173 reviews
This is one of the best films I have seen in years! I am not a Gwyneth Paltrow fan, but she is excellent as Emma Woodhouse. Alan Cumming is superb as Reverand Elton, and Emma Thompson's sister, Sophie, is hysterical as Miss Bates. And check out the gorgeous Jeremy Northam as Mr. Knightley; what a gentleman! Whoever said you need sex and violence in a movie to make it good has never seen Emma. I think that is what separates it from so many others--it's classy.
If you're looking for a film that you can watch with the whole family, or looking for a romance for yourself, look no further. Emma is that movie. With a beautiful setting, wonderful costumes, and an outstanding cast (have I mentioned the gorgeous Jeremy Northam?), Emma is a perfect ten!
If you're looking for a film that you can watch with the whole family, or looking for a romance for yourself, look no further. Emma is that movie. With a beautiful setting, wonderful costumes, and an outstanding cast (have I mentioned the gorgeous Jeremy Northam?), Emma is a perfect ten!
- superbyellow
- May 23, 2004
- Permalink
Emma (1996)
I like Gwyneth Paltrow, and I love Jane Austen. (That sounds bad. Sorry Gwyneth.)
And this is a great movie for its writing, and a stiff and imperfect movie for its acting. And for Austen fans (and fans is an understatement for some of them) this is almost awful movie. Awful if you love sublime writing and can't stand to see it so wooden.
Paltrow is good. She's pretty. She's appropriately upright. But she insists on "delivering" her lines. She has them memorized, yes. But she doesn't inhabit the character. And Emma, the character, is one of the best of all literature, filled with sassy individualism and social blindness due to ordinary teenage arrogance. The material is there, and it's a great story (if you like early 19th Century melodramas bordering on soap opera of the highest level).
So, it's not a terrible presentation of the movie, but it is, to be sure, a presentation. I honestly think (and don't tremble in rage here) that Alisha Silverstone in "Clueless" gets the spirit of Emma much closer. There is of course a gap of sensibilities here that I'm ignoring—a girl in 1995 (Silverstone) is no match for a girl in Austen's time. I'll leave that one vague.
About "Emma" it's worth saying that the sets and costumes are so convincing you don't really think about them. Everything is brightly lit (which I suppose is a reasonable choice, though it flattens the film emotionally as opposed to, say, the Merchant-Ivory approach). The whole spectacle is spread before the camera lovingly, if a bit predictably.
In the end it's Austen who wins. The writing, both in the specific dialog and in the general plot outline, are delicate and witty and insightful. Nothing sensational here, just drawing room observation at its best. Kudos for that much, and a reasonable translation to film. It's Austen who wins all those stars.
I like Gwyneth Paltrow, and I love Jane Austen. (That sounds bad. Sorry Gwyneth.)
And this is a great movie for its writing, and a stiff and imperfect movie for its acting. And for Austen fans (and fans is an understatement for some of them) this is almost awful movie. Awful if you love sublime writing and can't stand to see it so wooden.
Paltrow is good. She's pretty. She's appropriately upright. But she insists on "delivering" her lines. She has them memorized, yes. But she doesn't inhabit the character. And Emma, the character, is one of the best of all literature, filled with sassy individualism and social blindness due to ordinary teenage arrogance. The material is there, and it's a great story (if you like early 19th Century melodramas bordering on soap opera of the highest level).
So, it's not a terrible presentation of the movie, but it is, to be sure, a presentation. I honestly think (and don't tremble in rage here) that Alisha Silverstone in "Clueless" gets the spirit of Emma much closer. There is of course a gap of sensibilities here that I'm ignoring—a girl in 1995 (Silverstone) is no match for a girl in Austen's time. I'll leave that one vague.
About "Emma" it's worth saying that the sets and costumes are so convincing you don't really think about them. Everything is brightly lit (which I suppose is a reasonable choice, though it flattens the film emotionally as opposed to, say, the Merchant-Ivory approach). The whole spectacle is spread before the camera lovingly, if a bit predictably.
In the end it's Austen who wins. The writing, both in the specific dialog and in the general plot outline, are delicate and witty and insightful. Nothing sensational here, just drawing room observation at its best. Kudos for that much, and a reasonable translation to film. It's Austen who wins all those stars.
- secondtake
- Jan 16, 2014
- Permalink
This is a good adaptation of Austen's novel. Good, but not brilliant.
The cinematography is inventive, crossing at times the border to gimmickry, but it certainly avoids the trap of making this look like a boring TV soap in costumes, given that the entire story is dialogue-driven.
The acting is competent. Ms Paltrow is aloof, as her character requires, but the required distance from the other characters is accompanied by a much less appropriate detachment from her own actions. In other words, she does not seem to care enough of the results of her match-making endeavours. Some of the supporting cast is guilty of over-acting - very much in the style that is appreciated on stage but out of place in motion pictures. Personally, I had problems accepting Alan Cumming as Mr Elton - to no fault of his own, except for having left such an impression as a gay trolley-dolly in "The High Life" that it is now difficult to accept him playing any serious part. Acting honours go to Toni Collette who manages to radiate warmth, and Jeremy Northam who pitches his character at just the right level.
The cinematography is inventive, crossing at times the border to gimmickry, but it certainly avoids the trap of making this look like a boring TV soap in costumes, given that the entire story is dialogue-driven.
The acting is competent. Ms Paltrow is aloof, as her character requires, but the required distance from the other characters is accompanied by a much less appropriate detachment from her own actions. In other words, she does not seem to care enough of the results of her match-making endeavours. Some of the supporting cast is guilty of over-acting - very much in the style that is appreciated on stage but out of place in motion pictures. Personally, I had problems accepting Alan Cumming as Mr Elton - to no fault of his own, except for having left such an impression as a gay trolley-dolly in "The High Life" that it is now difficult to accept him playing any serious part. Acting honours go to Toni Collette who manages to radiate warmth, and Jeremy Northam who pitches his character at just the right level.
