Alicia I love this movie so much

Marketic It's no definitive masterpiece but it's damn close.

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

Crwthod A lot more amusing than I thought it would be.

summeriris I watched this three times because I wanted to be sure I could make my points. For this I deserve a medal. The first time I watched it I thought it pretty good, the second time things started to bother me, the third time I felt like throwing something at the TV screen.What we have here is a very bad adaptation, very bad direction and pretty poor camera work. We have a Margaret who spouts rhetoric from 'The Female Eunuch'. A Marianne who changes her emotions on a dime while being trained to be the perfect wife for Col Brandon, who is all Regency Action Man alpha male. An Edward who really could use some lessons in handling an axe, an Elinor who also needs some lessons in beating carpets and a scriptwriter who'es earlier successes has given him the inflated opinion that he is a better writer than Jane Austen. He isn't and this pretty poor adaptation proves it.It had some good points, Anne Steele was funny even if she did have a completely different accent from Lucy.

VReviews Over a decade after Emma Thompson's Oscar winning adaption of Jane Austen's most popular novel, Sense & Sensibility; screen-writer Andrew Davies brought the story to television released as a mini-series through the BBC. Given the critical acclaim Thompson's adaption received, one can't help but make comparisons. However, just as with Shakespeare, the fascination and enjoyment often comes in the choices of how and which pieces of the story will be developed and in the skill of the acting.The choices made in this adaptation bring more detail to the genesis of the Dashwood's circumstances, and the past dubious indiscretions of the cad Willoughby. To hardcore aficionados of Jane Austin, the opening scene between the unidentified lovers may feel out of place, even awkward especially since Austin didn't pen such a scene, nor is it even close to 19th century sensibilities. However, if you forgive this odd beginning, what follows is a much more illustrative and informative picture of life for the Ladies Dashwood as it was prior to Mr. Dashwood's death, than previous adaptations have afforded. They lived in splendor, yet due to the inheritance laws of the time, they also lived in a precarious state of anxiety not knowing if or how their father's first born son would honor Mr. Dashwood's request to take care of his 2nd wife and daughters. The mini-series format was much better able to take the time to fully develop this part of the story, which really provides the dramatic grounding to Austin's emotional tale. For instance, the scenes in which John Dashwood and his conniving wife Fanny discuss what his promise to his late father really meant, was excellent in it's distastefulness. Just as the stark dichotomy between the majestic Dashwood home is juxtaposed against the bleak and clinging coastal cottage that the Dashwoods are reduced to. These scenes are not only included, but are detailed out beautifully allowing the audience to fully appreciate the change in circumstances of the Dashwoods, and their need not only emotionally, but financially to be married.The casting by Kate Rhodes James is stellar; except perhaps for Dominic Cooper as Willoughby whose slight-of-frame, roguish, modern boy charm doesn't quite transfer to the 18th century. Subtle, yet purposeful directing by John Alexander lends a nuanced portrayal throughout. For example, Dan Stevens does a fine job in depicting the honorable and reserved, yet intelligent Edward Ferrars. This is an Edward who sees through his sister's insincere and mean-spirited discourse, and deflects the barbs thrown at the sisters Dashwood with a slight expression of the face, and perfectly placed word. His performance is more shaded and genuine than Hugh Grant's stammering and visibly conflicted Edward.The BBC has a long history of putting out top-notch period dramas, that along with multi- award winning writer Andrew Davies, and this glorious three-part/three hour format provides an enjoyable and entertaining immersion into Jane Austin's Sense & Sensibility.

