Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Movie review’ Category

I love old-fashioned, sentimental movies filled with likable characters and well told stories. I like films that take me out of time and place and land me smack dab in another world. I adore ensemble casts made up of famous and not so famous British actors. Ergo, I am wild about Cranford, which will air at 9 pm tonight on PBS’s Masterpiece Classic

This early Victorian tale, based on the writings of Elizabeth Gaskell, is about change and resisting change. Cranford is a sleepy town that time passed by until the coming of the railroad. It is ruled by women – Amazons, as Elizabeth Gaskell described them.

Eileen Atkins as Miss Deborah Jenkyns and Francesca Annis as Lady Ludlow are at the pinnacle of Cranford society: the former rules over poor widows and spinsters, and the latter commands everyone’s respect as the lady of the manor. These two powerful women are suspicious of anything that upsets their well-ordered lives. Miss Jenkyns cannot abide Charles Dickens’s modern stories, or suck juice from an orange in front of others, since to her the very thought of the word ‘suck’ is abhorrent. News that a railroad is coming to ruin her perfect town is so distressful that it brings on an apoplectic fit.

Lady Ludlow firmly believes that people should remain in their station and behave accordingly. She will not hire servants who can read or write, declaring that too much education upsets the natural order of things and would foment a revolution, as it did in France. This subplot sets up the film’s dramatic ending.

Simon Woods as Dr. Harris, represents new ideas and innovation. A frisson goes through the community when he elects to save Jem Hearne’s injured arm rather than amputate it. After the young doctor’s successful but revolutionary treatment of setting the bone and stitching the wound, his partner Dr. Morgan (John Bowe) declares testily, “Cranford has been disturbed by you.” The old doctor, thinking to relieve his work load and to turn his practice over to a younger physician once he retires, is completely taken aback by his assistant’s newfangled ways. “Cranford is a town that knows itself, he admonishes the doctor. “It is a town at peace.”

Cranford is also a town that takes care of its own. The staid ladies of Cranford donate their expensive candles to allow the doctor to practice his modern surgical techniques on the young carpenter before it is too late. They are charmed by this single man, a rare commodity in a town filled with spinsters. Many of the plot’s developments and misunderstandings that ensue are caused by their wishful thinking.

The people of Cranford are adept at hoarding scarce goods, such as candles and coal for fire. The lace incident, which, next to the cow incident, is one of my favorite scenes in the film, is all about recycling. Hand made foreign lace was a precious commodity, especially for a widow living on a meager income of 100 pounds. Any article of clothing that still had value was laundered, mended, or reworked rather than thrown out. When the cat swallowed the lace, along with the buttermilk that was bleaching it, it led to a series of events that had me choking with laughter. The ladies’ expressions as they watched a cathartic mixture being forced down the poor cat’s throat and listened to the ignominious expulsion of milk and lace into a boot were priceless.

Careful attention to detail was paid in this production, from costumes, such as the frayed bonnet of the impoverished widow (played by Julia McKenzie with Imelda Staunton at left), to the setting (the British Heritage village of Laycock), to props (two footmen huffing and puffing as they run while carrying their mistress in a sedan chair), to the plaintive wails of the cat as it expels the sadly abused lace.

As a drama, Cranford has it all: young romance (Kimberley Nixon as Julia Hutton at right), old romance, sweet comedy, dreadful calamity, deep sorrow and profound happiness. The town is populated with individuals who do what is right for themselves, their families, and their fellow man, even if it means breaking the law. I’ve read the book and was struck by how well Heidi Thomas’s script holds up against Mrs. Gaskell’s novel, which was actually a series of vignettes written for Household Words, a magazine published by Charles Dickens. Oh, the story is melodramatic and there are a few too many coincidences to be believed, but the characters are so well defined and likable that one forgives the script’s treacly overtones and neatly tied up ending.