For those JASNA devotees (Jane Austen Society of North America), this adaptation of Jane Austen's "Emma" will truly send them running for the hills.
But if you're willing to view Emma with the belief that this movie is loosely based on the novel, and enjoy it on its own merits, you'll truly enjoy yourself.
Emma (Gwyneth Paltrow) is the apple of her aged father's eye and spends her ample free time trying to play matchmaker. Having achieved some success by matching her own governess with the widowed Mr. Weston, Emma sets out to match easily persuaded, impoverished newcomer Harriet Smith (Toni Collete) with hilarious results.
Some have complained that the casting is "all wrong" but I don't agree. I think for the comedic spirit of the film, the actors were well chosen. Sophie Thompson nearly steals the show as the muddled but happy Miss Bates. Her silent mother, Mrs. Bates (played by Sophie Thompson's real-life mother Phyllida Law), also steals a few scenes. In my humble opinion, anybody who prefers Mark Strong (the A&E version) over Jeremy Northam in the role of Mr. Knightley has to be "addled in the attic" as it were. Not tall enough? I'm sorry but I wasn't watching how tall he was but that mesmerizing smile. I'm sure I wasn't the only one swooning in my seat.
This is no literary classic (the movie NOT the book!) so let's not make it something it isn't. What Emma truly IS..is an enjoyable romp with a healthy dollop of romance. Viewed in this light, you're in for a good time.
And yes, Ewan McGregor's wig IS hideous. My friends compared it to a dead cat but that would do the cat an injustice.
But if you're willing to view Emma with the belief that this movie is loosely based on the novel, and enjoy it on its own merits, you'll truly enjoy yourself.
Emma (Gwyneth Paltrow) is the apple of her aged father's eye and spends her ample free time trying to play matchmaker. Having achieved some success by matching her own governess with the widowed Mr. Weston, Emma sets out to match easily persuaded, impoverished newcomer Harriet Smith (Toni Collete) with hilarious results.
Some have complained that the casting is "all wrong" but I don't agree. I think for the comedic spirit of the film, the actors were well chosen. Sophie Thompson nearly steals the show as the muddled but happy Miss Bates. Her silent mother, Mrs. Bates (played by Sophie Thompson's real-life mother Phyllida Law), also steals a few scenes. In my humble opinion, anybody who prefers Mark Strong (the A&E version) over Jeremy Northam in the role of Mr. Knightley has to be "addled in the attic" as it were. Not tall enough? I'm sorry but I wasn't watching how tall he was but that mesmerizing smile. I'm sure I wasn't the only one swooning in my seat.
This is no literary classic (the movie NOT the book!) so let's not make it something it isn't. What Emma truly IS..is an enjoyable romp with a healthy dollop of romance. Viewed in this light, you're in for a good time.
And yes, Ewan McGregor's wig IS hideous. My friends compared it to a dead cat but that would do the cat an injustice.
- KurotsutaMurasaki
- Feb 6, 2014
- Permalink
Rich girl Emma Woodhouse (Paltrow) feels very unsecure about life when her nanny, and best friend, gets married and has to move away. Emma doesn´t really now who to talk to about her problems with her love life. Instead she tries to be a matchmaker for her friend Harriet (Collette). She tries to get her together with the nice young reverend Elton (Cumming), but it turns out he was only interested in Emma! Problems ahead for everyone involved.
I normally don´t enjoy romantic comedies, especially not those which take place in the 19th century, with costumes and everything that comes with it. But Emma was different. After a slow first half-hour, the story got started and I found that this was actually a funny, smart and beautiful tale.
The main reason I liked this movie must be Gwyneth Paltrow. She looked lovely and did her best performance yet. She´s actually better here than in `Shakesphere in Love', which gave her an Oscar. Every scene she´s in is a pleasure to watch, especially since she nails that English accent perfectly! The supporting actors and actresses are superb as well. Jeremy Northam is in his best role yet, and Toni Collette and Alan Cumming are perfectly cast.
I actually tried to read the book by Jane Austen at first, but I got tired of the slow pace and watched the movie instead. Which saved me a lot of time, and it was way above expectation.
The story is a bit slow, yes. But in the end Emma still feels like a winner. I usually don't like these kind of movies, but I liked this. Which means it must be above average.
* * * ½
I normally don´t enjoy romantic comedies, especially not those which take place in the 19th century, with costumes and everything that comes with it. But Emma was different. After a slow first half-hour, the story got started and I found that this was actually a funny, smart and beautiful tale.
The main reason I liked this movie must be Gwyneth Paltrow. She looked lovely and did her best performance yet. She´s actually better here than in `Shakesphere in Love', which gave her an Oscar. Every scene she´s in is a pleasure to watch, especially since she nails that English accent perfectly! The supporting actors and actresses are superb as well. Jeremy Northam is in his best role yet, and Toni Collette and Alan Cumming are perfectly cast.
I actually tried to read the book by Jane Austen at first, but I got tired of the slow pace and watched the movie instead. Which saved me a lot of time, and it was way above expectation.
The story is a bit slow, yes. But in the end Emma still feels like a winner. I usually don't like these kind of movies, but I liked this. Which means it must be above average.
* * * ½
- Psycho Mantis
- Oct 22, 2001
- Permalink
I was so impressed with Doug McGrath's film version of the Jane Austen novel "Emma," and I loved the music score by Rachel Portman so much, that when I went to the video store one day and discovered the two had re-united for "Nicholas Nickleby" I immediately rented it without any other consideration.