jlcdrama I just saw this mere hours ago and I couldn't get it out of my head. I'd like to start off by saying that I read the book and then saw the 1995 version of Sense and Sensibility and couldn't imagine what could top it. It's simple: this mini-series.Within minutes I was saying that I liked this adaption better than the 1995 movie. I mean no disrespect to Emma Thompson who wrote and starred in that movie, but this was a lot better. There were a few flaws in the film that I hadn't really paid attention too before until I saw this version. The main one being the age of both Thompson who played Elinor and Alan Rickman who played Colonel Brandon. Both were far too old to be playing Elinor who is supposed to be 19 and Brandon who was 35, in which Thompson was in her thirties I believe, and Rickman was 49. The problem wasn't so apparent until I saw this version.The age problem for Rickman in particular helped convey in the movie that Marianne should have wound up with Willoughby instead of Brandon. The point Austen wanted to make in the book was that Marianne's idea of Brandon being too old was silly seeing as 35 isn't that old. Shallow viewers of the 1995 version would be bothered by the more obviously older man (who looked to be in his fifties) marrying a teenager.The main thing that won me over in this movie was the portrayal of the men: Edward, Colonel Brandon and Willoughby. Hugh Grant in the 1995 film was good, but at times he seemed too awkward and insecure. Dan Stevens played Edward as having a bit of a sense of humor (like in the book) but still a private man. I instantly liked him. But honestly it was Colonel Brandon and Willoughby when stood out the most.Willoughby is often forgotten to be the villain of the story, this mini-series made it clear from the start that he isn't a good man. Purists might not like the opening scene of Willoughby seducing Eliza, but I thought it worked well particularly when Willoughby showed Marianne Allenhelm. It reminded us that Marianne is treading through dangerous waters and has no idea of who she is dealing with. In the 1995 film, Thompson left out the scene with Willoughby explaining his actions to Elinor after Marianne is jilted by him. My thought there was that Thompson felt that would draw too much sympathy for Willoughby, but I think that was a mistake. This mini-series included the scene and showed more of Willoughby's selfish character. I felt no sympathy for him at all. In fact I found it hard to believe a word he said. As it should be.Colonel Brandon is often forgotten about by scholars and that is shame because he is one of my favorite heroes. This adaption did him justice because not only did David Morrissey look the part, but Brandon was given more screen time. Unfortunately both Austen and Thompson didn't show much of Marianne's journey to falling in love with Brandon, but this one filled in that gap. At last we were finally able to see why Colonel Brandon was meant for Marianne instead of Willoughby. When she said that Brandon was "a truly romantic man" I squealed because I'm sure Austen meant the same.Beyond the men, I will say that the Elinor, Marianne and all of the other characters were done incredibly well. I found nothing lacking in any of them with the exception of Mr. Palmer who was much more amusing in the 1995 version, but since he was a minor character I wasn't offended.In short, Thompson's version was good but this one outshone hers. Sense and Sensibility had more complicated plot which is why I think a mini-series like this was better suited for it on screen since more time can be devoted to it. If you want to watch the best version of Sense and Sensibility, this is for you. I also recommend reading Colonel Brandon's Diary by Amanda Grange if you are as smitten with his character as I am.

peterquennell Truth is, my wife is (was) the family's one Jane Austen addict so I had zero inkling up-front of the two truly extraordinary story arcs. To say that this production is one wild, nail-biting roller-coaster ride is putting it pretty mildly.To follow Hattie Morahan's warm, kind, brave and hypnotically beautiful Elinor through to her dismal and heart-breaking dead-end in life, via a seeming never-ending series of emotional whacks... that's story-telling of the most profoundest kind.And then into that truly stunning few moments where eyes are absolutely GLUED to Elinor's quivering back... that's movie-making beyond awesome.I've dutifully watched the movie version too now. These REALLY go well together. The movie is intensely beautiful to look at and has great crowd scenes. Highly worth watching for the alternative take on the Marianne story; I liked it without necessarily preferring it. Each version has some dialog that greatly helps understand points in the other.No review I've read yet has mentioned the great voice-over commentary on the DVD. Director, producer and four leads. Nice happy family that one is. Hattie Morahan is self-effacing almost to the point of invisibility, but she has a truly great laugh we hear often. Remarks by "Edward" and "Marianne" and "Willoughby" are warm, funny and at times really insightful, and leave one liking each of them a lot.Plus we hear just how the director and producer arrived at many of their outcomes, adjusted things post-production, set up the scenes in the many houses and the studios, struggled for continuity, and came up with that proposal scene - told in that self-effacing and often funny British way, but they're true talents.And Janeites, please get this: the team makes it increasingly clear that there are several hours of unused scenes still in the can. They are not offered here on this DVD. So, a 4-or-5-hour director's-cut version? Okay. You know what to do...