User reviews

I was kind of dreading this, but it is now my favorite Emma adaptation. Much better than either the Paltrow or the Beckinsale version.

Romola Garai was as close to perfect an Emma as I could imagine. Jonny Lee Miller was an excellent Mr. Knightley. I adore Jeremy Northam but really he was almost too dishy to be a credible Knightley. With Northam around how could Emma ever think herself in love with anyone else? With Miller, Knightley became a more credible character -- that pleasant, cultivated, somewhat older man from next door that Emma had known all her life and never realized she loved because she was so used to him.

Michael Gambon was wonderful as Emma's father. He is easy to overplay to comic effect for his idiosyncrasies -- a foolish, fussy hypochondriac. With Gambon, he was more nuanced -- his fear of illness and accident was understandable (people did die of such things a lot in the 18th century, and he had lost his wife in tragic circumstances). He seemed genuinely loving of Emma, not just exploiting her as a dutiful daughter. You could understand why Emma was genuinely fond of him.

The rest of the cast was also excellent and the English countryside never looked so gorgeous.

There were some smallish glitches. I am quite sure, for example, that Frank Churchill would never have sprawled on the ground with his head on Emma's lap, as he did in the Box Hill scene. All Highbury would have been shocked.

Emma was really beautiful to watch. Though I will say, and I am not trying to be a killjoy here, but the book is better. In general, this mini series was very well done, not only in terms of acting but visually and musically as well. The mini series was exquisitely photographed, with camera work that never felt rushed in any way. It perfectly captured the breathtaking scenery and the gorgeous colourful costumes. I will confess whenever I watch a period drama I always look at how the drama is filmed, and as far as I am concerned Emma scored full marks on that. The music was just as perfect, very beautiful and pleasant. And the acting was fully professional. Romola Garai looked stunning as Emma and managed to stay true to her character. Johnny Lee Miller may look a bit too young, but I do think he was very handsome and charismatic enough as Knightley, and in general Miller is a very competent actor. The two leads's chemistry was convincing too. Michael Gambon is an exceptional actor, and he was superb as Mr Woodhouse. For me, any scene he was in brought some depth, darkness and poignancy that was very much needed. In fact, I don't think there was a single bad performance, maybe not the definitive interpretations, but solid enough. I do have two flaws with this mini series. It does distort the book, and I did notice some modernisations in the script, that sounded uneven and didn't quite work. My other flaw is that there were scenes that didn't quite ring true. As one reviewer said, the scene with the Knightley children screaming Uncle George was poorly done, and that is a real shame because the scene before I thought was very impressive indeed. Despite the flaws, it is a very solid adaptation of a wonderful book. 9/10 Bethany Cox

There is a clichéd version of Period and Regency characters which grew up in the 1920's and 1930's fostered by UK and US film studios with straight backs, ironed crinolines, stiff upper lips and emotionally strangled dialogue from which a number of recent adaptations have dared to depart.

Sometimes, as in the case of 1999 Mansfield Park, adapters and cast have departed for the hills and created something so far off Austen's wavelength that it might be a prequel for the Pirates of The Caribbean franchise. Enjoyable perhaps. But not MP.

That's not what we have here. What we have here is something that is entirely on Austen's wavelength, with characters behaving as her characters would and saying the sorts of things her characters say. Something which is faithful to the purpose and meaning of the book, which aims to get the characters Jane Austen wrote onto the screen where we can see, recognise and enjoy them. This series is triumphantly successful at doing just that, partly owing to the care that has been taken with the script and partly due to the outstanding performances of the leads.

It built on a wonderfully realistic foundation of what love, loss and family all mean. If it did, perhaps, labour the point a bit at the beginning, there were superb contrasts between where Emma's life was full and empty. Her lack of self knowledge, her yearning for companions and challenges worthy of her sense and intelligence clearly illustrated the traps she made for herself.

And whilst we follow the progression of their relationship from Knightley's point of view more than the book warrants, Emma's bursting discovery of her love for him is actually dramatised here just as Austen wrote it, not watered down by injections of artificial chemistry between the lead actors.

