I understand what Mark means about Flynn, but I think the actor’s fresh approach to Knightley has nothing to do with the nakedness or the horse riding, but rather with Autumn de Wilde’s decision to give us a Mr Knightley who turns into that fumbling fool in love after that dance... Just beautiful. In the book and other screen adaptations Knightley is always shown underplaying his emotions in an attempt perhaps to misdirect the audience. I think this is more often than not a mistake. Who are we kidding? Everyone watching “Emma” knows who is going to end up with whom... Also, it is refreshing not to have again the tall, dark brooding and aloof man with a baritone playing Knightley, but rather a more youthful, earthy and softly spoken kind of guy like Johnny Flynn... In the book we see Mr Knightley’s assuredness challenged by love and jealousy. It happens out of sight, during his country walks, within the walls of his house and that visit to his brother after Box Hill, but I’m glad that Autumn de Wilde did not keep this transformation off screen. This turmoil was beautifully interpreted by a very intuitive actor. Well done indeed. 😊👍
I completely understand what Mark is saying about Johnny Flynn. I also love live music performances in movies, and his duet with Jane Fairfax had me swooning. Seeing this movie with an audience was a blast. Everyone was very reactive, much more so than I’d usually expect with a period film. The collective gasp at the Box Hill scene was truly delightful.
Just seen Emma in a sold out afternoon screening. Mark is spot on with all his comments - the film was very funny, enjoyable and uplifting. I went to see Bill Nighy and all the cast were great. The music and dancing were charming and the costumes and settings beautiful. Go see it !
When old novels were printed there used to be full stops after everything, including the title. It's a kind of superfluous flourish that is very typical of the period. I think that's what Autumn de Wilde is emulating with the stylisation of the title as "Emma."
Yes, he was raw and sexy in Beast. I've always imagined Knightley as a bit of a stuffy character, but I'm really looking forward to seeing Flynn in the role!
just returned from seeing this and whilst i went in with some bias as i’ve loved and admired anya taylor-joy for some time, i thought it was absolutely brilliant. it’s perfectly cast, the production and costume design are great as are the cinematography and direction. i’m totally in love with it and can’t wait to see it again.
Agreed. It was very clever and very funny. Many adaptations of Austenf ail to account for the humor in her books. Dare I suggest that Flynn's Knightley give FIrth's Darcy a run for his money so far as swoonable (is that a word) Austen heroes go?
@@56vay Yess I def swooned over Johnny's My Knightley. I thought also he seemed what the book version of Knightley would be, although I've never read the book x
Can't believe he had to think befor agreeing that Flynn's Knightley is a fancy-able creature! I liked that they kept Emma unlikable, it made sense that somebody had to point out her flaws and grow
Loved it! Saw it in a regional Australian cinema, full to the brim (8 people). My daughter and I laughed and snickered; and then gasped when poor Emma had her picnic moment of, "Did I say that outloud?". A great period chick flick, that's not to chick flicky. Loved it.
Gwyneth Paltrow's version of Emma was a huge part of my childhood, and Romola Garai's version is my favorite, plus I love Clueless (I've seen Kate Beckinsale's version, but didn't care for it), so I'm looking forward to seeing this new adaptation. ☺ Also, I was named after Emma, as it's my mom's favorite book and character, and it/she is also one of my favorites. 😊
The Gwyneth Paltrow's version of Emma is far better. It is more subtle and is not as overloaded with obvious decorative elements as this latest version is. Everything visually stylized stands in the way of an interesting drama. Yes, a fun and entertaining one, but Emma is actually a comedic drama. Although this version is so well thought out visually that people walk in sync (much like a Russian military march), there is an incredibly annoying lack of timing. This is particularly disturbing in the scene when Emma insults Miss Bates. The line comes so slowly that it cannot be interpreted as anything other than pure evil and Taylor-Joy's cry after that is a school example of bad acting. Emma's bad behavior in the previous version (and book) is the result of a flirtation with Frank Churchill, but there is absolutely no chemistry between Taylor-Joy and Callum Turner, which is understandable because CT is a cardboard figure. Josh O'Connor, who was brilliant in The Crown, makes Elton a caricature and it gives the viewer no understanding whatsoever as to why he would be at all interesting as a husband to Harriet Smith. Apart from a number of anachronisms (I suppose you can endure with unmotivated naked buttocks, grabbed crotches and insinuating licking on berries) there are some pluses. M Goth plays miss Smith more credible than Toni Collette did and although I prefer Jeremy Northam, Johnny Flynn does a pretty good job.
