#it is the perfect Austen film adaptation

[ennaih]

Not Every Film I Watch In 2024

6. Persuasion (1995) -- eleventy-billionth rewatch

and bonus:

[burningvelvet]

I officially finished Pride and Prejudice yesterday! Some more rambles to add to the ongoing collection:

1 Learning that Wickham and Lydia are on the downward path I predicted is really satisfying for some reason. Just the image of the classic rake being forced to marry the unruly teen he had a fling with and then being forced to deal with the repercussions of his actions for the first time in his life — so good considering he seemingly believed he could partake in ruining her reputation and get away with it. And Lydia isn’t consciously suffering (although in reality, her prospects/reputation have indeed suffered) because she’s so oblivious to the misfortune around her that she thinks her life is much better than it is. It’s all just so true to life imo. Nothing is black-and-white. Every family has the worrisome trainwreck couple and these two are the perfect representation of that. Also, Wickham/Lydia give me major Byron/Claire Clairmont vibes (my fellow Romanticists iykyk).

2 Elizabeth’s conversation with Lady Catherine was so nerve-wracking. Elizabeth handled it so well, which surprised me. Toward the end of the novel I was getting a sense that Elizabeth had really come into her own self & seeing how expressive she became in comparison to some of the other women around her was very refreshing.

3 Elizabeth and Darcy’s long conversation while walking was actually cute, I can’t lie. I didn’t really find Darcy personally appealing at first, but he grew on me — which I’m aware was the intention — but due to the popularity of the romantic elements of the story in popular media and film adaptations, I was really surprised just how little Darcy and Elizabeth interacted if we take into account the entire length of the novel and how many actual conversations they had. It’s more realistic that way due to how things like travel, socializing, and marriage were conducted back then. I think for the sake of modern audiences and modern concepts of romance/etc., adaptations and maybe even fans themselves really overemphasize the romantic elements of the story. What I mean is that it is a love story, yes, but our concepts of love in the Anglosphere have changed a lot since Austen’s time. Adaptations reflect this change, although they also probably skew the reader’s reception of the original novel. Alternatively, the Georgian era was a bit more lively than we regularly think, which is seen by Wickham/Lydia’s rendezvous, and so we could also interpret the novel as containing more passion covertly hidden beneath the pages. There are a lot of ways to interpret the concepts of love/romance as shown in the novel.

4 Lydia is truly her mother’s daughter imo. I don’t have a thought-out argument to defend this opinion but it definitely showed that Lydia was her mother’s favorite and Elizabeth was her father’s favorite — and interestingly, they married two men who were enemies to each other, and diametrically opposed in personality. I think one of the biggest takeaways from the novel is that the Bennet parents were an ill-suited match and so their children are having this struggle of trying not to repeat the generational curse — in Lydia’s case she fails like her parents did, whereas Elizabeth and Jane manage well.

5 I routinely forgot that Mary Bennet existed. Like was she even in the novel or was I just zoning out every time she appeared? Lmao

6 Mr. Bennet sarcastically saying that he loves Wickham and Collins more than Darcy and Bingley because the former two amuse him more and give him free entertainment… same tbh!

7 It’s interesting how all the men and women function as foils for each other and represent various reactions to the system they live in. Mrs. Bennet, Mrs. Bingley, Lady Catherine, Mrs. Gardiner, are all interesting to compare to each other, and Mr. Collins, Mr. Bingley, Mr. Wickham, Mr. Darcy, Mr. Bennet, Mr. Gardiner are also in that way very neatly comparable.

8 I’m biased because I’ve studied Shakespeare but I really got a big Shakespeare vibe the entire time. I saw someone on here post that the novel may have been inspired by Much Ado specifically and I completely agree! I looked it up and there have been articles and academic papers writing about the influence of Shakespeare on Austen and P&P particularly, so we’re not alone here.

— Overall, I’ve been pleasantly surprised to find that I enjoyed this book way more than I thought I would! If none of you have read it, or are only familiar with adaptations, definitely give it a try.

[irhinoceri]

I’m a huge fan of the PJ LotR Trilogy, there was a time in the aughts that it was basically my whole personality. I have a tattoo. But even as a fan, I think it’s so funny how 25 years later people forget that it was actually loathsome to many book purists and viewed as a hollow soulless cash grab much the same way Rings of Power is now.

It only seems like a universally loved perfect adaptation now because of the passage of time. I read the books in preparation for the films, because the buzz around the films preceded their release by years, and reading those books altered my brain chemistry. I had the worst book hangover of my life after reading LotR, so much so that my mother noticed I hadn’t touched an new book for a month after reading LotR because as a child I could read whole novels in a day. I told her it was the best book I’d ever read and I couldn’t bring myself to move on. Eventually I did, but I was fundamentally different, because I’d never been a fantasy fan before (I mostly liked historical fiction, classic novels like Austen or Dickens, alongside contemporary realistic fiction, and mysteries) but afterwards fantasy was the only genre I wanted to read or write or think about. It became a hyperfixation that has still never really got supplanted. My love of Star Wars is an extension of LotR because it is fantasy in space.

But still, for all that fervor reading the books ignited, I was a newbie, a child literally and figuratively compared to the old guard who had cherished the story for decades, and it didn’t stop me from loving the movies despite all the changes and cuts and additions. Thus I found myself sharing fandom spaces online with people who reviled the movies and had a thousand complainants, valid or otherwise. I came to understand that while they were not necessarily Wrong in their criticisms… that their abhorrence came from a deep lifelong love that I didn’t have the bandwidth to even understand, that I didn’t have to renounce the films or care how anyone else felt about them at the end of the day. I could love them as adaptation.

But that doesn’t mean I have forgotten that there were complaints. So whenever anyone hates on RoP and holds up PJ movies as perfection in comparison I doubt their sincerity, especially when it’s hollow culture war bullshit. That ain’t new. Arwen replacing Glorfindel and sassing the Ringwraiths was lambasted as the great disgrace of the century long before Galadriel developed an attitude.

Anyway I don’t know what my point is besides that I’m old and I was there, Gandalf…

[booktomoviebrawl]

We are not judging how bad the movie is, we are judging which adapted the book the worst. There are good movies that are bad adaptions.

