Amanda Price (Jemima Rooper) reads Pride & Prejudice every night
Update: Well, I liked the series. It ended rather quickly, but I found the first episode charming. At the bottom of this review, find links to my reviews of Epis 2, 3, and 4.
It’s unfortunate that ITV’s 2008 ‘Lost in Austen’, directed by Dan Zeff, shares the same title with the 2007 novel by Emma Campbell. The confusion is reflected in my sitemeter statistics, where people are (presumably) clicking on my review of the novel hoping to find my thoughts about the film.
Having watched the first episode of ‘Lost in Austen’, I can attest that the script, written by Guy Andrews, is nothing like Ms. Campbell’s novel. While I had problems with the plot of the book (or nonplot), I found the film refreshingly entertaining and Jemima Hooper a delight to watch. I even chuckled on occasion. The movie is what it is: entertainment for audiences who are interested in time travel and Austenesque period pieces.
Elizabeth Bennet (Gemma Arterton) enters through the shower stall door
One must suspend all disbelief and accept the film’s fun and frolicky intent in order to enjoy it. I would not try to make historical sense of the story, for some of the details are outlandishly wrong, and I would not try to make the time travel details logical. After all, how scientific could the premise of this story be? – A fictional character from a novel steps out of a doorway into a shower stall in a 21st Century London flat and communicates with a real person. Right there, any attempt to apply the laws of physics would make absolutely no sense.
Amanda's Sleezy Boyfriend
I’m a fan of time travel novels, especially Diana Gabaldon’s Outlander series and Jude Devereaux’s Night in Shining Armor. (Most recently, Laurie Viera Rigler tackled time travel in the Confessions of a Jane Austen Addict.) One of my all time favorite movies is that most romantic of 80’s classics, ‘Somewhere in Time’ with Christopher Reeve (at his handsomest) and Jane Seymour (at her primrosiest best.) So, I am disposed to like any story that transports a modern day character to a previous age. In my experience, no writer has made time travel seem realistically possible, not even Robert Heinlein, that master of science fiction, who tried his best. In Outlander, Claire steps from the 1940’s through a crack in the standing rocks on the fairy hill to 18th Century Scotland.
Mr. Darcy (Elliot Cowan) saves Mr. Bingley from embarrassment
In ‘Somewhere in Time,’ Christopher Reeve wears authentic period clothes and repeats a mantra over and over to reach Elise Mackenna (Jane) at the turn of the 20th Century. A Delorian transports the heroes across the time-space continuum in ‘Back to the Future’. Would any of these methods realistically transport us to another century? Of course not, and I no longer attempt to apply logic to this genre. (See links below.)
‘Lost in Austen’ is the story of a modern woman entering a time and place she dreams about, encountering customs and social mores that are familiar and unfamiliar at the same time. We assume that with our advanced technology and knowledge of history, people from our age who travel back in time would be in a superior position. As Jemima Rooper (Amanda Price) so charmingly demonstrates, that is not necessarily the case. She is a stranger in a strange land. Although Amanda can predict the future, she is bewildered by her situation, contrasting what “should” happen (Mr. Bingley’s attraction to Jane) with his unexplained preference for her (he caught a glimpse of her cleavage).
Mrs. Bennet (Alex Kingston) warns Amanda
In this tale Mrs. Bennet is still a flibbertygibbet, but as played by Alex Kingston, her spine is made of steel. She corners Amanda at the Assembly Ball and “favors her with a warning”, cautioning her not to obstruct any of her daughters in seeking a husband.
Amanda caught out by Charlotte
Tom Mison as Mr. Bingley
Amanda manages to dance with Mr. Darcy in a witty and awkward scene. His gallantry in rescuing his friend Bingley from embarrassment and his subsequent coldness to Amanda provides a delightful parallel-universe-counterpoint to Elizabeth Bennet’s first impression of him. Amanda, acutely aware that things are going awry, also knows how the plot of Pride and Prejudice develops, and her desire to push Jane towards Bingley so that he can become enamored of her places Jane in danger.