@@skolrelaterat4113 Interesting! I look forward to seeing it for myself to see if I agree with you. I got quite a bit of Love and Friendship vibes from the trailer, and as I didn't care for that movie, it made me wonder if I would like version, but I'm keeping an open mind till I see it. ☺
@@skolrelaterat4113 Haven't seen it yet, so I may be misunderstanding you, but isn't part of the point that Mr Elton is absolutely a wrong choice for Harriet and Emma is being wilfully ignorant about it, perhaps so she doesn't have to deal with his feelings for Emma herself?
skolrelaterat This new version plays more with the satire element of the novel. Emma is an explosive mixture of idiocy and intelligence and Mr Elton isn’t a good marrying choice for Harriet or for anyone... Emma extolls his virtues because she’s worried that Harriet is too infatuated by Robert Martin and wants Harriet to aim higher socially. But Mr Elton is portrayed as completely ridiculous and full of adulation in the book from the very start.
@@glocar243 Yeah, having seen it now, I agree. Though I do believe Emma notices how charmed Harriet is by Elton's ridiculous gestures and matches them for that reason. Mia Goth is an absolutely perfect Harriet tbh even if she doesn't look the part
Just got back from seeing Emma. Wasn't expecting much. In fact I was expecting another Little Women, which bored me stiff. But this was brilliant. The comedy was all the better for being understated. Oddly I didn't find Emma unsympathetic. I saw her as a Dolly Levi type fixer for her own amusement at a time when there wasn't much in the way of occupying herself as a rich young lady. Not being familiar with the book but being very familiar with Much Ado About Nothing, from the initial sparring between Emma and George, I could guess the ending. The costumes were wonderful.
Please please please let this be good... I studied the book at A Level, it's one of my favourites ever, and the trailer understood all the important moments from it. And Anya Taylor-Joy is such a good choice for Emma.
It may not be as true to the original book as other adaptations, but ‘Emma.’ is great!! A lot of people are giving it 3/5 reviews which confuses me because I loved it! Out of 100 I’d give it an 88! 88/100!
Saw it earlier today and I thought it had a serious pacing problem. It just felt flat or something......the acting is great, can't be faulted and the photography is luminous, it looks glorious. It just is not the sum of its parts.
Simon O I agree the direction had problems at the start. The emphasis was all wrong and the comedy a bit distracting, but it improved as the film progressed and let the performances of all actors shine.
6:08 why is Simon pushing back on this? He’s the sexiest version of Knightly we’ve ever had, and not because he gets naked but for the reasons Mark lays out about the actor’s presence + performance.
"Pride and Prejudice" and "Sense and Sensibility" both make my top 300 movies of all time. Emma might finally make it was my immediate thought upon seeing the girl playing Emma in the 2020 version. I cannot wait to see it.
I loved this film ❤️ Anya was perfect as book Emma, but Johnny as Mr Knightly was such a fantastic fresh take on the character. I LOVED the dance, the run, the reaction on Box Hill...brilliantly emotional and real and true. It was my favourite Mr Knightly I’ve ever seen.
you sir gave a beautiful review. and a perfect one. Thank you. a lot of reviews kind of miss the genius of the author, film version writer :) the director, cinematographer, costume design , every single actor. etc etc etc . mr. Flynn has a magnetisms, as you said, that goes way beyond his naked body right through his costumes. Anya too was outstanding with her expressive face! How Does She Do That??? Flynn too?! Such great acting.😭😭😭 i loved it. and the book . so much fun to read again.
Books are about what people feel and think, movies are about what people say and do. So it is very hard to compare the book to the screen versions. They all have their pluses and minuses but the comedy to pathos moments are very important.
I remember a few versions : Kate Beckinsale ITV one, Gwyneth Powell one and BBC 2000s one with Romola Garai. Think the best version was Kate Beckinsale’s one.
The Beckinsale-Morton team of Emma and Harriet still seems the best casting of that pair; I just wish that version had had more than double the time, as Samantha Bond and Prunella Scales were both practically wasted.
"What you realize about that character is, that this cruelty is just below the surface, and it has to be" perfectly put. Not even a Frank Churchill would be able to get an otherwise heartfelt, pure person to spit out such a vicious, sarcastic sentence. All it took was a rollicking mood and a bit of banter to bring out that side of Emma, and she just says what's been on her mind all along. Anya brings that across perfectly, whereas earlier versions made it less believable because they portraied Emma with much more innocence.
Mr. Knightley is 37: 16 years older than Emma. For me the problem with making him sexy is why on earth didn't Emma find him attractive earlier. Why did it take so long for her to realise she loves him if he is such a desirable man? He needs to be easier for her to see just as a friend and mentor, particularly as the neighbourhood isn't exactly full of good-looking young men to distract her from his charms.
I think you are on to something with your opening line, because he’s 16 years older she grew up with him and didn’t notice him as being available until she was older and he was apparently attached to her friend.