Propaganda below the cut (spoilers may apply)

Persuasion:

They massacred my girl!! That is not Anne Elliot!! The whole point is that she's beaten down and thinks she's missed her chance at happiness and is bullied by her family, not making mean and snarky nods to the camera :( They completely missed the whole point of the dynamic and it's SICKENING! They also cut Mrs Smith who is arguably one of the most important characters as she highlights Anne's lack of focus on title and rank and her family's comparative obsession with it + it's only through her that Anne learns about Mr Elliot's true nasty nature. Also they cut the 'I am half agony, half hope' line from Wentworth's letter at the end so what's even the POINT of adapting it if you don't have that!! Oh my god!! My poor favourite Austen novel :( (I do want to make it very very clear that my issues with the movie come from the writing and adaptation and not in any way from the race blind casting. The casting is superb and I'm genuinely so disappointed that they got such a bad adaptation bc so many of the cast are literally perfect)

Where do I even start? They tried to 'modernize' both the protagonist and the love story and managed to take out everything that made it good in the first place. Anne Elliot in the novel is quiet and good and helpful, full of regret. In the movie, she constantly turns to the audience to mock everyone around her, feeling so much better than everyone, to the point where nobody understands why Captain Wentworth would still be in love with her, or have fallen in love with her in the first place. Eight years before the plot starts, she broker her engagement to him because she was persuaded by a family friend that it was a bad idea. No way would movie!Anne have let herself be persuaded. They just tried to do a Fleabag/Emma type of thing without understanding what made either the novel or those two things work and thereby ruined it completely

Whoever made this didn't understand the point of the novel at all. They completely screwed up the character of Anne Elliot (the protagonist), which in turn screws the rest of the movie, as the original story only works because Anne is the way she is. Also, it's a period piece but the characters are talking in modern slang the entire time. And not in a clever way but in a very cringey one. If Jane Austen knew, she'd probably turn in her grave, and rightfully so.

Maximum Ride:

The storyline makes absolutely no sense, and the movie is nothing like the book. You could've given the movie an entirely different name and and keep the plot I wouldn't bat an eye

the movie's just bad mate

Horrendous low budget netflix movie with effects so bad they make me feel physically ill and acting so wooden the cast is in danger of being attacked by lumberjacks. The story already wasn't the best and the film somehow made it worst. I came in with nostalgia for my dear kids with bird wings and left never to be the same again.

Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children:

While Miss Peregrine was one of my favorite books as a kid and incredibly unique in the way the story is written (The author basically took a box of weird antique photographs and created an underlying story behind a handful of them) the movie is incredibly boring. Like seriously I can't remember a single goddamn thing about the movie besides my extreme disappointment with it after leaving the theatres. It's probably because the original is a trilogy but they didn't want to make it a trilogy for the movie so they just scrapped the ending of the first book and rewrote a shitty climax where they threw snowballs at the nightmare child eating creatures or something. I remember THAT scene perfectly because it was so, so dumb. It was so stupid oh my God- ALSO, thank God I have a copy of the book from before the film came out because new copies don't have one of the photographs that the actual book uses as a base anymore and instead have the shitty movie poster! We truly do live in a society.

Changed way too much so it doesn't feel like the same thing. The main characters are these kids with different abilities (called peculiarities) and the movie switches around their powers and changes almost everyone's age. Emma and Olive switch powers so that Emma now floats (they also added that she can kind of control air to some extent) when she's supposed to have fire powers to match her fiery personality. Olive can make fire now and she's also aged up from an eight year old to a teenager and put her in this weird romance with Enoch. Enoch is also aged up from a grumpy thirteen year old to around the same age as Olive. Bronwyn, one of the older kids in the book and sort of a motherly figure to the younger kids, is now one of the youngest kids. Hugh and Fiona are aged down and basically have no interaction at all in the movie, even when their book counterparts had such a good relationship. The only one they didn't really change was Horace and Jacob. They also added these gorgon twins that do like two things. The antagonist in the movie is Mr. Barron who honestly isn't super memorable and isn't in the books whatsoever. The ending of the movie is weird too because they manage to turn back time somehow so Jacob's grandfather isn't dead and then he hops through loops so he can be with Emma and the other peculiars. I guess the problem of wights and hollowgasts is magically eliminated and we do not have to deal with the consequences. It took six books to fix everything. I appreciate that the movie engaged me enough to read the series but once I did, I could not believe they did my kids that dirty.

Yikes where to start. The 3 girl characters are all mixed up. There are 2 teens, one who's super strong and has a brother (I'll get back to him) and one who controls fire and is the love interest named Emma. The third girl is a child called Olive who floats. She's lighter than air.

In the movie, strong girl is the child, olive is now the fire girl and is for some reason super introverted, and Emma the love interest floats and gets given a super breath??? Power?? Like she rises a sunken ship by blowing in and keeps a man blown against a wall by blowing air at him. He makes a remark that she'll run out of breath eventually, which happens here because plot convenience, but not when she's blowing in the sunken ship.

The enemies in the book are terrifying Hollows. Creatures who have lost themselves and devour souls of those with powers... The movie decides they eat eyes now. And turn human again. And get busted up in a fair for the final act of the movie. Ugh.

The movie also decides randomly that time travelling through the loops is a thing; a loop being a pocket of time that replays the same day over and over. But apparently this means Main Character can travel back in time and stop his grandfather dying??? What?? His grandfathers death is the whole start of the movie and motivation for the character.

The movie undermines many of things that made the book amazing and even decides it's not a trilogy anymore!! Fuck the other 2 books, right?!

Tldr; it is terribly hollywood-ised and t tim Burton ruined a franchise by trying too hard to make it quirky and fun when the books already had a brilliant sombre and interesting tone to them.

[anghraine]

petty ranting about the LOTR movies

I've been in various fandoms where an ostensibly "faithful" adaptation was frequently held up as the One True Version of the text, the author's vision brought to life, the one nothing could ever compare to and the reason no others should ever be made, how is it possible to envision the characters or interpretations of them differently blah blah blah. (1995 P&P fandom is very frequently like this, sometimes Faith and Fear fans are, esp wrt The Borgias, etc.)

But I'm not sure I've ever seen an adaptation so uncritically adored by so many as the Jackson LOTR movies. I don't think any fandom is so insistent on an adaptation as people are insistent on the movies as the one true version of Middle-earth, even where they're radically different. Even when people agree with criticisms, it's been really noticeable that people often also add disclaimers about how they love the movies, they're perfect in almost every way, they're super faithful apart from this thing, of course the reason for [choice that was made] was understandable it's just that... etc.

And the thing is, I may hate some of the interpretations in other allegedly faithful adaptations. Like, speaking of the 1995 P&P, I dislike a lot about it and its influence on popular perception of what P&P is, of what adaptation should look like, of the brooding version of my fave hero Darcy, and so on. But I do understand why it's often held up as a faithful adaptation.