I have read the book, and for those overly-critical fans of this Jane Austen adaptation, I don't know what else McGrath could have done to more perfectly capture the spirit and major plot elements of Miss Austen's work, especially given the limitations of a two hour movie (which some have complained about being too long!). And as far as Gwen Paltrow's accent is concerned, I must confess I wasn't too familiar with her when I saw this at the theater initially, and I was absolutely convinced at the time that she was an English actress!
I am taken aback by those who criticized the film for its lush scenery. That is one of the things I enjoy and look forward to seeing in period pieces set in the English countryside. The film's beautiful backgrounds are a major contributor to its appeal and success. If your idea of escapist fare is something bleaker, then perhaps you should rent something like "Death Wish III!"
The English country settings are as attractive and charming as the cast, and combine with the story and soundtrack for entertainment that makes you not tire of repeat viewings. McGrath is a wonder at choreographing the interplay of subtle expressions that are so essential in conveying the complicated romantic intrigue that occurs in this story.
This refreshing movie could also be a clinic on how enjoyable a film can be minus sex, violence or even a villainous antagonist. The story is often amusing, endearing, and at times, quite touching.
I have seen many competent Jane Austen book adaptations but this is without question my favorite.
I have read the book, and for those overly-critical fans of this Jane Austen adaptation, I don't know what else McGrath could have done to more perfectly capture the spirit and major plot elements of Miss Austen's work, especially given the limitations of a two hour movie (which some have complained about being too long!). And as far as Gwen Paltrow's accent is concerned, I must confess I wasn't too familiar with her when I saw this at the theater initially, and I was absolutely convinced at the time that she was an English actress!
I am taken aback by those who criticized the film for its lush scenery. That is one of the things I enjoy and look forward to seeing in period pieces set in the English countryside. The film's beautiful backgrounds are a major contributor to its appeal and success. If your idea of escapist fare is something bleaker, then perhaps you should rent something like "Death Wish III!"
The English country settings are as attractive and charming as the cast, and combine with the story and soundtrack for entertainment that makes you not tire of repeat viewings. McGrath is a wonder at choreographing the interplay of subtle expressions that are so essential in conveying the complicated romantic intrigue that occurs in this story.
This refreshing movie could also be a clinic on how enjoyable a film can be minus sex, violence or even a villainous antagonist. The story is often amusing, endearing, and at times, quite touching.
I have seen many competent Jane Austen book adaptations but this is without question my favorite.
Emma is one of my least favorite Jane Austen novels, so it took a while for me to get round to watching this version. However, I was pleasantly surprised and found it much more enjoyable than the Kate Beckinsale version.
Gwyneth did a decent job, although I must state that the script portrayed Emma as a terribly spoilt snob, and I rather disliked her in the film and couldn't understand why Mr Knightley would admire her so when really, she was just dreadful. I certainly don't remember finding her so unbearable in the novel.
What I love about Jane Austin's work is that her characters are so witty and endearing, despite their faults, but that was not the case in this film. I certainly didn't care for Emma one bit and would have preferred it had the totally bland but sweet Harriet ended up with him instead.
Mr Knightley was a far better character in the film; far less critical, more gentle and appealing, and not the stiff, critical bore I found him to be in the novel. And the casting of Jeremy Northam was pure genius, for every girl knows that having a hunky romantic lead is essential in an Austen movie.
This film was well made and did justice to the novel. The acting was rather good, but I didn't love this film the way I do other Jane Austen film's, and wouldn't be compelled to watch it again.
Gwyneth did a decent job, although I must state that the script portrayed Emma as a terribly spoilt snob, and I rather disliked her in the film and couldn't understand why Mr Knightley would admire her so when really, she was just dreadful. I certainly don't remember finding her so unbearable in the novel.
What I love about Jane Austin's work is that her characters are so witty and endearing, despite their faults, but that was not the case in this film. I certainly didn't care for Emma one bit and would have preferred it had the totally bland but sweet Harriet ended up with him instead.
Mr Knightley was a far better character in the film; far less critical, more gentle and appealing, and not the stiff, critical bore I found him to be in the novel. And the casting of Jeremy Northam was pure genius, for every girl knows that having a hunky romantic lead is essential in an Austen movie.
This film was well made and did justice to the novel. The acting was rather good, but I didn't love this film the way I do other Jane Austen film's, and wouldn't be compelled to watch it again.
By no means my favourite Austen novel, and Paltrow is by no means my favourite actress, but I found the film almost totally delightful. Paltrow does a good job, and Cummings, Stevenson and the one who plays 'Miss Bates' are all absolutely terrific. The period detail is not alienating; the feel of the movie is just right, in fact. But the real 'find' is Jeremy Northam as Mr Knightley. There could not be more perfect casting, IMO. I hated Mr K in the novel, but found him wonderfully human and humane in the film. Northam's good looks and smiling eyes are no hindrance to enjoyment, either! Highly recommended. AnaR
- JamesHitchcock
- Mar 25, 2007
- Permalink
- shaundrahstrailer
- Nov 28, 2013
- Permalink
Emma is a true romance. If you love the soppy stuff, charged with wit and folly, you will love this movie! Its true to the novel, which is very important, with a few twists added for pleasure. Gwen is not one of my fave actreesess but she does justice to a role that required everything that she had to offer in spades. She shines in a role i think no other actress could have done proper justice to.
Jeremy Northam, as the hero. how shocked are you? I never looked upon him as overtly handsome but heck! What the right role can do for you! He looks so good as the sensible, regal Mr. K, that i am literally looking at him in a new light. He makes and excellent romantic lead. The charm and character that he brings to his role is wonderful!
