This is an enjoyable 90 minutes, with good performances throughout (especially Felicity Jones and Carey Mulligan). But it still left me with regrets.
It is nearly always a mistake to second-guess Jane Austen. You should either do the novels straight or leave them alone. This Northanger Abbey is better than the 1986 BBC version, but still could not resist playing around with the book and so it loses some of its best features.
It is Austen's shortest book so fits more naturally into the 90 minute format than her other works, but it still feels rushed and desultory at times. It is also her most poorly constructed story and the Bath scenes fit uncomfortably with the scenes at Northanger. The screenplay by Andrew Davies addresses this weakness and manages to smooth over the transition, but it has its own shortcomings.
Northanger Abbey is often misrepresented as a parody of the Gothic novel and the 1986 version took that as its cue to give the whole production a Gothic feel. In truth, there is no parody in the book. Austen simply defends her approach to fiction by drawing ironic contrasts between the mundane events she is depicting and the delirious fancies of the popular novels of her time.
Davies, thank goodness, gets this. He relegates the Gothic trappings to Catherine's daydreams which he then uses to set up the plot twist where she imagines herself to be in the middle of an actual Gothic mystery. At this point, it is appropriate for the style to be heightened to echo Catherine's viewpoint. However, he also gives us Jane Austen's sardonic observations as a voice-over. This is probably a mistake, because the voice-over would have better been reserved for Catherine, so she can clarify just how she comes to believe that General Tilney murdered his wife. As it is, we learn of her suspicions, but see very little justification for them.
Although this section of the story could have been better handled, it is the Bath scenes that are least satisfactory. Rather than a Gothic parody, the book is really about a naive young girl's introduction to society and her rapid disillusionment. This is the best-plotted part of the book and should probably have been presented pretty much as written.
We need to see more of the development of Catherine's relationship with Arabella and her growing apprehensions about her new friend. We need to see more of how Arabella and her brother impose on her pliant good nature for their own selfish ends. We also need to see more of John Thorpe's bone-headed self-absorption. He is one of the best and funniest creations in the book but we get very little of his character and none of the humour. Basically (as another reviewer has already said) we need more of Austen's dialogue. It is Tilney's drollery, Arabella's self-contradictions and John Thorpe's blustering and bragging that make the characters live.
Simple plot points are not particularly well handled. General Tiney's nature and ambitions need to unfold gradually rather than be made transparent from his first appearance. Similarly, we need to see how Henry Tilney inadvertently cues Catherine's fancies by his own parody of the Gothic style.
While I welcome this movie as the first half-way satisfactory version of Austen's least-dramatised book, I still regret that it doesn't quite capture the novel. At the end I was saying to myself: "Well, you got through the plot OK, but you didn't really tell the story."
Frustrating!
PS.
Memo to producers: You cannot tell a Jane Austen story in less than two hours (three is nearly always better), so there is no point in trying.
It is nearly always a mistake to second-guess Jane Austen. You should either do the novels straight or leave them alone. This Northanger Abbey is better than the 1986 BBC version, but still could not resist playing around with the book and so it loses some of its best features.
It is Austen's shortest book so fits more naturally into the 90 minute format than her other works, but it still feels rushed and desultory at times. It is also her most poorly constructed story and the Bath scenes fit uncomfortably with the scenes at Northanger. The screenplay by Andrew Davies addresses this weakness and manages to smooth over the transition, but it has its own shortcomings.
Northanger Abbey is often misrepresented as a parody of the Gothic novel and the 1986 version took that as its cue to give the whole production a Gothic feel. In truth, there is no parody in the book. Austen simply defends her approach to fiction by drawing ironic contrasts between the mundane events she is depicting and the delirious fancies of the popular novels of her time.
Davies, thank goodness, gets this. He relegates the Gothic trappings to Catherine's daydreams which he then uses to set up the plot twist where she imagines herself to be in the middle of an actual Gothic mystery. At this point, it is appropriate for the style to be heightened to echo Catherine's viewpoint. However, he also gives us Jane Austen's sardonic observations as a voice-over. This is probably a mistake, because the voice-over would have better been reserved for Catherine, so she can clarify just how she comes to believe that General Tilney murdered his wife. As it is, we learn of her suspicions, but see very little justification for them.
Although this section of the story could have been better handled, it is the Bath scenes that are least satisfactory. Rather than a Gothic parody, the book is really about a naive young girl's introduction to society and her rapid disillusionment. This is the best-plotted part of the book and should probably have been presented pretty much as written.
We need to see more of the development of Catherine's relationship with Arabella and her growing apprehensions about her new friend. We need to see more of how Arabella and her brother impose on her pliant good nature for their own selfish ends. We also need to see more of John Thorpe's bone-headed self-absorption. He is one of the best and funniest creations in the book but we get very little of his character and none of the humour. Basically (as another reviewer has already said) we need more of Austen's dialogue. It is Tilney's drollery, Arabella's self-contradictions and John Thorpe's blustering and bragging that make the characters live.
Simple plot points are not particularly well handled. General Tiney's nature and ambitions need to unfold gradually rather than be made transparent from his first appearance. Similarly, we need to see how Henry Tilney inadvertently cues Catherine's fancies by his own parody of the Gothic style.
While I welcome this movie as the first half-way satisfactory version of Austen's least-dramatised book, I still regret that it doesn't quite capture the novel. At the end I was saying to myself: "Well, you got through the plot OK, but you didn't really tell the story."
Frustrating!
PS.
Memo to producers: You cannot tell a Jane Austen story in less than two hours (three is nearly always better), so there is no point in trying.