“I, and only I, knew your heart and its sorrows; yet, to what did it influence me? — not to any compassion that could benefit you or myself. — Your example was before me: but to what avail? — Was I more considerate of you and your comfort? Did I imitate your forbearance, or lessen your restraints, by taking any part in those offices of general complaisance or particular gratitude which you had hitherto been left to discharge alone? No; — not less when I knew you to be unhappy, than when I had believed you at ease, did I turn away from every exertion of duty or friendship; scarcely allowing sorrow to exist but with me, regretting only that heart which had deserted and wronged me, and leaving you, for whom I professed an unbounded affection, to be miserable for my sake.” Marianne Dashwood,
Sense and Sensibility, Chapter 46
Musings on episode two
Episode two of Masterpiece Classic’s presentation of Jane Austen’s novel Sense and Sensibility aired Sunday night, and it did not entirely disappoint, nor did it thrill. I always enjoy act two of an opera or play so much more than the openning act. All of the main character introductions have been made, the plot established, and now we can get into the heart of the story. Tonight, we met several new secondary characters that thankfully added to the humor, witnessed a manly duel, and learned more about the conflict of the heart over the head.
As I mentioned in my review of episode one, the visuals of the film are quite stunning. The director John Alexander has added several touches that enhance the visual beauty and storyline nicely. I particularly appreciate the symbolism of the shell chime that appears in the opening credits, and later we learn that it was created by the younger sister Margaret Dashwood (Lucy Boynton) from her collection that she has crafted into a string of dangling shells suspended between driftwood posts on the beach.
Even though the privileged, but now impoverished Dashwood ladies have very few possessions after the death of their husband and father, Margaret’s shell chime represents the reconstruction of the family; the ladies as bits of natural beauty dangling and blowing in the wind. Their fate is uncertain, but they are together.
Their new rustic home at Barton cottage on the Devonshire coast also adds to the drama, mirroring their perilous situation financially and socially. The remote location and the crashing waves on the stark rocky coastline are disconcerting. We truly understand how far they have sunk from the grandeur and comfort of their Norland Park manor house. Austen authority Barbara Larochelle described it beautifully in her review on the blog, Jane Austen Today.
“Once the Dashwood ladies are settled at Barton cottage, frequent scenes are intercut of angular, craggy, jagged rocks jutting up at angles through turbulent crashing waves. There seems to be something wildly romantic about it; sensibility crashing up against sense, over and over again, if you will.”
Director John Alexander’s choice of shoreline is important. If the waves crashing represent Marianne’s wild untamed sensibility, and the jagged rocks on the shore Elinor’s solid sense, there does not appear to be much erosion by the pounding waves over the centuries! Is sensibility prevailing here? Is this foreshadowing?
My previous concerns about the male actors continued. Sadly, Dominic Cooper and David Morrissey’s portrayals of John Willoughby and Colonel Brandon did not improve as the story continued. Cooper is just miscast physically and emotionally, lacking the charm and charisma that Willoughby should exhibit. I never believed for one moment that he could win Marianne’ affections, or those of the fifteen year old girl that he seduced in the opening scene of episode one. He is evil incarnate from the get go! Run young ladies, and very fast from this Cretin.
Pensive and sullen David Morrissey as Colonel Brandon is another story, and since I have seen him alive in other productions, I will give him the benefit of the doubt and blame the director for not understanding Jane Austen’s intensions for the character. They tried to hook into the tortured, forsaken in love dogma that can appeal to the female need to save and fix broken men, but it backfired, and turned him into a giant Milk Dud, that deceptively looks like appealing eye candy, but just gets stuck in your teeth and pulls out your fillings. Torture. Pure torture!
The lack of humor that I lamented in episode one reclaimed its rightful Austen irony with the addition of some of the secondary characters in the Steele sisters, and the expanded role of Mrs. Ferrars. The standout comedic performance of the entire production is by Daisy Haggard as the ditzy Anne Steele! Not only did she have the best lines, her delivery and timing was superb. We are in no doubt of her desire to locate and attract prodigious beau, because it is the very core of her being. If Mrs. Dashwood’s daughters do not ‘set’ their caps for gentleman, then Anne Steele can certainly take up the slack from their abstinence. No man in England is safe from her consideration!
One interesting character who deserved further expansion in the novel is the officious and imposing Mrs. Ferrars. Screenwriter Andrew Davies seizes the opportunity and runs with it, creating scenes and dialogue for the sour wealthy widow, emphasizing her desire to socially climb over anyone to advance her family. Accomplished actress Jean Marsh, who has delighted us for years on the BBC and in major movies, brings out all of Mrs. Ferrars nasty qualities by her forced stately pomp. Just remember Mrs. Ferrars in her regal parlor, sitting upon her settee like it is her throne loudly chomping on nuts, and you know that if her children do not follow her wishes, their legs will be next!
There is a lack of compulsion in this version that I found wanting. Since I did not appreciate the performances of Marianne’s two love interests, half of the story just dissolved for me. Happily the storyline of Elinor (Hattie Morahan) fueled the plot, but even she and Edwards (Dan Stevens) long withheld romance could not entirely redeem the holes and missteps taken by the screenwriter and director. After close to three hours of love conflicts and plot twists, we finally have our hero Edward Ferrars arrive at Barton cottage unannounced, – the ladies thinking that he has married Lucy Steele (Anna Madeley). When we learn that Lucy has transferred her affections to Edward’s brother Robert (Leo Bill) and married ‘that’ Mr. Ferrars, we are relieved and anxious like Elinor. When Edward finally does propose, it seemed anti-climatic. I was not moved to tears like the same scene in the book, or the 1995 Ang Lee/Emma Thompson movie. They could have erased all of their blunders if they could have hooked me into the relief and joy of their future life together! Sigh.
