My goodness. Have read some reviews and I see no middle ground....2s or 9s..Someone mentions that Mr. Elton is a caricature...this is true so was Mr. Collins. Methinks, Ms. Austen liked to poke fun at the clergy.
The nudity reminded me of the wet shirt scene in Pride & Prejudice in 1995 TV adaptation. Didn't bother me. They were naked under all those clothes back then too.
I commend the casting, the performances, the costumes, and much more. I always approach Austen movies with trepidation. I always fear disappointment, but that rarely happens and this no exception.
The director is a photographer and approached the scenes with a photographer's eye. If you look at the frames, many are beautifully symmetrical photographic portraits. Loved the visuals. I compare it to CHIMES AT MIDNIGHT just in this respect. If you really watch that fabulous Orson Welles movie, the framing looks like the paintings of Dutch Masters (especially the scenes with Fallstaff, Silence, and Shallow out at the country house).
No chemistry between the two leads? Well, if you read Austen you know that Knightley is considerably older than Emma and watched her grow up due to the family's connections. Emma and Knightley's siblings are married to each other.
Knightley admires her from afar and is betwixt friendship, sibling, buddy, et. al. with Emma. This is played well in the earlier parts of the movie. The attraction develops into more and as Emma ages it is more appropriate. The nuance of this progression is well done.
I don't know if I should call certain little gems, Easter Eggs, or hidden meanings. But, I found Harriet's moaning and sighing on the couch after twisting her ankle, well, you know...as Knightley is attending to her foot so clever. I laughed out loud.
Well done by all. And I guess after reading some reviews, not all found it thus. I recommend a second viewing.
The nudity reminded me of the wet shirt scene in Pride & Prejudice in 1995 TV adaptation. Didn't bother me. They were naked under all those clothes back then too.
I commend the casting, the performances, the costumes, and much more. I always approach Austen movies with trepidation. I always fear disappointment, but that rarely happens and this no exception.
The director is a photographer and approached the scenes with a photographer's eye. If you look at the frames, many are beautifully symmetrical photographic portraits. Loved the visuals. I compare it to CHIMES AT MIDNIGHT just in this respect. If you really watch that fabulous Orson Welles movie, the framing looks like the paintings of Dutch Masters (especially the scenes with Fallstaff, Silence, and Shallow out at the country house).
No chemistry between the two leads? Well, if you read Austen you know that Knightley is considerably older than Emma and watched her grow up due to the family's connections. Emma and Knightley's siblings are married to each other.
Knightley admires her from afar and is betwixt friendship, sibling, buddy, et. al. with Emma. This is played well in the earlier parts of the movie. The attraction develops into more and as Emma ages it is more appropriate. The nuance of this progression is well done.
I don't know if I should call certain little gems, Easter Eggs, or hidden meanings. But, I found Harriet's moaning and sighing on the couch after twisting her ankle, well, you know...as Knightley is attending to her foot so clever. I laughed out loud.
Well done by all. And I guess after reading some reviews, not all found it thus. I recommend a second viewing.