Book Review: Jane and the Ghosts of Netley
I'm a fan of ghost stories, but I should warn anyone with similar hopes that there are no ghosts in this story at all. I was vastly disappointed in that. Jane and the Unpleasantness at Scargrave Manor, the first book in the series, had a far more gothic bent than this book. Also, though I knew it would happen since I listened to the audio of the book after this, a favorite character of mine dies. The story is well constructed, no more complaints than I usually have for this author which I already outlined in my other review, but it is easily the most depressing of the series. As such, and since it would be extremely bad for me to reveal much more if you're planning on reading the book, I fear this book review shall remain short.
Movie Review: Northanger Abbey 2007
YouTube Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v
After I read the previous book I was seeking consolation while still in a Jane Austen mood, so I looked up news of the newest adaptation of my second favorite (and sometimes my first favorite depending on mood) Jane Austen novel, Northanger Abbey. It establishes Austen as the brilliant satirist that she is and so was the best choice to put me in a cheerful mood. There has only ever been one other film adaptation of this story to my greatest regret. It was made for TV back in the 1980s, and I could never bring myself to watch it because it looked so bad. I don't like to judge actors on how they look, but I should at least not be repulsed on sight by an Austen leading man, and that is the case with the old Northanger Abbey. I also never heard any particularly good reviews of the eighties version that would tempt me to change my mind and give it a chance.
Anyway, I only expected to find news of the new movie, so imagine how happy I was to find the whole thing on You Tube, especially since it's not yet available to buy or rent on DVD in the US. The link to the first part of the full movie on YouTube is right below the title. You should be able to find the other parts from there under the "related searches" bar or just type in Northanger Abbey Part 2, 3, 4, and so on for the rest. It's in segments of about 6 minutes each. There are 16 segments all together and please note the last one is titled "Northanger Abbey Last Part" instead of "Northanger Abbey Part 16" as one might expect. I didn't want anyone thinking I was so cruel as to show them something that didn't have an end.
Now that the technical stuff is out of the way, onto the review.
The screenplay for the 2007 adaptation of Northanger Abbey was written by Andrew Davies, the same man who wrote the screenplay of the beloved 1995 version of Pride and Prejudice. This is clearly a good sign already and it only gets better from there because Mr. Tilney is played by a very handsome actor, in my opinion at least, by the name of JJ Feild, and he does the job exeedingly well. Unfortunately I couldn't find a picture of him in the Mr. Tilney character, so I put up a picture of Felicity Jones who plays the heroine, Catherine Morland. But if you're curious as to what's in store, you need only look at the picture below this review. The man behind the blonde girl (sadly not as in focus) is also JJ Feild. More on that later.
In any case, Northanger Abbey will seem a bit different to fans of Austen's other novels and the film is thus, somewhat different than other Austen films. The film, although condensed, was reasonably close to the feel of the novel. At first I was a little bothered by its frequent use of surreal gothic dream sequences, but for a viewer denied Austen's brillant prose, I suppose it's the best way to show the audience the absurdity of the genre she's kicking the snot out of, and admittedly several of the sequences are quite funny. Also important is that the movie makes sure that you know they're laughing at gothic fiction. I heard the eighties version did not quite grasp this concept, but I assure you the new version certainly does.
The look of the movie was also flawless. It has the costumes, dances, and scenes of regency England down pat. I'm not a historical or cinematic expert but, for the common person, nothing seems out of place. I am, however, a bit of a lighting snob which is curious since I know nothing about it professionally, but I have trouble with movies that are not well-lit. So I am happy to report it has a good cinematic glow that doesn't look too made-for-TV but also happily isn't anywhere near the high-end-art-film-gritty-reality light. If that made any sense to anyone.
