Does anyone else think this film is awful?

[deleted]

Actually, I watched the 1986 version for the second time recently, and I think it has grown on me a little. I liked John and Isabella Thorpe (just as shallow, pushy and vulgar as I'd imagined) and that version has a major advantage in that it was actually filmed in Bath, but I don't think anything could reconcile me to liking Henry or the General as portrayed by Peter Firth and Robert Hardy even though I usually really like these actors.

You pierce my soul. I am half agony, half hope

I agree. I think most of the actors were quite good, it's just all the sexual stuff that annoys me. I have no issue with Andrew Davies sticking all the inunendo he wants in other movies, but why Jane Austen? If you're going to make a Jane Austen adaption, why not make it the way she wrote it? It doesn't need to be sexed up and made more 'relevant'. She is one of the most popular writers of all time! Why does Andrew Davies think he needs to improve her work?! It's fine the way it is!

My thoughts exactly. Davis completely ruined it and will probably ruin Sense and Sensibility. I shudder at the thought.

The endings in Jane Austen's early work are often rushed, (Mansfield Park, Sense and Sensibility and Northanger Abbey).

I thought that the chemistry between Tilney and Moreland drove the narrative; and the sexual scenes weren't as explicit as the film version of Mansfield Park. Do you all think that people didn't think about sex?
As Foucault says, just because people didn't talk explicitly about sex doesn't mean that they didn't talk or think about it at all.

I would have blown off the heartless bas#$^% regardless of any change in her lover's fortune. What a monster of a man.

Not only do they talk about "Udolpho" - you can read the title in several scenes, where it is lying opened across Catherine's bed. ** Edit: now that I have seen the expurgated scene with the bath, I see where AD has her reading "the Monk". however - I love the way she goes from imagining the racy scene to her actual reaction when she sees Henry - then her perception of his actions :). ***

I thought references to "the Monk" a most fitting way to display the Thorpe family's "talents".

I much enjoyed this version (less the bath scene, whatever it was - not on my version). For those complaining about the "sexing up" of this story, of all Jane Austen's books, this is probably the truly darkest one, and is filled with *real* examples of all that overblown stuff found in Gothic novels (including lust, certainly)- after all, it's the entire point of the novel (I will grant that the deleted scene might be over the top, though). I absolutely love how well the director lets the audience see where the actual parallels between Gothic romances and the real world occur, and where they do not.

NA turns the exciting into the tawdry, the thrilling into the tragic - and the movie captures this very well.

For those complaining about the relationship between Henry and Catherine - I am sure that was the precise idea. Contrast their relationship (and that between Eleanor and Henry) with those in the novels this story lampoons (not the best word choice - perhaps "chides" :) ) - and between the avowed love that Isabella Thorpe holds for James.

Frankly, the similarity between the Gothic novel and much of modern TV is hard not to draw. Both are over-sexed, over-stimulated, hyperventilating exaggerations of reality - and too much of either is probably not good for anyone :).

That makes it even worse. If John Thorpe likes something, there's an almost 100% chance that Catherine wouldn't like it either. But here, she does. It makes no sense at all, and is a very stupid change to make. As I said before, Udolpho's plot is almost identical to NA's, which is why Austen used Udolpho in the novel.

There really is no reason at all to make the change. Zero. Unless, of course, you're Andrew Davies and you like being perverse.

I can't say that I thought this version was awful, but it definitely had it's problems. It moved way too quickly and I was surprised to learn at the end of the movie that Catherine was supposed to be 18 years old! The actress looked like she was 14 or 15! It kind of creeped me out when General Tilney expressed interest in Catherine, because it wasn't made clear if he thought Catherine would make a good match for his Frederick, or if he was thinking of marrying her himself.

I was really surprised by how short this adaptation was! I am so used to nice lengthy productions. I am big fan of Andrew Davies, so when I saw his name I thought it would be good regardless of the time. However, it felt very choppy and rushed. I didn't care so much for the actress playing Catherine- I did enjoy JJ Field. The guy that played John Thorpe was really creepy with REALLY bad teeth. I would have liked to have seen more scenes of Northanger Abbey but that all went so quickly. I was disappointed for sure!

Some of the dialog went by so fast, both of us watching couldn't catch it, especially about Eleanor marrying at the end. It seemed it could have been longer. but I thought the leads were appealing and Catherine was really cute and her hair wasn't appalling like Anne Elliot's in Persuasion.