Oh, and they also jipped us out of a wedding scene. Colonel Brandon carrying Marianne in front of his Delford manse is no substitute for a church wedding Mr. Alexander, even if Jane Austen did not actually include the scene in her novel. Don’t you know that whatever happens in the last two minutes is what everyone remembers most about the movie? Naughty, dirty beau!
It was a fun ride while it lasted Janeites. As The Complete Jane Austen series on PBS concludes, let us say a prayer of hope that it does not take another ten years for the next series of adaptations.
Well, I thought this was the best of the new adaptations, and equal to the best of ten-15 years ago (the 95-96 heyday). I actually enjoyed it more than the previous film, because I was moved to tears by the final scenes of Elinor and Edward – her deserved happiness and relief in quiet things really touch me. I really enjoyed all the cast, especially Sir John and Anne Steele in the minor roles, and Hattie Morahan and Dan Stevens in the main (and I loved Meg – such a cute brat played by Lucy Boynton). A few annoyances in the terribly common (these days) man walking into women’s bedrooms scenes, but since apparently the 1981 Sense and Sensibility also had that, I shall overlook it (I still refuse to forgive the 2005 P&P for that). I also loved little details, like Elinor drinking Marianne’s wine, Brandon visiting Eliza, and the gilded almonds in the Ferrar’s house. These bitty things make me very happy.
I can live without new films for a while now (since I like the 1995 Persuasion, 1995 Pride and Prejudice, both Sense and Sensibilities, 1996 Beckinsale/Davies/Strong Emma, and 2007 Northanger Abbey), but I would like a good Mansfield Park sometime within my lifetime. You know, where they actually keep Fanny as she is in the book, and don’t try and make her “palatable” to modern audiences.
I too found this adaptation rather “flat”. It seemed to spend too much time on the Marianne/Willoughby romance in the first half. The second half seemed very rushed. I think that the more recent adaptations are concerned with having “action”, like the sword fight, and this leaves less time for conversations between the characters.
From what I’ve read elsewhere, most viewers like David Morrissey as Brandon but I did not. I admire the actor but the portrayal seemed rather creepy (which may be largely blamed on the script and the direction). I certainly did not like the analogy to a wild horse that needs to be broken.
Overall positives were Hattie Morahan and Dan Stevens who were soulful and warm as Elinor and Edward. Mrs. Dashwood and Margaret were wonderful.
Negatives were Lucy Steele who’s conniving appeared off-screen instead of on-screen. Dominic Cooper who never appeared “dashing” (Greg Wise nailed the role).
Oh, and please stop the spinning shots during the romantic endings. It’s become a cliche.
Hi Lorraine, we agree and I didn’t want to go over the edge and bash this version, but there were a few tright and offensive things too. The referencess to Marianne needing to be tamed; horse following and hawk symbolism was off putting.
Cliche’s, oh don’t get me started! Brandon on a white horse, Marianne with big curly hair and low cut frocks, Elinor with straight hair and no clevage, Fanny with uptight curls and high necked frocks, little Henry fat with glasses, Willoughby in black, oh I must stop!
There are certain comfort and identity mirrors that are in every movie, novel or play, but when they over do it, it becomes unbelievable.
There are many redeaming qualities to this production, and it was definetly the best of the four new adaptations.
Thanks for visiting today, Laurel Ann
Hi I Miller, I enjoyed Elinor and Edward too. They saved this production for me. I know that many felt that Dan Stevens was too handsome and charming to be the Edward that Jane Austen created. That may be true, but it worked for me.
Most viewers seemed to like Brandon, but not me! In almost every scene he looks angry and mad. It was too off putting for me. Why would a young girl be attratched to a sour angry man 15 years her senior? At least Alan Rickman’s Brandon was gentle. Morrissey’s Brandon was just scarey.
I noticed the men walking into ladies bedrooms too. I thought that it was VERY wrong for Brandon to sit on Marianne’s bed in the sick scene. He also sits on the bed when he visits his ward and her baby! Not era appropriate. Even today it is awkward. Glad that you noticed also.
Thanks for visiting today. Cheers, Laurel Ann
I thought this version was good. Mind you, I’ve only seen the ‘95 version with Kate Winslet and etc. I liked both Elinor and Marianne in this one more. I also like Edward better. For me, no one can replace Alan Rickman. It’s his role, but the actor (I forgot his name) who played him this time was fine. I really really liked this Willoughby. I think the screenplay Emma Thompson wrote made Willoughby seen too nice. He was perfectly rude(but of course in a subtle way). The only thing missing with him is he wasn’t charming enough. I definitely would not fall for him. I also believe the actors’ looks fit the ages in the book better.
Finally, a man walking into a young womans room, SHUTTING THE DOOR and SITTING ON THE BED was annoying to say the least.
Becca
Not to be rude, because I did enjoy your review very much.
But I think you mean “cretin” — a stupid, vulgar or insensitive person. Not “Cretan” — someone from the island of Crete.
Just found your site – again, i do enjoy it very much. Thx.
Corrected! Never claimed to be a spelling expert, but am grateful to those who are!
I’ve yet to see this one, I’m particularly curious to see David Morrissey in the role of Brandon – I’ve seen opinions from him being absolutely spot on to being very disappointing indeed. A great shame if it is the latter, as I have seen him in several different roles and he really is a talented man, and capable of bringing out a winsome side of much more unlikely characters than the Colonel! With the right script and direction he could have been a really good Brandon.
Every disagreeing review I read makes me that much more impatient to see it :)