@Charisma Girl A very young Dad then. Few men of his class would have been Dad's at sixteen. Ageism was not a problem then, nor had it the hint of icky-ness that it has now acquired. I am six years older than my husband. His cousin is seventeen years older than his wife. I have friends whose husbands are considerably older than they are, one by twenty years. Age was not and is not an issue in our marriages. I have been reading 'Emma' for fifty years and it is only in recent years that comments on the age difference seem to be becoming more prevalent.
The cast were great and I enjoyed the second half more, but I have to admit to a bit of ambivalence towards the style. I get the ramping up the comedy, and that worked, I just wasn't a fan of how it was shot. I can't even really explain why, to be honest. I didn't hate it by any means but I left feeling a bit...meh.
The introduction to him is him getting home and undressing. You see him fully naked from behind. Emma also lifts her dress up to warm her butt by the fire but you only see the side of her leg.
I enjoyed the film but it seemed to be always saying, "Look at me, look how pretty I am and look how amusing I can be" - so much so that it teeters on the edge of being a Jane Austen parody. But Mark Kermode is right about the notorious Box Hill episode, which was certainly handled well.
There's 1 way in which EMMA 2020 stands out from the rest of the franchise. You see, there's a scene where George Knightley (the love interest) tells the title character that she hurt someone's feelings. In every other version, he would say "Badly done, Emma!" I hated it every time! It sounded like he was scolding his daughter or even his pet! This time, he says "Your treatment of her... It was badly done, indeed!" It's phrased a little differently, yet it feels so dissimilar. What a relief! Among the other changes, there's the wacky comedic approach, but that worsens everything. The actors occasionally mug for the camera unnaturally and Isobel Waller-Bridge and David Schweitzer catchy music score annoyingly accentuates everything. *Spoilers ahead!* And then there's the scene that's always different in every adaptation: When Emma rides in a carriage with Philip Elton, the local vicar, who confesses his attraction for her. In the 1972 mini-series, he's fairly calmed and always keeps a distance, while Emma gets indignant pretty quickly. She even stops the carriage and gets out. It's not until the later scenes that we get to see his true colors, so her response seemed a little exaggerated. In both of the 1996 movies, Mr. Elton is a little more aggressive (in the made-for-TV one, he even goes for a kiss), so Emma would be justified in getting out, but she chooses to stay in the carriage. Here, Mr. Elton falls on Emma by accident and then keeps his distance for the rest of the scene. Ah, so he's a nice guy? No, because he sucks so much at handling rejection that he stops the carriage and angrily gets out. I don't see the point in comparing those scenes to the one in CLUELESS, since that one takes place in modern day, so gender dynamics are very different. *End of spoilers.* And... That's about it for the changes. Overall, it's just the same story all over again, and to be honest, it's not that great of a story to begin with. Not even Christopher Blauvelt's stunning cinematography can liven things up. 4/10
Sincere question: Does 'adaptation' mean 'Reboot' but for more 'artistic'/Arthouse movies? Nothing against people redoing but there is definitely a stigma for Hollywood Blockbusters doing it but Little Women (which I still really want to see because of the cast/director) doesn't have the same conversations around it.
No a reboot is taking a movie franchise that is either old or didn't work or both and redoing it often with a new vision and a bigger budget(usually). An adaptation is taking something like a book and adapting the story for the big screen.
@@AmundLyric You've described a remake. A reboot should be a sequel to an existing franchise which has lost it's lustre. So the actions of the original movie have already happened and the new movie is taken in a new direction, within the same universe, often based around new actors/characters. See the later Terminator movies. Admittedly now days the terms are often used interchangeably but that doesn't mean they're being used correctly. Reboot has less of a negative connotation to it.
The recent Little Women was a radical re-adaptation (like, remake + adaptation) since it restructured the story differently from previous film adaptations, re-ordering events and telling the story from two timelines running concurrently. You needn't make such a dramatic change to re-adapt a story, but if you wanted to do something different with it other than make it look more current for the time, that's a very clear way to do it. You can't really re-BOOT a novel into a film unless you made fundamental changes to the meat of the story, taking the basic premise and doing your own thing with it.
Adaptation as in a book (or a play) adapted to work as a film. A reboot is a resetting of a movie franchise (and not a remake of a single film). Sometimes a reboot is also an adaptation. Emma. is an adaption of the novel Emma by Jane Austen and not based upon or inspired by a previous film or films. I'm not aware of a stigma against reboots. The problem is that every reboot is an artistic successful. The Amazing Spider-Man (2012) was seen as pointless since it retold the Spider-Man origin story is a less compelling way than Spider-Man 2002. Spider-Man: Far From Home received positive reactions because it brought youthful energy to the Spider-Man franchise.
