which version is best?
Of the two versions, which one is the better? I just finished the book today and I always like to see film adaptations, so I consult the Austen-ites to steer me right. :)
Ignore the trolls!
I've never seen the 1980s version, but I hear it's not great. But then, I did see the 2007 version and I didn't like it at all. I thought Andrew Davies tried too hard to 'sex up' this version and that did not work for me. Catherine is a total innocent, and she does not daydream about getting naked with Henry. This adaptation also strongly implies that Isabella slept with Captain Tilney. I have read the book several times and NEVER believed that to be the case. Isabella is a lot of things, but stupid is not one of them. And sleeping with Captain Tilney would have been a VERY stupid thing to do.
shareActually, this is the version I chose (based solely on the clips shown in the Men of Period Drama video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTH-GS2x9Ng ) and while I enjoyed it, the daydreams WERE overly sexual. Shame, because it was otherwise a wonderful way of showing how crazy her imagination could be. And I agree about the sleeping-together part--it showed Captain Tilney to be an even worse cad and made me feel a little sorry for Isabella.
Otherwise, it was very good, I thought.
Ignore the trolls!
Neither version is particularly good, but I'd advise anyone considering watching an adaptation of NA to avoid the '86 version like the plague. Dreadful, dreadful, dreadful. This adaptation has a nice lead couple and Mrs Allen was excellent.
I lost my jobshare
What? Why?... Not the Phantom Menace?
Catherine is not a total innocent, simply based on the novels she was reading. Confused, with many misapprehensions, for sure - but not a total innocent. In fact, I got a good chuckle out of the simplistic and unrealistic way that sexuality was displayed in her dreams.
AD sexed up the story, of course, and added in a modern slant in regards to the Isabella/Capt. Tilney relationship, but I can live with that modernization, though I can understand why many might not (mostly because it makes her look foolish - but then again, that is implied by Eleanor in the novel). I also like the simplification of the General's motives, making him a bit easier to understand in a 2-hour format.
Yes, that was a good shortcut they gave it, to have Catherine believe Mr. Tilney was still angry with her over her mental accusations against the General and that's why she was being turned out of the house so shamefully. On the other hand, I am closer to Julie's opinion regarding Catherine's innocence. I had the impression that Catherine was rather childlike due to her lack of experience, and all of the dominant/submissive imagery was far beyond anything her narrow-though-active imagination would have the chance to cook up.
Ignore the trolls!