Ewan McGregor, Greta Sacchi brings in the rest. a good cast. A good movie. If you are a fan of Jane Austen, see this movie, along with Pride and Prejudice - AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, buy the books. It enhances the movie to heights that are extraordinary
Jeremy Northam, as the hero. how shocked are you? I never looked upon him as overtly handsome but heck! What the right role can do for you! He looks so good as the sensible, regal Mr. K, that i am literally looking at him in a new light. He makes and excellent romantic lead. The charm and character that he brings to his role is wonderful!
Ewan McGregor, Greta Sacchi brings in the rest. a good cast. A good movie. If you are a fan of Jane Austen, see this movie, along with Pride and Prejudice - AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, buy the books. It enhances the movie to heights that are extraordinary
- sweetrupturedlight
- Apr 4, 2002
- Permalink
It's a comedy set in rural England in the early 19th century. It follows an attractive but meddling young woman who misunderstands her ability to judge the wants and desires of others.
In this production, Emma Woodhouse (Gwyneth Paltrow) is more nuanced than in 2005's Anya Taylor-Joy but is still more superficial than Kate Beckinsale in the 1996 British production. On the other hand, Jeremy Northam is a worthy George Knightley. Differences in script emphasis make Alan Cumming's Rev. Elton less significant in this production, but it does heighten the role of Rev. Elton's new wife, Augusta (Juliet Stevenson). Harriet Smith (Toni Collette) is somewhat better in the British production. There are differences in the evolution of the various romantic relationships, and a few scenes are uniquely portrayed here.
This film is better than the 2005 production, but I prefer the British 1996 production as the most well-rounded and realistic of the three productions. It was the least flashy (2005 wins on flashiness) with the lowest production values, but the script wins the day. So I rank this one between the British 1996 and 2005 production.
In this production, Emma Woodhouse (Gwyneth Paltrow) is more nuanced than in 2005's Anya Taylor-Joy but is still more superficial than Kate Beckinsale in the 1996 British production. On the other hand, Jeremy Northam is a worthy George Knightley. Differences in script emphasis make Alan Cumming's Rev. Elton less significant in this production, but it does heighten the role of Rev. Elton's new wife, Augusta (Juliet Stevenson). Harriet Smith (Toni Collette) is somewhat better in the British production. There are differences in the evolution of the various romantic relationships, and a few scenes are uniquely portrayed here.
This film is better than the 2005 production, but I prefer the British 1996 production as the most well-rounded and realistic of the three productions. It was the least flashy (2005 wins on flashiness) with the lowest production values, but the script wins the day. So I rank this one between the British 1996 and 2005 production.
- steiner-sam
- May 31, 2023
- Permalink
I'll seen every adaptation and read the book. This film is clunky and stiff. If this was the only version of the novel that existed I would not love the story the way I do. Don't waste your time with this. I felt like I was watching a bad high school play.
- nathan-p-hart
- Apr 4, 2022
- Permalink
Emma is not about very much except the utopian espionage of a limited clique of people who will all basically have to marry each other at some point, if they haven't already. Either you are on a wavelength with this material or you are not. It may be that the majority of my generation, in a lenient time, do not have much to immediately relate to in a movie in which an aristocratic matchmaker spends her days scheming to couple reluctant contenders for marriage. But what is timeless is Emma's personality. I'm sure everybody's met a busybody drama queen who's so sweet and likable, even crush-worthy, but somehow conflict is everywhere apparent when she's around. We don't want to accept that she doesn't really care as much about us as she so convincingly seems to and probably believes she does herself, but instead is just very talented at manufacturing drama that she can appear in the middle of to mediate and make peace with those opposed. How sweet.
Gwyneth Paltrow shimmers in this title role, as young Miss Emma Woodhouse, who feels a need to be puppetmaster in her own petite township of England. Paltrow is pitch-perfect as we see her eyes tending the room, deliberating on whose lives she can control, or make better, which is more the way she sees it. She undertakes Harriet Smith, played by Toni Collette, who evokes humble sympathy as an honest young woman of flawed breeding, standing firm that she marry the Rev. Elton, played by the cheerfully foolish Alan Cumming. Miss Smith would much sooner marry a provincial farmer. Emma won't permit it. When the meager cropper sends Miss Smith a letter of proposal. Miss Smith is so unsure of herself that she rejects the farmer, just to find that the Reverend doesn't love her. He loves Emma. This should be a helpful example of the uncontrollable nature of people for Emma, who in her mind feels capable of controlling everyone. But, like most people who live in their head, she'll need more than one.
Plots like this are about etiquette, detail and the manner in which genuine personalities strain against the strait-jacket demands of the social order. In an age when transportation was significantly limited and entertainment was predominantly confined to community affairs, three-volume novels and church services, rumors were the favorite leisure activity. Neighborhood personas were precious, as they gave you someone about whom to speculate and judge, and this Austen farce has its allotment, most enjoyably Mrs. Elton (Juliet Stevenson), who commends herself constantly by quoting others.
Other community intrigue is supplied by Miss Bates and her deaf mother, Mrs. Bates. They are played by Sophie Thompson and Phyllida Law, who are Emma Thompson's sister and mother, both sharing the great writer-actress' understatedly quirky Brit sense of humor. Miss Bates says everything three times and Mrs. Bates never hears it, and when Emma is disgracefully mean to poor Miss Bates it is the honorable Mr. Knightley, her brother-in-law, in a warm and observant performance by Jeremy Northam, who rakes her over the coals, giving her a hard-line lesson on her moral duties under the class system. Emma views Knightley as a brother. She is not by any means attracted to the Reverend. There is a dapper young bachelor in the community, Ewan McGregor with an essential flirtatious glow, who appears destined to be her squire. However, he has other intentions as well, and in due time Austen sees that everyone gets what they have coming, or for Emma maybe a bit more.