OK, I'm not gonna claim to know Kermode and Mayo on an off-mic, banter-ish way, but....I can't help but feel like Mayo is giving Kermode some (passive) schoolyard-level grief over the latter's description of Mr. Knightley as being a classically attractive "gentleman" character. What are you on about there, Mayo? You're coming off both phobic and baiting. And since others are commenting, the 2009 4-hour TV version with Romola Garai and Johnny Lee Miller is MY Emma. Pretty, for TV, and the story's given room to breathe. This version has a lot to live up to. The (paltry) Paltrow version was my first (first Emma, first Austen, first ANY period/chick-flic), but it did introduce me to the genre/style, and I'm grateful for that. Even if I like every other version of every other story better than that one.
The 2009 version is my favorite also. I loved the Gwyneth Paltrow/Jeremy Northam Emma when it first came out, but after watching Romola Garai and Johnny Lee Miller's confession scene found that I could no longer sit through the cloyingness of the earlier one. They get to an emotional truthfulness that is very exciting and very moving. This version also gives us the comedy of Miss Bates and her mother without losing their humanity. Seeing it, I realized that by reducing them to caricature the earlier version led the audience to participate in Emma's subtle cruelty toward them. I could write pages but will leave it there!
She's a terrible actor. She's only cast because, for some unfathomable reason, she has a large following and the producers want to attract them to the film.
Just saw the most lifeless, limpless, underwhelming version of the classic Emma story. Crushingly bored to tears. Was waiting for Johnny Flynn to say “and now for a tasty debrief” like the wannabe serial killer he is. Bill Nighy does a reoccurring gag about feeling draughty. Yawn!
This movie was horrible and I like a wide range of movies.Little Women was way better.I just watched them back to back in empty theaters by myself bc the corona virus got everyone in doors.Yeah it stunk in comparison too little women.This movie was not funny at all.Someone take this microphone away from this guy if he thought thus was a good movie.Arguably the worst film I saw all year even worse than "fantasy island was twice this film "if that gives you an example.
I loved this film ❤️ Anya was perfect as book Emma, but Johnny as Mr Knightly was such a fantastic fresh take on the character. I LOVED the dance, the run, the reaction on Box Hill...brilliantly emotional and real and true. It was my favourite Mr Knightly I’ve ever seen.
I loved this film ❤️ Anya was perfect as book Emma, but Johnny as Mr Knightly was such a fantastic fresh take on the character. I LOVED the dance, the run, the reaction on Box Hill...brilliantly emotional and real and true. It was my favourite Mr Knightly I’ve ever seen.
I understand what Mark means about Flynn, but I think the actor’s fresh approach to Knightley has nothing to do with the nakedness or the horse riding, but rather with Autumn de Wilde’s decision to give us a Mr Knightley who turns into that fumbling fool in love after that dance... Just beautiful.
In the book and other screen adaptations Knightley is always shown underplaying his emotions in an attempt perhaps to misdirect the audience. I think this is more often than not a mistake. Who are we kidding? Everyone watching “Emma” knows who is going to end up with whom... Also, it is refreshing not to have again the tall, dark brooding and aloof man with a baritone playing Knightley, but rather a more youthful, earthy and softly spoken kind of guy like Johnny Flynn...
In the book we see Mr Knightley’s assuredness challenged by love and jealousy. It happens out of sight, during his country walks, within the walls of his house and that visit to his brother after Box Hill, but I’m glad that Autumn de Wilde did not keep this transformation off screen. This turmoil was beautifully interpreted by a very intuitive actor. Well done indeed. 😊👍
Couldn't have said it better myself, so I won't.
Preach 🙌
I completely understand what Mark is saying about Johnny Flynn. I also love live music performances in movies, and his duet with Jane Fairfax had me swooning.
Seeing this movie with an audience was a blast. Everyone was very reactive, much more so than I’d usually expect with a period film. The collective gasp at the Box Hill scene was truly delightful.
Just seen Emma in a sold out afternoon screening. Mark is spot on with all his comments - the film was very funny, enjoyable and uplifting. I went to see Bill Nighy and all the cast were great. The music and dancing were charming and the costumes and settings beautiful. Go see it !
Johnny Flynn is an exquisite looking man. Ruggedly handsome.
Well he is rugges
❤
When old novels were printed there used to be full stops after everything, including the title. It's a kind of superfluous flourish that is very typical of the period. I think that's what Autumn de Wilde is emulating with the stylisation of the title as "Emma."
Exactly so and I'm surprised that critics seem to be unaware of this.
de wilde said that it's a pun on period drama!
Not seen Emma but I get what he means about Johnny Flynn. He's definitely got the "it" factor. He was fabulous in that film Beast .