Jane Austen’s novels were never so sugary sweet, but this film production offers us an interesting glimpse of a world that Cassandra Austen, Jane’s beloved sister, must have known before she died. Changes caused by the industrial revolution had swept England, and new inventions in manufacturing, machines, science, and travel caused wholesale changes in how people lived and worked. Jane Austen only caught a glimpse of what was to come, but Cassandra lived long enough to see macademized roads replace dirt roads, gas lights put up on public streets, and steam engines overtake stage coaches as public transportation. Other aspects of society remained the same, such as the plight of widows and spinsters whose income was inadequate, and a high mortality rate among children.

Post Script: Winning her first BAFTA award at the age of 73, Eileen Atkins edged Judi Dench for best actress for her performance as Miss Jenkyns. Eileen wasn’t sure about the role at first, saying, “I didn’t think it was too good a part – I thought she was the only one who wasn’t funny.”

More about Cranford:

  • Penny for Your Dreams features a series of great Cranford reviews. Here is the link to Episode One if you don’t mind spoilers, along with the other four posts.

I would also like to direct you to Laurel Ann’s Cranford review on Austenprose, and Kay Daycus’s take on this movie adaptation. Mrs. Elton offers a unique perspective about this first episode on Jane Austen Today. Learn more about Elizabeth Gaskell in Jane Austen in Vermont. See you next week for the second installment!

Read Full Post »

Inquiring readers, Ellen Moody, has been writing a series of interesting posts about Jane Austen movie adaptations, comparing several movies of the same novel.

Click here to read Sense and Sensibilities Alter the Landscape of Austen Films.

Read Full Post »

The Yorkshire Post wrote a review of Miss Austen Regrets four days ago. In it, script writer Gwynneth Hughes, who was interviewed for the article, traces the film from conception to realization. This is one of the best reviews of the film I have read, in part because so much of the material comes straight from Ms. Hughes, who provides her rationale for choosing specific scenes and themes. The review ends with this paragraph: “Ms Hughes has no regrets about her portrayal of JA. “People will find my Jane (and Olivia’s) surprising, maybe, but I stand by everything I wrote. It’s my account of how she might have been, and I don’t think she would have been any gentler or sweeter. She was no shy spinster.””

I’m glad Ms. Hughes made it clear that her account of Jane’s life is her own and therefore subject to interpretation. I also give her great credit for not making much ado of Jane’s short youthful fling with Tom Lefroy, and for writing such an intelligent script.

Read Full Post »

Jane takes care of henryThe script from Miss Austen Regrets uses language from Jane’s letters and writing, and scenes from events that actually occurred in her life. For these reasons, the film is worth watching and rewatching – in addition to Olivia Williams’ complex and mature performance. I wish the tone of the movie had been less somber (read my review here), and had concentrated more on Jane’s sparkling wit and amazing publishing success, but many months after viewing the film, I am still left with a strong and positive impression.

One of the film’s historically significant scenes shows Jane’s meeting at Carlton House in 1815 with Rev. James Stanier Clarke, the Prince Regent’s librarian. Jane’s favorite brother, Henry (right in movie), lived in London at the time, where he worked as a banker and acted as Jane’s agent. At this prolific juncture of her life, Jane’s writing career had taken off and her books were selling well. Several of the Austen brothers were experiencing financial setbacks, and Jane’s added income must have relieved them from no small amount of anxiety.During Jane’s visits to London in 1815 to revise proof-sheets (of Emma, one supposes), Henry fell seriously ill and Jane spent her time nursing him (Top left). The doctor who attended Henry was also one of the Prince Regent’s physicians. Edward Austen-Leigh writes about his encounter with Jane in A Memoir of Jane Austen:

In the autumn of 1815 [Jane] nursed her brother Henry through a dangerous fever and slow convalescence at his house in Hans Place. He was attended by one of the Prince Regent’s physicians. All attempts to keep her name secret had at this time ceased, and though it had never appeared on a title-page, all who cared to know might easily learn it: and the friendly physician was aware that his patient’s nurse was the author of `Pride and Prejudice.‘ Accordingly he informed her one day that the Prince was a great admirer of her novels; that he read them often, and kept a set in every one of his residences; that he himself therefore had thought it right to inform his Royal Highness that Miss Austen was staying in London, and that the Prince had desired Mr. Clarke, the librarian of Carlton House, to wait upon her. The next day Mr. Clarke made his appearance, and invited her to Carlton House, saying that he had the Prince’s instructions to show her the library and other apartments, and to pay her every possible attention.