The movie tapers the crevice between deftly manipulated social satire and soap opera, but it feeds on a spry intellect and a resilient comic tone. Writer-director Douglas McGrath, who wrote the immaculate Bullets Over Broadway with Woody Allen and moved from Saturday Night Live to Jane Austen with uncanny dexterity, is snug letting the comic features of Austen's work dominate its scholarly heritage. Realizing the broad comic prospects of Emma and the humorous facets of an embellished ceremonial pace, McGrath boasts competently good humor. If this Austen adaptation is ultimately less affecting than, for example, Ang Lee's atmospherically ornate adaptation of Sense and Sensibility, it is more fit to deliver an unexpected sight gag or an audaciously contemporary touch.
Gwyneth Paltrow shimmers in this title role, as young Miss Emma Woodhouse, who feels a need to be puppetmaster in her own petite township of England. Paltrow is pitch-perfect as we see her eyes tending the room, deliberating on whose lives she can control, or make better, which is more the way she sees it. She undertakes Harriet Smith, played by Toni Collette, who evokes humble sympathy as an honest young woman of flawed breeding, standing firm that she marry the Rev. Elton, played by the cheerfully foolish Alan Cumming. Miss Smith would much sooner marry a provincial farmer. Emma won't permit it. When the meager cropper sends Miss Smith a letter of proposal. Miss Smith is so unsure of herself that she rejects the farmer, just to find that the Reverend doesn't love her. He loves Emma. This should be a helpful example of the uncontrollable nature of people for Emma, who in her mind feels capable of controlling everyone. But, like most people who live in their head, she'll need more than one.
Plots like this are about etiquette, detail and the manner in which genuine personalities strain against the strait-jacket demands of the social order. In an age when transportation was significantly limited and entertainment was predominantly confined to community affairs, three-volume novels and church services, rumors were the favorite leisure activity. Neighborhood personas were precious, as they gave you someone about whom to speculate and judge, and this Austen farce has its allotment, most enjoyably Mrs. Elton (Juliet Stevenson), who commends herself constantly by quoting others.
Other community intrigue is supplied by Miss Bates and her deaf mother, Mrs. Bates. They are played by Sophie Thompson and Phyllida Law, who are Emma Thompson's sister and mother, both sharing the great writer-actress' understatedly quirky Brit sense of humor. Miss Bates says everything three times and Mrs. Bates never hears it, and when Emma is disgracefully mean to poor Miss Bates it is the honorable Mr. Knightley, her brother-in-law, in a warm and observant performance by Jeremy Northam, who rakes her over the coals, giving her a hard-line lesson on her moral duties under the class system. Emma views Knightley as a brother. She is not by any means attracted to the Reverend. There is a dapper young bachelor in the community, Ewan McGregor with an essential flirtatious glow, who appears destined to be her squire. However, he has other intentions as well, and in due time Austen sees that everyone gets what they have coming, or for Emma maybe a bit more.
The movie tapers the crevice between deftly manipulated social satire and soap opera, but it feeds on a spry intellect and a resilient comic tone. Writer-director Douglas McGrath, who wrote the immaculate Bullets Over Broadway with Woody Allen and moved from Saturday Night Live to Jane Austen with uncanny dexterity, is snug letting the comic features of Austen's work dominate its scholarly heritage. Realizing the broad comic prospects of Emma and the humorous facets of an embellished ceremonial pace, McGrath boasts competently good humor. If this Austen adaptation is ultimately less affecting than, for example, Ang Lee's atmospherically ornate adaptation of Sense and Sensibility, it is more fit to deliver an unexpected sight gag or an audaciously contemporary touch.
This is an OK adaptation, but not as good as the TV version. The actors are generally alright but I found Jeremy Northam rather wet as Mr Knightley, particularly compared to Mark Strong in the TV version. Gwyneth Paltrow is OK and her English accent is pretty good but again, I preferred Kate Beckinsale's Emma. There are excellent support performances from Toni Collette, Juliet Stephenson and Sophy Thompson.
The script is often played too much for laughs, the book is a comedy, but there are too many set-piece gags here, and also the Frank Churchill subplot is almost completely absent.
My biggest criticism is the scenery. It is far too lush. England has never been like this. It looks like a chocolate box. Only Americans would make it like this.
Despite these criticisms I enjoyed this film but would recommend the TV adaptation more.
The script is often played too much for laughs, the book is a comedy, but there are too many set-piece gags here, and also the Frank Churchill subplot is almost completely absent.
My biggest criticism is the scenery. It is far too lush. England has never been like this. It looks like a chocolate box. Only Americans would make it like this.
Despite these criticisms I enjoyed this film but would recommend the TV adaptation more.
What a delightful film...
Accompanied by Oscar-winning Composer RACHEL PORTMAN's lush, emotional and dreamy music, this film remains a pure delight worthy of viewing more than once a year.
Incredible casting...
Gwyneth Paltrow was perfect for the role of Emma. Toni Collette was great as Harriett Smith.
The character who stole the film was MISS BATES!!! She was mesmerizing to watch, one finds oneself on the edge of ones' seat just hanging on her every word and laughing hysterically WITH her. One of the most endearing characters I have come across in ages. From one of the opening scenes when she is thanking Mr. Woodhouse for sending "that lovely quarter-hind of pork... PORK, MOTHER!!!" she shouts into her daffy and clearly hearing impaired Mother, Mrs. Bates (played by Emma Thompson's mother, Phyllida Law) who looks forlorn and lost.
The comical ways that Emma would avoid the grating Miss Bates builds itself up for one truly gut-wrenching scene at the picnic when Emma insults Miss Bates who takes her cruel dig to her heart. We then see poor Miss Bates stammering and on the verge of tears and just so crushed one can not help but feel one's heart ripped out to her on her behalf. It is a classic scene, one to be rewound and played over & over...
The ending is right up there with "Sense & Sensibility" and provides one of life's greatest lessons about how one should marry one's best friend...
