28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[Philip J. Fry]

[Mara]

Inspired by a conversation over on the Discord, I have put together the list nobody asked for: my ranking of Austen adaptations! This list is not exhaustive, as I have apparently seen dozens of these, but just the list of those I think are notable. There are so many made-for-tv adaptations that I could sum up as "fine," but left no lasting impression. I did include one made-for-tv adaptation that is too good to leave off, but am not including loose adaptations like Clueless, Bridget Jones' Diary, etc, or works inspired by Austen's life instead of her novels.

1. Persuasion (1995) Austen's most mature book is translated into a thoughtful, understated and lovely film. This is the only Austen adaption on this list that is brave enough to cast non-beautiful actors as canonically plain characters, and Root and Hinds are electric together. It's a story for adults, more introspective and melancholy than most of her work, while still being swooningly romantic. A+, no notes

2. Pride & Prejudice (1995) The most faithful adaptation of an Austen book ever made, this meticulous miniseries could have been laborious and dragging, but is instead sparkling, hilarious and fun, thanks mostly to stellar casting from top to bottom. Ehle and Firth are absolutely the best Lizzie and Darcy of all time. The expansive run time gives the story room to breathe and explore the nuances of Austen's subplots, which work together to form an excellent whole.

3. Sense & Sensibility (1995) One of Austen's weakest novels is given an incredible face-lift thanks to a brilliant, witty screenplay by Emma Thompson, lush direction by Ang Lee, and terrific interplay between Thompson, Winslet, & Rickman. Even Hugh Grant, an actor I generally dislike, does serviceable work here.

4. Emma. (2020) More of a deconstruction than a strict adaptation, this stylized version of the story is heavy on slapstick and social commentary, but doesn't have much heart, with the exception of Johnny Flynn, who pulls off an unprecedented, interesting take on Mr. Knightly.

5. Pride & Prejudice (2005) It looks absolutely gorgeous, I'll give it that. Macfadyen brings some interesting choices to Mr. Darcy, but Knightley is doing the same character she does in every period piece. She's boring. Many of the film's choices feel inexplicable (why the time period change?) and feel like they exist just to try to make the story feel different than the other 200 adaptations out there.

6. Emma (1996) This more faithful adaptation of the novel is pretty and fun, but spends a lot of time ticking the boxes of what an Austen adaptation is supposed to be (see the three examples from the year before, 1995, above) without bringing anything new or insightful to the table. Most of the cast is fine, with a young Toni Colette being a standout as the awkward Harriet Smith.

7. Mansfield Park (1999) This is a tricky novel to adapt, with a real soggy blanket as a female lead. I respect that the film tries to liven things up, and also to place the story within a more modern perspective on England's brutal West Indian plantations, which is paying for all the lavish lifestyle we see on screen. It works sometimes, but the more modern perspective is often at odds with the story as it is told. (If this Fanny is so self-actualized and progressive, for instance, why does she let herself get kicked around by every other character for 90% of the plot?)

8. Pride & Prejudice (1940) This adaptation has no idea what it is doing, with attempts to simplify the plot leaving it incoherent. Setting the story several decades later does nothing but change the costumes, as no attempt is made to make the dialogue or interactions sound like they take place at any time but 1940. I will say that Lawrence Olivier is a good choice for the mannered haughtiness of Darcy.

9. Love & Friendship (2016) This is an interesting failure. Kate Beckinsale is committed to the villainous Lady Susan, but the film can't overcome the fact that the unfinished novel doesn't have a sturdy enough plot to keep the whole thing afloat.

[Yxklyx]

Saw Inland Empire for the first time last night, which has me thinking how I often enjoy movies about making movies. I've seen a lot, but I haven't seen them all. I would appreciate any insight you may have into the movies below based on 1) if they're good and 2) how much or how little they are actually about making movies. (Ed Wood is very much about making movies, while Inglourious Basterds is very little about making movies.)

...
A Star Is Born

Have not see any of those other films!

Two that come to mind though:

Beware of a Holy Whore
Irma Vep

and of course:

8 1/2

The Fassbinder has more filmmaking scenes than 8 1/2 - actually the Fellini film has no filmmaking.