I think there are lots of people who could turn out an Emma adaptation like the two films from the 90's. This version set itself the much harder task of adapting the book (as Clueless did) rather than just animating selected bits and stringing them together. And it succeeds. The reason Garai's Emma is different to all the others is that Garai is playing the character Jane Austen wrote and Sandy Welch, as she did with Jane Eyre, got her onto the screen by dramatically recreating her rather than transposing her dialogue into a screenplay.

There are, of course, unnecessary departures from the canon. Perhaps it is highly unlikely that Emma would have allowed Knightley to kiss her within sight of the house, or that Knightley would have forgotten himself that far either. However, were they sure of being unobserved, I think Emma and Frank would have been perfectly capable of shocking even modern dowagers with a passion that is written carefully into the novel but seldom gets up onto the screen. If I was servant at Hartfield, I'd be very careful to make them aware of my presence outside the bedroom door before taking their morning tea in.

I had my reservations about this adaptation at first but having watched it more times than I now care to admit, I cannot now name a better Austen adaptation. I think the unusual start was a gamble designed to illustrate the insecurity of early 19C family life to newcomers and wilfully detach dedicated Austen fans from their comfort zone from the opening seconds, both of which worked triumphantly. It instantly drew parallels between the lives of Emma, Jane and Frank (and, more subtly, Harriet) which are at the core of the book and completely absent from any other adaptation. A very, very clever trick for which some purists have yet to forgive her. Not this one, however. Once you have adjusted your goggles, this adaptation hits new heights for the whole genre and becomes an unalloyed pleasure.

It's beautifully shot, all the characterisations are incredibly detailed, even minor characters like John Knightley and Mrs Goddard are fully realised and Garai and Miller hit their top notes reliably again and again.

I'm sure Austen would love it.

With the enduring interest in the novels of Jane Austen, an author eons ahead of her time as far as writing stories that dealt with women's view of the world, it is not unexpected that the film makers repeat versions of these rollicking tales. This may be the fourth or so version of EMMA and for this viewer it is the most successful. A large part of the success of this version of the novel is both the screenplay by Sandy Welch and the direction by Jim O'Hanlon who elect to open the graphic gates of Highbury with a sequence that shares with the audience the background of the diaspora of the children whose parents have died and whose lives will eventually come together as adults. It works very well in setting the scene and the mood of class distinction so prevalent in England of the period.

Emma is brought fully to life by Romola Garai and this role further establishes her as one of the more important character actresses on film. The remainder of the cast is perfectly balanced, with Michael Gambon as Emma's ever needy father, Jonny Lee Miller as the perfect Mr. Knightley, Lousie Dylan as the ditsy Harriet Smith, Tamsin Grieg as the hilariously boring and mouthy Miss Bates, the striking Blake Ritson as the vicar Mr. Elton, talented Laura Pyper as Jane Fairfax, and Jodhi May as the governess turned neighbor Anne Taylor. The ensemble casting is as fine as any of the Austen transitions to the visual and the cinematography and costumes are first class.

The words may not all belong to Jane Austen (Sandy Welch has introduced some very apropos new lines), but the feel of the novel would likely please the author as much as it pleases the audience. The 4 episode BBC production comes in two CDs and the quality of production is superb. In every way, this EMMA is a joy.

Grady Harp

Brilliant! Everything from the acting, the costumes, storyline, and music was just so superbly done. This version of Emma far surpasses its predecessors. Romola, actress staring as Emma, puts Pultrow to shame.

This movie sets itself apart from other versions of Emma. The storyline is very much dictated by the actual book. The actors and actresses really captured the characters in the story; it made all the difference in being able to identify and understand the characters.

Also, the setting and costumes they chose really captured the times. The color palate was sensational.

If you are a true Jane Austen fan, you will love this film. It is a must for your Austen collection!! WELL DONE!!