I hope that this film delights you all as much as it has myself.
I ADORED it!
Accompanied by Oscar-winning Composer RACHEL PORTMAN's lush, emotional and dreamy music, this film remains a pure delight worthy of viewing more than once a year.
Incredible casting...
Gwyneth Paltrow was perfect for the role of Emma. Toni Collette was great as Harriett Smith.
The character who stole the film was MISS BATES!!! She was mesmerizing to watch, one finds oneself on the edge of ones' seat just hanging on her every word and laughing hysterically WITH her. One of the most endearing characters I have come across in ages. From one of the opening scenes when she is thanking Mr. Woodhouse for sending "that lovely quarter-hind of pork... PORK, MOTHER!!!" she shouts into her daffy and clearly hearing impaired Mother, Mrs. Bates (played by Emma Thompson's mother, Phyllida Law) who looks forlorn and lost.
The comical ways that Emma would avoid the grating Miss Bates builds itself up for one truly gut-wrenching scene at the picnic when Emma insults Miss Bates who takes her cruel dig to her heart. We then see poor Miss Bates stammering and on the verge of tears and just so crushed one can not help but feel one's heart ripped out to her on her behalf. It is a classic scene, one to be rewound and played over & over...
The ending is right up there with "Sense & Sensibility" and provides one of life's greatest lessons about how one should marry one's best friend...
I hope that this film delights you all as much as it has myself.
I ADORED it!
- patrickdc202
- Feb 7, 2002
- Permalink
I have no idea how a Texan (the director, Douglas McGrath) and the American actress Gwyneth Paltrow ever pulled this off but seeing this again will remind you what all the fuss about Ms. Paltrow was in the first place! I had long since gone off the woman and still feel she is rather dull in her Oscar-winning "Shakespeare In Love" performance but she gets all the beats right here--she is nigh on perfect as Emma Woodhouse. She may have won her Oscar for Shakespeare but she should be remembered for this.
Of course, she's surrounded by a great supporting cast including Toni Collette, Greta Scacchi, Juliette Stevenson et al...Jeremy Northam is very appealing as the love interest, even if the script wallows a bit in his declaration of love to Paltrow (in the process, allowing all of the tension to drain out of their relationship); several years on, Ewan's hair is a little easier to take than it was in '96 and, personally, I find puckish Alan Cumming a grating presence in anything nowadays. But the standout is, without a doubt, Sophie Thompson (sister of Emma Thompson, daughter of Phyllida Law) as Miss Bates; what this version needs is a scene where Emma reconciles with Miss Bates, as she is the character to whose fate we are drawn. The film is worth watching (again even) for her performance alone.
All in all, this has aged wonderfully with charm to spare and more than enough subtlety to sort out the British class system. Well worth a rental (because its unlikely that Paltrow will ever be this good again--but we'll always have Emma).
Of course, she's surrounded by a great supporting cast including Toni Collette, Greta Scacchi, Juliette Stevenson et al...Jeremy Northam is very appealing as the love interest, even if the script wallows a bit in his declaration of love to Paltrow (in the process, allowing all of the tension to drain out of their relationship); several years on, Ewan's hair is a little easier to take than it was in '96 and, personally, I find puckish Alan Cumming a grating presence in anything nowadays. But the standout is, without a doubt, Sophie Thompson (sister of Emma Thompson, daughter of Phyllida Law) as Miss Bates; what this version needs is a scene where Emma reconciles with Miss Bates, as she is the character to whose fate we are drawn. The film is worth watching (again even) for her performance alone.
All in all, this has aged wonderfully with charm to spare and more than enough subtlety to sort out the British class system. Well worth a rental (because its unlikely that Paltrow will ever be this good again--but we'll always have Emma).
- classicsoncall
- Jun 5, 2018
- Permalink
I was surprised when I saw this film. I'd heard it was the best ever filmed of the novel. How disappointed I was.
How any true Jane Austen fan can rate this adaptation is a mystery to my eyes. The scriptwriters have decided to stick in bits of ridiculous humour which are embarrassing at the best of times, but also ruin the feel of the period. As for the cast: Gwyneth Paltrow makes a rather shallow heroine (but then any 'hot' American star would be questionable in the role), Toni Collette is miscast, and poor Ewan McGregor is made to look laughable!
I really could not say a good thing about this film. I seem to be among the very few who don't rate it, but if you want my advice, see instead the TV production starring Kate Beckinsale - believe me, that is far preferable to this superficial trash.
How any true Jane Austen fan can rate this adaptation is a mystery to my eyes. The scriptwriters have decided to stick in bits of ridiculous humour which are embarrassing at the best of times, but also ruin the feel of the period. As for the cast: Gwyneth Paltrow makes a rather shallow heroine (but then any 'hot' American star would be questionable in the role), Toni Collette is miscast, and poor Ewan McGregor is made to look laughable!
I really could not say a good thing about this film. I seem to be among the very few who don't rate it, but if you want my advice, see instead the TV production starring Kate Beckinsale - believe me, that is far preferable to this superficial trash.
Romance is in the air and love is in bloom in Victorian era England, in this light-hearted story set against a society in a time in which manners were still in vogue, the ladies were charming and elegant, and the gentlemen dashing. `Emma,' based on the novel by Jane Austen and written for the screen and directed by Douglas McGrath, stars the lovely Gwyneth Paltrow in the title role. A self-appointed matchmaker, Emma takes great delight in the romantic notion of playing Cupid and attempting to pair up those she feels are suited to one another. Coming off a successful matching that ended in marriage, she next sets her sights on finding a mate for her friend, Harriet (Toni Collette), but the outcome of her initial attempt proves to be less than satisfying. Meanwhile, her endeavors are tempered by by the handsome Mr. Knightley (Jeremy Northam), whose insights into matters of the heart often seem to be a bit more astute than Emma's, and lend some needed balance to the proceedings. And Emma, so concerned with what is right for others, neglects the heart that is actually the most important of all: Her own. The world goes round and love abounds, but Emma is about to miss the boat. Luckily for her, however, the is someone just right for her waiting in the wings. Now, if she can but stop long enough to realize it. But as everyone who has known true love knows, matters of the heart can go right or wrong in an instant, depending upon the slightest thing; and while romance is at hand for Emma, she must first recognize it, and seize the moment.
