MovieChat Forums > Mansfield Park (1999) Discussion > Great film but butchered the book!

Great film but butchered the book!

posted 15 years ago by Charlotte_720
23 replies | jump to latest

I actually enjoyed this version of Mansfield Park , in its own little way, but NOT in relation to the book. I watched this before I read the book and am astonsihed at the huge differences! Mainly because -

1) Sir Thomas in the book was a bit grumpy and scary, but never tried to force Fanny to marry Henry, he just didnt think she knew what she wanted and needed a little more persuading. In the film he was portrayed as a bit mental and pervy

2) Fanny went to Portsmouth through free will because she wanted to see her family again, not because she was forced when she rejected Henry

3) They ommitted the character of William, Fanny's older brother, as he was quite a main character in the book, and shared a special bond with Fanny. I think they shifted this bond more onto Edmund

4) Mary Crawford was not a lesbo in the book and there was no sexual tension

5) Fanny would never have got angry and rode her horse in the rain at a whim. She was painfully shy in the book and would probably just have stayed put!

6) No one ever knew she was in love with Edmund in the book, she never made her feelings overtly clear.But in the film, Henry knew and it was SO obvious

7) Fanny did not walk in on Maria and Henry doing it and did not be try and kissed by Edmund

8) The actors were about 10 years olderthan their charaters

9) Lady Bertram was actually nice in the book and not an opium addict - just a lazy arse

10) Sir Thomas never abused slaves while Tom drew them.

11) We had to feel sorry for Tom in the film because of what his father put him through. In the book e was just a spoilt brat who enjoyed drink too much and never hated his father

12) In the book Maria is pretty

Anyone else agree?? See for me its all these little things that spoil it in relation to the book. Austen would be spinning in her grave!

[–] weaselfrance 15 years ago

There are so many things I dislike about this film, I don't know where to start!

In fact it's quicker for me to say that I liked the idea of having the same woman play Mrs Price and Lady Bertram, and I liked Mrs Norris's reaction when her husband keeled over dead into his dinner. Everything else !

I lost my job
What? Why?... Not the Phantom Menace?

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] randommovies2002 15 years ago

I liked Julia's sleeveless gown.

[–] ChocolateIsMyDrug 15 years ago

I agree - I dislike the MANY changes the film made, but the two things I did like:

1) Mr Norris' death - I laughed out loud
2) Edmund - he was kind of cute

"I wish you to know that you have been the last dream of my soul."

[–] unionjgirl 15 years ago

Having seen the movie a while ago (not very impressed), and reading the book currently, I think the worst crime of the movie is that Fanny Price in the movie bears almost no resemblance to Fanny Price in the book. They put words into her mouth in the movie that are either Mary Crawford's or the narrator's. They made her into something she absolutely wasn't. To me, that just made the entire idea of adapting the novel ridiculous. If you aren't even going to stay true to the main personality traits of the main character, what's the point?

[–] randommovies2002 15 years ago

They also put Jane Austen's words (from the juvenilia) in Fanny's mouth. For example, Run mad as often as you chuse; but do not faint is from Love and Freindship.
http://www.pemberley.com/janeinfo/lovfrnd3.html#sophialw

And
The History of England from the reign of Henry the 4th to the death of Charles the 1st (By a partial, prejudiced, & ignorant Historian)
http://www.pemberley.com/janeinfo/juviscrp.html#histengl

There's lots more, including from Austen's letters.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] randommovies2002 15 years ago

In the book Fanny just lets things happen to her and gets lucky. She has no backbone and is not a very interesting character. She is pious, gentle and sweet but that's it.

I strongly disagree. Fanny stands up to Sir Thomas and never waivers in her refusal to marry Henry Crawford -- despite an enormous amount of pressure on her to do so. I call that backbone. I call that strength. I call that character.

By comparison to the other heroines, she has little to offer readers in my opinion.

If the main thing readers are looking for is an Austen heroine in a romantic story, then Fanny Price/Mansfield Park is not the right choice for them.

[–] Unwanted_Birdtamer 15 years ago

But it's not true to this heroine. It doesn't matter what other Austen characters were like, it matters what Fanny was like as Austen created her; other Austen novels and Austen characters, and Austen's own character have absolutely nothing to do with it. And this Fanny was nothing like Austen's creation. Austen purposely created a shy and retiring character, one who was at the mercy and whims of her rich relatives, one who was neglected and mistreated by almost everyone around her. A character unlike most of her other heroines. Fanny could not speak out freely like Emma Woodhouse or Elizabeth Bennet or do whatever she liked--if Fanny did so, she was likely to be sent home, and her family would suffer. Elizabeth Bennet could turn down a Darcy, and her family's fortunes, while not improved as they might have been, at least wouldn't nosedive. The Prices' fortunes would have if Fanny had offended Sir Thomas or the Bertrams and they chose to hold it against her and by extension, the rest of her family.
And yet, Fanny does have a strong character and strong backbone. She is the only one in the novel with a fixed moral compass. She knows what she believes, she knows what she wants, she knows who not to trust, and she is absolutely right in all of it. Her standing up to Sir Thomas and not agreeing to marry Henry Crawford takes far more courage and conviction than Elizabeth refusing Darcy, or any other "courageous" action from any other Austen heroine. Because Fanny standing up to Sir Thomas can have repercussions to both her situation, and also to her family's. Yet she knows the right thing, and despite whatever hardship it might exact, she does it anyway. I think she has quite a lot to offer readers.

