Amazing.

This movie makes me cry every time. In fact, I think I'll watch it now.

If you think this movie appears, from the outside, to look somewhat boring, stilited and vaquely Merchant-Ivory-ish, fear not. It's as vital and alive a movie as I have ever seen. Hopefully, 40 years from now, people will look back on this as an enduring classic. It's that good.

I'm not a big fan of Jane Austen, but I can appreciate her work and its depiction on screen. This showcased Winslet's early acting chops and provides a sense of how great an actress she will become.

B

Pretty good film but Pride and Prejudice (2005) was better. Alan Rickman owns every scene he is in. Could have been a bit shorter, but it got the ending right, which Austen adaptations require.

B.

BJs Grade:

A

awesome, perhaps the best Jane Austen adaption I have ever seen.

B


Now I will probably get some flack for it, but in my opinion, this is not even the best modern Jane Austen adaptation, as Joe Wright's Pride and Prejudice beats it slightly to the honor.

That said, it's still a solid period pic and literary adaptation. I remember that many were surprised at the lack of a Best Director nomination for Ang Lee here, but I must say that his directing abilities actually weren't very evident in this one, at least not as much as in Brokeback Mountain, Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon or even Lust, Caution (which I wasn't a big fan of, but you could see that it was in the hands of a very capable director). Sense and Sensibility lives through its well-crafted screenplay by Emma Thompson and the great acting by the ensemble. I must say that this rather reserved performance by Thompson is my favorite of hers to date. Granted, I haven't seen Howard's End yet. The scene at the end of the film in which she finally breaks down in tears might be the single best scene of the entire film. I could connect to her character pretty well and she was my favorite in this one. Kate Winslet was no slouch either, showing that her first Oscar nomination was very well-deserved. Hugh Grant was pretty good too in a role that is at least *somewhat* different for him from his usual stuff (even though still playing a romantic lead).

I won't get into any criticisms of the plot simply because that wouldn't be directed towards the film, but much rather towards Austen's source material, but of course that somewhat affected my enjoyment as well. As for the film, I just felt that it was a tad too long for the story it told and the whole affair felt a little too...stiff. The screenplay was pretty good and most of the cast felt right too (though I was unsure about Alan Rickman in his role), but the movie didn't feel as spirited, energetic or even romantic as, for instance, Pride and Prejudice. It was a solid effort for what it was, but it won't enter the pantheon of best period pieces, I have ever seen.

You are indeed wrong in believing that 'Pride & Prejudice' (2005) were better.

I love both. I'm not sure which I prefer.