It's interesting that as of April 2017, IMDb fans rate this 2009 BBC TV mini-series an average of 8.2 – the highest of all the "Emma" stories ever made for the silver screen or TV. Yet it's the least of the lot of the films generally available. This late rendition comes nowhere near the 1972 BBC mini-series. And, compared to the best of the "Emma" films (1996, Gwyneth Paltrow), this one is no better than fair. The critics of the day saw the inferiority of the script and the weak casting. Most of the performances just weren't that good. This series has three glaring shortcomings. One is the more serious overtones of the script, which tend to diminish the humor in those scenes when it should be paramount. Another is the modern touch to the culture of 19th century England in the manners of Emma and others. The last is the casting. Romola Garai is fair as Emma, but no better than just fair. And, most of the casting after that misfires. Mr. Knightly is supposed to be 17 years older than Emma, but Jonny Lee Miller looks close to her age.
Most of the young characters in this series appear to be very young – barely out of their teens. Michael Gambon is a fine actor, but his Mr. Woodhouse isn't nearly as genuine as is that played by Donald Eccles in the 1972 series. Again, it likely is due to a script rendition that seems to steer to a plot that is both more serious, modern and then silly in its humor. This contention gives the story a feeling of uneasiness. Whereas the earlier series and the 1996 film with Gwyneth Paltrow move along smoothly between the serious notes and the humor, with the humor dominating them, as most scholars, students and fans of Austen think she intended.
One suspects that many who saw this late rendition of Austen's wonderful comedy of manners, probably had not seen other productions. Many probably were young and just being introduced to a broadcast or film of Austen's novel. Those who rated it so highly surely would enjoy the other productions. And, after viewing the 1972 TV miniseries and the 1996 Paltrow film, viewers would be able to make fair comparisons. At the very least, I recommend the 1996 movie, which is readily available on DVD. That film is sure to delight anyone who enjoyed this just fair 2009 production. It's the best "Emma" made to date, and one that will be hard to top in the future. This is one that the BBC had best not attempt to outdo – even though it's not a BBC product.
Most of the young characters in this series appear to be very young – barely out of their teens. Michael Gambon is a fine actor, but his Mr. Woodhouse isn't nearly as genuine as is that played by Donald Eccles in the 1972 series. Again, it likely is due to a script rendition that seems to steer to a plot that is both more serious, modern and then silly in its humor. This contention gives the story a feeling of uneasiness. Whereas the earlier series and the 1996 film with Gwyneth Paltrow move along smoothly between the serious notes and the humor, with the humor dominating them, as most scholars, students and fans of Austen think she intended.
One suspects that many who saw this late rendition of Austen's wonderful comedy of manners, probably had not seen other productions. Many probably were young and just being introduced to a broadcast or film of Austen's novel. Those who rated it so highly surely would enjoy the other productions. And, after viewing the 1972 TV miniseries and the 1996 Paltrow film, viewers would be able to make fair comparisons. At the very least, I recommend the 1996 movie, which is readily available on DVD. That film is sure to delight anyone who enjoyed this just fair 2009 production. It's the best "Emma" made to date, and one that will be hard to top in the future. This is one that the BBC had best not attempt to outdo – even though it's not a BBC product.