• not that there's anything the matter at all with the two 1996 versions of Austen's novel or their two Emmas, Gwyneth Paltrow and Kate Beckinsale, but I think that Romola Garai releases an Emma that's perfect: her obtuseness as far as the hearts of others are concerned is matched perfectly with the special kind of air-headed charm that Garai delivers (so very far from the sensible Cordelia she delivered in Ian McKellen's "King Lear"). Paltrow was beautiful, Beckinsale sweet, but Garai manages an Emma who seems unaffectedly oblivious to her own beauty and sweetness and only strives to do right by others – and fails. This appears to me to be the essence of the character that is the most fallible of Austen's heroines, with the possible exception of Catherine Morland in "Northanger Abbey." But apart from that, the scenes between Garai's Emma and Jonny Lee Miller's Mr. Knightley are electrifying. Especially their argument after Emma has talked Harriet Smith into rejecting Knightley's champion, Robert Martin. Miller's Knightley doesn't just correct Emma with a wish to render her a more blameless person – this Knightley truly enjoys his rows with Emma, without knowing it himself, of course: that clearly comes across.

The fact that the Director O'Hanlon has been extremely aware of every opportunity of non-verbal communication where the camera studiously catches every frown, every half-smile, every twinkling of an eye makes this version a pure delight to watch from beginning to end.

It's lovely.

So far this is proving to be a great series - up there with BBC's Pride and Prejudice. Jonny Lee Miller plays a very good Mr Knightley. He comes across as a slightly softer character than when Mark Strong played Mr. Knightley - but it's done well. The interaction between him and Emma is very enjoyable to watch - I love all the dialogue. I must say, although I like Jonny as an actor, I wasn't sure how he'd come across in this role but he's doing it very well. I will buy this on DVD when it comes out as it's one to keep. It has a very romantic feel to it and the filming is excellent. I love it when they do a great adaption and put the right actors in the right roles. If you haven't seen this - I would highly recommend it.

Definitely the best Emma I've ever seen! The casting was perfect; it is a must watch that goes on the shelf with the other greats, Pride and Prejudice, Wives and Daughters etc. Emma was my favourite book out of all Jane Austens works and this film really does it credit! Michael Gambon is a great actor, he plays Emmas father so well! Jonny Lee Miller is my favourite actor to ever play Mr Knightley, he pulls it off with such ease. In the book he is described as having 'a cheerful manner that always did him good' and that is just how JLM portrayed him. Other Actors always seemed to play him to be a stern man who never smiles much etc, but he plays him just as I imagined he would be! Very impressed. Mr Elton is perfect! Handsome and thinks too much of himself. Romola Garai does play Emma very well. It took me a little while to get used to her but it didn't take me long to decide she definitely plays Emma better than anyone I've seen before. I've watched it twice and Im going to watch it again, most unusual for me I usually can only bear to watch a film once and I only watch it twice if its very good, three times means it amazing! You guys must see it, You will enjoy it if you like the book! Its a must watch!

Not another "Emma"! And not Romola Garai! This was never my favourite Jane Austen book, always read with "what's the point?" on my lips; and I've never really taken to Garai's rather frosty beauty on screen. But I found myself liking this adaptation in spite of myself as it went on. Grudgingly. But really, there are other books out there! Must we do the same dance over and over again? Despite being determined to dislike Garai's "Emma", by the end I was appreciative of how she managed to balance her character foibles and genuinely good qualities. Johnny Lee Miller took a bit of getting used to, but put in an excellent, subtle and likable performance as Mr Knightley. My only slight snarky point would be that there didn't appear to be a really discernible difference in age between him and Emma, which represents such a significant barrier in the original story to Emma's consideration of Mr Knightley as something more than a scolding old friend, her superior in age, intellect and gravitas. Generally the cast was high quality – I'd love to see Jodhi May given more full-on screen time. Her face as a (slightly!) older woman is as extraordinary as it was when she played the silent screen star in "Last of the Mohicans" way back in 1992.

There were more of the now familiar jarring, socially-aware inserts into the screenplay from writer Sandy Welch - it's almost comforting to note that they sit as uncomfortably in Austen's text as they did in Gaskell's ("North & South"). Somehow her scripts seem to make the least of the best material – I can't quite work it out. Very annoying, like the awkward waving at each other frequently indulged in by the lead characters. At least it wasn't all about heaving bosoms, as others have been. But the last two episodes were, I thought, very much better, less awkward, more serious and more seriously enjoyable, than the first two.

I've always experienced Mr Woodhouse, Emma's father, as a fussy, over-delicate, nervous and entirely unlikeable character. But writer Welch and Michael Gambon have done something very interesting: they've turned him into someone who might almost have a nameable medical condition in today's psychologically aware times. This, together with Emma's loving and committed care of him, generates considerable empathy…this Mr Woodhouse is a person that a lot of people with an elderly parent or grandparent might well recognise. That was a touchingly unexpected thing to tease from the source material.

Still, I'd love to now move on from the microscopic study of the 1% of Regency England that dwelt in fine houses and did nothing but sit interminably in elegant chairs. All right, so I didn't have to watch it…but I always do

"Emma" (2009) has now become one of my favourite mini-series, closely following the 1995 version of Jane Austen's "Pride and Prejudice", with Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle.

"Emma" is a beautiful adaption of Jane Austen's classic novel of the same name. The story is based on Emma, the pretty daughter of a wealthy gentleman, Mr. Woodhouse, and her attempts at matchmaking people in her neighbourhood. It is an engaging, sweet and playful movie, which is touching and a delight to watch.

When compared to the 1996 adaption of "Emma", with Gwyneth Paltrow, Jim O'Hanlon's version is superior; this is partially due to the length. The four part mini-series enables the characters and plot to be developed with more detail than in the feature film. In particular, you are able to see Emma mature and watch her relationship with Mr. George Knightley change. More of the original text and dialogue is included which makes the series more believable. Watching a Jane Austen film, I personally believe, should be like taking a vacation. You should be able to slow down, enjoy the slower pace of the era and enjoy making your own observations of characters, while enjoying the beautiful scenic shots. This is what you get with the 2009 mini-series – time, whereas the 1996 film is rushed, with a lot crammed into a few hours.

The cast is excellent. Romola Garai is a youthful, vivacious and expressive Emma Woodhouse. What impressed me the most was her ability to present not only Emma's love of life and enthusiasm but her innermost thoughts as well; when she is reflecting or unhappy about something but trying to "put on a brave face" we see it. Although I like Gwyneth Paltrow, she is not able to portray the youth and innocence of Emma as well as Romola Garai. Johnny Lee Miller is a handsome and intelligent Mr. George Knightley and Michael Gambon is a very lovable Mr. Woodhouse, although I identified him as "Dumbledore" immediately. The only character that I do not fully believe in is Mr. Elton. Perhaps it is just personal preference but I do not think that Blake Ritson portrays the handsome and gentlemanly Mr. Elton successfully; he is more of a "Mr. Collins". However, he is the only character who I have not taken to.

Like many of the BBC productions, the historical buildings, props and gardens used are amazing. When watching the mini-series, keep an eye out for some of the incredible landscape shots throughout the film.

The costuming for the film is quite proper. However, I would have liked to have seen Emma in a few prettier gowns. Although she lives in the country, I think as a wealthy young woman she should have had some more expensive looking gowns. I also would have liked her to have her hair in some more elaborate styles.

However, all in all, the mini-series is fantastic. I love the scenery, the actors are superb, the pace is just right and the story a classic. It is a beautiful adaption and I strongly recommend watching it.

My first introduction to Jane Austen was BBC's wonderful Pride & Prejudice - so how excited was I to get my hands on this one? Not very, once I started watching it. After I'd watched P&P I went out and bought the book, immediately, and read and reread it. And then I rewatched the show and was delighted at how faithful it stayed to the book, and how well cast every single person in it was.

Since then P&P and Emma have remained my two absolute favorite Austens. Let me begin by saying that I know that people say that books don't work as movies, but I'm sorry, I think movies like P&P disprove that. So when I say that they took the book Emma and decided that Austen just wasn't 'snappy' enough for the screen so they'd just take the liberty of changing a whole bunch of dialogue... I hope you understand just how much I take that as an indication that they should never have been allowed to make the book into a movie in the first place. For the length this goes on, there is no excuse for it not to have been a highly faithful and well performed adaptation. Instead it is bits and bites of Austen with plenty of "well we'll just make this better for TV" dialogue smothering those bits and bites. Jane Austen's dialogue is what *makes* her stories. She was an incredible writer, and to have the guts of Emma torn out and replaced with someone else's writing is like saying "well we're going to be displaying the Mona Lisa next week, but first we're going to paint over it, maybe add some eyebrows and a real smile, you know?"

I managed to sit through the whole thing in the hopes I'd finally hit the point where Emma becomes charming, and Mr. Knightley becomes dashing, and Mr. Woodhouse becomes a dear (and lord, what an utter *waste* of getting Michael Gambon of all people to be in your movie!), and Frank Churchhill to become irresistibly casually flirtatious - but the characters were all ... very ... boring. There were a few tantalizing bits where I thought at least the Jane/Emma final scenes might be worth it but they were over almost as fast as they'd begun.

Honestly, this is only the second version of Emma I've ever seen. And since the first was the Gwyneth Paltrow version, I had absolutely no doubts that this version, longer *and* made by the BBC would blow it out of the water. But you know what? I think the Paltrow version actually had better casting, and kept *more* of Austen's dialogue in than this one. Badly done, BBC. Badly done.

I have read everything Jane Austen wrote, and now I'm working on re-reading her novels, listening to audiobooks of them, and watching all the film adaptations.

This version of Emma comes alive more than the other Emmas as well as some of the other titles.

When I first started watching it, I didn't think Jonny Lee Miller was tall enough, handsome enough, or refined enough to be Mr. Knightley. But, by the time I had finished watching it, his tremendous acting skills had me falling in love with his Mr. Knightley. Who could resist him?

Romola Garai also owns her role.

Don't miss it.

There is no doubt that the dramatization of a Jane Austen novel is immensely popular, perhaps none so much as Austen's 'Emma' which revolves around one of the few Austen heroines who is wealthy and doesn't "require" a husband to maintain her status.

The latest adaptation, written by Sandy Welch and broadcast originally as a four-part BBC television drama, is outstanding for it's visual beauty, and production values. Shot on location in the villages and parishes of southern England, you immediately are immersed into a romanticized version of 19th century England. The costumes are beautifully authentic and provide an individualized palette of color for each character that substantiates their personality and status in life.

Director Jim O'Hanlon made excellent use of a continuous camera flow that follows the actors through various rooms without missing a line. The casting choices are right on, with no distracting oddities. O'Hanion, working with this excellent cast, obviously put a great deal of emphasis on facial expression and it is a delight to watch great actors convey subtle nuances that enhance the storytelling. Note: Don't pass up watching the Special Features segment provided.

Emma is a complete delight to watch. In a world where films are usually ruined by having dramatic changes made to the characters or plots, this BBC adaption is quite faithful to the book and is a wonderful "escape" to a world we no longer live in and yet are completely fascinated by. I found this version was warm hearted and funny. Emma was my favourite of all the Jane Austen novels when I read them yet I never felt that any of the previous versions did the book any justice. This one, however, was captivating. The characters were well portrayed and the casting was brilliant.

Romola Garai was light hearted and brought a fresh youthfulness to the part of Emma which I found particularly refreshing, whilst Jonny Lee Miller portrayed a perfect Mr. Knightley, bluntly truthful and sensible, yet somehow catching the "cheerful manner" Jane Austen describes him as possessing.

All in all a very good film that can be watched over and over. I would say that, if you are a true Jane Austen fanatic, this series cannot fail to enchant you!

All in all, this was a good adaptation of Emma, but not the best I've seen. On the technical side, I find no fault with it. The cinematography is good, the music is well composed and fitting. My complaints lie mainly with the casting and characterization. Romola Garai did maintain Emma's playful nature, but carried it a bit too far for my taste. She lacked the air of sophistication that set her apart from some of the other characters. Jonny Lee Miller does a poor Knightley, in my book, reciting the lines but lacking so much of the character. Christina Cole is a way too perky Mrs. Elton, and Tamsin Greig is too subdued for Miss Bates. The only casting points I can't find fault with are Blake Ritson and Michael Gambon. Ritson gives Mr. Elton an air of piety and aloofness that increases as the story goes on, becoming more and more obnoxious, which is perfect. Gambon is the best Mr. Woodhouse I've seen, fully deserving of the Emmy he was nominated for.

