Rating: 
Summary: Pissing on Austen
Review: I'm reminded of small minded 19th century composers "enhancing" Mozart symphonies so they'd be up to date. Or the Bee Gees' version of Sgt Pepper. Vandalism, as is this. PC (so 10 years ago). A moustache on the Mona Lisa (so 80-years-ago). What made these Hollywood victims think their little dogmas and anachronisms were improvements on the incomparable genius of Austen's favourite (and possibly most profound) novel? Missed the point entirely, omitting the highly significant symbolism (eg. Maria's scene at the garden gate). Generally clueless, extraordinarily annoying, frustrating (such a lot of money down the drain, and we still don't have a decent MP adaption), and insulting. Only thing for it: read the book. Repeatedly. You'll be amazed.
Rating: 
Summary: Austen or no Austen, thats the question!
Review: The movie shares the name and characters with the Jane Austen novel...and the similarity ends right there, in my opinion. The aura of the Augustan way of life is not well represented in the movie and doesnt do true justice to the mood Auten succeeds to create. The actors do a marvellous job, but the script writers have intrepreted the Austen masterpiece quite differently. It is arguable whether that makes the movie better or not, considering the fact it is quite challenging to take on a Austen movie to begin with. Overall, a nicely done movie. One should be cautioned that this movie will not serve as a substitute to reading the novel itself. Nevertheless, the movie serves as a nice introduction to the Jane Austen world...
Rating: 
Summary: I Love This Movie
Review: This is, by far, my favorite Jane Austen movie of recent years - and I've seen them all. I loved the way it was filmed - with very witty and romantic effects: having the protaganist address the audience, slowing down the frames to build romantic suspense. I thought it was masterful. Also loved Frances O'Conner's performance. When I saw this movie for the first time I swooned! I have watched it many times since. It did not get as much press or exposure as "Emma" starring the well known Gwyneth Paltrow and I think somehow this affects people's opinions - many more seem to rave about "Emma" - but I found Mansfield Park superior. Perhaps it's because of the unconventional views of the film, choosing to include a view of the less priveleged. For me it was a combination of all these things - editing & film techniques, approach to the story, a well chosen cast - that brought this together so effectively. I just love it!!!
Rating:
Summary: Not Exactly Like The Book......
Review: Well, this movie, while not exactly like the book, does capture the essence of what I think Jane Austen wanted to convey. I've read all of her books and there is always a little bit of cynicism and satire of the upper class society in them. I think Fanny was well portrayed, though not entirely as like she was in the book. I do think that it was a good move on the part of the screen writer to make her more confident as she matured though, that is usually how most people are anyway. Bertram was portrayed rather well, as were most of the characters. I think that a little more time should have been spent on Edward though, he was, after all, the love of Fanny's life. As a portrayal of life at that time, I found it to be excellent. It brought up many points in history that were issues at the time. Overall, I'd have to say that I'd recommend the movie to anyone who loves Jane Austen. One must be forgiving to screen writers when it comes to turning a book into a movie. Some plots are just too intricate. I think as long as the essence of what the author was trying to express is there, there's no harm is taking creative license.
Rating: 
Summary: Urgh - yet another bad Jane Austen adaption
Review: I'm begging production companies to stop torturing Austen fans with half-arsed, bad-casted adaptions of her books. I was so disappointed with this version of Mansfield Park. The film isn't true at all to the book...the only character well cast was Edmund (played by Johnny Lee Miller). Frances O'Connor, while I think she's a great actress, didn't fit the roll of Fanny Price at all. She was too outspoken & witty...Fanny Price in the book wasn't either. The only reason why I gave it two stars was for Alessandro Nivola -- but only because he's a cutie pie. Those wanting a good adaption should see the 1986 BBC production.
Rating: 
Summary: Very Enjoyable-if not thought of in terms of the book
Review: While I felt Mansfield Park was not one of Jane Austen's best books, I felt that the movie was so different that many could be disappointed and insulted with it. I would have been thoroughly insulted as well, but I watched it as if it was just another movie. It was a very well done movie, better than most movies out there, however do not watch it if you think movies should not be changed at all or very much. Pride and Prejudice (1995) was a six hour movie, but this was only 2 hours, and I understand the need to cut out several parts of the book. But parts such as the play were not included in the great detail it was in the book, because it happened to be a big part of the book. Characters- Sir Thomas was not, in my opinion, a person who would think of incest towards his niece! In the movie she made it out that he was a villain but in the book when he noticed fanny's change, fanny had thought that she regretted not loving him enough and wishing him to not return home, he did not look at her in a way that was less than decent.
