Last week we talked about the 2 most recent versions of Persuasion; this week we're taking on Sense & Sensibility. Now, this has the potential to be really unfair to the 2008 version, as the 1995 film was this insane award-winning juggernaut, but before you all rush to say 1995!!! please take a moment to really consider it. As much as I, too, love Emma Thomspon's screenplay, I think there are a lot of things the 2008 version nailed, and it deserves a closer look.
If you've seen both, feel free to skip the trailers and weigh in (or watch them to refresh your memory), and if you've seen only one (or neither - yes, you can vote if you haven't seen them!), please watch the two objectively, consider which appeals to you more as a film and which seems to work best as an adaptation, and then let us know which you're voting for in the comments!
Enjoy!
1995
VS.
2008
Last Week on FFO: The 1995 and 2007 versions of Persuasion went head to head, and as expected, the 1995 version one (though there were some honorable mentions for the 1971 version, for text faithfulness).Winner --------> 
 | |
|
It has to be the 2008 version, I only managed to sit through the Emma Thompson version once. She's too old, Kate Winslet just drives me crazy and I hate Hugh Grant with a passion.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to Jane Austen adaptations I'm definitely an Andrew Davies fan.
They're both amazing. I love Emma Thompson and Alan Rickman in 1995 and the music is beautiful. It is less faithful than 2008, but mostly due to shortened film length; when you have a four hour mini series, you can include a lot more. I love that 2008 included Willoghby coming to see Marianne when she was sick/dying. Elinor tells him off and Marianne sees him but chooses not to go down to talk to him.
ReplyDeleteI love both, but I'll say 1995 is my favorite.
2008 was definitely closer to the book, but I found it sad that colonel Brandon was not as dashing as Alan Rickman. Both had beautiful costumes and scenery but music was best in 1995. And though I love Edward in the 2008 version, you can't beat Hugh Grant. Tough call, I'd say 1995 is my favorite. And Marianne sings so beautifully in it too :)
ReplyDeleteVoting for 1995! I hadn't heard of the 2008 version before this, but how can you compete with the stellar cast from 1995?! And the swoonworthiness of Alan Rickman and Hugh Grant?!
ReplyDeleteI haven't seen either. Judging from the trailers, I'm very conflicted. The 1995 version seems to be focused more on the "light"/humorous side of the story; it has big name actors (Emma Thompson! Hugh Grant acting goofy! Kate Winslet!), great soundtrack... the kind of movie that leaves you content, with a smile on your face.
ReplyDeleteThe 2008 version seems to be quite longer, and more focused on the "dark"/dramatic side of the story. The actors are less easy to recognize, which actually might be a good thing (when I picture Edward Ferrars in my head, he's a good-looking fellow, but no Hugh Grant; and when I see/hear Alan Rickman, my brain shouts, "Severus Snape!"). It does sound more faithful to the book, but I think the whole thing would make me want to have a big cry at some point (possibly, more than once).
It's a hard choice. I'd want to see them both. But I'd watch the 1995 version first, so... voting for the 1995 version.
I like both versions, but I prefer 2008. I like 1995 as a film, yes, but it pales in comparison as an adaptation. A lot of the cast was way too old, but not Kate Winslet.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, I loved 2008 on its own and as an adaptation. I preferred almost all of the cast.
I also own and enjoy the 1971 and 1981 versions. The production values are not great, but they still have a lot to recommend them.
I love them both, each for various reasons. Though I do think that the 2005 version has actresses that look like the ages that Elinor and Marianne are supposed to be.
ReplyDeleteI have to say originally I only liked the 1995 version but after watching the new one a few more times I have to admit I like them both for different reasons.
ReplyDeleteI loved both- I must admit I find it hard to dislike Willoughby on any level because of Greg Wise, and I thought David Morissey was a gorgeous Colonel Brandon in the 2008.
ReplyDeleteActing was superb in both, as were settings and costumes. I really enjoyed seeing Willoughby explain himself to Elinor in the 2008 version - I wished that had been addressed in the 1995. Hard to choose, but the Emma Thompson just pips it for me!
I've only ever seen the 95 one. I got the 08 one from the library but the dvd wouldn't play. I was not a happy camper lol. I wanted to see David Morrissey as Brandon.
ReplyDeleteI always cry at the part where Emma Thompson does, when she finds out Edward isn't married.
Toughie! I love both of them so much. The newer version was longer and had the potential of being more faithful to text. Plus, the steamy scene at the beginning was just fun ;) Also, I think Emma Thompson was a bit too old for the part. So I think I'll go with the newest version. But the Hugh Grant one is just a classic too. Grrr. I'm not sure! New one...
ReplyDeleteAm I the only one who's like, Eff Hugh Grant!? I mean, when this came out, yeah, he had a certain bumbling charm.
ReplyDeleteThat I got over VERY QUICKLY.
But Dan Stevens... Dan Stevens is perfection as Edward Ferrars. PERFECTION.