There are certain other points I'm not crazy about, like the fact that this version takes far more liberties with the story than some of the others. However, overall, it's a decent telling.

I was surprised to see the new Emma. It's back to the way Jane Austen wrote it. It's a slowly unfolding story about a not too pretty girl with character flaws. She has a temper, she gossips, she hurts peoples feelings, and she can't keep her promise to stop matchmaking. But she grows on you.

The plot is close to Austens novel. The only funny aspect comes from Gambon, although everybody's acting is good. I like it, when actors act with their eyes, in stead of rambling on about it. I think you'll notice more subtle hints if you know the story.

The first two episodes are not romantic. But then, you know Jane Austen pays a lot of attention to describing how to behave when you're a rich civilian in the country.

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.

Here is another stellar British film adaptation of a Jane Austen novel. The cast of "Emma" is wonderful with an especially strong leading lady.

The cinematography is splendid, and the screenplay includes all the main strands of the narrative. At four hours, the running time of the miniseries was perfect for this PBS presentation. The houses, rooms, interior decoration, and costumes were also thoroughly professional.

With the ensemble cast, the crisp dialog, and the heartfelt emotion, this film would do the author proud! If there is a time machine around, I would like to find to take a break from the rat race today and find a way to become a character in this film!

This will be for both the biased and the unbiased. For the Austen enthusiasts, and the other ones who won't read the books. No matter, I suppose, but you really should read the books. ;)

First, my unbiased review. Hard to believe. I do always attempt to put my love of the book aside and give the film adaptation a chance to properly portray the basic idea. I admit, however, I began watching the series with very very low expectations having previously tried watching the BBC Sense and Sensibility and was so offended within the first 5 minutes I turned it off. Even though I was horrified by Romola Garai's portrayal of Emma, which I will return to later, I stuck it out. I became engrossed. The costumes, the settings, and the music were beautiful, and it was well acted, except for our heroine, again, more on that later. The story was well told enough that it didn't drag on. However, the end did feel slightly rushed. I would like to add, since, don't lie, we watch these because the romantic leads are what we all secretly desire, and Mr Knightley, has always been my favorite. I was skeptical about Johnny Lee Miller as Mr Knightley, but he was wonderful. He made a swoon worthy romantic lead.

Romola Garai's Emma will sit here between my unbiased and biased reviews as it affects both. I acknowledge her skill as an actress and understand why she chose to portray the character as she did but it was far too over the top. Firstly, Romola Garai acted as if she was playing a 13 year old and Emma is supposed to be 20. Secondly, while bored, gossiping, and a busy body, Emma, was still a well bred young woman who would not have allowed her facial expressions to expose how she truly feels in conversation. Lastly, Romola Garai walked with duck footed posture and was constantly hunched. Again, I realize these choices were meant to portray what the character was like, as nosy and meddling, and I give her credit for having her own interpretation, but that's just not how a young woman would've moved or behaved. I don't care for Gwyneth Paltrow but at least, when she played Emma (1996) she was poised and convincing as a respectable woman in a small town.

For the biased portion of this review I'm sure what I wrote about our heroine scared you away, but I hope you're still with me. Once I survived the first episode, my only real complaints were some creative liberties taken for the sake of character development. The changes were a bit too much for my liking. I don't want to give anything away so I won't go into detail there. I'll point out I was a bit offended by Tamsin Greig, who played Miss Bates. Her portrayal was an exact replica of Sophie Thompson's Miss Bates from the 1996 version. The manneurisms with awkward smiles and breathy voice were perfectly mimicked, to be sure.

All in all, while I scold people who don't read the books, I'm also going to scold anyone who can't entertain the notion of a beloved Austen novel not portrayed with 100% accuracy. I'm glad I watched it and may even venture to watch it again.