Mansfield Park

Rating:
Summary: Magnificent film for romantics
Review: I am a huge fan of Jane Austen and her writing style. They always make me fall in love with all her characters, Mansfield Park included. A lot of the time when a book is made into a movie the movie is a big let down. But in the case of Mansfield Park that is not true. The movie is fun and creative and tells a tale of true love. I really recommend it if you love romantic films like me.

Rating:
Summary: Not faithful but entertaining
Review: As has been mentioned before, this is not a faithful adaptation of the book. Some of the characters have been tinkered with in order that modern viewers might identify with them and one or two from the book are never even mentioned. That being said, I found the movie, taken on its own merits, quite entertaining. The director did take some liberties incorporating events and dialogue from Jane Austen's personal papers into the character of Fanny, but I did not find the changes to be entirely bad. Several changes and additions to the plot and characters are explained in the notes to the New York Public Library Collector's Edition of the book (which includes excerpts from Austens papers) and bolsters some of the director's more marked changes, such as the slavery issue and the "Completely Biased" history of the British monarchy. All in all, not as good as the BBC Pride and Prejudice, but worth seeing.

Rating:
Summary: If you love Jane Austen, you probably won't like this movie.
Review: I may be wrong, but if you you admire Jane Austen's works, full of inimitable wit, intelligent character descriptions, stunning phrasing and wonderfully crafted dialogue, I do not think you will like this movie. Again, I may be wrong. I am not here to review the movie for you. Only to spare you a couple of bucks on a movie rental if you are one of those people who would prefer a movie that adopts the name, characters, etc. of a classic work such as Mansfield Park to be much, much more similar to the original work. (Whether or not the movie claims to be based on the novel, as I have understood it is not referenced in the actual film. Here I may be wrong as well.) I think my favorite Austen work ventured on film would be the BBC version of Pride and Predjudice all though it is not the only one I think well done. Hope this review helps someone. :)

Rating:
Summary: Hey, I loved it!
Review: Sorry, angry people, but me and my wife really enjoyed this film, back in 99'. We found it fun, original, creative, a beautiful work all in all. I'm not an expert on Austen, but have read and love some of her books. Also, I've seen several movie and TV adaptations: among them, 'Mansfield Park' is in my opinion one of the best.In many ways, it brings a refreshly different yet respectful approach to JA's novels.

Rating:
Summary: Jane is turning over in her grave!
Review: This movie is not worthy of being called a Jane Austen classic! The characters are not true to the book and the story has been monkeyed with as well. The social statements made are ones we may find pivitol for today, but were not primary issues of the 18th century and certainly not issues in this particular book. Buy any of the other recent J.A. movies - they're all worth your time and money - but leave this one on the shelf.

Rating:
Summary: Interesting adaptation
Review: Mansfield Park is a love story set in Regency England. Elements of the plot and the characters will be familiar to Jane Austen fans, as this novel shares much in common with her other works. (In addition, the actress playing Maria also appears in Persuasion.)
The movie uses the main characters and basic plot of Austen's novel as well as her early works and letters as a departing point, being forced by time limits and the director's interests to pare down the novel and change some of the story's focus. This speeds along the plot but hinders the development of some characters and cuts out some of Austen's witty banter and biting social observations.
Patricia Rozema, the screenwriter and director, took some risks in making this adaptation. She has presented Fanny as a strong individual who writes, speaks her mind, and thus appeals to modern viewers. In addition, she has infused the movie with modern sensibilities. It is true that the other adaptations--and Austen herself--often neglect the world beyond the well-to-do as well as the darker side of their society. The frank depiction of Fanny's lower class family is the best realized of the director's intentions to more fully capture life at the time. Suggestions of sexuality, including an erotic scene between two female characters, for the most part intend to flesh out characters but may offend some viewers. The inclusion of drug use and slavery especially would have been more effective if woven into the story better, and a subtheme of the role of music and other arts is sadly dropped after suddenly appearing.
Although the screenplay undoubtedly could have benefited from some editing, the movie is enjoyable to watch. The modern elements detract from the sense of authenticity but do make this movie approachable for a modern audience. Frances O'Connor is captivating as Fanny Price, and Alessandro Nivola gives Henry Crawford a real sense of humanity. I liked listening for bits of Jane Austen's juvenalia and letters--some of the movie's best lines come from these works.
This is, however, my least favorite of the recent Jane Austen adaptations due to its unevenness. Nevertheless I recommend that all who are intrigued by this movie go ahead and see it, especially before you purchase it. You may love it; you may simply like it, as I do; or you may be so appalled at the changes from Austen's novel that you hate it. Bottom line: Give it a chance. It's not the best Austen adaptation, but it's not bad.
Note: the DVD has a widescreen version of the movie, the theatrical trailer, a short feature with brief interviews of the director and four main actors discussing what about the story and Fanny Price (as presented in the movie) appeals to them, and a rambling commentary by Ms. Rozema about her modern take on Jane Austen's work.