McGrath has crafted and delivered a delightful, feel-good film that is like a breath of fresh air in our often turbulent world. There may be an air of frivolity about it, but in retrospect, this story deals with something that is perhaps the most important thing there is-- in all honesty-- to just about anyone: Love. And with McGrath's impeccable sense of pace and timing, it all plays out here in a way that is entirely entertaining and enjoyable. It's a pleasant, affecting film, with a wonderful cast, that successfully transports the viewer to another time and another place. It's light fare, but absorbing; and the picturesque settings and proceedings offer a sense of well-being and calm that allows you to immerse yourself in it and simply go with the flow.
The winsome Paltrow, who won the Oscar for best actress for `Shakespeare In Love' two years after making this one, seems comfortable and right at home in this genre. She personifies all things British, and does it with such naturalness and facility that it's the kind of performance that is easily taken for granted or overlooked altogether. She's simply so good at what she does and makes it look so easy. She has a charismatic screen presence and an endearing manner, very reminiscent of Audrey Hepburn. Yet Paltrow is unique. As an actor, she has a wide range and style and has demonstrated-- with such films as `Hard Eight,' `Hush' and `A Perfect Murder'-- that she can play just about any part effectively, and with that personal touch that makes any role she plays her own. But it's with characters like Emma that she really shines. She is so expressive and open, and her personality is so engaging, that she is someone to whom it is easy to relate and just a joy to watch, regardless of the part she is playing. And for Emma, she is absolutely perfect.
Jeremy Northam also acquits himself extremely well in the role of Knightley, and like Paltrow, seems suited to the genre-- in the right role, that is; his performance in the more recent `The Golden Bowl,' in which he played an Italian Prince, was less than satisfying. Here, however, he is perfect; he is handsome, and carries himself in such a way that makes Knightley believable and very real. Like Colin Firth's Mr. Darcy in the miniseries `Pride and Prejudice,' Northam has created a memorable character with his own Mr. Knightley.
Also excellent in supporting roles and worthy of mention are Toni Collette, as Emma's friend Harriet Smith; and Alan Cumming, as the Reverend Elton. Respectively, Collette and Cumming create characters who are very real people, and as such become a vital asset to the overall success of this film. And it demonstrates just how invaluable the supporting players are in the world of the cinema, and to films of any genre.
The supporting cast includes Greta Scacchi (Mrs. Weston), Denys Hawthorne (Mr. Woodhouse), Sophie Thompson (Miss Bates), Kathleen Byron (Mrs. Goddard), Phyllida Law (Mrs. Bates), Polly Walker (Jane Fairfax) and Ewan McGregor (Frank Churchill). An uplifting, elegant film, `Emma' is a reminder of civilized behavior and the value of gentleness and grace in a world too often beset with unpleasantness. And even if it's only through the magic of the silver screen, it's nice to be able to escape to such a world as this, if only for a couple of hours, as it fulfills the need for that renewal of faith in the human spirit. And that's the magic of the movies. I rate this one 9/10.
McGrath has crafted and delivered a delightful, feel-good film that is like a breath of fresh air in our often turbulent world. There may be an air of frivolity about it, but in retrospect, this story deals with something that is perhaps the most important thing there is-- in all honesty-- to just about anyone: Love. And with McGrath's impeccable sense of pace and timing, it all plays out here in a way that is entirely entertaining and enjoyable. It's a pleasant, affecting film, with a wonderful cast, that successfully transports the viewer to another time and another place. It's light fare, but absorbing; and the picturesque settings and proceedings offer a sense of well-being and calm that allows you to immerse yourself in it and simply go with the flow.
The winsome Paltrow, who won the Oscar for best actress for `Shakespeare In Love' two years after making this one, seems comfortable and right at home in this genre. She personifies all things British, and does it with such naturalness and facility that it's the kind of performance that is easily taken for granted or overlooked altogether. She's simply so good at what she does and makes it look so easy. She has a charismatic screen presence and an endearing manner, very reminiscent of Audrey Hepburn. Yet Paltrow is unique. As an actor, she has a wide range and style and has demonstrated-- with such films as `Hard Eight,' `Hush' and `A Perfect Murder'-- that she can play just about any part effectively, and with that personal touch that makes any role she plays her own. But it's with characters like Emma that she really shines. She is so expressive and open, and her personality is so engaging, that she is someone to whom it is easy to relate and just a joy to watch, regardless of the part she is playing. And for Emma, she is absolutely perfect.
Jeremy Northam also acquits himself extremely well in the role of Knightley, and like Paltrow, seems suited to the genre-- in the right role, that is; his performance in the more recent `The Golden Bowl,' in which he played an Italian Prince, was less than satisfying. Here, however, he is perfect; he is handsome, and carries himself in such a way that makes Knightley believable and very real. Like Colin Firth's Mr. Darcy in the miniseries `Pride and Prejudice,' Northam has created a memorable character with his own Mr. Knightley.
Also excellent in supporting roles and worthy of mention are Toni Collette, as Emma's friend Harriet Smith; and Alan Cumming, as the Reverend Elton. Respectively, Collette and Cumming create characters who are very real people, and as such become a vital asset to the overall success of this film. And it demonstrates just how invaluable the supporting players are in the world of the cinema, and to films of any genre.