Fanny- way too confident, not weak enough, and while placing jane austen's juvenalia was an interesting concept it changed much of fanny's personality, making her much more opinionated.
Mary Crawford-in the movie she seemed to be bisexual and attracted to fanny, she was not at all like that in the book.
Edmund-ignored throughout the movie. I actually wanted Fanny to end up with crawford in the movie! And when she ended up with edmund I could hardly care less.
She also changed other characters but I'm sure other reviewers made comments about that already. She never ever accepted the proposal! That's all I have to say. The commentary is interesting however it confused my opinion on what I thought the book was. Reading other reviews I see that she misinterpreted the book heavily. The movie is still enjoyable, but don't expect anything like the book.
Rating:
Summary: Good film
Review: Didn't read the book and have no intentions on doing so. The film itself was good. I saw nothing politically correct about it. The actors did a good job of portraying early 19th Century English society with all its warts and largesse. Watch and enjoy.
Rating:
Summary: From a true Jane Austen fan
Review: I have read Mansfield Park no less than 6 times and seen this movie at least that many. The movie is wonderfully done and highly entertaining, though it is not an exact representation of the novel. I find the other reviews interesting. It's true that Patricia Rozema took some liberties with this adaptation, but I certainly don't agree with some other reviewers that the only similarity between the book and the movie are the names of the characters. It is the same story, though the screenplay's Fanny Price is based more on Rozema's interpretation of what Jane Austen herself may have been like. She gives Fanny the thoughts, emotions and writings of Jane Austen herself. If you have the time, watch the commentary by Rozema on the DVD. It really explains her interpretation of the novel and includes many facts about Jane Austen's life. The BBC's Pride & Prejudice, very true to the novel and very enjoyable for me, moves too slowly for the average moviegoer and is too long to watch at one sitting. Mansfield Park will entertain the average person and perhaps spark interest in her writings.
Rating:
Summary: A brilliant adaptation
Review: I don't quite understand why this movie got skewered by people who claim to love Jane Austen so much. Austen was a master at satire and subtlety, so don't be shocked that the slavery plotline isn't obvious in the book. It is my conviction that few of Austen's characters are free from her own ridicule. The Fanny in the book was upright and moral (so is the one in the film) but she was also dull. The movie's Fanny has spirit and more human qualities where I felt the literary character was lacking. I know this is more a review of the adaptation of the movie, but so many reviews seem to be addressing that topic that I feel the need to defend this - one of the best movies I've seen in a while - wonderful adaptation of Austen. I wonder that people are so disgusted with the sketches Fanny finds in Tom's sickroom. Slavery was a disgusting and shocking thing, and I think any softened version of it would be doing an injustice to history, trying to turn a blind eye to human cruelty. The movie is smart and displays every person for what they really are, as they were portrayed in the book. If you go back and reread, try and look between the lines. Anyway, excellent movie. I must, in indignant fury with some of these reviews, defend the movie with a quote from Roger Ebert, who says, "anyone who thinks (Mansfield Park) not faithful to Austen doesn't know the author but only her plots." If you have the guts for a truly well done, sophisticated, smart film, that does not pander to the masses, enjoy. I'm sure you will.
Rating:
Summary: What a shame!
Review: I had just finished reading Mansfield park, and was very excited that a movie had been made. I was so disappointed! The only thing that follows the book are the names of the people and that Maria and Crawford take off together, but even that is portrayed differently than the book. In my opinion, Jane Austen portrayed, and desired, Fanny Price's character to be very gentle and respectful. This movie does it great injustice. I could write many more things that I disliked about the movie, but it is not worth my time. It is not worth the money to rent it, let alone buy it. What a shame they had to mess up such a sweet book! Shame on the people who wrote this pathetic storyline!!!
| 