In the film, Jane is shown as feeling some apprehension and awkwardness as she walks through the grand house accompanied by footmen in livery to meet Rev. James Stanier Clarke (left in movie). Although no record Watercolour of Jane Austen (?)of the meeting survives, Jane’s correspondence with Mr. Clarke is well known. Jospehine Ross reveals in Jane Austen: A Companion that Mr. Clarke was slightly smitten with the author (p 38). A recent exciting find of Mr. Clarke’s Friendship Book contains a small watercolour likeness of a woman that many experts believe to be one of Jane. (See image at right.)

During this meeting, Mr. Clarke revealed the Prince Regent’s request to have her next novel dedicated to him. The prince was a great admirer of Jane’s novels and he kept editions of her works in all his houses. The “honour” of the Prince’s request might have induced mixed feelings in Jane, who reveals in this letter:

“I suppose all the World is sitting in Judgement upon the Princess of Wales’s Letter. Poor woman, I shall support her as long as I can, because she is a Woman, & because I hate her Husband…” – February 16, 1813

After Jane returned to Hans Place, she was not quite sure of the exact nature of Mr. Clarke’s request, and wrote this letter to clarify her confusion:

Sir, I must take the liberty of asking you a question. Among the many flattering attentions which I received from you at Carlton House on Monday last was the information of my being at liberty to dedicate any future work to His Royal Highness the Prince Regent, without the necessity of any solicitation on my part. Such, at least, I believed to be your words; but as I am very anxious to be quite certain of what was intended, I entreat you to have the goodness to inform me how such a permission is to be understood, and whether it is incumbent on me to show my sense of the honour by inscribing the work now in the press to His Royal Highness; I should be equally concerned to appear either presumptuous or ungrateful. – November 15, 1815

When Emma was printed in March of 1816, Jane wrote this dedication to the Prince:

TO
HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS
THE PRINCE REGENT,
THIS WORK IS,
BY HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS’S PERMISSION,
MOST RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED,
BY HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS’S
DUTIFUL
AND OBEDIENT
HUMBLE SERVANT,
THE AUTHOR

Read more on this topic at these links:

Read Full Post »

Cast of My Boy Jack

My Boy Jack

My Boy Jack will be shown on PBS tonight at 9 pm. Click here to read my review of this powerful movie (Warning: spoilers) and here for Laurel Ann’s post on Carrie Mulligan, who played Elsie Kipling. Both posts also solicit your knowledge about movies in Six Degrees of Austen Adaptation Separation. Rudyard Kipling’s connection to Jane Austen is his powerful short story, “The Janeites,” which popularized the term, and his well-publicized admiration for the author.

Jane SmilesMiss Austen Regrets

Miss Austen Regrets.com offers a variety of current posts and photos of the film, to be shown on BBC on April 27th. Click here to see the stills I pulled from the film, and here for my review, Miss Austen Regrets Perhaps a Bit Too Much For My Taste. Learn more about Olivia Williams on this PBS press site.

Andrew DaviesAndrew Davies

In a recent interview with the Birminham Post, Andrew Davies shares his well-known insights on sexing up the classics for film adaptations. In a slightly older interview with CNN, Mr. Davies continues to expound on his script writing philosophy.

Best Quote Seen Over the Ether:

It was very entertaining, but shouldn’t have been called Mansfield Park.”

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »