Sense and Sensibility

Some actors & actresses play a part which is so indelibly fixed in the public mind because their own personality is so similarly shaped like the part they assume that sometimes they receive acting awards for authenticity.Such is the case with Patricia Routledge who played Hyacinth Bucket in the 1990s sit-com "Keeping up Appearances".In the 1971 TV series of Sense & Sensibility Hyacinth (Patricia) looked 25 years younger than her most famous part when she played Mrs Jennings who takes a surrogate mother type role to the two Dashwood sisters Marianne & Elinor.

The innate characteristics of actors can never be entirely counterfeited despite the passage of years.Each of us carries a unique blueprint of our personality with us for life.So it was that I immediately spotted Joanna David as Elinor from when 24 years later she would play Mrs Gardiner in the highly acclaimed TV mini series of Pride & Prejudice.I suspect also Robin Ellis earned his laurels playing Edward Ferris for his most famous role of Poldark.

I also noticed the director, Denis Constanduros also directed another TV Jane Austen classic of "Persuasion" in the early 1970s which I can recommend and which I saw on YouTube earlier.I preferred Kate Winslet's Marianne (1995) to that of Ciara Maddern (1971), & Charity Wakefield (2008) probably because her character concentrated more on her musical ability, a time in history of romantic poets and musicians & composers which I love.I awarded this 1971 version 8/10 as it was well produced and acted and not studio bound but had some interesting location shots.

While Marianne and Elinor Dashwood are supposed to be the heroines of this Jane Austen story, they are so dull in this 4-part BBC production that when Mrs. Jennings appears, she jumps out of the screen as a full-blooded character full of life.

Hampered by extremely low production values where most of the scenes are set in smallish rooms, the viewer is left little on which to fix his/her attention. The costumes also are dull and repetitious and all of one design. The girls talk and talk and talk.

Set in the 1810s, story has the Dashwood sisters falling in love with the wrong men and then agonizing over their feelings ad nauseum. These sisters are a gloomy pair indeed and cannot compare to the sisters in Emma Thompson's brilliant 1995 film. Here , they fret and stew without a whisper of humor or spirit.

My guess is that the lackluster writing and directing defeated Joanna David ad Ciaran Madden from the getgo. Their mother (Isabel Dean) is also a gloomy gus so maybe it's inherited. Elinor (David) falls for Edward (Robin Ellis) who seems to be vaguely engaged to the grasping and catty Lucy (Frances Cuka), while Marianne (Madden) falls for Willoughby (Clive Francis) who seems to have a secret life in London.

The girls make the acquaintance of Mrs. Jennings (Patricia Routledge) a merry widow whose daughters are safely married. Mrs. Jennings takes an active interest in young people and is an inveterate matchmaker. She also serves as a surrogate mother to the girls while they are in London.

The girls suffer through dashed hopes and various humiliations before everything comes aright in the end via a series of major misapprehensions about Willoughby and Ferrars, mostly because of the gossip they listen to so attentively.

Routledge is a burst of energy physically and vocally. While the yunger women drone on in monotones, Routledge fills the air with laughter and gasps and a mellifluous voice. Those familiar with Routledge from her TV characters Hyacinth Bucket and Hetty Wainthropp will not be surprised. She's brilliant.

Stick with the 1995 film version.

"Sense and Sensibility" (1971), directed by David Giles, is one in a long list of successful BBC adaptations of novels by Jane Austen. The BBC productions are known for their high production values. I was surprised that another reviewer found the production values to be just adequate. I thought they were excellent. (Not excellent for 1971, but truly excellent.)

As always with the BBC, the ensemble acting is very good. Both Joanna David as Elinor Dashwood, and Ciaran Madden as Marianne Dashwood are beautiful in a slender, graceful way. (And they could easily be sisters.) The three male leads, Robin Ellis as Edward Ferrars, Clive Francis as John Willoughby, and Richard Owens as Colonel Brandon act well enough, but somehow they didn't stand out as vastly different from one another. This differentiation needs to happen if the adaptation is going to be fully successful. I thought Ellis was excellent as Edward Ferrars, but Francis as Willoughby wasn't dashing enough, and Owns as Brandon didn't strike me as a military hero.

Patricia Routledge, as the kindly but very talkative Mrs. Jennings, steals every scene in which she appears. Hers is a supporting role, but it's her character that you'll remember when the details of the rest of the film begin to fade.

Of course, Austen's novels can be painful to see or read in the 21st Century, because women's roles were so constricted and their options were so few. For women like the Dashwoods, their main concern had to be to make a good match. A well-bred young woman could hope to be a wife and mother, or she could be a governess, but that's where the choices ended. Although both women profess a certain indifference to marriage, the reality was that marriage was the one realistic option open to them. A bad marriage would ruin their lives, so they had to take infinite care. Gossip and intrigue swirl around all the young women, and the gossip and intrigue inevitably revolve around who is going to marry whom. The book--and the film-- reflect this reality, but it's not a pretty picture, especially from our historical perspective.

As in any other film portraying rural 19th Century England, this movie would look better in a theater. However, it was made for TV, so it doesn't lose too much on the small screen. We saw it on DVD and it worked very well. This is a very good movie that's worth finding and seeing.

If you're not against watching older adaptations with low production values, you will probably highly enjoy this version of Sense and Sensibility. The acting was mostly good- Joanna David was excellent (and quite beautiful) as the sensible Elinor. Patricia Routledge was another standout as Mrs. Jennings. She was absolutely hilarious yet also showed the character's kind nature. Robin Ellis (who you may recognize as Ross Poldark) even had a "sexed-up" scene as Edward.

Some of the acting/casting was less than perfect, however. Ciaran Madden played Marianne as borderline insane- going into hysterics all the time. Her and Colonel Brandon's storyline wasn't given as much screen time as the Elinor/Edward story so it may feel underdeveloped in comparison. Lucy Steele looks close to 40 and is so obviously evil one wonders how she ever could have charmed Edward. Lady Middleton's actress looks older than her supposed mother, Mrs. Jennings! (Maybe they could have given Patricia Routledge a gray wig to make her look older?) Eliza Williams was oddly made into Colonel Brandon's niece...(so why can't he just tell everyone she's his niece?).

A lot of the costumes/hairstyles are quite...70s. And of course, the production values are not up to the standard you may be used to today. But I didn't let this bother me and was able to thoroughly enjoy this version.

Usually television adaptations of period pieces are better than films for those who like things to be faithful to the text. The classic BBC adaptations are usually steadfast in their respect to and faithfulness to the text. So I really enjoy watching them as they are educational rather than being Hollywoodised and truncated as tends to happen in movies. So I watch a lot of BBC novel adaptations. Most are from 1970 onwards because before this time not a lot of TV was recorded (actors performed live), and that which was has been deleted over the years by the BBC. So this is one of the earlier extant BBC period adaptations. So it is really low budget. At one point Marianne describes that it is raining but it is clearly a sunny day where they are. The BBC budget couldn't stretch at the time for waiting until another day when it is raining to shoot the scene. But the respect for the source material is clear. So it is enjoyable in this regard. However, at 3 hours long I think it packed in far less detail than the shorter 1995 movie. As the 1995 movie was such an unusually good movie adaptation of a period novel, it kind of renders this version useless. However, it does have charm and is perhaps worth a watch for die hard Austen fans. It was remade by the BBC again only 10 years later. Im guessing that this one has higher production values and is more pleasant to watch or I don't know why they would have justified remaking it so soon after this. I will watch that version soon and let you know.