As for the acting itself, it's already clear that I liked Feild's Mr. Tilney. Admittedly the movie plays up the romance a little more than it actually did in the book, but because of my bias towards the actor, I can't really say I disliked this addition. They also are sure not to overdo it and it actually slightly improves the depth of Tilney's character for him to like Catherine for reasons other than the fact that she likes him (as it is explicitly stated in the book). The extra romance with Tilney also helps Catherine's character. Felicity Jones did a good job of portraying someone endearingly silly. The Catherine in this movie is like someone we all know, a best friend (or even ourselves) who we love but must guide towards reason from time to time. She may even be more endearing and a little less silly than the Catherine in the book since we have to believe Tilney's love for her. The book is also told from the humorous, though sometimes bitingly so, perspective of the narrator, whereas in the film, you inevitably feel closer to Catherine and more sympathetic of her feelings.
I would never say it's better than the book, because it can't be. But it's true to the spirit of the work which is all one can ask for in a film. It's also perfect for anyone wanting to be put in a good mood. I highly recommend it.
Anyway, I only expected to find news of the new movie, so imagine how happy I was to find the whole thing on You Tube, especially since it's not yet available to buy or rent on DVD in the US. The link to the first part of the full movie on YouTube is right below the title. You should be able to find the other parts from there under the "related searches" bar or just type in Northanger Abbey Part 2, 3, 4, and so on for the rest. It's in segments of about 6 minutes each. There are 16 segments all together and please note the last one is titled "Northanger Abbey Last Part" instead of "Northanger Abbey Part 16" as one might expect. I didn't want anyone thinking I was so cruel as to show them something that didn't have an end.
Now that the technical stuff is out of the way, onto the review.
The screenplay for the 2007 adaptation of Northanger Abbey was written by Andrew Davies, the same man who wrote the screenplay of the beloved 1995 version of Pride and Prejudice. This is clearly a good sign already and it only gets better from there because Mr. Tilney is played by a very handsome actor, in my opinion at least, by the name of JJ Feild, and he does the job exeedingly well. Unfortunately I couldn't find a picture of him in the Mr. Tilney character, so I put up a picture of Felicity Jones who plays the heroine, Catherine Morland. But if you're curious as to what's in store, you need only look at the picture below this review. The man behind the blonde girl (sadly not as in focus) is also JJ Feild. More on that later.
In any case, Northanger Abbey will seem a bit different to fans of Austen's other novels and the film is thus, somewhat different than other Austen films. The film, although condensed, was reasonably close to the feel of the novel. At first I was a little bothered by its frequent use of surreal gothic dream sequences, but for a viewer denied Austen's brillant prose, I suppose it's the best way to show the audience the absurdity of the genre she's kicking the snot out of, and admittedly several of the sequences are quite funny. Also important is that the movie makes sure that you know they're laughing at gothic fiction. I heard the eighties version did not quite grasp this concept, but I assure you the new version certainly does.
The look of the movie was also flawless. It has the costumes, dances, and scenes of regency England down pat. I'm not a historical or cinematic expert but, for the common person, nothing seems out of place. I am, however, a bit of a lighting snob which is curious since I know nothing about it professionally, but I have trouble with movies that are not well-lit. So I am happy to report it has a good cinematic glow that doesn't look too made-for-TV but also happily isn't anywhere near the high-end-art-film-gritty-reality light. If that made any sense to anyone.
As for the acting itself, it's already clear that I liked Feild's Mr. Tilney. Admittedly the movie plays up the romance a little more than it actually did in the book, but because of my bias towards the actor, I can't really say I disliked this addition. They also are sure not to overdo it and it actually slightly improves the depth of Tilney's character for him to like Catherine for reasons other than the fact that she likes him (as it is explicitly stated in the book). The extra romance with Tilney also helps Catherine's character. Felicity Jones did a good job of portraying someone endearingly silly. The Catherine in this movie is like someone we all know, a best friend (or even ourselves) who we love but must guide towards reason from time to time. She may even be more endearing and a little less silly than the Catherine in the book since we have to believe Tilney's love for her. The book is also told from the humorous, though sometimes bitingly so, perspective of the narrator, whereas in the film, you inevitably feel closer to Catherine and more sympathetic of her feelings.
