I have not read the book and mainly watched this as a fan of many of the actors and as a historian. I am perfectly willing to allow that an author can take liberties with history in order to make an engaging story that works in a mini-series. However, that is no excuse for getting basic facts just wrong. Many of the royals were grossly mischaracterized, either as idiots, monsters, or both. Prince Eustace, for example, was not some craven boy but notorious for quite the opposite, and Prince Henry did not kill Eustace in battle. Stephen was not involved in any plots to murder Prince William or Henry I. Maud was empress because she married the Holy Roman Emperor, not because she took the title on a whim. Mistakes in basic monastic and village life were endless. It all got quite ridiculous. I hope no one watching this series believes that any of this supposed history was accurate. I enjoyed the story as a story, though I thought the bad guys were rather cartoonish in their evil. The cast was terrific, and made what was rather a soap opera into something much better. Kudos go especially to Tony Curran as Stephen, Natalia Wörner as Ellen, and Rufus Sewell as Tom Builder. So, if you like a good drama, this is fun and over the top. If you like history, this isn't it.
Reviews
3 Reviews
Bizarre Adaptation
20 January 2006
Normally BBC productions of Jane Austen are pretty good but Northanger Abbey is just odd. What were they thinking? This film has little of Austen's charm and ironically mimics the Gothic novels that Austen so wonderfully mocked. Not only that, the "gothic" sequences are tacky, over-the-top, and frankly silly. The actress playing Miss Morland is poorly cast with no obvious appeal to attract the attentions of an eligible bachelor, and though I rather liked the creepy Peter Firth as Mr. Tilney, he is not a bit like the novel, even when delivering dialog straight out of the book. Robert Hardy as General Tilney turned in one of his few terribly "ham" performances. This film was so bizarre and strange that I actually watched it again just to savor how freakishly wrong it was.
Pride and Prejudice
(1980)
Excellent Adaptation
7 December 2004
For anyone who has actually read "Pride and Prejudice" (rather than just knowing it from the A&E production), this is an excellent and lively adaptation of the book. It is worth watching just to see the parents, Mr. and Mrs. Bennett, in action. Unlike the A&E version, which took enormous liberties with Jane Austen's novel, much of the dialogue is straight from the pen of Austen herself. Adorable as Colin Firth is, David Rintoul does a much better job of capturing the essence of Dr. Darcy as created by Austen, and Elizabeth Garvie is a spirited Elizabeth Bennett. The supporting cast is also for the most part excellent, particularly Charlotte Lucas, Mr. Collins, and Lady Catherine. In a few places, the pace is stilted, and it was clearly made for TV before big budgets, fancy sets, and more modern technology. Nevertheless, if someone wants to view an adaptation true to Austen's creation, this is an enjoyable experience.
Tell Your Friends