[Mal]

Gonna have to disagree on Love And Friendship - adored the film and its humor. But I'm not an Austen-ite, so I don't have the perspective via adaptation/text.

[Philip J. Fry]

[DFA1979]

Mara I believe the Ang Lee Jane Austin flick was on Tubi last I checked so I may view that one. I really need to read her books first.

[Philip J. Fry]

Mara I believe the Ang Lee Jane Austin flick was on Tubi last I checked so I may view that one. I really need to read her books first.

Pride and Prejudice is such a fun read. Killed it in a night.

[Mara]

Mara I believe the Ang Lee Jane Austin flick was on Tubi last I checked so I may view that one. I really need to read her books first.

I would argue that you don't really need to read the books first, especially with Sense & Sensibility, which is not her best work. She's not known for her plot twists, so watching the film first isn't going to spoil anything. The books just go deeper and you get more of her wit.

[DFA1979]

Noted, thanks!

[StuSmallz]

Batman Returns at 30 is still as weird as big-budget blockbusters get: how Tim Burton’s kinetic and kinky sequel pushed the boundaries for the summer movie template

[StuSmallz]

Anyone else hate it when movies succumb to the trope of "Schrödinger's C(h)a(rac)t(er)"? You know, when a character clearly dies in a movie, whether it be in a stand-alone original or part of an existing franchise, but then that movie and/or character gets iconic (or at least successful), the studio wants a sequel, and the filmmakers suddenly regret their decision to kill off them off, so they try a resurrection, either with a very flimsy explanation as to how they survived, or even nothing at all in some cases, meaning that the character is both dead according to the canon of the previous entry, and simultaneously alive in the next one; think Blade 2 with [

Show Spoiler

Whistler

], The Matrix Reloaded with [

Show Spoiler

Agent Smith

], or this scene in Halloweenwater (aka Halloween H20) where...

[

Show Spoiler

...Michael clearly dies, but Resurrection wants us to believe that that was actually a paramedic who couldn't speak because he had his larynx conveniently crushed by Michael, who then swapped his clothes with the guy and escaped, and he somehow never bothered removing the mask to reveal his true identity to Laurie. Yeah sure, movie.

]

[Skitch]

Yes.

[StuSmallz]

Thanks, good talk.

[Skitch]

I didn't have anything to add, you already said it.

[Mysterious Dude]

The one that really annoyed me was Kingsman 2. I didn't even see it, so I don't actually know how they managed [

Show Spoiler

to make Colin Firth survive being SHOT IN THE HEAD AT POINT BLANK RANGE.

]

[StuSmallz]

The one that really annoyed me was Kingsman 2. I didn't even see it, so I don't actually know how they managed [

Show Spoiler

to make Colin Firth survive being SHOT IN THE HEAD AT POINT BLANK RANGE.

]

Well, according to the Wiki, [

Show Spoiler

"Harry survived his shooting thanks to Statesman technology, but is suffering from amnesia",

] so I guess that explains it...? Anyway, we can apparently also include Avatar 2 in this trope, from the reports I've heard...

[DFA1979]

The one that really annoyed me was Kingsman 2. I didn't even see it, so I don't actually know how they managed [

Show Spoiler

to make Colin Firth survive being SHOT IN THE HEAD AT POINT BLANK RANGE.

]

No kidding. That's a great example.

[DFA1979]

Anyone else hate it when movies succumb to the trope of "Schrödinger's C(h)a(rac)t(er)"? You know, when a character clearly dies in a movie, whether it be in a stand-alone original or part of an existing franchise, but then that movie and/or character gets iconic (or at least successful), the studio wants a sequel, and the filmmakers suddenly regret their decision to kill off them off, so they try a resurrection, either with a very flimsy explanation as to how they survived, or even nothing at all in some cases, meaning that the character is both dead according to the canon of the previous entry, and simultaneously alive in the next one; think Blade 2 with [

Show Spoiler

Whistler

], The Matrix Reloaded with [

Show Spoiler

Agent Smith

], or this scene in Halloweenwater (aka Halloween H20) where...

[

Show Spoiler

...Michael clearly dies, but Resurrection wants us to believe that that was actually a paramedic who couldn't speak because he had his larynx conveniently crushed by Michael, who then swapped his clothes with the guy and escaped, and he somehow never bothered removing the mask to reveal his true identity to Laurie. Yeah sure, movie.