It uses a lot of the original text (though it can be subtly or glaringly different in execution), it's able to blur the lines between its own inventions and material from the text in a way that's often convinced audiences that things from the adaptation are actually in the novel, and it's more successful at doing this than any other Davies version of Austen IMO, it has a very convincing cast, blahblah. Like, I disagree that it is as faithful as it's reputed to be (by a long ways), but I get why it has that reputation, at least.

But I genuinely find Jackson's LOTR so different from the book! The movies certainly draw from it in significant ways, but dialogue is heavily altered or manufactured, motivations and characterization are simplified, altered, or just outright transformed into something entirely different, themes are shifted around, the structure is seriously changed (something Tolkien specifically did not want to happen), the relatively compact battles in the book are turned into big action set pieces taking up major swaths of screen time, a lot of the lore is heavily contracted, changed, or simply absent where it casts heavy shadows over the dynamics in the book, and oh yeah, they manage to be even more racist.

Some of this (not the racism) is defensible even if I don't personally agree w/ those defenses in a lot of cases. But there are a ton of differences between them! And you can talk about the films as their own thing cinematically and that's its own discussion. But the conflation of the movies with the actual things Tolkien actually wrote is even more widespread and absolute and annoying than with things like the 1995 P&P, with not half as much reason for it.

[bethanydelleman]

i decided to list out every austen film/series adaptation this month to keep track of the ones i still need to get to and that's how i found out 1967 existed. basically, I Was Today Years Old

Do you also know about Emma 1972? It has a perfect Harriet Smith, despite being a kind of odd adaptation. Also the Persuasion mini from the 1970s! So good!

I love P&P 1967 so I'm always trying to let people know about it! I think I've watched every Pride & Prejudice, Emma, Persuasion, Northanger Abbey, and Mansfield Park adaptation (at least the historical ones, not all modernizations). I am still missing some Sense & Sensibility ones, the two older minis.

[fictionadventurer]

Austen asks! 4-24

I don't know if you intended this to be inclusive, but I'll answer them all anyway (skipping over the ones that have already been answered).

6. Favorite movie adaptation

The 1995 Sense and Sensibility. To me, it strikes a good balance between being a good adaptation and making the story accessible to audiences that haven't read the book, and it's one of the few that seems to understand Austen's humor and romance.

7. Favorite Austen couple

Anne and Wentworth. Their personalities balance each other perfectly.

8. Least favorite couple

Colonel Brandon and Marianne are so frustrating to me, mostly because of how Austen writes them. They fall victim to the Marian Halcombe Problem--if you spend the whole book showing a man and woman having tons of conversations and developing a good dynamic as equals, I'm not going to believe that he's in love with her sister.

9. Most hated foe of a heroine

Isabella Thorpe is a terrible person, and I can't think of any redeeming qualities or circumstances.

11. Least favorite book

I gained a better appreciation for Sense and Sensibility on my last reread, but it's still definitely Austen's weakest novel.

12. Least favorite Austen heroine

Marianne Dashwood is a realistic teenager, but not someone that I can admire or sympathize with too much.

14. Favorite love confession from the books

Can any Austen fan say anything other than The Letter in Persuasion?

16. Least favorite film adaptation

I hold a grudge against the 2005 Pride and Prejudice, because it did nothing to make me understand the appeal of Austen, and it's a horrible adaptation, but it has such a huge influence on fandom's interpretation of the novel.

Also, every once in a while, I remember the scene in the 2008 Sense and Sensibility where Brandon gives Willoughby a "stay away from my daughter" speech, and I shudder over how creepy it is.

17. Moment that made you sad/cry while reading

Basically any scene of Fanny Price's childhood.

18. Moment that made you smile/happy while reading

Henry Tilney's introduction scene in Northanger Abbey is just pure distilled joy.

19. Moment that made you laugh while reading

I'll never forget the time I laughed out loud in class while reading one of Miss Bates' speeches in Emma.

20. Moment that made you mad while reading

I don't know if I've ever been so mad for a heroine as I was during the scene where the neglected poor, orphaned, outsider Fanny watches everyone fawn over poor, orphaned outsider Mary Crawford.

22. Favorite Austen female casting decision

I love Tamsin Greig as Miss Bates in the 2009 Emma, because I did not imagine her talkativeness as stemming from anxiety, but it was fun to see her played that way and to experience a different interpretation that still felt valid.

I'm also going to take this opportunity to mention that I love Mrs. Jennings and Sir John Middleton in 1995's Sense and Sensibility. I just grin through every scene they're in, and I especially respect them after learning that they were the only cast members that Emma Thompson didn't have to write random extra dialogue for in crowd scenes, because they just naturally knew how to talk like Regency characters.

23. Favorite Austen male casting decision

I love Johnny Lee Miller as Mr. Knightley in 2009 Emma. I don't know if he matches the character in the novel, but I love how he portrayed the dynamic with Emma.

Also, Hugh Laurie as Mr. Palmer in 1995's Sense and Sensibility is perfection. And Greg Wise as Willoughby is beautiful and charming enough to do his job of fooling you into thinking he could be the romantic lead before he proves to be an utter cad.

24. Favorite supporting character

Mrs. Jennings. Hands-down. So vulgar, nosey, and over-the-top, but beneath it all, so kind and friendly and helpful. I love her so much.

[island-in-the-shadows]

I always find it so wonderfully interesting when people prefer IWTV S1 to S2 but, tbh, they're both great seasons of television.

When I saw S1 as it premiered, I consistently struggled with it. There were (and to this day are) parts of it that severely pissed me off. "A Vile Hunger..." (1x5) is still the episode I like to rewatch the least, for example. It took me watching S1 twice to totally love the show. And it's because, when I saw S1, I was holding onto the source material while I watched.

This was fucking stupid on my part, especially given I took a class on adaptation while at Uni and got the academic tools to discern what makes for a good adaptation in film terms (I've talked about other adaptations with people who are book readers first and they tend to view it way differently). Hell, I wrote a thesis on why Clueless is a great adaptation of Jane Austen's Emma regardless of the change of setting in both time and place.

But IWTV was way too personal to me, it went back to my childhood, so it was hard to let go. I did instantly love a lot of the changes. I love the time change and the change to Louis' race and background. I love that we saw more of Louis pre-vampirism and that show Louis has more complex reasons for his long term struggles whereas book Louis just seemed so whiny to me for no reason. On the other hand, I struggled with: why is it a second interview, why was Claudia SA-ed, why the DV, why is fucking Antoinette a canker sore that never leaves, why the fuck is Armand in Dubai, what the fuck is happening with this timeline? I couldn't let go and my viewing experience suffered for it.

When I sat down to watch a second time, I said, "Ok, do what you were taught and let the source go. Adaptations cannot be 1:1 due to the change in medium". And that's when things started clicking. I stopped viewing S1, and the show as a whole, as needing to use the books as a plot bible and viewed it as using them as a guidebook to function on TV terms and tell its own version of the story. It allowed me to appreciate the things I loved much more and to understand the ones I hadn't been so sure about and, even, love some of those things.

For S2, I went into it with that mentality already so I solely judged it on film/TV terms even though, having read books 1-4 and 6 and reading about the rest, I saw subtle things people with no knowledge of the source canon did not. Like when YT reactors consistently worried about Daniel being killed and I'm just filing my nails because, to those in the know, Daniel has massive plot armour. Or people being confused about Raglan James and I'm sat there like wtf does this trifling ass want? Nevertheless, I enjoyed the tale as it was told and what it was on solely TV terms.

Both season are great television but, to me, S2 just took it up a notch. Daniel Hart popped off extra hard. Carol Cutshall popped off extra hard in costuming (stg she played faves because why did Armand get more fashion slays than anyone else? ^_^). The sets went extra hard. The acting, which was already superb in S1 because this is a fucking excellent cast (Jacob, Sam, Eric, Bailey, and Delainey 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼), went harder as well because we have more players such as Ben Daniels doing the absolute MOST with Santiago, Roxane Duran being absolutely OUTSTANDING as the formidable Madeleine, and Assad Zaman stepping out from the background and giving a STUNNING performance as, to me, what's clearly the definitive Armand. To my taste, S2 is a lot less slow and I felt the pot boiling tension to the explosive ending build more keenly than in S1. And, again to my taste, the ending of S2 felt more satisfying because we have a sense of completion in Louis' journey rather than a, admittedly dope, cliffhanger. S2 has, arguably, the 3 best episodes of the show so far in "Don't Be Afraid..." (2x5) "I Could Not Prevent It" (2x7), and "And That's The End of It..." (2x8). For me, there's just no contest.

And yeah S2 isn't perfect either. The abrupt episode endings, for example, are a bit annoying---especially the end of 2x4. Yes, there's bits I would've changed a bit. (Though I will say, some book readers apparently wanted the show to include book Armand's Franken-experiments and I could very much do without it ever being included because it serves no narrative purpose other than to prolong Claudia's suffering. The show already goes hard to show Armand is a fucking asshole in other ways and it's gonna add to that in S3. We don't need that detail.) But, as a season of television, it just went the extra mile.

Still, I love that some people prefer S1. I love that they prefer S1 because it's more intimate or because it's more of a family season or because of the good Louis and Lestat moments or the good vampire family moments. Or maybe they love it for other reasons, it's all very personal.

I still think "In Throes of Increasing Wonder" is an outstanding pilot and it's one of my favourite episodes. Louis' confessional scene/the church scene is definitely one of the top moments of the show. Claudia's monologue at the end of "The Ruthless Pursuit of Blood..." still gives me goosebumps. Claudia stomping on Antoinette's fucking face and Daniel reading Louis to absolute FILTH at the end of "The Thing Lay Still" both make me clap and stomp like I'm at a concert or a sporting event.

Either way, S1 or S2, it's great TV and it deserves more love and recognition. I hope it gets it because it's truly deserving. Maybe we just need to hear our Brat Prince have his say for the uninitiated to awaken to it. S3 I have been seated since they made the call to release that teaser.

[bestadaptationtournament]

Pride and Prejudice Canonical Adaptations

Pride and Prejudice (2005 film)

I've never like straight romance stories but when I had to read Pride and Prejudice during high school I really liked it. Then they made us watch the movie and I was worried it was going to focus on the cheesy part but it adapted the most important scenes , of course it focus a bit more in the romance, but the actors deliver their lines so well while saying exactly what was written in the novel.

Pride and Prejudice (1995 TV miniseries)

most adaptions are not faithful to the novel that they are based on. this one is so incredibly faithful, its like the exact movie version of the novel. it has almost entirely the exact dialogue from the novel. its perfect and beautiful and six hours long. i saw it as a kid and it made me become interested in reading the novel and jane austen in general (which i previously was not, i was like 11)

[captain-aralias]

9 books that are my favourites

tagged by @arenee1999 a few days ago, thank you <3 as i was writing this list in my head last night, i thought - this could be read as a list of my favourite fandoms and television/film adaptations, but hey ho. i did a degree in english lit or something.

harry potter and the prisoner of azkaban by JKR - no book has been so important to my life and i also just think it's a really fun mystery and i still like it, so - it's here, it's staying.

carry on by rainbow rowell - but of course. this one was quite important too.

pride and prejudice by jane austen - i don't think this has ever made a fav book list before, i think because i thought it was too basic, but damnit - this book is great, it influences the way i write enemies to lovers, i love the 1995 adaptation and all of austen's novels are bangers except mansfield park, which i keep trying to like but it sucks.

the once and future king by TH white - all my life i loved the movie 'camelot' and it's depiction of arthur. i only learned as an adult that it was TH white's gentle, earnest, thwarted arthur that they'd used <3 he's perfect. 'ill-made knight' is the best of the series, IMO

lieutenant hornblower by cs forester - i haven't read the books in ages, so maybe it's time for a re-read. the ioan grufford adaptation is great, i wish they'd do the later/earlier books too! BUT this early (in hornblower's life) book is my fav - the only one told from bush's POV as he struggles with how he loves hornblower but worries the guy wants to do a mutiny (which he totally does)

the folk of the air by holly black - a new entrant even though i've loved it for years, but i've decided i don't just think it's really good, it's so good that it's one of my favs. maybe the best of the trilogy is the middle book, 'wicked king' where jude is in power with limited support and they fall in love (or do they???). how the king of elfham learned to hate stories is also brilliant.

'the emperor mage' by tamora pierce. i've been waiting my whole life for the numair book and it was terrible, but her first three trilogies are my absolute crack, and this is the best book of those series IMO. the bit where numair tries to hit the emperor for implying he loves his student daine (which he does) while she's listening but disguised as a bird - and then he fakes his own death, and daine goes crazy... that bit has stayed with me for decades, i love it so much.

'night watch' by terry pratchett. i still feel late to properly loving pterry, but i've always liked this one and now i love it - vimes is my guy, i love the time travel, that he trains himself, that he resists both passively and when required actively. v good. my next fav is probably ... 'monstrous regiment', which i think is a bit more of a weird choice (unlike this one which is mega popular and also about all the things i like), but it just does everything right! oh, 'and 'going postal'.

