At age 10, Fanny Price is sent by her destitute mother to live with her aunt and uncle, Sir Thomas and Lady Bertram. As a child she was often made to feel that she was the poor relation but... See full summary »
Free-spirited yet naive, country girl Tess, is caught between her wealthy, manipulative, "cousin" Alec and the handsome, educated, farmer Angel Clare, in this Victorian tragedy from novelist Thomas Hardy.
Young Pip is expected to become a blacksmith, but, hating the soot and smoke, he secretly dreams of becoming a gentleman. When he meets the mysterious Miss Havisham and her haughty niece ... See full summary »
At age 10, Fanny Price is sent by her destitute mother to live with her aunt and uncle, Sir Thomas and Lady Bertram. As a child she was often made to feel that she was the poor relation but by the time she reaches 18, and in the absence of her uncle who leaves on a business trip for an extended period, she begins to enjoy herself. When Henry Crawford and his sister Mary become neighbors to the Bertrams, opportunities abound. Edmond Bertram falls in love with Mary but she wants to marry a man with money, not someone destined to life as a clergyman. Meanwhile, Fanny's love for her cousin Edmond prevents her from accepting Mr. Crawford's proposal of marriage. Written by
Was this sponsored by Wash and go? Was the hair stylist on strike? What a mess! Would well-bred young ladies of those days be seen in public with hair like Billie Piper's? Casting Ms Piper was a big, big, big error. She is undeniably attractive to look at, but, after Dr Who, the natural place for her was EastEnders, not in a Jane Austen adaptation. Her looks and demeanour are completely out of place.
The ITV website shows the makers of the film saying (this is the gist) that Fanny Price is a boring character, but that they fixed that by bringing in Billie Piper. If they had so little sympathy or understanding for Jane Austen's original work, why did they bother adapting it? (Were these the same people who gave us 'Marple'? The same blinkered, tied-to-the-zeitgeist mentality was at work there too).
This version is rather boring. It also seems to be a very low-budget one, bound to the one setting. The so-called picnic (a few people standing around on the lawn of the house) is an unbelievably feeble scene.
But it is at least vastly better than the 1999 version.
27 of 40 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?