Rating:
Summary: Jane Austen is Rolling in her Grave
Review: If you like the type of movie that takes great liberties with a novelist's work, you'll like Mansfield Park. I love most of the works of Jane Austen, and was amazed at how truly awful the writing, acting, and scenery were in this movie. It took a great deal of nerve to call it Mansfield Park. If you're an Austen purist, you may like the earlier version, but bear in mind that it was made decades ago with a smaller budget. I own that particular version, and have watched it and reread the novel several times.

Rating:
Summary: Great movie but far from accurate
Review: I rate this movie five stars only because of it's cast and filming and in no way how true it is to the book. If I were to judge the movie based on it's accuracy it would recieve one star. If you are wanting to see this movie because you have not the time to read the book by all means see the movie but know that it is flawed in most ways and is very decieving as to the actual characters Jane Austen invented. Fanny Price was one of Austens least favorite characters and was acutally very irritating to most of her readers. Unlike in the movie where she is a very agreeable character. Most of the characters in the movie were protrayed very differently then the book. But if you wanting to see this movie for the sake of just enjoying it then it is such a great movie. The casting was wonderful right down to the evil Mrs. Norris.

Rating:
Summary: Reinterpretation that grapples with conceived flaws
Review: Mansfield Park is the least favorite of Jane Austen's novels for me. I always got the feeling that she was warring with her own impulses and instincts to come up with its proper, rather formal ending. It feels like an ugly duckling growing phase in her oeuvre, so now we come to this film of the book. Evidently they had the same problems so many of us did with Fanny Price's 'passivity ', so they tried to make her into a more shrewdly observant commentator like her creator was, which was an interesting approach. ( I had seen the BBC version by the way in which Fanny seemed like the little shocked mouse radiating potent disapproval on an entire househole, psychically manipulating others or trying to in the name of prudent conduct.) By making Fanny more like Jane, they tried to make her more approachable, admirable, but a little of the subtleties of the family's interactions was lost - due to time demands in that format, which were inescapable in the novel and BBC version. I did not mind that approach, except that it made it even more excruciating when Henry Crawford ( Alessandro Nivola ) turns up, flirts shamelessly with the Bertram sisters, only to recognize something better or more compelling about Fanny Price and to court her instead. Mr. Nivola really brings that charming scoundrel to life, so much so that it is torture to watch Fanny accept and then reject him. You sympathize more for him and you suddenly see why he would act out the way he does after Fanny's treatment of him. In this casting, the performance itself on Mr. Nivola's part, and the choices of the filmmaker, this film shines a harsh light on what seemed like an unsatisfactory choice that Jane Austen made. The original ending seems like a clinical imposition and the film reminds one of the road not taken. The character of Edmund was wonderfully cast too, but still, and no one seems to have brought this up even in the book reviews, Edmund and Fanny are FIRST COUSINS. I mean...EWWW! (It makes one wish for a time machine, so one could go back and have a little chat about genetics and social taboos with Jane Austen.) If you loved the novel as it was, then you won't like this movie. If you found Henry Crawford beguiling in the novel, this movie will be a wonderful torment, until it becomes frustrating when Jane Austen's plot goes it's inevitable way.

Rating:
Summary: movies have a right to be interpretive
Review: i believe when making a movie adaptation of a book, esp. from a very different time period, one has to consider the fact that the director and all involved are working in the present and therefore to be historically faithful and precise to the book is always interpretive. I applaud any director who will use their own creative and conceptual knowledge to bring out an interpretation that is also relevent with today's times - it is a dialogue between the book, its history and the movie medium [see Women in Love]. Any reader of any book has a subjective opinion. I've read all of Austen's books EXCEPT for Mansfield Park [i have to admit i avoided it because i didn't like the heroine's name] and now because of this movie I am compelled to read the book. That in itself is a good thing - most movie adaptations of books these days make people read less - this makes me want to read more. Most Austen movie adaptations are predictable and somewhat fluffy and I'd be hard-pressed to believe that Austen herself would discourage her work to be remade with another concept in mind. The director granted me a different take on Jane Austen and because I love her novels so much, I am glad to see even more how her writing impacts on my life through the issues and imagery brought up in this movie.