Mary, Kitty, and Amanda
I enjoyed the depiction of the Bennet sisters. Mary, Kitty, Lydia, and Jane act as a Greek chorus, proverbially reacting to Amanda’s modern witticisms with a collective: “Ooooh! What did you mean when you said that?” Charlotte Lucas is smart as a whip, not believing Amanda’s excuse for swapping places with Lizzy.
Lydia exposed to a modern cut
My major disappointment is with Mr. Bennet. I adore Hugh Bonneville, but in this first episode his Mr. Bennet comes across as the cartoonish one-dimensional character I expected to encounter when I read the advance notices of this film. I hope his role fleshes out in future episodes and that he will seem less dense. Also, once Elizabeth Bennet steps into the 21st century, she disappears. I am curious to know what her life is like in the present.
Hugh Bonneville as Mr. Bennet
I understand that critics are disposed to dislike this production. I was one of them when I saw the advance publicity. But frankly, given the pap we’ve been fed on t.v. (Has anyone seen the horror that is ‘Date My Ex’ on Bravo? In comparison Lost in Austen is sheer genius. Yeah, for anyone in the know, that’s meant to be a punny reference to another Bravo show.)
The Bennet family walks to church. Morven Christie as Jane Bennet is on the left.
As a viewer starved for all things British, I’ll take a romp through the English countryside anytime, and watch ballroom scenes, handsome gents in tight breeches, lovely ladies in Regency gowns, and a time travel plot – even a tepid one – for a couple of hours of entertainment.
For our U.K. friends, the trailer for the second episode of this mini-series can be seen at this link. Frankly, I can’t wait to see the rest of this show (surreptitiously, of course.) It reminds me of a Chinese meal. Delicious, but one is hungry for more just a few hours later.
- Update: My review of Episode Two
- Update: Review of Episode Three
- Update: Review of Episode Four
- Here’s a review that says the mini-series isn’t all that awful.
- Review by Britwriters
- Laurel Ann’s impression
- Time Travel Paradoxes
- Time Travel
Jane Austen's World 
[…] September 16, 2007 by Vic (Ms. Place) Lost in Austen: Create Your Own Jane Austen Adventure, by Emma Campbell Webster Please Note: My review of the ITV movie of the same name sits here. […]
Thanks for the great review. I am enjoying it also. It is much better than the advance publicist had lead me to anticipate. One thing that I am really happy with is that the screen writer chose to have the heroine Amanda fixated on the novel Pride and Prejudice and not the 1995 Mini-series of Pride and Prejudice. Please do not get me wrong. I adore the 1995 version of P&P and admire Colin Firth as Darcy as much as the next Janeite, but having her love the romance and characers of the book makes her an advocate of literature as opposed to lusting after the wet Darcy in the pond plunge like Bridget Jones did in the novel and the movie Bridget Jones’ Diary. I like smart heroines and this screen writer chose that difference, and I thank him for it.
I am looking forward to the next two episodes.
Cheers, Laurel Ann
I agree with you, Laurel Ann. Amanda is influenced by the novel and she’s a reader. Kudos to the script writer for sticking with Jane’s book. Thanks for your insights. I am looking forward to the rest of the series, which I am enjoying. Like you, I never thought I would say so. Vic
[…] does not find it particularly worthwhile and has enjoyed kicking it about, and Ms. Vic from Jane Austen’s World thinks it “a delight to watch.” Since it is a mixed film in itself, with historical […]
[…] review of episode one at Jane Austen’s […]
Sounds kind of fun. I wonder if we’ll get it here in the US anytime soon.
[…] in the UK this week and is garnering quite a bit of discussion at AustenBlog. Episode one was fun and frolicky, with more than a few improbable surprises. Catch my reveiw of Episode two on Monday, September […]
If you know your Austen pretty well, this production is a comedy hoot with the daft modern Amanda trying to fix up the P&P plot gone horribly wrong. Nice in jokes like Amanda works for ‘ Sandition Life ‘ Great cast, fast pace, punchy lines made for TV. This is where it scores much better than a studious adaption of the standard Austen novel. Finicky viewers can study the Hogarth prints on the Bennet’s wall – the rest can only have fits at Amanda’s antics.
