![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
I just saw Emma...
and I thought it was perfect. Like, tied with the 2009 version with Romola and Johnny Lee Miller levels of perfect. (I'm not super crazy about the Gwenyth version--though I do love Jeremy Northam in it and it has a wonderful score--or the one with Kate Beckinsale. They're both fine! But I don't love them.) I expected to enjoy it, but honestly I loved it, and that really surprised me.
I am not putting this behind spoiler cuts because, lbr, any of you who have any interest in seeing this film have already seen or read another version of Emma.
+ So the first thing I fell in love with in this movie: the production design. It is delicious. All Adam style interior design and perfect Regency colors, but it's pushed to a stylistic extent that I absolutely love. I cannot wait till it comes out on DVD and I can screencap it and make a hundred thousand million icons. LOVE.
+ Anya Taylor-Joy made perfect use of her weird little pixie face. So much of this film was reaction shots and she nailed it. She also looks so very young, which is fantastic because Emma is just twenty-one and that's so important! She really went all in for Emma's flaws, all her unlikable moments and characteristics. (Though of course I love her anyway.) Her Emma was so sharp at the beginning that I wasn't sure the film would know how to handle her story, but it did, and she had the vulnerability the second half needed.
+ Honestly, I thought the film was going to be too sharp, and it's true that it wasn't as...warm as the 2009 version. But that's okay! It worked. I really thought it worked.
+ I had Reservations about this Johnny Flynn guy as Mr. Knightley, and I still think he was too young, but he was great, too. I don't think he's quite on JLM level for me, but that's probably just because I find JLM more aesthetically appealing. Flynn did a fantastic job especially conveying Knightley's sexual frustration which was not something I expected but wow.
+ My forever fave Bill Nighy was perfectly Bill Nighy. They really could have used him a lot more, and I'm kind of sad they didn't, but he was so good in what is the most Bill Nighy role ever that that isn't too much of a complaint.
+ Mia Goth as Harriet at first struck me as OTT, but I went with it, and the OTT performances here (Mr. Elton, Mrs. Elton, etc.) ended up working for me within the context of the film. Every actress who plays Harriet is so different from every other one, but I liked her. And she has such an interesting face!
+ OMG MIRANDA HART. I'm predisposed to loving anything she does, but she was so incredibly good as Miss Bates. Like, you can totally, totally see why she would be insanely irritating to be with for more than a few minutes at a time, but also: she's so human and her reaction to Box Hill is just absolutely heartbreaking. She doesn't get enough dramatic roles. I'd give her a best supporting actress nomination.
+ The whole supporting cast did a great job. Shoutout to Rupert Graves for being an absolute sweetheart at the ball.
+ I liked seeing my friend Emily Bronte as Isabella, though I was a bit surprised at how miserable they portrayed her and her marriage. I don't remember that in the novel? It's fine though--it works in the context of the movie.
+ Frank Churchill was underdeveloped--I think they could have let him have a bigger presence? Maybe it was just the actor? I thought he was fine, but maybe you need someone with more presence? I really think that's my one complaint about the film.
+ The lady who played Jane Fairfax just looked like she belonged in an entirely different movie...but again, that kind of worked, since she's such a foil for Emma (though she doesn't mean to be).
+ THE MUSIC. My goodness, I'm in love with that soundtrack. I can't even talk about it--you'll have to see for yourself. (Though I will now have "How Firm a Foundation" stuck in my head for the rest of my life. At least I always really liked that song.)
+ Also: does Phoebe Waller-Bridge have a sister who writes film scores????
+ Actually, now that I think about it, there is one spoiler that I won't mention, but let me just say there was an addition to the proposal scene that I am still thinking about, and if you've seen it and have thoughts, please share them with me. (THE HANDKERCHIEF.)
+ CLOTHES. CLOTHES CLOTHES CLOTHES. Again: Regency pushed to the extreme. I would commit murder for Emma's yellow coat.
+ I also thought the film was very sneaky about class. The servants are more present than they usually are in these films and yet they're also not allowed to be characters. There are all these scenes of servants dressing and undressing the characters, and it's such a potent reminder of how intimate master/servant relationships were but also how much of a distance there was between these people. Like, these people are literally dressing you like they're you're closest family, seeing you naked and vulnerable in a time when that meant even more than it does now, and yet there's no human connection whatsoever. I really liked the way that kept intruding into the film, reminding us that the lives of the wealthy were totally dependent upon the labor of their servants.
+ Another impression I walked away with was the world of Highbury. I was reminded again and again (and I'm not sure how de Wilde accomplished this aside from the tiny church--I'll have to rewatch it to figure out her tricks) that this is a very isolated little town with an incredibly small number of people. Emma's social circle is tiny and most of the people are not people Emma can relate to very much and there's nothing to do in this town. You totally see that this is a world where the same twelve people have the same twelve conversations over and over and over again. (The line about all of Jane's letters being read 40 times--in this film, that is absolutely literal and you believe it.) This was important to me because...
+ So, to me, the most important thing about Emma, and the thing that I rarely see people talking about, is how it's really about patriarchy as a cage. Like, I don't think that Jane Austen would have seen it that way, but my reading of it is absolutely that it's about what happens to a smart, talented, ambitious young woman who has absolutely nothing to do. Mr. Knightley points out that Emma could have actually applied herself to reading or music or something, and that's fair on one level, but on another, no it isn't! Because that's not what she was born to do! She was born to lead people--she should be a politician or an admiral or something! Her particular strengths are worse than useless in the situation she's in; in that cramped world, they twist and become something they never should have been. I really felt that here. What else is she going to do but match-make and try to manipulate people? I'm not saying that to excuse her behavior--which frequently is awful, though she realizes that and grows--but just to say I find her totally, totally understandable.
+ Of course, when you think about it, that's not a problem that's really solved by the happy ending. I mean, having a husband she loves and is super ridiculously attracted to is definitely going to take up some of her time and energy. But other than that, it's the same life. HOWEVER. I like to imagine that Knightley lets her help with the running of the estate and she finds out she's super great at it. (I have this headcanon that Emma is dyslexic or something and has always had trouble with reading, but if you gave her numbers, she'd be brilliant.)
+ As an extension of all of that: in this film, Emma is lonely. Really, really lonely. And she latches on to Harriet at first because she has no one else her age, and at first, she is very irritated with Harriet, even as she's trying to talk herself into liking her because she has no other options for friends. (Mrs. Weston leaving? HUGE blow to Emma.) And yes, part of it is Emma's vanity, that she likes Harriet's adoration, likes being able to treat Harriet like a doll. But over the course of the film the relationship slowly becomes something really genuine. By the end, I absolutely believed that Emma really did love and appreciate Harriet. (Oh! There was one more tiny addition that, again, I will not spoil, but that was so perfect and made me cry. You'll know it when you see it.)
+ Honestly, sometimes I feel like I have more feelings about adaptations of classics than about classics themselves.
I am not putting this behind spoiler cuts because, lbr, any of you who have any interest in seeing this film have already seen or read another version of Emma.
+ So the first thing I fell in love with in this movie: the production design. It is delicious. All Adam style interior design and perfect Regency colors, but it's pushed to a stylistic extent that I absolutely love. I cannot wait till it comes out on DVD and I can screencap it and make a hundred thousand million icons. LOVE.
+ Anya Taylor-Joy made perfect use of her weird little pixie face. So much of this film was reaction shots and she nailed it. She also looks so very young, which is fantastic because Emma is just twenty-one and that's so important! She really went all in for Emma's flaws, all her unlikable moments and characteristics. (Though of course I love her anyway.) Her Emma was so sharp at the beginning that I wasn't sure the film would know how to handle her story, but it did, and she had the vulnerability the second half needed.
+ Honestly, I thought the film was going to be too sharp, and it's true that it wasn't as...warm as the 2009 version. But that's okay! It worked. I really thought it worked.
+ I had Reservations about this Johnny Flynn guy as Mr. Knightley, and I still think he was too young, but he was great, too. I don't think he's quite on JLM level for me, but that's probably just because I find JLM more aesthetically appealing. Flynn did a fantastic job especially conveying Knightley's sexual frustration which was not something I expected but wow.
+ My forever fave Bill Nighy was perfectly Bill Nighy. They really could have used him a lot more, and I'm kind of sad they didn't, but he was so good in what is the most Bill Nighy role ever that that isn't too much of a complaint.
+ Mia Goth as Harriet at first struck me as OTT, but I went with it, and the OTT performances here (Mr. Elton, Mrs. Elton, etc.) ended up working for me within the context of the film. Every actress who plays Harriet is so different from every other one, but I liked her. And she has such an interesting face!
+ OMG MIRANDA HART. I'm predisposed to loving anything she does, but she was so incredibly good as Miss Bates. Like, you can totally, totally see why she would be insanely irritating to be with for more than a few minutes at a time, but also: she's so human and her reaction to Box Hill is just absolutely heartbreaking. She doesn't get enough dramatic roles. I'd give her a best supporting actress nomination.
+ The whole supporting cast did a great job. Shoutout to Rupert Graves for being an absolute sweetheart at the ball.
+ I liked seeing my friend Emily Bronte as Isabella, though I was a bit surprised at how miserable they portrayed her and her marriage. I don't remember that in the novel? It's fine though--it works in the context of the movie.
+ Frank Churchill was underdeveloped--I think they could have let him have a bigger presence? Maybe it was just the actor? I thought he was fine, but maybe you need someone with more presence? I really think that's my one complaint about the film.
+ The lady who played Jane Fairfax just looked like she belonged in an entirely different movie...but again, that kind of worked, since she's such a foil for Emma (though she doesn't mean to be).
+ THE MUSIC. My goodness, I'm in love with that soundtrack. I can't even talk about it--you'll have to see for yourself. (Though I will now have "How Firm a Foundation" stuck in my head for the rest of my life. At least I always really liked that song.)
+ Also: does Phoebe Waller-Bridge have a sister who writes film scores????
+ Actually, now that I think about it, there is one spoiler that I won't mention, but let me just say there was an addition to the proposal scene that I am still thinking about, and if you've seen it and have thoughts, please share them with me. (THE HANDKERCHIEF.)
+ CLOTHES. CLOTHES CLOTHES CLOTHES. Again: Regency pushed to the extreme. I would commit murder for Emma's yellow coat.
+ I also thought the film was very sneaky about class. The servants are more present than they usually are in these films and yet they're also not allowed to be characters. There are all these scenes of servants dressing and undressing the characters, and it's such a potent reminder of how intimate master/servant relationships were but also how much of a distance there was between these people. Like, these people are literally dressing you like they're you're closest family, seeing you naked and vulnerable in a time when that meant even more than it does now, and yet there's no human connection whatsoever. I really liked the way that kept intruding into the film, reminding us that the lives of the wealthy were totally dependent upon the labor of their servants.
+ Another impression I walked away with was the world of Highbury. I was reminded again and again (and I'm not sure how de Wilde accomplished this aside from the tiny church--I'll have to rewatch it to figure out her tricks) that this is a very isolated little town with an incredibly small number of people. Emma's social circle is tiny and most of the people are not people Emma can relate to very much and there's nothing to do in this town. You totally see that this is a world where the same twelve people have the same twelve conversations over and over and over again. (The line about all of Jane's letters being read 40 times--in this film, that is absolutely literal and you believe it.) This was important to me because...
+ So, to me, the most important thing about Emma, and the thing that I rarely see people talking about, is how it's really about patriarchy as a cage. Like, I don't think that Jane Austen would have seen it that way, but my reading of it is absolutely that it's about what happens to a smart, talented, ambitious young woman who has absolutely nothing to do. Mr. Knightley points out that Emma could have actually applied herself to reading or music or something, and that's fair on one level, but on another, no it isn't! Because that's not what she was born to do! She was born to lead people--she should be a politician or an admiral or something! Her particular strengths are worse than useless in the situation she's in; in that cramped world, they twist and become something they never should have been. I really felt that here. What else is she going to do but match-make and try to manipulate people? I'm not saying that to excuse her behavior--which frequently is awful, though she realizes that and grows--but just to say I find her totally, totally understandable.
+ Of course, when you think about it, that's not a problem that's really solved by the happy ending. I mean, having a husband she loves and is super ridiculously attracted to is definitely going to take up some of her time and energy. But other than that, it's the same life. HOWEVER. I like to imagine that Knightley lets her help with the running of the estate and she finds out she's super great at it. (I have this headcanon that Emma is dyslexic or something and has always had trouble with reading, but if you gave her numbers, she'd be brilliant.)
+ As an extension of all of that: in this film, Emma is lonely. Really, really lonely. And she latches on to Harriet at first because she has no one else her age, and at first, she is very irritated with Harriet, even as she's trying to talk herself into liking her because she has no other options for friends. (Mrs. Weston leaving? HUGE blow to Emma.) And yes, part of it is Emma's vanity, that she likes Harriet's adoration, likes being able to treat Harriet like a doll. But over the course of the film the relationship slowly becomes something really genuine. By the end, I absolutely believed that Emma really did love and appreciate Harriet. (Oh! There was one more tiny addition that, again, I will not spoil, but that was so perfect and made me cry. You'll know it when you see it.)
+ Honestly, sometimes I feel like I have more feelings about adaptations of classics than about classics themselves.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Like, tied with the 2009 version with Romola and Johnny Lee Miller levels of perfect.
I was not expecting this to happen but big agreement here! I can't wait to watch it again!
I cannot wait till it comes out on DVD and I can screencap it and make a hundred thousand million icons. LOVE.
YES YES YES
though I was a bit surprised at how miserable they portrayed her and her marriage. I don't remember that in the novel? It's fine though--it works in the context of the movie.
By my recollection the 2009 version actually makes their marriage seem nicer than I recall it in the book - not bickering angry or anything, but this didn't seem totally left field to me.
I think Frank Churchill was a more minor role, but especially given the movie format I feel like de Wilde gave him appropriate screentime. He's not actually that important in the end, to anyone, not even his father or Emma so - he gets less focus here.
THE MUSIC I'M SO IN LOVE!!! CLOTHES! THIS WHOLE PRODUCTION!!!!
I do talk about that spoiler in the proposal scene in my post, btw.
What else is she going to do but match-make and try to manipulate people? I'm not saying that to excuse her behavior--which frequently is awful, though she realizes that and grows--but just to say I find her totally, totally understandable.
This!!! I don't know what else to add but yes, this! I feel like we are in such sync on this movie and I LOVE IT SO MUCH
no subject
I am just very delighted that it took us by such surprise. It's been so long since I've gone to a movie and end up liking it so much more than I thought I would.
He's not actually that important in the end, to anyone, not even his father or Emma so - he gets less focus here.
The more I think about this, the more right I think you. His absence should be more significant than his presence. The fact that he's never there is the whole point...and having him be a kind of nonentity when he arrives is thematically the right choice. Thank you for pointing this out!
THE MUSIC I'M SO IN LOVE!!! CLOTHES! THIS WHOLE PRODUCTION!!!!
I cannot believe it's so aesthetically perfect! Why are all movies not this wonderful to look at and listen to???
I may have stronger feelings about Emma than about any other Austen story!
no subject
THERE'S A JONNY LEE MILLER VERSION???
no subject
(Your icon!)