Customer Reviews

Masterpiece Theatre: Mansfield Park

5 star:		(20)
4 star:		(20)
3 star:		(22)
2 star:		(31)
1 star:		(27)

 

 

It is a truth universally acknowledged that Jane Austen fans have yet to find an adaptation of "Mansfield Park" that truly does justice to the novel. "Pride & Prejudice" and "Persuasion" have their share of successes, with the 1995 versions and the recent versions having (for the most part) become instant classics and fan favorites. But not so for poor "Mansfield Park."

I wanted so badly to love this version, especially with all the press hoopla surrounding the casting of Billie Piper (Dr. Who). The 1980s version starring Sylvestra Le Touzel remains the most faithful adaptation of the book, but has become outdated, is slow moving and tends to drag in places. The 1990s version starring Frances O'Connor is an anathema to Austen purists. This is Mansfield Park in name only, and is a slap on the face for true fans of the book. In short, Janeites were ready for a new and improved adaptation of "Mansfield Park."

Sadly though, this new version falls short of expectations. If you have not read the book, then you will probably like it. If you have - and especially if you count yourself as an Austen purist - then there are many aspects of this version that you may find irritating (or worse..).

I dislike starting my reviews on a negative note, but I was disappointed with this one. Among the shortcomings are as follows (warning - SPOILERS):

- Casting of Billie Piper and Maggie O'Neill. Personally, I find Billie's blonde hair and dark eyebrows very distracting and far too modern for a period piece. Ladies in the Regency era tied their hair back in a bun but the filmmakers totally disregarded this and left Billie to run around like a wild child instead of a proper Regency lady. I also took issue to Maggie O'Neill who was not quite the right age and was a tad too "fine looking" as the widow Mrs. Norris.
- Very choppy beginning. It almost feels like the first half hour is filmed in hand-held camera. It is annoying and gave me a headache.
- Too many scenes were altered or omitted entirely. Many characters do not even make an appearance. There is no visit to the Price family home in Portsmouth; no visit to the Rushworth home; Maria and Julia Bertram disappear in the second act, when Maria and Rushworth marry; Maria and Julia Bertram and Mr. Yates are mere cyphers and don't have much to do; other than William Price, all the other Prices (including Susan) are absent in this story...and the list goes on.
- Scenes jump around and there is little coherence to the screenplay. Novices to the story will be confused (especially in the beginning) as new characters come and go, there is little character development and no fluidity as the scenes move from one to another. Everything in the first act is rushed and you feel like the filmmakers are trying to cram hundreds of pages of storyline into the first half hour.

There is, however, a light at the end of the tunnel. The story does improve as you go along and the last half hour provides some memorable highlights. Blake Ritson's Edmund proves to be swoon-worthy in some key (romantic) scenes from the book. The 'thunderbolt' scene (you will know what I mean when you see it) up until the end is certainly worth seeing. Jemma Redgrave's Lady Bertram also does some scene stealing of her own.

Most of the cast are perfect for their roles. Blake Ritson is quite dashing (in a solemn, Byronic way) and handsome as Edmund Bertram and Joe Beattie makes for a charming and attractive Henry Crawford. Jemma Redgrave, Douglas Hodge (Sir Thomas Bertram), Hayley Atwell (Mary Crawford), Michelle Ryan (Maria Bertram) and others are well cast. Hayley Atwell shines as the scheming, manipulative and lovely Mary Crawford. Jemma Redgrave's portrayal of Lady Bertram is a change from the book, but I actually liked it. She gave an otherwise bland character added dimension and some warmth. Douglas Hodge (a veteran of British period dramas) is excellent as always.

All in all, this version has a bumpy beginning but a much improved second act, overall good casting, mediocre screenplay and what appears to be a relatively low budget (all of the scenes were filmed in one location - yes, no kidding). If you want a more faithful adaptation of Mansfield Park, look to the 1980s version starring Sylvestra Le Touzel and Nicholas Farrell (who, incidently, play Mrs. Allen and Mr. Musgrove in the new versions of "Northanger Abbey" and "Persuasion", respectively).

Of the 3 recent Austen tv adaptations, this is my least favorite. For my choices in the recent Masterpiece Theater dramas, my vote goes to "Northanger Abbey" with "Persuasion" a distant second. I have yet to see the new version of "Sense & Sensibility" so I will reserve judgement until then. This "Mansfield Park" is certainly worth a viewing, just make sure to keep your expectations in check.

As an Austen scholar, I was bracing myself for something that would take liberties with the novel, but it seems that the screenwriter must surely have read only the Cliff notes. Even then, the early part's first-person narrative made me wonder if s/he had picked up her abbreviated version of Jane Eyre instead. An estate called Mansfield Park is indeed involved, but that's about as close it gets.