]

[

Show Spoiler

For me it's Malcom in the Jurassic Park books and kind of in the movies, too. He was supposed to be killed off but after he was so popular among the fans Crichton gave in and made it so he wasn't dead.

]

[DFA1979]

Another good example is obviously Jason Voorhees with Part 5 bombing so naturally they bring him back for Jason Lives.

[StuSmallz]

[

Show Spoiler

For me it's Malcom in the Jurassic Park books and kind of in the movies, too. He was supposed to be killed off but after he was so popular among the fans Crichton gave in and made it so he wasn't dead.

]

[

Show Spoiler

Aw, the good ol' "Schrödinger's Cast" trope; Ian's also the very first example listed in the Film examples on that page, even!

]

[StuSmallz]

Down here... you're on your own.


[

Show Spoiler

They say big things have small beginnings, but, while that's true in the case of Blood Simple, the start of the Coen brother's now-legendary decades long career, it's also true that this small beginning is a great one as well, taking a familiar Noir tale of adultery and murder, and filtering it through a sweaty, Neo-style sensibility, crafting a tight, tense work of profound, creeping paranoia, Texas (and Coen brothers)-style, and creating an enviable foundation for everything the iconic duo of filmmakers have made since.




It tells the story of Abby & Ray, a neglected housewife and an average joe bartender respectively, who impulsively strike up an affair while driving through a torrential downpour somewhere down in Texas. Naturally, Abby's husband Marty isn't too thrilled when he finds out about her infidelity, especially since it's with one of his own employees, but when he hires a sleazy, untrustworthy private eye for a "not strictly legal" job as an act of revenge against them, he accidentally sets off a increasingly insane chain of events, one where the dead seem to keep coming back to life, no one ever really trusts each other, and absolutely none of the characters can think straight, through both the real and imaginary pools of blood continually serving to obscure their vision.




So, when looking back on this film, it's striking how much Blood Simple set the stage for the Coens' later modern classics, with echoes reverberating throughout Fargo and their magnum opus No Country For Old Men, and, while it may not have 100% of the substance of some of their later efforts, Simple still has just as much STYLE, with cinematographer Barry Sonnenfeld's tense, unnerving tracking shots, composer Carter Burwell's haunting, piano-centric score (which marks the first of his many collaborations with the Coens), and the pacing working to bring things to a slow (pot)boil, being agonizing in the most pleasurable sense of the word, if that makes sense.




And finally, Simple excels through its sheer, palpable atmosphere, which has one foot in the "real world", due to the copious amount of sweat constantly dripping off every character, whether it's from the Texas heat or their addled, fearful states of mind, while also accurately capturing the feeling of being trapped in a dream, albeit a bad one you can't even fully grasp, let alone escape from, as one bad mistake inevitably leads to the next, eventually leading you into an early grave. Add on top of that some sharp dialogue, a great cast all-around (including Frances McDormand herself in a strong debut performance), and traces of the Coens' signature black humor, and Blood Simple is anything but "the same old song"/film, as far as I'm concerned.

]


Final Score: 9

[Yxklyx]

Anyone else hate it when movies succumb to the trope of "Schrödinger's C(h)a(rac)t(er)"? You know, when a character clearly dies in a movie, ...

Hate is not the word I'd use. Rather fraud, cheat, manipulator. All movies can be turned into manipulation rather easily but when it's so blatant, when a director uses death to manipulate an audience but then says, no I didn't mean that, that's the lowest of the lows.

[StuSmallz]

[Idioteque Stalker]

Hate is not the word I'd use. Rather fraud, cheat, manipulator. All movies can be turned into manipulation rather easily but when it's so blatant, when a director uses death to manipulate an audience but then says, no I didn't mean that, that's the lowest of the lows.

It happened in Rise of Skywalker at least twice, maybe more. One of the many reasons it's one of the worst movies ever.

[StuSmallz]

Roger Corman on the art, and business, of moviemaking: A frank conversation with the filmmaker who gave Hollywood legends like Jack Nicholson, Martin Scorsese, and William Shatner their start