Come, we must press against the tide of naughtiness. Mind your step.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Unwanted_Birdtamer 15 years ago

Fanny isn't always my favorite Austen character, but she gets such a beating from so many quarters, I have to defend her. I absolutely agree on a version that does her justice--I haven't really liked any of the three MP adaptations and would love a version that gets her right.

Come, we must press against the tide of naughtiness. Mind your step.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Julie-30 14 years ago

Dear God no. Andrew Davies would add at least as much sex to the story than Rozema did. I hated what he did to NA, and I cannot see him being as subtle as MP needs to be.

http://currentscene.wordpress.com/tag/jane-austen-odyssey/

[–] weaselfrance 15 years ago

Have you seen the '83 BBC mini-series of MP? I really enjoyed it (even though the budget is clearly tiny) and thought the portrayal of Fanny was excellent.

I lost my job
What? Why?... Not the Phantom Menace?

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Julie-30 14 years ago

I just watched it last week. It's a real shame that the budget was so tiny because it's very good given the circumstances.

http://currentscene.wordpress.com/tag/jane-austen-odyssey/

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] unionjgirl 15 years ago

I agree!! I have to give credit to the filmmakers. This film is true to the spirit of Austen OVERALL. It is true to the OTHER heroines. This is supported by including a lot of Austen's own words from her own letters, etc.

The film's Fanny is much more like Marianne Dashwood, Lizzy Bennet, etc.

In the book Fanny just lets things happen to her and gets lucky. She has no backbone and is not a very interesting character. She is pious, gentle and sweet but that's it. By comparison to the other heroines, she has little to offer readers in my opinion.

This film shows Mansfield Park through the prism of other Austen settings and characters. I saw this film years before I read the book and I was STUNNED by the differences in the book, just as you were. It is not a bad book, but Fanny is the only Austen heroine who doesn't have a strong constitution/character.

If this is what the filmmakers were thinking, then to me, that's worse than trying and failing to recreate the book. Basically what that says is that the book isn't worth making into a movie, but why not increase the Austen franchise and make a few bucks by borrowing from all her other work? That doesn't make sense. Either Mansfield Park is worth filming or it isn't.

And I think that personally there is a lot to get from it. Fanny herself is very reminiscent of Elinor Dashwood, pining secretly and holding the family together, and I don't think she brings her novel down at all.

[–] squishie28 15 years ago

I preferred Elinor to Marianne as well, so that's probably why I am so quick to jump to the defence of Mansfield Park and Fanny.

I, too enjoyed the film, but having read the book prior to it I was a little thrown at what on earth had happened to the character. In fact, I first watched the 2007 TV movie, and I don't think either got the book or at the very least Fanny's character right. She's running around doing all sorts of impulsive things in both adaptations and while 2007 was probably closer to the book overall (the confines of length aside) I feel like neither does justice.

There were a few things I liked though - the coda in which Fanny V.O's what has happened to the other characters, and pretty much everything else Fanny V.O's. It's witty and amusing - not quite Fanny, but it contributed to the film quite well.

However I don't have the patience to watch the miniseries, I even found the P&P mini rather tedious though I know it is very popular.

"Lots of planets have a north!"

[–] lisee_lulu 14 years ago

I really enjoyed the movie but it does no justice for the book. Firstly, Susan is not mentioned in the book so I'm presuming in the movie they used Susan rather than William. That's a shame because William is such a great character in the book, I wished they'd used his character in the movie. Secondly, all the characters are portrayed so differently in the movie than in the book. As it has been pointed out, Fanny was not forced to go back to Portsmouth and she was never forced to marry Henry. As much as I enjoy the movie, the book is certainly much better. I haven't seen the 80's series of this book though, I should sit down and watch it soon.

[–] elizabeth_author 13 years ago

I whole heartedly agree with those who have defended Fanny.

The thing is, Fanny is the only main character I can think of in print or on screen who is properly shy. If anyone else can think of one then please do. One of the great things about books is that they allow you to see that others think and feel the same way you do, that you're not alone. They give you someone to identify with. Shy people, whose shyness stems from a lack of confidence in the first place, don't really get that from books. They are one of the most unrepresented and ignored groups. Which is a shame because they often have quite vibrant personalities underneath, which they're afraid to show for fear that they'll be thought eccentric, weird etc. And this movie takes the one character who is shy and takes the shyness away. If you were a shy person, what would that say to you?

[–] prideorprejudice 13 years ago

You're right on all accounts. Jane Austen's books all have a lighter feel to them. Even in the book, Edmund's immediate switch from Mary to Fannie bothered me.

[–] Ilario1 12 years ago

Okay I just read the book. And just to clear up one point in this thread. Susan was mentioned in the book. When Fanny went back to Portsmouth Susan was there and mentioned quite a bit.

Anyway, I don't mind the change from the book fanny to the film Fanny. What I don't like is how they changed Sir Thomas. He was strict but he was always nice to Fanny and didn't turn on her like the movie showed.

"What happens to a dream deferred?"