.

@@kimberlymba9065 the thing that’s so I infuriating is that Austen has plenty of strong willed heroines. Can you imaging Liz Bennet or Elinor Dashwood EVER being talked out of marrying who they love? If they wanted to do a witty adaptation, they could have turned to literally any of Austen’s other works. But Anne is different. Anne is the one heroine who is feeling desperate and sorrowful and somber. They COMPLETELY butchered her and the story. For no reason!

He said he was offered both the role of the love interest and the antagonist, and wanted to switch up his roles for once. Since he's usually seen in the love/nice guy role. 🤷🏻‍♀️

@@Raydog07 fair haha

That was me.

Exactly!

We dont have to be included in on most random movies ever. Thats such a pick me behavior. I have seen so much examples that they only put poc people because it was mandatory for them and had no meaning on the plotline.

@@callmekhaleesi why white people was necesary for the plot of any movie theyre in? its just cause theyre the "basic"

it's truly just terrible

Yes, the fact that I feel it reflects Austen's own "what if" thoughts makes the novel all the more interesting.

It’s about persuasion! It’s in the title, JA wasn’t exactly subtle with her titles. Anne caves to peer pressure and regrets it. Then as an adult she doesn’t, and is better for it. Also about the pressures put on women, and the interesting point that wentworth might night have been as successful if he hadn’t been turned down by Anne. Great, nuanced story. Sometimes I wonder if wentworth isn’t more representative of JA. Not disagreeing with what you said though.

The proposal she turned down is echoed in Mansfield Park, not here. THIS book deals with her summer romance with a young man who died, which of course explains the melancholy of the book.

well said.

Definitely not a social realist. That would be a main trend in a much later period and not exactly an english phenomenon. The fact that she didn't *really* live on the outskirts of society would be the critique of a more passionate social realist, who would try to set social realism as a universal standart in art, but a more observant reader would probably manage to defend her worth exactly by saying that women were, in fact, at the outskirts of society, looking towards the inside, parodying those who reside there. If the social realist doesn't agree though... well... Austen no more.

@@itsmj3103 She did live on the outskirts of this society, She lived in as a spinster with other women supported by family on the brink of ruin. If she were fully outside that society she'd never be able to comment on it like she did. Social Realism isn't anti-society.

Credit where it's die, watching this version really let me understand the tortured angst Anne goes through. Of course, none of it was on screen...

THIS

I feel this way about Thor now

That is Hollywood!

I mean Dakota is just a nepotism baby so 🤷‍♀️

I don’t think this is a “now” thing. Studios have been casting based on persona since old hollywood (Marilyn Monroe, Audrey Heburn, Katherine Hepburn). Public image and perception has also had a place in casting. Social media and excess media (interviews) has just made personas more obvious and a big variety of media/production companies has allowed for more films to be made (hence a rise in “lesser” performances).

Very well said, Jessie.

I know, right?!

I HATE P&P 2005. I don’t like people changing classics. The dialogue in the P&P novel especially Liza Bennett dressing down her social betters was exquisite. It was unfortunately modernized in P&P 2005 to the point where Austen’s voice was compromised. I am a purist, and I feel novels like Jane Austen’s work are diminished when adaptations stray too far away from the author’s original work. As soon as I saw the trailer of Netflix’s Persuasion with Dakota Johnson I knew it would just piss me off. So I will not be watching this adaptation of one of my favorite author, Jane Austen’s book. 🤨🤨🤨🤨.

Me too. Turned it off.

L'adaptation de 1995 était la meilleure, les adaptations des années 2000 sont nulles

I think the phrase to describe him is "ruggedly handsome".

@@minimaker5600 Who? Ciaran Hinds or the guy from the new adaption?

@@EriksDesdemona Ciaran Hinds, definitely. The new guy looks like he's embarrassed to be there, and I don't see him taking charge as captain of a ship.

Agreed, the anachronistic dialogue was a little jarring, and overdone at times.

This would be great. I’m reminded of classic Hollywood movies with some of the best adaptions and pre 20th century settings. This give and take over with some formality but not too old fashioned.

I'm 19 too and I prefer when they stick closely to the dialogue in the book (like BBC did with pride and prejudice 1995 or with Shakespeare plays) because I can catch the gist of things and it also helps me understand the book when I go back and read it, bc I've already watched it happen so it's easy to keep up. It's frustrating when they don't stick to the book because then not only does it feel less accurate, it also gives me the impression they don't think the audience is smart enough to catch all of Austen's subtleties. I want to go back in the past, not have the past brought to me and modernized.

@@zzyzxzzyzx agreed, it also doesn’t help that most of the “modern” slang used is written by people who aren’t actually in tune with current slang lol

Why didn't they just set it in modern day. Clearly they wanted to do that.

I know! When Anne said that, it made me wonder if it meant the same thing it means today or something else I was not aware of. A duh moment.

