Rating: 
Summary: Austin fans;RUN AWAY! RUN AWAY!
Review: I so wanted to like this movie...But alas, attempts to "modernize" Miss Austin's novel with nudity, sex scenes and graffic depiction of sexual abuse of slaves leaves me cold. The director seemed to have a general lack of regard for the sensibilities of the period. The overall effect was the fractured feeling that the movie couldn't decide in which century it wanted to reside. My advice is to steer clear of this adaptation and read "Mansfield Park" for yourself.
Rating:
Summary: Jane Austen Disrespected!
Review: This movie is awful. I was so disappointed to see that the novel was not followed closely. The director actually had the odacity to try to improve on Jane Austen, which just cannot be done. The story line has been twisted, the costumes and hairstyles are mediocre at best (especially Edward's!), and the graphic sexual scene is completely uncalled for and inappropriate. Jane Austens novels have a pervading modesty and the director just ignored that. Also, the business about slavery was totally out of place. Use your money on something else -- like the BBC's joint effort with A&E of "Pride & Prejudice", which is a truly wonderful film adaption of an Austen Novel.
Rating: 
Summary: A Unique Spin on Jane Austen
Review: I'd like to point out from the very beginning that this is not Jane Austen's "Mansfield Park". Fanny Price in the novel was irritatingly vapid and by the end I didn't care one way or another what happened to her. In my opinion what happened, bad or otherwise, was her own fault. After reading it I was unimpressed by it, after "Pride and Prejudice" anyone would be. So I'll rate this movie on its worth alone. I believed the acting to be superb, the characters were relatively three dimensional and as in any good movie I started to feel for them. Frances O'Connor as Franny, the soft-spoken, passionate heroin was perfect. She gave the right amount of placity and sauciness to the character. Johnny Lee Miller as Edmund was irresistable with the combination of shyness and passion hidden in his character. I found I didn't have the heart to hate Alessandro Nivola as Mr. Crawford because he seemed so pitiful and forlorn. Embeth Davitz brought a perfect amount of immorality to Mary Crawford and made her irritating but perfectly played. Amoung the cast of relatively secondary characters were some hilarious and touching portrayals of the other inhabitants of the estate. Sir Bertram's reformation is an example. Fanny deserves to earn the admiration of Edmund and her secondary family and her morality makes her admirable, but it's morality to an extent and doesn't cross the line into being annoying and trying for the viewer. It's true that the climax of Mary Crawford's defense of her brother isn't truly shocking, but it does bring a cruel depth to the character that's enough to change most previous opinions about her. True, a few parts of the movie do make me want to fast-forward for a scene but the overall movie is an engrossing portrayal of another era long-gone. Tip: Movie stores are selling "Mansfield Park" previously viewed for about ten dollars.
Rating:
Summary: Mansfield Machinations
Review: - It is understood that a screenwriter must be allowed some lattitude in adapting an author's work, in order to accomodate the necessary differences between film and the printed page. However, it is to be hoped that the rendition of a great classic will bear some resemblance to the original. For Patricia Rozema, it would appear that it was sufficient to borrow some of the names of Austen's characters, and very little else. Young student's hoping to utilize this film as an easy substitute for a book report will be quickly discovered, for Rozema has significantly altered the unfolding of events, and has omitted several important characters as well. While Rozema's Miss Price is very appealing to modern tastes, she certainly does not suffer the painful shyness which pervades the very being of Austen's heroine, and thus we are denied the full impact of Fanny's eventual triumph. Rozema has concocted her own version of the story which adds a social message about the evils of slavery. What she has created is not without merit. For those who have never read Austen, it makes for a very satisfying film, but Rozema should take full credit for it's authorship and thank Jane Austen only for her inspiration. For those who wish to see something more closely in harmony with Austen's novel, the 1986 BBC version (currently available only in VHS) will prove far more satisfactory. It is interesting that the more authentic version claims to be "Based on the Novel by Jane Austen, Dramatized by Ken Taylor" while the jacket of Rozema's DVD loudly proclaims that this is "The Story Jane Austen Loved Best." Were this film to be judged solely on its own merit it should probably rate four stars, but for its pretense to claim Austen's authorship, I cannot give it more than one.
Rating: 
Summary: Amazing movie....
Review: From the moment this movie started I was in awe. It was acted superbly. The setting was amazing. The story is timeless. The most amazing thing about this movie is that the director added Jane Austen's adolescent stories into the film! The story about the woman who "lived beyond her means and was imprisoned and partially eaten by her two young sons" is my favorite! This is a must see!