'the princess bride' by s morgenstern william goldman. i haven't read this for ages either so maybe it shouldn't make the list, but i expect it's still pretty great. a mindfuck for a young child who has only seen the film and thinks all of the frame narrative must therefore be real... also, the film is like one of the best films ever and i have seen that super recently. if you haven't seen the home movie, do yourself a favour and watch it because it's a great way to enjoy the movie a-new.

no idea where this meme has been already. so just saying hello to some folks and if you'd like to do this meme and haven't done it already, please do! @giishu @orange-peony @you-remind-me-of-the-babe @carryonvisinata @alleycat0306 @fight-surrender @cows4247 @messofthejess @mysterioussheep

[kuroppiii]

DON’T FILE THOSE DIVORCE PAPERS. but i thought emma was boring i desperately need ur full take geek out plz tell me what I don’t see

i would NEVER divorce you pookie??

(us actually)

everyone gets film freaky in their own way!!! its ok!!!

two film essay posts in less than 24 hrs by ro, someone needs to sedate me or something

( sort of spoilers for emma (2020) under the cut , but nothing explicit , really )

!!! disclaimer i think to really fw regency-ish movies, kind of inherently calls for being into things like their original source material. and trust!! i know its not for everyone!!!

personally, i'm actually a big fan of reading those old and classical kind of books. as in, i have a full, clothbound, BOX SET, of jane austen's novels (emma being one of them). my literature teacher recommended me to read pride and prejudice ONCE and i've been hooked ever since.

yknow people joke that back then that it was all "oh my god you can't show your ankles!!!" and yeah, that's pretty much what it's like when you get down to reading novels from that time 😭 but that's what makes it so entertaining for me! the bridgerton series (which i also really like by association) is an easy example of this. i once saw someone say bridgerton plays out like a kdrama and YES!! that's the level of yearning and pining and slow burn i feed off of

upfront, i liked the movie–even from when its first trailer came out–because its aesthetics visually were just so nice. like yes!!! pastels!! pretty flowers!!! hats with feathers!! tea parties!!! big poofy dresses!!! (and anya taylor joy)

but it was when i watched it for a second time, i found a lot of why i like this specific adaptation of emma is because i think it really got across the vibe of jane austen's writing–especially the humor.

ok now stay with me: i'm not saying you have to read the whole original novel to get it, bc basically i would summarize the reason why the humor is so dry (when usually you would think this rich and old-fashioned vibe of a story should be much more over-the-top and dramatic) is because jane austen was always trying to make fun of all the social constructs of her time. especially for women! (heavy on how her works were ones of satire!)

like it all plays out so bare-bones that you just can't ignore how ridiculous everything sounds, which is what austen felt about all the rules and expectations emma and the other characters were trying to uphold the whole story. i also find that kind of humor from the movie very charming in a simple way, too.

the whole vibe of watching the movie and its characters is very much unserious, and it's a personal favorite in that watching it and listening to the soundtrack makes me feel ok to wallow in my emotions like the characters do. it's very cathardic in that way to me. but yeah by no means is it very action-packed or even conventionally "dramatic", so i get how it can wind up boring.

the character development of emma is always so interesting to me though. it's subtle, especially on the first watch, but it always warms my heart when she goes from thinking she's got everything figured out, to seeing the value of true friendship in harriet and even mrs. bates (MY FAV CHARACTER I CANNOT LIE SHE'S SO FUNNY), and that making her more open to questioning her and her life more, including not being as perfect as she once thought she was.

and that's really why we get that payoff with her and knightley, because he's known her all this time but when she finally recognizes her imperfections and embraces them, that newly found self-awareness us what pushes him over the edge in love. then we get that BEAUTIFUL confession scene under the tree. 🤭🌳

it very much fits the genre of a "romantic" movie, in that it romanticizes everything. but not to the point where it lets you forget what everyone's wants were, and that there were genuine struggles grappling with all those societal rules at the same time.

bc at the end of the day those rules were efforts meant to promote values that could hopefully lead a life of morality, responsibility/duty, and respect to others and yourself (arguably there are rules we face today that try to promote the same things, but they just look much different than rules about showing your ankles lol). i think in emma it's interesting to see just how each character tries to navigate those rules to get what they want out of life from them, and i think it's just a very beautifully-made film overall as well.

[lordisitmine]

TTNBD BLOG: PART TWO

Welcome once again, to the extended author’s notes! That’s kind of how I’m thinking of these posts. This post covers the details of chapter two of the story, (chapter 3 on ao3 if you’re just looking at the numbers), entitled What a Tangled Web We Weave. So, spoilers if you haven’t read that yet.

HISTORICAL ACCURACY

In this week’s retrospective, I’d like to talk a little bit about historical accuracy. If you’re anything like me, you like watching and reading a lot of things that take place in past eras. If you’re like me, you hate when something- be it a phrase, an outfit, a hairstyle, or a reference to people/events- is egregiously incorrect to the time period being portrayed. Big anachronisms drive me crazy.

However, there’s a level of inaccuracy that I don’t actually mind- if it helps better the story without taking me too much out of the fantasy, or if it adds something to the setting while not detracting from the believably- I’ll allow it. Basically, what I’m saying is that, like a lot of other aspects of writing/art, historical accuracy is about finding the right balance. Or, getting as close as you can to the target of perfect. With fanfiction, I think the margin is even wider- I try not to take this medium too overly seriously, especially when I’m reading and enjoying something someone else has written. I’m a little tougher on myself, though I hope not too tough.

I like to call what I do “movie-accurate”. A lot of my favourite period films have things in them that just aren’t correct, but because I love those movies so much, and because the overall vibe is close enough to what I know about history, I let it slide.

For example, in the 2005 film Pride and Prejudice, the hairstyles of the young women, as well as some of their dress styles are quite off from what women’s fashions were actually like at the time in which the novel/movie was set. The 1995 BBC miniseries adaptation is far, far more faithful in terms of aesthetics. However, the 2005 film is incredibly beloved by a lot of Jane Austen fans, despite its inaccuracies! Because it’s a fucking good movie, which sells the characterization and romances so well that you can sort of excuse the “dumbing down” of the details. It’s one of my favourite period films, and films, period.

Obviously there are bad movies that don’t even try to be accurate, but when I say “movie-accurate” know that I’m talking about the good ones.

During the course of Though the Night be Dark, I’ll be making a lot of references to/descriptions of outfits and hairstyles, because I’m pretty sure I was a fashion designer or personal stylist in my past life, but not all of them will be totally accurate to the years 1899/1900. That goes for stuff like technology, too- it won’t ever be over-the-top (i.e. they’re not gonna have television in the year 1900) but if you notice stuff that seems just a little out of place, know that I felt it was necessary to fudge the numbers, so to speak, in pursuit of the characters, the romance, and the story itself.