The supporting cast includes Greta Scacchi (Mrs. Weston), Denys Hawthorne (Mr. Woodhouse), Sophie Thompson (Miss Bates), Kathleen Byron (Mrs. Goddard), Phyllida Law (Mrs. Bates), Polly Walker (Jane Fairfax) and Ewan McGregor (Frank Churchill). An uplifting, elegant film, `Emma' is a reminder of civilized behavior and the value of gentleness and grace in a world too often beset with unpleasantness. And even if it's only through the magic of the silver screen, it's nice to be able to escape to such a world as this, if only for a couple of hours, as it fulfills the need for that renewal of faith in the human spirit. And that's the magic of the movies. I rate this one 9/10.
This first thing to say about Jane Austen's Emma is that to really have done it justice it should have been over six episodes like the great 1995 Pride and Prejudice! What we have instead is two versions of Emma that came out within a year of each other. The Gwyneth Paltrow (GP) version and the Kate Beckinsale (KB) version. Both are feature film length with the GP version being approximately five minutes longer. So how did it do? Well the important thing about cramming a five hour story into 1 hour fifty is to know what to leave out and what to keep in obviously. There are several aspects of the story that must be brought to the viewers attention. First is that Emma is a match maker and both the GP and KB versions did this. Second is that Emma takes Harriet Smith under her wing and again both versions managed this. Thirdly that Miss Bates is a bit of a chatterbox and both versions managed this and then there is a divergence. An important part of the story is the arrival of Frank Churchill and his seemingly indifference to Jane Fairfax and his caring for Emma. In the KB version this is accurately portrayed with him seemingly reluctant to call on Miss Bates hence Jane Fairfax and his adverse comments about Jane's complexion and his hints that Jane had a thing for Mr Dixon. However in the GP version it was barely touched on and he did not appear to favour Emma over Jane. For instance he sang with both Emma and Jane and at the picnic he sat by Jane and not Emma whereas in the KB version he only sang with Emma and at box hill he sat with Emma. Another telling divergence is that Harriet Smith's liking for Mr Knightly is not properly shown to us in the GP version. In the KB version at the dance we see Harriet quite clearly being blanked by Mr Elton and then Knightly seeing this and making a point of dancing with Harriet and Harriet's happiness that Mr Knightly did dance with her. In the GP version we saw the blanking but it was not made clear that Knightly then danced with Harriet himself. This is important because it reveals why Harriet thinks that Knightly cares for her. I gave the GP version 7 out of ten because of Sophie Thompsons portrayal of Miss Bates. The scene at box hill when she is insulted by Emma was brilliant. I had a tear in my eye when Miss Bates realised she had been insulted by Emma. So while the GP version of Emma was good in my opinion the KB version is superior because it does bring out the points in the story that need to be brought out.
I honestly had somewhat high expectations when I first began to watch this movie, but it turned out to be probably one of the most boring films I have ever seen!
First of all, the pace is incredibly slow, so it seems much longer than it is (and it's not short).I'm sure when Jane Austen wrote the book, she made it several pages long, filled it with description, and didn't intend for people to read in in one day, or it might drag and lose it's appeal, which "Emma" most certainly did. Now "Sense and Sensibility" had this flaw of a slow pace, but at least it had lively lines to make up for it, as well as some good performances!
That brings me to flaw #2, which is of course, the acting. While I don't happen to care for basically anybody involved in this film, I am sure they are capable of good work, but I didn't see much of it in this movie. It was like people were trying too hard to be witty, too hard to be "upper-class", too hard to be British (well, some of them), so they all just came off as a bunch of actors and not as people.
#3. The cast, as I said, seemed only like actors, and not actually like the people they were playing. Maybe that's a good thing, because the people they played really weren't all that nice. Why did everybody like Emma, for example? Sure, she was nice to the rich, handsome people in front of them, but she was an awful gossip behind their backs. If her friends were "ugly", then she didn't even bother to go behind their backs. So, why is this girl so great? Why do people have to tell stories, "just to make her laugh?" Of course the snob couldn't even do that right. I have enough problems with Gwyneth Paltrow as Gwyneth Paltrow, and her "Emma" did not exactly change my opinion.
Well, it's easy to see that I did not care for this one. I'm sure it's a lovely book and all, but some books are really not meant to be made for the big screen, and "Emma" is one of them.
First of all, the pace is incredibly slow, so it seems much longer than it is (and it's not short).I'm sure when Jane Austen wrote the book, she made it several pages long, filled it with description, and didn't intend for people to read in in one day, or it might drag and lose it's appeal, which "Emma" most certainly did. Now "Sense and Sensibility" had this flaw of a slow pace, but at least it had lively lines to make up for it, as well as some good performances!
That brings me to flaw #2, which is of course, the acting. While I don't happen to care for basically anybody involved in this film, I am sure they are capable of good work, but I didn't see much of it in this movie. It was like people were trying too hard to be witty, too hard to be "upper-class", too hard to be British (well, some of them), so they all just came off as a bunch of actors and not as people.
#3. The cast, as I said, seemed only like actors, and not actually like the people they were playing. Maybe that's a good thing, because the people they played really weren't all that nice. Why did everybody like Emma, for example? Sure, she was nice to the rich, handsome people in front of them, but she was an awful gossip behind their backs. If her friends were "ugly", then she didn't even bother to go behind their backs. So, why is this girl so great? Why do people have to tell stories, "just to make her laugh?" Of course the snob couldn't even do that right. I have enough problems with Gwyneth Paltrow as Gwyneth Paltrow, and her "Emma" did not exactly change my opinion.
Well, it's easy to see that I did not care for this one. I'm sure it's a lovely book and all, but some books are really not meant to be made for the big screen, and "Emma" is one of them.