Yes, he was raw and sexy in Beast. I've always imagined Knightley as a bit of a stuffy character, but I'm really looking forward to seeing Flynn in the role!
@@pamelaatkinsonscats2873 Me and a friend said after we watched Beast that it was like you could smell him from the screen 🤣
Alison Winter That describes him perfectly!
It's a film the studio we're probably expecting more women than men to want to see so naturally casting a hunky man in a lead role wouldn't hurt.
just returned from seeing this and whilst i went in with some bias as i’ve loved and admired anya taylor-joy for some time, i thought it was absolutely brilliant. it’s perfectly cast, the production and costume design are great as are the cinematography and direction. i’m totally in love with it and can’t wait to see it again.
Me too. Agree with all you said. I love Anya and Johnny as Emma and Mr Knightley. Their chemistry was amazing :)
Agreed. It was very clever and very funny. Many adaptations of Austenf ail to account for the humor in her books. Dare I suggest that Flynn's Knightley give FIrth's Darcy a run for his money so far as swoonable (is that a word) Austen heroes go?
@@56vay Yess I def swooned over Johnny's My Knightley. I thought also he seemed what the book version of Knightley would be, although I've never read the book x
Can't believe he had to think befor agreeing that Flynn's Knightley is a fancy-able creature!
I liked that they kept Emma unlikable, it made sense that somebody had to point out her flaws and grow
Loved it! Saw it in a regional Australian cinema, full to the brim (8 people).
My daughter and I laughed and snickered; and then gasped when poor Emma had her picnic moment of, "Did I say that outloud?".
A great period chick flick, that's not to chick flicky.
Loved it.
I think I liked it. Flynn, Taylor-Joy and Hart are all excellent. Some sequences were absolutely stunning.
Gwyneth Paltrow's version of Emma was a huge part of my childhood, and Romola Garai's version is my favorite, plus I love Clueless (I've seen Kate Beckinsale's version, but didn't care for it), so I'm looking forward to seeing this new adaptation. ☺
Also, I was named after Emma, as it's my mom's favorite book and character, and it/she is also one of my favorites. 😊
The Gwyneth Paltrow's version of Emma is far better. It is more subtle and is not as overloaded with obvious decorative elements as this latest version is. Everything visually stylized stands in the way of an interesting drama. Yes, a fun and entertaining one, but Emma is actually a comedic drama. Although this version is so well thought out visually that people walk in sync (much like a Russian military march), there is an incredibly annoying lack of timing. This is particularly disturbing in the scene when Emma insults Miss Bates. The line comes so slowly that it cannot be interpreted as anything other than pure evil and Taylor-Joy's cry after that is a school example of bad acting. Emma's bad behavior in the previous version (and book) is the result of a flirtation with Frank Churchill, but there is absolutely no chemistry between Taylor-Joy and Callum Turner, which is understandable because CT is a cardboard figure.
Josh O'Connor, who was brilliant in The Crown, makes Elton a caricature and it gives the viewer no understanding whatsoever as to why he would be at all interesting as a husband to Harriet Smith.
Apart from a number of anachronisms (I suppose you can endure with unmotivated naked buttocks, grabbed crotches and insinuating licking on berries) there are some pluses. M Goth plays miss Smith more credible than Toni Collette did and although I prefer Jeremy Northam, Johnny Flynn does a pretty good job.
@@skolrelaterat4113 Interesting! I look forward to seeing it for myself to see if I agree with you. I got quite a bit of Love and Friendship vibes from the trailer, and as I didn't care for that movie, it made me wonder if I would like version, but I'm keeping an open mind till I see it. ☺
@@skolrelaterat4113 Haven't seen it yet, so I may be misunderstanding you, but isn't part of the point that Mr Elton is absolutely a wrong choice for Harriet and Emma is being wilfully ignorant about it, perhaps so she doesn't have to deal with his feelings for Emma herself?
skolrelaterat This new version plays more with the satire element of the novel. Emma is an explosive mixture of idiocy and intelligence and Mr Elton isn’t a good marrying choice for Harriet or for anyone... Emma extolls his virtues because she’s worried that Harriet is too infatuated by Robert Martin and wants Harriet to aim higher socially. But Mr Elton is portrayed as completely ridiculous and full of adulation in the book from the very start.
@@glocar243 Yeah, having seen it now, I agree. Though I do believe Emma notices how charmed Harriet is by Elton's ridiculous gestures and matches them for that reason. Mia Goth is an absolutely perfect Harriet tbh even if she doesn't look the part
Just got back from seeing Emma. Wasn't expecting much. In fact I was expecting another Little Women, which bored me stiff. But this was brilliant. The comedy was all the better for being understated. Oddly I didn't find Emma unsympathetic. I saw her as a Dolly Levi type fixer for her own amusement at a time when there wasn't much in the way of occupying herself as a rich young lady. Not being familiar with the book but being very familiar with Much Ado About Nothing, from the initial sparring between Emma and George, I could guess the ending. The costumes were wonderful.