This same sort of “movie-accuracy” applies to the settings. I’ve never been to Paris or London in my life- I’m broke and there’s a whole ocean in between me and Europe. I do my best to research and reference actual places and landmarks, but if you do live in either of those places and what I write seems fantastical or inaccurate, I am sorry, believe me. Please forgive me, and do your best to imagine these as like, imaginary versions of these places.

I don’t know why I’m defending myself- most people probably don’t mind, and some probably don’t notice things like this. But it’s important to me to be as accurate as I can be within the scope of my ability, and it’s important to me for people to learn about my process if they want to. I digress.

CHAPTER TWO: WHAT A TANGLED WEB WE WEAVE

Sometimes I pick titles because they’re references to things, and the words/themes of the things in question closely fit the character and the story. For example, To the End of Everything is a lyric from the Adam Lambert song Sleepwalker, which was on my SebaCiel playlist back in 2014 when I was first writing it. It fit the story of the end of Ciel’s life, and the end of his contract with Sebastian, and it’s such a nice set of words to say out loud and look at on a screen.

The first chapter of this fic, A Far, Far Better Rest, is a reference to the final line from A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens. Two cities, London and Paris, both of which are the settings for TTNBD. Not a super deep reference, but there’s a reason for it.

What a Tangled Web We Weave is also a reference to something- part of a famous line from am 1808 poem Marmion: A Tale of Flodden Field by Sir Walter Scott. It’s set in the time of Henry VIII and tells the romantic and ultimately tragic story of some rich guy and his affair with a woman. The full line is what a tangled we weave/when first we practise to deceive.

I picked this title for three reasons: one, because it has the word web in it, and Claude is a spider demon. Two, because it’s about lies, and lies are the basis for some of the upcoming conflict in this story. And three, and most chief among the reasons: it sounded cool.

What can I say. Sometimes I write/use things are deep and profound, and sometimes I just use things I think are kinda neat. I try, as always, to strike a decent balance.

Alright, let’s break this chapter down.

We started off with a remix of a scene from the second season of the Black Butler anime. It’s a little infamous, to be sure. I’m speaking of course about the scene where Alois shoves his finger into Hannah’s eye socket! I know that in the original scene he doesn’t actually pull out her eyeball, but I wanted to go whole-hog, I think it’s just extra insane and I wanted you to know what kind of Alois Trancy character I’m playing with here. He’s an adult here, whereas he was a kid in the anime- I don’t know, I just thought the increased level of brutality suited him.

I pulled actual dialogue from the scene and repurposed it, which I love doing and have done many times in my fanfic writing career (side-eye at my Supernatural fics). I wrote it from Claude’s POV because I love that outsider POV in a scene. I also wanted to establish his thoughts and feelings about Alois right off the bat.

Cards on the table: I haven’t watched the second season of the anime in a very long time. I watched the first few episodes some time last year I think??? When I was deciding to write this story, just to get a feel for their characters/relationship again. I’ve seen them portrayed in fanon as everything from a toxic couple to a couple who are more actually in love, like Ciel and Sebastian- I very much don’t see that for these two. Their tension is different, and in the context of this story, it’s been years, and that tension is heading towards a boiling point.

What I’m saying is that I’m sorry to any real die-hard Alois and/or Claude fans in advance if I do stretch them too far out of the OOC allowance margins… but also no I’m not hehehehehe.

Claude mentions Alois reading penny dreadfuls. Penny dreadfuls were these cheap little serialised fiction zines you could buy for a penny, hence the name. Every volume was like, an 8–16 page chunk of a story. The dreadful part comes from the fact that they were highly sensationalised and sometime salacious stories about murder and highway robbery and pirates and stories of real-life criminals doing heinous murder and such- sometimes sold at public executions! Overall, these things weren’t considered Proper English Literature. Which of course meant that they were VERY popular. Mostly in the early to mid 1800s. As far as I know, they started to lose ground in popular culture by the turn of the century, but they existed, I think they were cool, and therefore I can include a reference to them!

Penny dreadfuls weren’t really about romance or sex but they were super popular among young people, and the idea of Alois reading trashy romance novels in general is just hilarious to me. And like I said, I just really wanted to reference something so undeniably Victorian.

And yes, for the purposes of this story, he does in fact know that Hannah is a demon. Did he know that in the anime? I think maybe he did, but like I said, it’s been a while, and I don’t remember. I could go back and watch it again, but I don’t want canon to mess up my fanfiction. Anyway, the fact that Alois knows Hannah is a demon will become relevant and important as the story continues, so I won’t say too much more about it.

Back to Paris- it’s time for more Lizzy content! There’s quite a bit of that in this chapter. Originally, this chapter and the next one were originally just supposed to be one chapter, but the whole thing got too long/had a natural breaking point in my mins, so I split it up.

These parts of the story are more difficult to write- they involve the OCs a lot, and there’s lots of things to establish. It’s hard to do that without getting to in the weeds or being really clunky, but on the other hand, I can’t forget that anything outside of canon references is in my brain and no one else’s, so I have to make sure to cover the important stuff.

This is my first time writing F/F romance! That’s not quite true. I’ve been writing original stories with F/F romances in them for years and years- this is my first time writing an F/F romance that other people are actually going to read. Thankfully, being a lesbian, I have actual experience falling in love with women, so I have lots of real-life stuff to draw from. I didn’t realise how much of my own past and current crushes and preferences wormed their way into the Lizzy/Sybil dynamic. I’ve read posts before about how romance/sex scenes are always revealing of the author’s preferences/feelings/kinks, and I was like “not me haha I am Unknowable” but I guess I can’t say that anymore oops.

When it comes to labels for fictional characters, I don’t like to use them/talk about them unless it’s been explicitly stated in canon. For example, I would never say a canon bisexual character is exclusively gay, that would be bi erasure and we don’t do that shit here. This is especially relevant when it comes to time periods where terminology was different, and labels hadn’t been invented yet/didn’t mean the same things.

I’m trying to write Lizzy in a way that the reader can interpret any way they want! If you want to read her as bi or as a lesbian, that’s fine, I have no hard opinion on the subject! I think it makes a lot of sense that she’s bi, I think that there’s a case for her being a lesbian who’s had to deal with some hardcore compulsory heterosexuality.

However, Sybil is my character and therefore I do get to say what she is, and she is a lesbian. Stone cold homosexual. Again, not that it matters, I just like saying it.

