Read through, drool a bit over the gifs and the melodramz, and then let us know in the comments which version you think nailed it!
One of the utter joys of humanity is the habit of trends. If one product is successful in its given market, producers will reasonably assume that similar products will have similar success. And so, when Pride and Prejudice graced our theaters back in 2005, of course what should follow but a festival of Austen remakes? Between the BBC and ITV, all of Austen's titles were revisited in the wake of P&P's success.
The question today: which Sense and Sensibility gets your vote?
Old school nineties OR Retouched post-modern
If you haven't seen both--STOP EVERYTHING. Take the weekend off and immerse yourself. Youtube had both available, if you knew where to look, but both are currently blocked. Sorrow and sadness. You will need to visit the local library or break into your crazy anglophile neighbor's house to watch either in their entirety. Well worth the trouble...
While they're catching up, those of us already acquainted with this beloved love hexagon can get down to business.
Ang Lee and Emma Thompson did a glorious job on their feature film, no doubt about it. Elinor and Edward certainly have some sweet, lovely moments that engage us as believers in their love story.
The Lee/Thompson project is, perhaps, more of a condensed story--one continuous thread of lonely compassion. Whereas the Davies miniseries has more freedom in terms of time and content to follow the book's original storyline.
But Elinor and Edward are hardly half of the story, and the two productions do not develop significant differences in their affair. Miss Marianne is another story.
Blowsy and romantic Kate Winslet, or the wholesome whimsy of Charity Wakefield?
Marianne's side of the romance is not significantly altered between the two versions, but the stops along the path are different. Some of this can be attributed to the very different heroes who pursue her.
In a perfect world, at this point we'd have to break to refresh our drinks and buckets of ice, because her fellows are always worth our undivided attention.
On the one hand, we have Alan Rickman and Greg Wise. Emiently worthy as the older man and the younger scoundrel, these men certainly portray classic Regency men.
On the other, we have David Morrissey and Dominic Cooper. Very different variations on "calm under pressure" and "trouble waiting to happen," these portrayals help a modern audience connect with the appeal and folly of each.
(Can anyone find a clip of the opening credits? I've lost my head--I mean, copy.)
[MISTY'S GOT THIS.]
While on the subject of folly, it is not a bad idea to ponder one of the widest differences of interpretation between the two versions: Lucy Steele.
Imogen Stubbs delivers a subtle, understated performance that leaves a lot for the audience to assume. Which has good and bad points.
Hugh Grant's quintessential Englishman is more than a miss could hope for out of her local clergyman. Hard not to love a man who is good to your sister, keeps his promises, and finds you interesting.
[Misty's got this one, too. ;)]
Yup. My mind is definitely split. What about you? Which version gets your vote?
Don't forget to post links to clips that help you break this terrible tie...
[Oh, and last week on FFO, the US and UK versions of A Weekend with Mr Darcy went head to head, and the cutesy UK version won. Both are super cute, but I really wish you guys could see the US version in person, because a picture online doesn't do it justice. It's cute, yes, but it's also saucy. But anyway, UK wins!)
|Click the pic to be taken to the Austen in August Main Page!|
Thanks to faestock & inadesign for the images used to create this button.