"Whenever you translate anything from novel to the screen, the screen version has got to stand on its own" 2:32
Please please please let this be good... I studied the book at A Level, it's one of my favourites ever, and the trailer understood all the important moments from it. And Anya Taylor-Joy is such a good choice for Emma.
It may not be as true to the original book as other adaptations, but ‘Emma.’ is great!! A lot of people are giving it 3/5 reviews which confuses me because I loved it! Out of 100 I’d give it an 88! 88/100!
I really thoroughly enjoyed it.
Did you like it?
Saw it earlier today and I thought it had a serious pacing problem. It just felt flat or something......the acting is great, can't be faulted and the photography is luminous, it looks glorious. It just is not the sum of its parts.
It's a problem with the direction I would say.
Simon O I agree the direction had problems at the start. The emphasis was all wrong and the comedy a bit distracting, but it improved as the film progressed and let the performances of all actors shine.
I genuinly love this film. The content is just breathtaking and very effortless.
Knightly is 35-36. It says so in the novel he was around 15 when Emma was born.
6:08 why is Simon pushing back on this? He’s the sexiest version of Knightly we’ve ever had, and not because he gets naked but for the reasons Mark lays out about the actor’s presence + performance.
"Pride and Prejudice" and "Sense and Sensibility" both make my top 300 movies of all time.
Emma might finally make it was my immediate thought upon seeing the girl playing Emma in the 2020 version. I cannot wait to see it.
I loved this film ❤️ Anya was perfect as book Emma, but Johnny as Mr Knightly was such a fantastic fresh take on the character. I LOVED the dance, the run, the reaction on Box Hill...brilliantly emotional and real and true. It was my favourite Mr Knightly I’ve ever seen.
you sir gave a beautiful review. and a perfect one. Thank you. a lot of reviews kind of miss the genius of the author, film version writer :) the director, cinematographer, costume design , every single actor. etc etc etc . mr. Flynn has a magnetisms, as you said, that goes way beyond his naked body right through his costumes. Anya too was outstanding with her expressive face! How Does She Do That??? Flynn too?! Such great acting.😭😭😭 i loved it. and the book . so much fun to read again.
Books are about what people feel and think, movies are about what people say and do. So it is very hard to compare the book to the screen versions. They all have their pluses and minuses but the comedy to pathos moments are very important.
Mr Knightley in the book is around 37-38 yo. Not 40.
Only Mark would be able to sneak Skiffle into a film review of Emma
And so instructively :)
I love Mr Kermode's HONEST reactions and reviews.
I remember a few versions : Kate Beckinsale ITV one, Gwyneth Powell one and BBC 2000s one with Romola Garai. Think the best version was Kate Beckinsale’s one.
Don't forget Clueless with Alicia Silverstone.
Yes.... Mark Strong as Knightley was incredible, and Kate Beckinsale played such a wonderfully flawed, nuanced and despite all that, likeable Emma!
The Beckinsale-Morton team of Emma and Harriet still seems the best casting of that pair; I just wish that version had had more than double the time, as Samantha Bond and Prunella Scales were both practically wasted.
"What you realize about that character is, that this cruelty is just below the surface, and it has to be" perfectly put. Not even a Frank Churchill would be able to get an otherwise heartfelt, pure person to spit out such a vicious, sarcastic sentence. All it took was a rollicking mood and a bit of banter to bring out that side of Emma, and she just says what's been on her mind all along. Anya brings that across perfectly, whereas earlier versions made it less believable because they portraied Emma with much more innocence.
My Queen Bee as the credits roll is the icing on a most exquisite cake.
Mr. Knightley is 37: 16 years older than Emma. For me the problem with making him sexy is why on earth didn't Emma find him attractive earlier. Why did it take so long for her to realise she loves him if he is such a desirable man? He needs to be easier for her to see just as a friend and mentor, particularly as the neighbourhood isn't exactly full of good-looking young men to distract her from his charms.
I think you are on to something with your opening line, because he’s 16 years older she grew up with him and didn’t notice him as being available until she was older and he was apparently attached to her friend.
@Charisma Girl A very young Dad then. Few men of his class would have been Dad's at sixteen. Ageism was not a problem then, nor had it the hint of icky-ness that it has now acquired. I am six years older than my husband. His cousin is seventeen years older than his wife. I have friends whose husbands are considerably older than they are, one by twenty years. Age was not and is not an issue in our marriages. I have been reading 'Emma' for fifty years and it is only in recent years that comments on the age difference seem to be becoming more prevalent.
