MovieChat Forums > Emma (1997) Discussion > This adaption is a mess...especially cas...

This adaption is a mess...especially casting

posted 18 years ago by sietz
58 replies | jump to latest

Oh my. I rented the DVD of this the other day for some light entertainment, both being a fan of the book and the Paltrow version.
Unfortunately IMO this is a complete mess.
Beckinsale is o.k. as Emma and Jane Fairfax is played well,but Mr Knightly comes off as a bit psychopathic with a bad hair sitiation who needs some anger management courses (he always seems to be yelling), Emma's father comes off as mildly retarded...and the accent on the (american?) Mrs Elton! OMG...it was the worst thing ever. Harriett Smith is completely forgettable and Mr Elton doesn't nail his part at all.

The screenplay is also a bit all over the place with the relationships between Emma and Churchill, and Knightly and Fairfax coming off a bit oddly. Also, there was no chemistry between Emma and Knightly....

Also,since when was John Knightly a horrible, dull complainer? Also...those "dreams" that Emma kept on having got really old after about 2 seconds.

I'd like to know what everyone else thought though. It doesn't seem to be as hated as I would have thought.

Did anyone else get creeped out when Knightly is about the kiss her and he starts talking about how he held her when he was 3 weeks old. I was like...o.k.

[–] Ishallwearpurple 13 years ago

----shown on OvationTV Sunday and watched last night - 3/28/11. Did not realize the same year of the Paltrow film version, we had a Beckinsale version. Is it great minds are seized by the same thoughts that gives us 2 versions the same year? Oy vey!

Mark Strong as Mr. Knightly is not horrible to me. He was an adult dealing with a bunch of childish and pretentious country people.

As was Austen's usual setting for her stories, we are in rural England. Their small towns are full of gossip, and making sure of the classes, and who was who and what was what. Her books all full of razor sharp comments on the mores and morals of the folk.

Since I have no idea of how these people really talked except for writings from various sources, I have no preconceived notions of HOW the actors should do their roles. Each version I have seen, I either like it or not. So far, I have enjoyed the Paltrow and now this one - I call 'the Strong version.' To me he is more interesting than Emma or Jane or anyone else.

Maybe because when I was 24 I married a 38 year old man and we were still together when he died at age 84. By the time we married, I had dated for a long time, and came to realize I was going to have to raise a boy to be a man along with any babes I had. For me, it was an easy choice.

To each their own.

Jane
My Movie Blog, The Ancient Pelican here:http://purpleladyj.blogspot.com/

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] coolbluegreen 11 years ago

<<Also,since when was John Knightly a horrible, dull complainer? >>

Well, I guess you never read the book. He complained all the time and was quite inconsiderate about it. Most of his lines were taken directly from the book, actually.

Of course, if you are a fan of the Paltrow version, then clearly sticking close to the book (which you clearly have not read) is not a priority for you.

[–] randommovies2002 10 years ago

Guy Henry is my second favorite John Knightley, followed by Dan Fredenburgh's portrayal in the 09 version. My favorite is Yves Tighe in the 72 adaptation.

[–] coolbluegreen 10 years ago

Mrs. Elton is not American. In the book, the narrator says Mrs. Elton is from Liverpool. In this version of the film, Frank Churchill says it. In the book, it is strongly suggested that Mrs. Elton is the daughter of a slave trader. Mrs. Elton should show you what Jane Austen thought of slavery.

[–] randommovies2002 8 years ago

Not Liverpool, but Bristol. 😃

Miss Hawkins was the youngest of the two daughters of a Bristol--merchant, of course, he must be called; but, as the whole of the profits of his mercantile life appeared so very moderate, it was not unfair to guess the dignity of his line of trade had been very moderate also (ch 22).

[–] coolbluegreen 8 years ago

Whoa. Strange.

Randommovies2002 -- you just corrected my post on November 1, 2015. But I made the correction myself -- 3 minutes after I made the error. The post you corrected -- and rightly so, because wrong information should not be out there -- was made on Sun Aug 31 2014 14:04:23. I must have thought I deleted it, because right below I made another, correct post -- made on the same day, 3 minutes later -- Sun Aug 31 2014 14:07:08.

This is so weird. I don't remember making the mistake and I usually don't make mistakes with Jane Austen. However...that was around the time my mother saw Paul McCartney in a yoga class -- a BIG, epic event. I know that date! And it coincides. So...I guess I had Liverpool on the mind.

I am a Jane Austen fan. Not a Beatles fan. But I was just cleaning up, putting away some of my Jane Austen Society of North America books, among other things, and listening to the radio -- some Beatles special was playing. And I checked my email and found -- this.

Does this MEAN something? Is there some deep, inner meaning to this? It's just weird! I am glad I never deleted the mistake -- this never would have happened. And normally I would delete it because I don't want bad information out there...but I just have to leave it up. I mean, the original, incorrect post. I'd normally take that down, but it is staying up with the corrected version of 3 minutes later.

Why? Because there is clearly a Beatles/Jane Austen connection and I must be meant to write an article about it for JASNA!!! But I have no idea where to start! If you have any suggestions...please share!

[–] randommovies2002 8 years ago

LOL! That post just made my day! 😀

[–] coolbluegreen 8 years ago

I am glad the post made your day, randommovies2002! I remember making it! I still am not sure what the deep, inner meaning is of all those coincidences....but I will figure it out one day! :-)

[–] randommovies2002 8 years ago



[–] coolbluegreen 10 years ago

Mrs. Elton is not American. In the book, the narrator says Mrs. Elton is from Bristol. In this version of the film, Frank Churchill says it. In the book, it is strongly suggested that Mrs. Elton is the daughter of a slave trader. Mrs. Elton should show you what Jane Austen thought of slavery.

From the book

Miss Hawkins was the youngest of the two daughters of a Bristol – merchant, of course, he must be called; but, as the whole of the profits of his mercantile life appeared so very moderate, it was not unfair to guess the dignity of his line of trade had been very moderate also.

Bristol was known for being a center of slave trading. Jane Austen clearly does not think slave trading is respectable.

[–] Who (5146) 3 years ago

This OP is going to hate the 2020 version.