Rating: 
Summary: INFERIOR TO THE RECENT SENSE & SENSIBILITY AND EMMA
Review: Unlike Austen, whose writing always radiates a joi de vivre, this film is full of annoying affects (filming scenes through windows, freeze-framing the action, etc.) that distance the viewer from the action. The attempts to modernize the story are well intentioned but jarringly anachronistic. If you decide to see the film, get the DVD so you can hear the director's interesting commentary (AFTER seeing it without listening to the commentary). You'll understand the film better, even if it doesn't make you like the film more.
Rating:
Summary: wonderfully romantic
Review: personally, i thought this movie was very good. i haven't read the book and therefore do not know if it strays from the original novel as other reviewers have said, but in my opinion the plot was intriguing and well-written. true the slave parts were a bit morbid as when tom's pictures are shown, and i suppose some of these scenes could have been omitted. but the romantic life of the heroine fanny price was moving. you found yourself wanting her with edmund then when henry started showing nobler intentions you thought maybe he was the one, then you went back to edmund again after henry had an affair with mariah. the confusion was what added to the quality of this movie. all in all i'd recommend this to all people who like a romantic period comedy, i wasn't disappointed and i hope you won't be either.
Rating:
Summary: A new addition....
Review: To tell the truth, I could care less how authentic this film is to the novel. In the end I loved it, and that was enough for me. I have seen several other recent Austen adaptations, and read her work. I first read (and saw) Pride and Prejudice. I liked the film version, and the novel as well, but I was not intrigued as I was with this film. And I sat, waiting for Persuasion to pick up -- it never did. Mansfield Park is my newest addition to my top ten favorite movies of all time. As for the accusations of lesbianism - I can easily see when one could assume that. It however, was not the case. When Miss Crawford is "rehearsing", she is simply trying to subtly seduce Edmund, case closed. If you wish to see flat acting, look into another Austen adaptation. As for the slavery issue, I believed it showed just how much a heroine Fanny is. Some have said that Austen her self would know nothing of it. Completely untrue! England was practically the center of an ongoing Abolitionist/pro-slavery debate at the time! I think in the end, Austen's points come across. Notice this - When Mrs. Price tells Fanny "I married for love" (Implying that is why she suffers so) to the comparison of Mariah who marries for money, has an affair, and becomes an outcast. This movie truly drew me in. I particularly loved the ballroom scenes -- truly enchanting. I will watch it many times in the future - and am sure I will find new things to love with every viewing.
Rating: 
Summary: Interesting, but extremely flawed.
Review: The makers of this film modernized most of the charm out of Jane Austen's Mansfield Park, and thus made a film that is not as enjoyable as it should be. There is a dark edge to it that is not part of Austen's work. Another problem I had was that the villain/useless rake did not seem very rakish. The heroine, Fanny Price, is a penniless, poor relation of a wealthy family. He can have no ulterior motives in pursuing her. She has no money or family connections. When she turns him down, due to her love for a cousin, this rake follows her to her family home where he sees the poverty and coarse living conditions of her family, and still he ardently seeks her hand in marriage. I thought that showed he had quite a lot of character. Meanwhile, the Edmund, the cousin Fanny wants, is busy pursuing a suitable match. Since I have not read this Austen book, I really hoped that Fanny would come to see that the man she thought was shallow really was not, while the man she admired was the shallow one. It seems that the producer had her own agendas going here. Introducing the slavery issue is out of place, and the hints at lesbianism certainly don't come from Austen's pen. The biggest problem with here is the total lack of the clever, witty dialog one expects of an Austen movie, and the lack of humor. Still, it wasn't all bad. The costumes were lovely. The sets were interesting, though I'm not sure why they chose to show the interior of Mansfield Park as such a rustic place. That seems inaccurate. The movie kept my interest for one viewing, but it's not something I'd ever want to watch again. I'd like to see a more faithful adaptation of the book, but this is still a movie worth seeing one time.
Rating:
Summary: Misguided attempt to redefine Austen
Review: This outing promised to deliver a fresh, more plausible Jane Austen. Laden down with too many agendas and obvious anachronisms, this film lacks the crackerjack wit of the author, although it is straining very hard to do...well, something. O'Connor is a promising find, but she is unevenly directed here. Alessandro Nivola, however, is the quintessential Henry Crawford: tortured by his first venture into a love of the heart. Nivola flawlessly depicts a man who has never had to practice restraint, or hear the word "No" in response to anything he has truly desired. Nonetheless, this film misses its mark.
|