That Beatles metaphor is great. Totally agree on the set design and all those production aspects. It's such a beautiful movie, truly.
Hilarious and very enjoyable review. Looking forward to watching it!
I great film just watched it again on iplayer
Mark and Johny sitting in a tree....
Saw it today pleasantly enjoyed it, good review doctor.
when is the next adaptation of Emma coming out? Are they like London buses?
The cast were great and I enjoyed the second half more, but I have to admit to a bit of ambivalence towards the style. I get the ramping up the comedy, and that worked, I just wasn't a fan of how it was shot. I can't even really explain why, to be honest. I didn't hate it by any means but I left feeling a bit...meh.
Mr. Knightly is meant to be 37, not 40
Autumn de Wilde produced a perfect film.
Oh my god i love Anya Taylor-Joy sooo much! I want everything she does to be successful, and she is an asset to any film she is in!
He doesn't get it out does he?
If you're talking about Mr Knightley - apparently he shows his bum at one point and that's it
The introduction to him is him getting home and undressing. You see him fully naked from behind. Emma also lifts her dress up to warm her butt by the fire but you only see the side of her leg.
I enjoyed the film but it seemed to be always saying, "Look at me, look how pretty I am and look how amusing I can be" - so much so that it teeters on the edge of being a Jane Austen parody. But Mark Kermode is right about the notorious Box Hill episode, which was certainly handled well.
Tim Clarke I think you nailed it. More style than substance. Loved looking at it, but it fell flat for me.
Had trouble understanding the English language in this, especially when the women were crying.
clearly the other one didnt read the book nor seen the movie in whole...
You can play it skiffle
An unlikable Emma - precicely the reason I like her more! Anya Taylor-Joy was fantastic
Brilliant!
There's 1 way in which EMMA 2020 stands out from the rest of the franchise. You see, there's a scene where George Knightley (the love interest) tells the title character that she hurt someone's feelings. In every other version, he would say "Badly done, Emma!" I hated it every time! It sounded like he was scolding his daughter or even his pet! This time, he says "Your treatment of her... It was badly done, indeed!" It's phrased a little differently, yet it feels so dissimilar. What a relief! Among the other changes, there's the wacky comedic approach, but that worsens everything. The actors occasionally mug for the camera unnaturally and Isobel Waller-Bridge and David Schweitzer catchy music score annoyingly accentuates everything.
*Spoilers ahead!*
And then there's the scene that's always different in every adaptation: When Emma rides in a carriage with Philip Elton, the local vicar, who confesses his attraction for her. In the 1972 mini-series, he's fairly calmed and always keeps a distance, while Emma gets indignant pretty quickly. She even stops the carriage and gets out. It's not until the later scenes that we get to see his true colors, so her response seemed a little exaggerated. In both of the 1996 movies, Mr. Elton is a little more aggressive (in the made-for-TV one, he even goes for a kiss), so Emma would be justified in getting out, but she chooses to stay in the carriage. Here, Mr. Elton falls on Emma by accident and then keeps his distance for the rest of the scene. Ah, so he's a nice guy? No, because he sucks so much at handling rejection that he stops the carriage and angrily gets out. I don't see the point in comparing those scenes to the one in CLUELESS, since that one takes place in modern day, so gender dynamics are very different.
*End of spoilers.*
And... That's about it for the changes. Overall, it's just the same story all over again, and to be honest, it's not that great of a story to begin with. Not even Christopher Blauvelt's stunning cinematography can liven things up.
4/10
Technically she's an actress, not an actor, as she is a woman.
6:12
Yay I love Anya!
Sincere question: Does 'adaptation' mean 'Reboot' but for more 'artistic'/Arthouse movies? Nothing against people redoing but there is definitely a stigma for Hollywood Blockbusters doing it but Little Women (which I still really want to see because of the cast/director) doesn't have the same conversations around it.
No a reboot is taking a movie franchise that is either old or didn't work or both and redoing it often with a new vision and a bigger budget(usually). An adaptation is taking something like a book and adapting the story for the big screen.
@@AmundLyric You've described a remake. A reboot should be a sequel to an existing franchise which has lost it's lustre. So the actions of the original movie have already happened and the new movie is taken in a new direction, within the same universe, often based around new actors/characters. See the later Terminator movies.
Admittedly now days the terms are often used interchangeably but that doesn't mean they're being used correctly. Reboot has less of a negative connotation to it.