I would never say it's better than the book, because it can't be. But it's true to the spirit of the work which is all one can ask for in a film. It's also perfect for anyone wanting to be put in a good mood. I highly recommend it.
Movie Review: The Ruby in the Smoke
You Tube Link: http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ue8gMmyqHYo
Not Jane Austen, but as you see, there's still the lovely Mr. Tilney. The reason I found this movie was because I was looking up JJ Feild just out of curiosity to see if he'd been in any other movie I might like to see. Lo' and behold, I saw on IMBD that he had just finished making The Shadow in the North. Now this made me more excited than it might make some people because that is the sequel to a book written by Phillip Pullman. It's in a trilogy of three books of mysteries about a girl named Sally Lockhart that I enjoyed last summer. The Shadow in the North is not yet available and possibly has not yet aired, but when I searched it on YouTube, I found the first book, the Ruby in the Smoke, had also been made and, happily, was also on YouTube in its entirety. This time the movie is segmented into nine ten minute segments and you can find the first part by clicking the link at the top of this review. Find the other parts much in the same way you would for Northanger Abbey.
However, despite it being on YouTube, The Ruby in the Smoke is available to buy or rent and it is worth it in my opinion. However, the beauty of YouTube is you can see if you agree with me. If you've ever read the books, it's a well-done adaptation, keeping with the general flow and spirit of the novel. It remains to be seen if the movie versions will have the same problems as the books. Unless Pullman has not finished the series, then there are a few nagging loose ends he leaves. There is only one detail explained in the novel that is not in the film, but it is not really overly important to the plot and might even be inferred by the more astute. The conclusion of the movie also seemed a bit rushed. I believe Sally did a little more investigating in the book to justify her knowledge, but I can't recall for certain. It's still a fascinating, adventure story and much better adapted than I expected. My favorite character, Fred Garland, played by Feild, was not in it as much as I would have liked, but since the story does focus on Sally, this is only to be expected and he does, at least, have several scenes. Upon first seeing the girl who would play Sally, I thought she looked too mature. But she portrayed a nineteen year old girl very well. My only critique on her is that her eyebrows were strangely dark for a blonde, but this is a small detail that I soon learned to ignore.
Once again, if you like period dramas, it's an excellent one of Victorian England. However, unlike Northanger Abbey, it's a bit sad. It has a reasonably happy ending, but if you're already feeling depressed, probably not the best feel-good movie.
However, despite it being on YouTube, The Ruby in the Smoke is available to buy or rent and it is worth it in my opinion. However, the beauty of YouTube is you can see if you agree with me. If you've ever read the books, it's a well-done adaptation, keeping with the general flow and spirit of the novel. It remains to be seen if the movie versions will have the same problems as the books. Unless Pullman has not finished the series, then there are a few nagging loose ends he leaves. There is only one detail explained in the novel that is not in the film, but it is not really overly important to the plot and might even be inferred by the more astute. The conclusion of the movie also seemed a bit rushed. I believe Sally did a little more investigating in the book to justify her knowledge, but I can't recall for certain. It's still a fascinating, adventure story and much better adapted than I expected. My favorite character, Fred Garland, played by Feild, was not in it as much as I would have liked, but since the story does focus on Sally, this is only to be expected and he does, at least, have several scenes. Upon first seeing the girl who would play Sally, I thought she looked too mature. But she portrayed a nineteen year old girl very well. My only critique on her is that her eyebrows were strangely dark for a blonde, but this is a small detail that I soon learned to ignore.
Once again, if you like period dramas, it's an excellent one of Victorian England. However, unlike Northanger Abbey, it's a bit sad. It has a reasonably happy ending, but if you're already feeling depressed, probably not the best feel-good movie.
No comments:
Post a Comment