[…] Lost in Austen, A Review of the Movie, Episode One: On this blog […]
[…] Lost in Austen, Episode One […]
Just got the chance to watch the Lost in Austen series here in the US on Ovation. What fun! I’m a mother to two under the age of 5 and BBC dramas are my little vacation in my own living room thanks to Netflix. What a fun and dreamy escape this was!
I also stumbled on this on Ovation and was instantly drawn into it. I’ve read all the criticisms of it. That the characters would not say the things that they were made to say. But that’s the point of it. Amanda’s being there changes things and therefore I believe what they did and said was quite believable. Gulp, even Jane marrying Collins. Though she must love her family more that I love mine because I don’t think that I could have done it. There are so many lines I really loved. For example “That’s Jane Austen spinning like a cat in a tumble dryer!” She herself acknowledges that it’s going totally unlike the novel. Anyway, I love it and am anxiously awaiting it being released on DVD here on April 14. I’m hoping it also is on iTunes so I can carry it around with me!
Jemima Rooper Pooper whatever her name is, is downright ugly!!
Most of the characters were not charming at all. They looked like they were trying to act like the characters.
A nice idea to start with, but turns out to be a ridiculously embarrassing production.
Elle you’re an idiot.
Hi folks,
Let’s keep our remarks civilized. This blog emulates the customs of the Regency Period. If you do not like something or someone, please use irony and wit to drive your barb home. While everyone is entitled to their opinion on this blog, it is the manner of its delivery that will persuade others.
Thank you, Vic
I, too, watched this humorous, witty production on the Ovation Channel, here in the U.S. Absolutely enjoyed it. I couldn’t wait for everyone to go to bed so I could watch it by myself. My sweet little pleasure for the last four nights! I recorded it, and cant get myself to delete it now that I am done. Next up, another Jane Austen adaptation of Pride and Predjudice – the Bollywood version – also on Ovation. Love that others love the books as much as me!!!
[…] Austen’s World: One, Two, Three, […]
I’m new to this so I am not sure but I think I’m commenting on the television series Lost in Austen. I must say I was disappointed that; after the works of Jane austen have been loved and admired for so many generations, the author of this show thought it necessary to include the worldly (and often inappropriate) expressions and actions.
I personally have found Jane Austen’s novels a welcome escape from our often sick and disturbing world. I hope with all my heart that when each and every person comes across a truly good and relatively pure book they enjoy it for its noble qualities as I have Jane Austen’s novels!
Camilla D.
LaurelAnn, I’m sorry to say that the subsequent episodes yielded to the temptation to dunk Darcy in a pond, never the best scene in the 1995 mini-series. I have just rented them as a dvd, and I also agree with Vic that it would have been interesting to watch more of Lizzie in modern London, for she does, by definition, exhibit much more of the wit that characterized Austen, rather than the slapstick that is also there. Amanda gives us more than enough of that. I didn’t think Mr. Bennett was so bad.
In regard to romantic time travel, Vic, did you see The Lake House? It was a rather sweet movie with two actors I don’t generally like, but my husband and I both enjoyed it when we rented it.
I got the dvd from the local library here in u.s. and have now watched it for the 5th time ! It becomes more enjoyable each time – The 1st time I was not sure wether I liked it or not, but anything to do with Darcy is viewable for me, but after having to see the ‘post modern’ moment again, and again and again…. I have decided that I love this film. You go girl!!!!
I saw the video last night and really enjoyed it! I may try watching it again on maureen’s recommendation. It was great fun. The writers did an amazing job. I was afraid it was going to use all the old dialogue and just put a new character in it. (The old dialogue is fine for the original, but I wanted to see something different for this story.) I was very happily surprised. It passed my expectations. Brilliant writing and great variations on the themes and insights into the characters we love! Wow!
I’m glad I not the only one that didn’t like it.
They were all trying to hard.
The story line had to many flaws.
Has anyone noticed that this is not really a time travel story? Amanda travels into the book – and moreover into her own reading of the book. This means that any anachronisms or misinterpretations can be attributed to how Amanda understands the book. Very clever of the scriptwriter to give himself this get-out-of-everything-free card!
