A One Mann’s Movies review of “Sense and Sensibility” (1995, 4.5*, U).
The latest Everyman “Throwback” presentation was “Sense and Sensibility”, now – depressingly – 30 years old and on a limited anniversary re-release in the UK. But it still looks like a million dollars on the big screen. Given how many Jane Austen fans there are, I was surprised that it was so sparsely attended: there were only about another 8 people in the screening with us.
The film was garlanded with seven Oscar nominations, deservedly winning Emma Thompson her second (and to date, last) Oscar for the Screenplay. It’s a terrific piece of work.
Plot:
After the death of her father (Tom Wilkinson), his wife (Gemma Jones) and the three Dashwood daughters, Elinor (Emma Thompson), Marianne (Kate Winslet) and Margaret (Myriam Emilie Francois), are turfed out of their family estate by the scheming Fanny Dashwood (Harriet Walter) and her hopelessly vacillating husband John (James Fleet). Pitching up in a Devon ‘cottage’ (which would be £2M+ on “Homes in the Country”!), the family struggle with money and, particularly, love matches given their new lowly status in society.
Certification:
UK: U; US: PG. (From the BBFC web site: “Very mild injury detail”.)
Talent:
Starring:
Emma Thompson, Kate Winslet, Gemma Jones, Harriet Walter, James Fleet, Tom Wilkinson, Hugh Grant, Alan Rickman, Myriam Emilie Francois, Elizabeth Spriggs, Robert Hardy, Greg Wise, Imelda Staunton, Imogen Stubbs, Hugh Laurie, Richard Lumsden.
Directed by: Ang Lee.
Written by: Emma Thompson. (Adapted from the novel by Jane Austen.)
Running Time: 2h 16m.
Summary:
Positives:
- A truly enthralling script – 2 hours and 16 minutes just flew by.
- A tour de force of the British acting community.
- Some clever and striking directorial decisions.
- Brilliant in costume, hair/makeup and production design.
Negatives:
- A couple of the acting performances felt slightly imperfect.
Full Review of “Sense and Sensibility”:
A script that hammers along at a cracking pace.
It’s a Jane Austen potboiler, so what’s not to love about it? A story of the patriarchy, social expectations, promises made, promises broken, dramatic revelations and misunderstandings in communications. Taking all of this great content and converting it into a workable script was the challenge taken up by Emma Thompson and so successful was she in doing it, she won the Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay (as it would be called now). The script fizzes with life and zips along like a thing possessed. It was a real surprise to find that the film is 136 minutes long…. I would normally get fidgety and restless for a lesser film.
The cream of the 90’s British acting community.
What a great cast! Of particular note for me are:
- Emma Thompson, perfectly cast as Elinor Dashwood. You can fully believe that she is approaching the age at which 19th century society will instantly dismiss her as an ‘old maid’. Her reactions in a famous drawing room scene with Hugh Grant are exquisite. Thompson earned an Academy Award nomination for the part. It adds even more romance to the story that she met her long-time husband, the dashing Greg Wise playing John Willoughby, during this filming.
- Kate Winslet is again just perfect as Marianne Dashwood, full of fiery passion and fervour. Winslet also earned an Academy Award nomination for the part. This was only her third feature film (after 1994’s “Heavenly Creatures” and Disney’s forgettable “A Kid in King Arthur’s Court” from earlier in 1995. It was to be two years before she was to find global mega-stardom by jumping into freezing cold water with Leo DiCaprio, but this film was certainly a rung on the ladder to get her there.
- It really hurts the heart to see Alan Rickman alive and well as Colonel Brandon, purring his sweet nothings into the unflinching ear of Marianne. It’s another wonderfully nuanced performance from Rickman.
- Adding immense comic charm to his minor role is Hugh Laurie as Mr Palmer, chipping in acerbic responses to his talkative wife Charlotte (the ever-engaging Imelda Staunton).
In a fabulous production, there are a couple of the roles I would have tweaked.
I’m being picky here, but in a marvellous cast there were just a couple of performances that felt slightly off for me:
- Hugh Grant was in his ‘floppy’ phase where he was basically playing the same character with different lines and wardrobes. This was before he showed recently what a marvellous range he has, from the comedic heights of “Paddington 2“, through villainous baddie in “Dungeons and Dragons: Honour Among Thieves“; through to sadistic mass murderer in “Heretic“. I really rather felt that here, playing Edward Ferrars, he was in full “Notting Hill” mode: right down to his mannerisms and indeed the way he delivered some of his lines. I mean, he is still utterly delightful in the role, butthe casting rather detracted from the flow of the film for me.
- Harriet Walter on the other hand was definitely not “too nice” as Fanny Dashwood. Although she is meant to be the villain of the piece, she rather came across as a little too ‘Wicked Witch of the West’ for me in her performance. Something a bit more nuanced would have sat better with me.
Directorial and Technical Flair.
Although being nominated for Best Picture (it lost out to “Braveheart”, but “Apollo 13” was also in the mix), Ang Lee failed to get nominated for Best Director. With five white guys in the nominations list, I could jump to a conclusion here. Lee would have to wait another six years for a directing nomination (for “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon”).
The film really has some impressive little directorial flourishes which I loved. One in particular has Elinor (Thompson) pouring her heart out to Mrs Dashwood (Gemma Jones) in the parlour of ‘the cottage’ and the camera ever-so-slowly backs out of the door as if intruding on the conversation.
As well as the Best Picture nomination, the two acting nominations and the screenplay win for Thompson, the film also garnered the following additional nominations:
- For Cinematography for Michael Coulter (losing to “Braveheart”);
- Best Costume Design for Jenny Beavan and John Bright (losing to “Restoration”) and
- Best Music Score by Patrick Doyle (losing to “Il Postino” by Luis Bacalov).
Summary Thoughts on “Sense and Sensibility”
After I watched “Weapons” last night (review to follow) I was engaged in a brief discussion with the Everyman cinema manager and a group of other cinemagoers on the street outside. When asked if she liked the film, one young woman shook her head vigorously as she “didn’t like horror”… whereas her boyfriend loved it. Well, if he’s looking to put the balance right, this is the perfect relationship-recovery film. For it is a simply perfect concoction of elegance and romance that can’t but fail to sooth a “Weapons”- or “Bring Her Back“-traumatised soul!
In fact, if the romantic final church scene doesn’t make you go “Ahhhh” then it’s official…. you aren’t human!
Where to watch?
Trailer for “Sense and Sensibility”:
The trailer is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WGq2Rbs1Qg.
Subscribe
Don’t forget, you can subscribe to One Mann’s Movies to receive future reviews by email right here. No salesman will call!