Even such a massive rewrite might have been tolerable with some accurate historical research, but there are SO many funny mistakes in the representation of both the characters and the period that it was hard to believe this production could appear on (the program once known as) Masterpiece Theatre.

One could hardly determine which was longer and bounced more--Fanny's full and unbound hair or her full and nearly unbound cleavage, as the charity-case companion races shrieking and laughing through the estate. Nor should you look for the novel's complacent, drowsy, plump Lady Bertram (for whom so many have a secret affection); the beautiful but miscast Jemma Redgrave presents an elegant, intelligent mother with sharp insight.

But there's worse. When Henry Crawford drags Maria behind the curtain and declares himself her lover as they grope and grab, I nearly gagged; and when Edmund sits next to a sprawling Fanny after the picnic (no ball) and tells her how lovely she looks, I did gag. Plus, Fanny's absolutely central visit to Portsmith is axed. I don't mind streamlining when the end product is smooth and historically and literarily accurate, but this production was jumpy and jumbled.

When the whole thing finally closes with a WALTZ in 1810, it was I who was shrieking with laughter--eveyone knows that dance did not come out until 20 years later and THEN was considered very racy; certainly not something a reserved clergyman from the upper classes would have initiated at his rural Tory wedding. Good lord, who wrote this mess anyway, Barbara Cartland?

Which is a real shame, because the marvelous actors and actresses (except for the lovely Miss Redgrave) looked right for their parts--and I'm sure we'll see them again in hopefully better material. But let's face it, folks; modern screenwriters are just too terrified of frail, gentle Fanny to bring her to us as Austen created her.

While Mansfield Park is not the most appealing of the Austen novels, it deserved a better effort than this latest version. Most fans of Austen have read the original books, so we understand much of the manners, custom and dress of the times, and have certain expectations. Other reviewers have pointed out the problems, and I agree with them. I also could not get past Fanny's appearance (which was more like a bar maid than even a servant) to have any empathy for the character. I did not understand the director's decision to dress everyone else in the piece for the period and not the main character. Keeping every scene in one spot and mostly in the same room might have been cost effective but hardly does justice to the richer world that Austen was so adept at portraying. Although I own most DVD versions of other Austen productions, I know I will not want to see this again. My recommendation is to watch it on PBS or rent it before you buy.

Of the three iTV 90-minute films done this year, Mansfield Park is my least favorite:
Persuasion and Northanger Abbey were just much better done (even with their faults & foibles). As always, there is not a great adaptation of Mansfield Park available: the 80's version is fairly true to the book, but that Fanny is not my favorite in casting: the 90's version is too modernernized, and this one again, just ends up missing the mark. For one, the story is too much condensed, with so much being left out, that I was almost shocked, for one, to have met Mr Rushworth within the first 4 minutes of the film.

The casting of Billie Piper worked out somewhat: she does a good job of being active of mind and body, but never quite gets the tone of humbleness and quiet servitude which should also accompany this, in the person of Fanny Price. Her blond hair hanging loose and wild (it's never up in a proper Regency hairdo) is far too unrealistic for me, to what would have been expected of a young Regency woman, poor dependent or not (I'm sorry, but her hair would have always been up or pulled back! EXCEPT maybe when she's in her own bedroom). Blake Ritson as Edmund is fine casting, as well as Hayley Atwell as Mary Crawford, Joseph Beattie as Henry Crawford, and Jemma Redgrave as Lady Betram. I found the whole story a bit rushed and stilted, and it seemed to be a whirlwind: if I, avid reader of Jane Austen, had trouble following the storyline, how much more so would someone who had not read the book?

Content: there are some things to be aware of: some cleavage is shown, sexual innuendos, an engaged woman kisses a man who is not her fiancé, there is talk of a scandal where a married woman runs off with another man, a scene where a woman is washing her hair in a basin and a man comes in to talk with her, there is not much else: it is pretty tame.

Although it was a bit of a disappointment, I can appreciate certain moments in the film, where the fine acting of some shines through, and with good costuming to eye and things along that line, it is an enjoyable way to wile away 90 minutes: not up to par they way that I would have hoped, but all in all, and enjoyable version of Mansfield Park until one better comes along.

As an ardent Jane Austen fan, I shuddered with horror at this production. It bore little resemblance to the book. I can't begin to write about how wrong everything was, so I'll keep my comments to a few of the main characters.

Instead of a shy, retiring, timid, somewhat delicate Fanny Price we get a robust serving wench of a girl - all bosoms and teeth with wildchild hair. The difference between Jane Austen's Fanny and her cousins is intended to compare a poor girl with uncompromising moral principles to a group of worldly, indolent young people who pursue pleasure unencumbered by such principles. (Even the steady, religious-minded Edmund goes off course; Fanny - never.)