Good point, Polly. The series is unique in that Amanda has fallen down the Rabbit Hole and meets characters, not people who once actually lived and breathed. Perhaps it was all a dream (?)
I never tire watching this series… It just makes me want to read all her published works again…
It was great when it aired in September, last year. Cosy Sunday nights in, just me, my cuppa of tea and DVD – watching Amanda takes us through her adventure and ending up with Mr. Darcy, even when trying her best to put things right with Elizabeth and Darcy towards the end. A was wonderful idea brought to TV. This stands alone in its own right. I am sure if Miss Austen was here, she would see the funny side – romance with a punch line! I cannot wait to see the film (I know old news) – Sam Mendes is reportedly planning to adapt ITV1’s Lost in Austen for the big screen. I hope this does happen and not be shelved like so many other projects…
Have you heard that the LIA film produced by Sam Mendes will have Amanda in, wait for it, New York (not London)?!! My God, will she be American too? What a disaster. Guy Andrews should forget the big screen adaptation and give us more of Jemima Rooper and Elliot Cowan et al. How about a sequel, Living in Austen? I don’t want to see the big screen version – won’t be the same.
Great Idea for a production, pitty about using Jemima Rooper. She played the part well however her humongous lips and really dark eyes gradually became more and more scary as the mini-series went on!!
Elliot Cowan played the part ok, though he is no Mc Fadden or Firth!
Wouldn’t mind seeing Gemma Arterton play Elizabeth Bennet again, say in the 21st Century
If freakishly huge eyes and lips are a qualification for the role they could give the American version to Anne Hathaway – and then turn it into a musical, which is the only genre the Austen rip-offs haven’t yet strayed into (as far as I know). As for Elliot Cowan … I never imagined that Mr Darcy looked like Sir Bob Geldof!
*Mac Fadyen that is.
They should have tried Francis O’Connor as Amanda Price. She played Fanny in Mansfield Park (the movie) only a few years ago and did it wonderfully.
[…] are tons of reviews finding the TV series Lost in Austen witty and light and fun. I wish I’d seen the same show. I championed the revisionist 1999 Mansfield Park […]
I found the series delightful – it was light-hearted and funny. I bought the DVD of the series and it’s been circulating around my friends (still waiting for it to come back one day)
but I found that some of my friends couldn’t stand it, or finish the series, because it felt so wrong. One of them remarked it as being a ‘betrayal’ of the ‘greatest love story ever told’ (ah, I hope I didn’t mess up that quote, but Pride and Prejudice is wayyy better than Romeo and Juliet, imho).
Personally, I disagree. We discussed the series briefly in our English Extension class, and (after picking it apart for a bit) decided that Jemima’s character is, essentially, a representation of the modern day female, who is clearly in love with the politeness and the customs of the Regency Era. Especially if it contains a Mr. Darcy!
And her having her ‘post-modern moment’! Loved that!
Elizabeth was great as well. She’s pretty much a modern-day feminist in her own right. I thought it was great how they swapped places. I always thought of Elizabeth as being rather headstrong and independent – she’d fit in rather well in our time. Yet there are some girls, like Jemima, who dislike the crudeness of our world today and prefer the customs of the Regency Era. I know I would, except I don’t know how I would handle brushing my teeth with chalk…
*like Amanda, sorry, I keep forgetting her name.
I just saw this whole thing on DVD . . . twice. It’s a delight! Absolutely the best “check film” I’ve ever seen. And by the way, Mr. Darcy does jump in the lake, so that Amanda can have her “postmodern moment.” It’s hilarious. “When life is gettin’ me down, I’ll be sure to go downtown,” says Mr. Bingley after hearing her after-dinner song.
I have to say I did NOT like this film. I got about half way through and found I had no desire to know how it ends. I thought the acting was awful. I turned it off and really do not feel any regret when I mailed off the unfinished film back to Netflix. While a fine idea to begin with the execution left something to be desired.
I think some people take it all too seriously. I laughed my head off. I loved how they came up with other sides to people’s stories, like Wickham. who cares if the actors weren’t perfect or if there were holes in the storyline, wasn’t it just fun knowing along with Amanda that the story was getting all messed up?! I was wonderfuly shocked when Jane married Bingley, thinking, no way it would go that far! Come on. It was great. Then again, I had heard no reviews about the series, I just happend to see something with the word “austen” in it and hit record on the DVR and watched it later. So I had no expectations.
