Mansfield Park (2007)

In my opinion, I'd say yes, well it's either between this and the 1980s Northanger Abbey. I love Jane Austen, her language, her characters and how she evokes the period. I also love various adaptations of her work, especially the 1995 adaptations of Pride and Prejudice, Sense and Sensibility and Persuasion. As much as I didn't like the 1999 adaptation of Mansfield Park, at least you could tell what period it was meant to be set in. This Mansfield Park may not be badly shot and the scenery looks great, but I saw very little evocative about the period recreation, I missed the atmosphere that even 2007's Persuasion(disappointing as that was) had and all the best Austen adaptations have and to me it felt too much like a costume drama being shot against a modern era rather than being transported through a time machine. The music wasn't terrible but there wasn't anything exceptional or dynamic about it either. What was terrible was the script, the first person narration was very badly written and not needed and a lot of the lines were stilted and cheesy in alternative to poetic and sophisticated. The story also disappoints, the adaptation is too short so consequently the storytelling feels too rushed complete with characters that you just don't care anything for and very little of the attitudes and statuses of the time which would have given it some authenticity. I wasn't too thrilled about the casting either, the actors are good and try their best but it is all a wasted effort when their characters and story aren't very interesting or well developed. I do have to agree that Billie Piper is completely wrong for Fanny Price, she was too modern and I could really have done with much less of how flirtatiously Fanny was portrayed. Overall, a mess saved by some good photography and scenery. For my tastes, this was a failure both as an adaptation and on its own merits, and is one of the least authentic Jane Austen adaptations you will find. 1/10 Bethany Cox

I agree with most of the reviews that Billie Piper was not a convincing, or perhaps I should say, correct choice for Fanny Price.I really want to see a Fanny Price (written AND acted) who is strong in a QUIET way, just as Jane Austen presented her - and she IS strong in the book, standing her ground in refusing to marry Mr. Crawford even in the face of so much pressure - but it seems that screenwriters are ever afraid to present her as she is in the book. Do they think it would be beyond the capabilities of most actresses? Must Fanny Price always be written as a vivacious, playful, conscious of the wrongs done to her, sequel to Elizabth Bennet? Can't I see a quiet woman who is pure without being puritanical, shy but still able to have strong convictions about right and wrong, accepting of her (low) place in the family without being resentful (as she was in the book), perceptive without being self-righteous about what she sees in others? (Sigh) It must be too hard, let's just stick a 21st century female in Mansfield Park and be done with it.On the bright side, Blake Ritson is perfect. I look at him and it is as though an illustration of a Gentleman of the time has come alive and walked out into the world. And he manages to present so wonderfully the key to Edmund's character - that he is in love with an ideal, but does not see it lives right in front of him (in the person of Fanny) until after the heartbreak with Mary Crawford. I think those eyes... mmm, make women feel a little... naughty! Though I am sure Jane Austen would never write so, because of course as we all know sex did not exist back then ;)!

I recently read the book (a bit of a slog but brilliant) and was interested to see a screen adaptation, wondering how on earth they could breath life into Fanny Price who seems to be more of an ideal that a real person. I haven't yet seen Patricia Rozema's version but this one is such a travesty that I watched the whole thing in fascination and horror; much like not being able to look away from a traffic accident. This one's sort of like Moll Flanders' adventures in Jane Austenland. Jane is now such big bu$ine$$ that they simply take one of her plots, add some good actors, a stately manor or two, some hifalutin sounding dialogue, heaving bosoms and stir. The acting's quite good including the girl playing Fanny who's so disastrously miscast and costumed (and what's with her hair?) that it renders the whole thing ridiculous. This cynical mess has as much to do with Jane Austen's intentions as a ham sandwich. James Retsin's great, as always.

Fanny is a poor ten-year old girl who has been sent away to live with her wealthy relatives at their home, Mansfield Park. There, her only friend is her cousin Edmond, whom she grows to love. When she is 18, new neighbors Henry and Mary Crawford come into her life; Henry has eyes for Fanny while Edmond is smitten with Mary.This Masterpiece Theatre version of Jane Austen's novel was really disappointing. The biggest problem was the casting of Billie Piper as Fanny. Her always-disheveled, bottle blonde hair and inexplicably black eyebrows weren't true to the period and she acted too modern and low class; none of her dialogue was believable because she looked so wrong for the part. She would have been better as a naughty chambermaid than someone brought up in an aristocrat's home. Another victim of inaccurate hair and make-up was Hayley Atwell (Mary Crawford) who had a 2007 hair style and sculpted eyebrows which were lovely, but completely wrong for the time. Her casual speech and flirtatious actions would have had no place in formal Regency society.The actors playing Fanny's aunt and uncle were too young and lacked a lord and lady's proper breeding. And the waltz danced in the final scene would certainly have shocked onlookers, if indeed it were even known at that time, but there was only pleasant reaction to the dance. All in all, this misguided film is visually distracting and sadly unconvincing.