In this production, I saw a healthy, active girl who bounces about. She takes part in the play staged by the Bertram children and their friends the Crawfords and runs shrieking and grabbing people at a picnic. The Fanny in the book refuses to take part in the play, even when asked by her beloved cousin because it's against her morals. Somehow I can't imagine Ms. Austen intended her to be the life of the party at a picnic. Thus a most important theme in the book is lost.

Aunt Bertram seemed to become a somewhat shrewd character instead of the woman who would plaintively ask others what she should think and who would placidly agree with stronger personalities. Lady Bertram is supposed to an example of egoistic indolence and sloth. In her, Jane Austen creates a satirical stereotype of manners and customs.

Aunt Norris, that selfish busybody who's persecution of Fanny and blind adoration of Maria underscores her foolishness fades in importance. She should be characterized by meanness, officiousness and sycophancy towards the powerful, and bullying of anyone she perceives to be in her power - such as Fanny. She was a key character in Jane Austen's story.

I won't go into all the scenes left out or changed in this production. And the very important themes lost - does Sir Thomas' business in the West Indies involve the slave trade? (Or the unique, rather bizarre ones added to it.) I guess this adaptation was an attempt to "modernize" the story by introducing an inordinate amount of sexual tension and removing the wit and sting of Jane Austen's writing.

If you are a serious Jane Austen fan, don't watch this. It's truly awful, a powerful example of how wrong things can go when you take a classic and remove its soul.

The sheer unadulterated awfulness of this absolutely amazes me. Fanny Price as a flirty, pouty, bosoms almost falling out, bottle blonde with bed hair and an acting style straight out of "Tom Jones" pretty much ruins the whole thing singlehandedly. The intended villainess, Mary Crawford, looks downright demure by comparison and a far more suitable match for a clergyman. Then there's the inconsistent uncle who starts out Simon Legree and ends up Father Knows Best. And the otherwise adequate and attractive actor playing Edmund who's given about 15 seconds of close-up across the family breakfast table to show, with just his face, the aha! moment when he realizes it's Fanny he loves after all. That scene alone may end up earning this movie a place in the so-bad-it's-funny pile. I don't think Jane Austen is turning in her grave; I think she's laughing herself silly at the ludicrousness of it all.

This may not be the perfect adaptation fans have been waiting for, but for a low-budget production, it wasn't too bad. The casting was nearly perfect, though Billie Piper may not have been ideal for Fanny. She still did a decent job pulling off the role. Edmund, Mary, Mr. Bertram, and Mrs. Norris were all superb in this film! Mrs. Bertram was altered slightly from the book, but I thought it was for the better.

SPOILERS BELOW!!
Just like all low-budget productions, scenes and characters from the book were cut. Most I could accept, like not visiting the Price family. But I do wish they had kept the ball in. Instead they changed it to a picnic. Also they didn't have Henry Crawford leave before Maria was married, making the scene between her and Mr. Bertram (where Maria insists on marrying Mr. Rushworth despite the easy out her father is offering her) confusing and gives Maria a poorer character than in the book.

Overall, this adaptation was decent. Certainly better than the terrible '97 movie.

Warning: Do not let this movie be your first introduction to Jane Austen or Mansfield Park as there are too many deleted scenes from the novel for it to make sense. The huge turning point for Fannie Price is when she is returned to her parents after refusing Henry Crawford so that she might be reminded of the comfortable life she has grown accustomed to at Mansfield Park. And yet in this film, they never even leave MP! We never see Maria in any opulence that the Rushforth fortune would have brought to her -- that would have clearly shown what she forfeited for the rake, Crawford. And Fanny's hair is always down and messy, not very realistic for a period piece. Lady Bertram has been relegated to background as is the condescending, manipulative Mrs. Norris that everyone loves to hate! The scene with Edmund and Miss Crawford when she tells him of her strategy for over-coming the tragedy and scandal of their siblings' affair, was lacking in dramatic tension. As was the entire film. The 1999 version, is so much more enjoyable! (Although I now own this DVD, I doubt it will be watched again. I am disappointed to admit, it will simply fill a space in my collection.)

This is not Jane Austen's "Mansfield Park"--it's another story altogether, from another place and time. The first, and establishing portion, of the novel has completely disappeared, the themes of the Austen book have vanished, the language is pure 21st century, and the characters, their bearing and their manners bear no resemblance to the originals--the actors just happen to be wearing Regency garb.

I would have no objection to, and would in fact enjoy, watching a good melodrama decked out in 18th century costumes--just don't try to tell me that this is "Mansfield Park."

This production suffers from being too short to fully develop the story and from poor decisions in casting and directing. Fanny is presented as a disheveled hoyden of no particular charm while Mrs. Norris is too pretty and too passive. Miss Austen would not recognize either as the women about whom she wrote. I had hoped for much better from BBC; Austen fans are still left without a top-notch film version of this book.