Lizzy and Sybil’s romance isn’t a full-on slow burn per se, but I’m really enjoying building it up here brick-by-brick. At this point, she and Lizzy have been friends for a long time and already know each other really well, so the “to lovers” part can kind of come into play early, but I’m not going to give it all away at once- where would the fun be in that?

Let’s talk about Verity. Madame LaChance if you’re nasty. Verity, of course, means truth, and la chance is French for luck. I kind of wanted her to be straight up called “Lady Luck” but that was a bit TOO hokey, even for me. I wanted there to be an auntie-like side character, and I said to myself, what if there was a character who was like, all the good, lighthearted parts of Grell and Madame Red without any of the “oh btw I’m insane/also a serial killer”. I thought it’d be funny if she was sort of a go-between, having friendships with both Sybil & Lizzy as well as Ciel & Sebastian without any of them being aware of it. She became a bigger part of the story than I’d originally intended- she sort of stole my heart, maybe she’ll steal yours too.

She’s a little mysterious, but I can promise you she is a normal human. She’s just very… unique, I guess you could say. No more spoilers.

I’m being sort of vague about the club and what it’s called and what it looks like, there’s a lot more about it in a future chapter, don’t worry. Also, Madame refers to Ciel as Monsieur Phénix and Sebastian as Monsieur Corbeau. That’s French for phoenix and raven respectively. Stage names. Code names. C'est très dramatique. (No, I don’t actually speak French, beyond some very basic words and phrases.)

I hate to admit it, but I felt woefully out of my element while writing this part and I'm not 100% happy with how it came out I knew I wanted to have some reason to show Sebastian and Ciel going about their day-to-day lives, but I was also struck by the lack of, like, drama or action so far in the story. I fell back on the old adage of “write what you know” and had the boys not solving crime per se (there will be time for that later) but perhaps avenging somebody. I don’t think Ciel will ever give up his vengeful nature, whether its on his own behalf or someone else’s. And for Sebastian, it’s just bad business, and we can’t have that, can we?

There are a whole two paragraphs from Little Women by Louisa May Alcott in this next scene. I don’t know if that book is meant to be sad, but it made me terribly melancholy when I read it as a kid. Also, there I go again referencing literature. I pulled the same trick in next week’s chapter too, which I didn’t even realise I was repeating until I’d already done it. Oops.

“-And nobody saw Beth wipe the tears off the yellow keys, that wouldn't keep in tune, when she was all alone. She sang like a little lark about her work, never was too tired for Marmee and the girls, and day after day said hopefully to herself, "I know I'll get my music some time, if I'm good."

"There are many Beth’s in the world, shy and quiet, sitting in corners till needed, and living for others so cheerfully that no one sees the sacrifices till the little cricket on the hearth stops chirping, and the sweet, sunshiny presence vanishes, leaving silence and shadow behind.”

I wanted Lizzy to be reading aloud in this scene and this reference jumped out at me when I was trying to think of books that existed at the time and that characters this age might have access to. Beth of course is short for Elizabeth, and Lizzy’s arc in this story is about her becoming her own person in a lot of ways, or like, realising who she is, and this quote about Beth feeling like she’s in everyone’s shadow and only exists to do things for other people seemed really appropriate.

There’s a little more insight into Simeon- I drew the photograph described in the scene so you could get an idea of what Simeon looks like. I really like writing Simeon. He’s such a Good Dad. I mean, he’s bound by his word to be a good dad, but he really loves Sybil so much and wants her to be happy. But there’s also so much going on beneath the surface. I know most of you have figured out his true nature by now, but I hope that I still have the ability to surprise you in the long run when it comes to him.

Once again, thanks for reading! Comments and questions are always welcome, and I’ll see you all again next week! Special shout-out to vandorttranslations, who is translating this story into Russian as we go! It will never not be amazing to me that someone feels strongly enough about my work to undertake such a task!

-lord_is_it_mine

[pers-books]

Bloody hell! There's a cast and a half in this!!

BBC to air Miss Austen, starring Keeley Hawes and Rose Leslie

The four-part drama takes a literary mystery and reimagines it as a fascinating, witty and heart-breaking story of sisterly love

The BBC has acquired Miss Austen, a star-studded production of Gill Hornby’s best-selling and much loved novel, produced by Bonnie Productions for MASTERPIECE in the US and distributed by Federation Studios.

The adaptation, from BAFTA-winning writer Andrea Gibb (Elizabeth is Missing, Mayflies), will star Keeley Hawes (It’s A Sin, Bodyguard, Line of Duty), Rose Leslie (Game of Thrones, Vigil), Patsy Ferran (Living, Hot Milk), Jessica Hynes (Life After Life, Years and Years), Mirren Mack (The Witcher: Blood Origin, The Nest), Phyllis Logan (Downton Abbey, Shetland), Kevin McNally (The Crown, Ten Percent), Max Irons (Condor, The Wife), Alfred Enoch (How to Get Away with Murder, Foundation), Calam Lynch (Bridgerton, Archie) and Liv Hill (The Serpent Queen, Elizabeth Is Missing).

The four-part drama, directed by BAFTA-winning filmmaker Aisling Walsh (Maudie, Elizabeth is Missing) started filming last month in the UK and is produced by Stella Merz (Gentleman Jack, Renegade Nell).

Miss Austen takes a literary mystery – Cassandra Austen notoriously burning her famous sister Jane’s letters – and reimagines it as a fascinating, witty and heart-breaking story of sisterly love, while creating in Cassandra a character as captivating as any Austen heroine.

The drama begins in 1830, a while after Jane has died. Cassandra (Keeley Hawes) races to see her young friend Isabella (Rose Leslie) who is about to lose her home following her father’s death. Cassandra is ostensibly there to help her friend, but her real motive is to find a stash of private letters which, in the wrong hands, could destroy Jane’s reputation. On discovering them, Cassandra is overwhelmed as she is transported back to her youth. In flashback, we meet Young Cassy and Jane (Patsy Ferran) as they navigate the infatuations, family feuds and dashed hopes which shaped their lives and laid the foundations for Jane’s unforgettable stories. Cassandra’s re-evaluation of her past eventually leads her to realise how blind she has been to the real cause of Isabella’s heartache and distress. Finding a way to guide Isabella towards true happiness, Cassandra is finally able to understand and celebrate the sacrifices she chose to make for her brilliant sister, Jane.

Sue Deeks, Head of BBC Programme Acquisition, says: “Miss Austen is the perfect blend of intriguing mystery, vivid and engaging characters and beguiling period charm – BBC viewers certainly have a treat in store.”