If I saw that in a screenshot I'd assume it was one of those fake quotes Tumblr posts

EXACTLY. incorporating cinematic techniques that you appreciate in others is part of film making tradition, it's how the medium continues to move forward, but it ONLY works if the whole of your film is MORE than the sum of it's parts

Doesn't that support him not being Wentworth? Henry golding doesn't seem like the type to just quietly go off to sea for 8 years after rejection, nor not try to charm her upon his return. Despite the lack of chemistry, I actually felt the Wentworth actor played the pained character pretty well.

Yes! I agree completely. I doubt "most people" consider it the superior adaptation at all. The cinematography for 2005 is pretty (although sometimes leaning into what I feel is more of a Gothic styling for dramatic effect), but that was the only superior aspect for me. Maybe I'm too much a purist, but that movie didn't feel like Pride and Prejudice to me. It was probably enjoyable enough to someone who isn't that excited about Regency culture and intricacies of dialogue, but when it comes to pure adaptation of the heart and soul of the novel, the 1995 BBC version will always be the superior adaptation for me.

I think opinions will deviate from the 90s the more time passes and girls who didn't grow up with those movies/series step into fandom. I've no doubt the BBC series is excellent, but as a little girl in the 2000s, Colin Firth will always be a dad figure to me (Mamma Mia, the Kings Speech etc) and therefore I just cannot get behind him as Darcy. The idea feels wrong. No doubt since Matthew McFaddyen (idk if that's spelled right) also moved into dad roles, we'll need a new Darcy soon for the youngins, but I think context of the time and actors are often overlooked. Or at least not taken as much into account when considering the audience favourite.

@@madeniquevanwyk I agree. For me I can’t get into seeing Colin Firth as a romantic interest as he’s more of a “dad” figure to me. I also find a series adaption of one book to be weird. However I admit I have never seen it so I probably should.

The 1995 series version was brilliant because it gave us a believable Lizzie, with such charm - she doesn't need to be stunningly beautiful because she has that 'something else' that captures Mr. Darcy's fancy. I like the movie adaptation but like you, totally cannot get behind it being the best adaptation of P&P.😊

The Emma adaptation was absolute perfection. The costumes were gorgeous and very historically accurate, and overall the movie captured the tone of the book so well. It's probably Austen's funniest book so I loved how they leaned into the comedy of it

@@hi-ve1cw oh i know, i agree about the Emma adaption, I was comparing the parts that seemed immediately lacking in Persuasion when i saw the trailer. The dialogue also felt.... Stiff and obv modern Slang was thrown in

I was expecting the worse after the trailer, but honestly really enjoyed it. Not at all like the book but overall a decent film. As long as you separate the two you might enjoy it

THERE WAS GOING TO BE AN ADAPTATION WITH SARAH SNOOK??????? WHAT??? WE AERE ROBBED

@@erikdaniels0n yes, I still so sad about it.

Joel Fry being cast as her Wentworth was such a good choice too! At least the Netflix version will be constantly haunted by the ghost of what never was. An endless "did you know they cancelled the GOOD version" until the end of its days. A punishment this film deserves tbh.

they were gonna do an adaptation with Sarah Snook!!!!!!?????? Man, I loved her in Predestination, She would've made an awesome Anne

@@LadyAhro JOE FRY WAS GONNA BE WENTWORTH!!!!????

Same with me. Agree.

I enjoy modern adaptations like that series. Real modern adaptations not modernized period adaptations.

I prefer the 70s miniseries that no one ever talks about. Next would be 95, then 07.... and then whatever this dreck is. 🙄

I also enjoyed the sisters, aside from Walter Elliott. Too bad they didn't show more of the Crofts and Lady Russell. Otherwise, it was not something I enjoyed watching. I had to push forward a few times, then I fast forwarded 1/2 of the movie....

@@purcascade Haha I actually really like the 70s miniseries too! I'd place the 95 at the top position, but I really like how the 70s basically takes us through the whole book and that Anne is this meek and sweet figure, but not completely doom and gloom (as I find the other two versions can be... although some people seem to prefer those interpretations of Anne). While I was watching the Netflix version, I kept thinking how I needed to give the 70s series a rewatch!

@@ruth.555 Yes! I'm disappointed the miniseries isn't on BritBox (anymore? I thought it was?) I rewatched 07 last night as a palate cleanser, but that just made me think that perhaps 22's creators watched that version and leaned into the elements there I don't like as much. 🤣

Same, Persuasion is my favorite Austen novel tied with Northanger Abbey, and neither of those have a definitive adaption in my opinion. I’m bummed because that other Persuasion that was in the works sounded promising.

Trash is the perfect word for it😂😂

agreed, it shows a lack of respect for the original source material

Yes, very much so and that is why this version is such a failure.

YES! Both Northanger Abbey and Persuasion deserve a second chance at adaptations. I will say, I’m glad that Mansfield Park wasn’t chosen to be adapted. We already have a phenomenal adaptation of it (the 1999 film with Jonny Lee Miller and Frances O’Connor). Plus it’s my favorite Austen novel, so seeing them butcher such a realistic and charming portrayal of a coming-of-age love story would have disappointed me deeply.