The recent Little Women was a radical re-adaptation (like, remake + adaptation) since it restructured the story differently from previous film adaptations, re-ordering events and telling the story from two timelines running concurrently. You needn't make such a dramatic change to re-adapt a story, but if you wanted to do something different with it other than make it look more current for the time, that's a very clear way to do it. You can't really re-BOOT a novel into a film unless you made fundamental changes to the meat of the story, taking the basic premise and doing your own thing with it.
Adaptation as in a book (or a play) adapted to work as a film. A reboot is a resetting of a movie franchise (and not a remake of a single film). Sometimes a reboot is also an adaptation.
Emma. is an adaption of the novel Emma by Jane Austen and not based upon or inspired by a previous film or films.
I'm not aware of a stigma against reboots. The problem is that every reboot is an artistic successful.
The Amazing Spider-Man (2012) was seen as pointless since it retold the Spider-Man origin story is a less compelling way than Spider-Man 2002.
Spider-Man: Far From Home received positive reactions because it brought youthful energy to the Spider-Man franchise.
The constant music was annoying.
OK, I'm not gonna claim to know Kermode and Mayo on an off-mic, banter-ish way, but....I can't help but feel like Mayo is giving Kermode some (passive) schoolyard-level grief over the latter's description of Mr. Knightley as being a classically attractive "gentleman" character. What are you on about there, Mayo? You're coming off both phobic and baiting.
And since others are commenting, the 2009 4-hour TV version with Romola Garai and Johnny Lee Miller is MY Emma. Pretty, for TV, and the story's given room to breathe. This version has a lot to live up to. The (paltry) Paltrow version was my first (first Emma, first Austen, first ANY period/chick-flic), but it did introduce me to the genre/style, and I'm grateful for that. Even if I like every other version of every other story better than that one.
The 2009 version is my favorite also. I loved the Gwyneth Paltrow/Jeremy Northam Emma when it first came out, but after watching Romola Garai and Johnny Lee Miller's confession scene found that I could no longer sit through the cloyingness of the earlier one. They get to an emotional truthfulness that is very exciting and very moving. This version also gives us the comedy of Miss Bates and her mother without losing their humanity. Seeing it, I realized that by reducing them to caricature the earlier version led the audience to participate in Emma's subtle cruelty toward them. I could write pages but will leave it there!
If Miranda Hart is funny that will be the first time ever. Does she fall over in this?
She's a terrible actor. She's only cast because, for some unfathomable reason, she has a large following and the producers want to attract them to the film.
She's OK in Spy but that's about it
@@kitsullivan1583 It's always good to get the "real story" from someone like yourself who was there at the production meetings* *sarcasm font
@@56vay you were there too???
Not seen the film but Miranda Hart was certainly funny in the trailer.
This is the best Emma movie by far, very well done. It's exactly the way I imagined her when I was reading the book.
Packed multiplex audiences....
Sigh...
Clueless 2.0
Damn you. Beaten by like 15 seconds
Exactly. Do we really need another one?
@@argentivulpes2813 Clueless is a modern adaptation Emma. Not sure where you're getting Taming of the Shrew.
They're thinking of '10 things I hate about you' as 'taming of the shrew'
@@argentivulpes2813 you're definitely thinking of 10 Things I Hate About You
Just saw the most lifeless, limpless, underwhelming version of the classic Emma story. Crushingly bored to tears. Was waiting for Johnny Flynn to say “and now for a tasty debrief” like the wannabe serial killer he is. Bill Nighy does a reoccurring gag about feeling draughty. Yawn!
@@ririschannelx If you watch the Cineworld ad with Flynn, there's a moment where his character says, "and now for a tasty debrief" it's very creepy.
Been a long while since hearing someone who is so self obsessed and self aggrandising as Anya Taylor Joy.
It lacked a sexscene
No, it didn't. There are at least three.
Do we need another f*cking Emma?
Do not waist your time and money . . .
The "Emma"movie, was anything but funny.
This movie was horrible and I like a wide range of movies.Little Women was way better.I just watched them back to back in empty theaters by myself bc the corona virus got everyone in doors.Yeah it stunk in comparison too little women.This movie was not funny at all.Someone take this microphone away from this guy if he thought thus was a good movie.Arguably the worst film I saw all year even worse than "fantasy island was twice this film "if that gives you an example.
I loved this film ❤️ Anya was perfect as book Emma, but Johnny as Mr Knightly was such a fantastic fresh take on the character. I LOVED the dance, the run, the reaction on Box Hill...brilliantly emotional and real and true. It was my favourite Mr Knightly I’ve ever seen.
I loved this film ❤️ Anya was perfect as book Emma, but Johnny as Mr Knightly was such a fantastic fresh take on the character. I LOVED the dance, the run, the reaction on Box Hill...brilliantly emotional and real and true. It was my favourite Mr Knightly I’ve ever seen.