Christine Langan, executive producer, says: “To have this hugely entertaining female-driven story told by such a stellar cast, led by Keeley Hawes, as Bonnie Productions’ first drama is genuinely a dream come true. Gill Hornby has found an ingenious way into the Austen world, creating female characters modern audiences can empathise with and delight in. I’m so honoured to be bringing this wonderful novel to the screen in collaboration with the deeply talented trio of writer, Andrea Gibb, director, Aisling Walsh and producer, Stella Merz.”

Susanne Simpson, MASTERPIECE executive producer, says: “Miss Austen is a beautifully told story about the loves and losses of the Austen sisters. I’m thrilled that this heartfelt, romantic, and funny adaptation is in the hands of a remarkable ensemble cast led by the incredible Keeley Hawes.”

Miss Austen (4x50) is a co-production of Bonnie Productions and MASTERPIECE, in association with the BBC and Federation Stories.

The executive producers are Christine Langan for Bonnie Productions, Susanne Simpson for MASTERPIECE and Polly Williams for Federation Stories. Keeley Hawes, Andrea Gibb and Aisling Walsh are also executive producers.

[zahlenfreak]

Strap in. This will be a long post.

I hadn't read Mansfield Park by Jane Austen until a few weeks ago when I decided to listen to a dramatic reading on LibriVox. I liked it very much and it led me down a whole new rabbit hole. I found two adaptions on youtube, from 1999 and 2007. The one from 1999 is the much better film, really beautiful to watch, but differs heavily from the book. The one from 2007 has a shaky camera (boo!) and leaves out many important scenes. But it has Billie Piper in it, who I like exceedingly. With the book fresh on my mind, the un-regency-like manners of all characters in both films were rather jarring. Both versions of Fanny Price were not at all as in the book - depicting quiet strength in a main character is hard, I guess. I liked both versions of Edmund Bertram. Johnny Lee Miller has always been a favourite and he does a great job. This is where the rabbit hole really begins.

Blake Ritson is the perfect Edmund, but also, look

I'm not immune to those eyes. And the whole ending was so cute and romantic that I like this adaption better now.

So, what next? I rewatched the adaption of Emma from 2009. It has both actors as Mr Knightley

and Mr Elton

He makes the funniest faces.

Of course, I went on imdb to look for what else I could watch. And I found

Careful with those eyes. You might need an arms licence for them.

The DVD (yes, I still buy those!) of Da Vinci's Demons arrived a few days ago. I have watched three episodes. The series is entertaining, but not very deep. I had hoped for a lot more gayness. Since when is Leonardo straight? Anyway, guess who my new favourite soft-spoken villain is.

Instead of watching more episodes like a normal person I side-stepped and watched the episode Apollo from the series Endeavour.

So, that's the state of things. My mind is in shambles. I'm normally rather mildly attracted to people. Not this time. I must attempt to draw him (as you can see I made heaps of screenshots), but I'm not sure if I could do his beautiful face justice.

OK, I must take a walk and then lie down for a bit. Bye.

[booktomoviebrawl]

We are not judging how bad the movie is, we are judging which adapted the book the worst. There are good movies that are bad adaptions.

Propaganda below the cut (spoilers may apply)

Persuasion:

They massacred my girl!! That is not Anne Elliot!! The whole point is that she's beaten down and thinks she's missed her chance at happiness and is bullied by her family, not making mean and snarky nods to the camera :( They completely missed the whole point of the dynamic and it's SICKENING! They also cut Mrs Smith who is arguably one of the most important characters as she highlights Anne's lack of focus on title and rank and her family's comparative obsession with it + it's only through her that Anne learns about Mr Elliot's true nasty nature. Also they cut the 'I am half agony, half hope' line from Wentworth's letter at the end so what's even the POINT of adapting it if you don't have that!! Oh my god!! My poor favourite Austen novel :( (I do want to make it very very clear that my issues with the movie come from the writing and adaptation and not in any way from the race blind casting. The casting is superb and I'm genuinely so disappointed that they got such a bad adaptation bc so many of the cast are literally perfect)

Where do I even start? They tried to 'modernize' both the protagonist and the love story and managed to take out everything that made it good in the first place. Anne Elliot in the novel is quiet and good and helpful, full of regret. In the movie, she constantly turns to the audience to mock everyone around her, feeling so much better than everyone, to the point where nobody understands why Captain Wentworth would still be in love with her, or have fallen in love with her in the first place. Eight years before the plot starts, she broker her engagement to him because she was persuaded by a family friend that it was a bad idea. No way would movie!Anne have let herself be persuaded. They just tried to do a Fleabag/Emma type of thing without understanding what made either the novel or those two things work and thereby ruined it completely

Whoever made this didn't understand the point of the novel at all. They completely screwed up the character of Anne Elliot (the protagonist), which in turn screws the rest of the movie, as the original story only works because Anne is the way she is. Also, it's a period piece but the characters are talking in modern slang the entire time. And not in a clever way but in a very cringey one. If Jane Austen knew, she'd probably turn in her grave, and rightfully so.

Maximum Ride:

The storyline makes absolutely no sense, and the movie is nothing like the book. You could've given the movie an entirely different name and and keep the plot I wouldn't bat an eye

the movie's just bad mate

Horrendous low budget netflix movie with effects so bad they make me feel physically ill and acting so wooden the cast is in danger of being attacked by lumberjacks. The story already wasn't the best and the film somehow made it worst. I came in with nostalgia for my dear kids with bird wings and left never to be the same again.

[the-girl-from-another-time]

Actors Who Should Play Jane Austen Heroes

So with Emma (2020) and both 2022 Persuasion movies, we’re in the new wave of Jane Austen adaptations. I have suggestions.

Henry Cavill

Especially after the Enola Holmes movies, he feels like a natural in period dramas. He definitely has the tenderness to play an Austen hero, plus he’s good as a romantic lead.

Ideal character(s): Mr. Darcy in Pride and Prejudice, Colonel Brandon in Sense and Sensibility, or Captain Wentworth in Persuasion

Brandon Routh

Sure, he’s American, but this wholesome sunflower is SO good at playing Kind And Respectful Sweethearts. While we’re at it, I want his wife Courtney Ford to star alongside him.

Ideal character: Colonel Brandon in Sense and Sensibility

Grant Gustin

Okay, I KNOW he will always be the Flash first and foremost, BUT this adorable sunbeam would be perfect for one of Austen’s more light-hearted heroes.

Ideal character(s): Mr. Bingley in Pride and Prejudice or Mr. Tilney in Northanger Abbey

Sam Claflin

I don’t have a specific character in mind for him, but I like him in period films and he gives me Austen vibes.

Feel free to add more!