I thought this was just awful. Blunt, coarse, and totally un-Austen like. The characters were often out of character, and I thought Amanda extremely unlikeable. Blech.
My goodness, some people here don’t like Lost in Austen all that much… I think it’s fabulous. Note, by the way, that it’s not a time-travel story: Amanda knows she’s going into a *novel*, not into the past. A much more interesting idea, to me. Putting the status of the novel-as-we-find-it-today at risk because the people she meets are getting it wrong is odd on many more levels than the idea that going back into the past might change the present. And… well, for example, having Amanda ask Darcy to get into the water, so he can come out again so Colin Firth-istically, showed, I thought, that the series’ makers were thinking not just about P&P but about our relationship to movies about it and how those movies relate to the novel. I waited for the DVD so I could watch it all the way through… and more than once. This isn’t supposed to BE a Jane Austen novel, any more than Chuck Berry’s “Roll over Beethoven” is trying to be (like) a work of Beethoven’s… Tom
It is very amusing! But it is also so embarrasing in some places, I can’t bare to watch it! I’m in the middle of watching this series, in where Amanda asks Mr. Darcy to take dip. Oh my god! I just can’t watch it. I have to engage myself with some else activity when my nerves will be calmed down and I can continue with this crazy series! Is this really a novel written in 2007?
It was nice to see a different perspective but it kind of ruined the original story. May be, in the end, if everything had happened just like in the original story just like jane and bingley’s marriage, may be the intrusion could have been forgotten, but since the ending was different, it just did not feel right!!!
I hadn’t heard of this series until a few days ago when a friend suggested I might enjoy it.
She was right. I did. I even got my husband to sit through it with me.
I’ve read mixed reviews, and I guess I can understand how die hard Pride and Prejudice/Jane Austen fans might be upset by this series, but I thought it was fun.
I will admit here and now that I’ve never read the book (I know – faint – I plan to remedy that soon), but I have seen a BBC mini-series of Pride and Prejudice (Jennifer Ehle and Colin Firth), and plan to see another version soon (Keira Knightley’s).
I love the original story, but I like this version for the off beat take. And time travel movie or not, it’s an interesting concept.
I don’t feel that it ruins the original story at all. I agree that some are taking it way too seriously.
As for the possible movie….Now that bugs me. Why can’t they leave well enough alone? This was a good series, it doesn’t need to be turned into a movie, and set in the US to boot.
I said the same thing after seeing this series…How about ‘Living in Austen’. lol
this was an atrocious series, i winced almost all the way through.
I would have been “cute” except for the horrible miscasting of Jemima Rooper. What in the world were they thinking? It really ruined the entire series. Absolutely frightening.
[…] indeed. It’s a trivializing very much in the spirit of the recent free adaptation of P&P, Lost in Austen. The mini-series begins with with a resonant reference […]
Well I love Pride and Predjudice. But I loved this also. This is so clever, yes it is different but that’s the fun of it. There are so many brilliant lines. I particularly loved the line “Miss Price is quite possibly the instrument of Satan”.
No, it isn’t historically accurate or realistic, it’s involves time travel. Besides in Pride and Predjudice do you really think during that time period that Darcy would have settled Wickham’s debts and overlooked Elizabeth’s family breeding to be with the woman he loved. A man so absolutely a product of his time. Given his social stature I think it would be more likely he would have married to ensure his continued success in society and perhaps have offered Elizabeth a position as his mistress. I know this will not be a popular opinion. But let’s face it the original work is a FANTASY too.
I believe I like this Darcy best. I like that this Darcy shows more of his conflict of falling in love with a totally unsuitable person. Trying to keep Miss Price at a distance by being relentlessly unpleasant. I wasn’t crazy about Amanda kneeing Collins in the groin……but it was funny. In fact the whole movie is so funny that my husband likes it too.
[…] Austen World reviews (episode 1, episode 2, episode 3, episode […]