Sense and Sensibility

Emma Thompson(Elinor) in the 1995 version scripts herself more time on screen compared to Kate Winslet(Marianne).This version focuses on BOTH of the sisters equally. This version is far more faithful to the novel than the movie made in 1995. The only flaw in this version is the mysterious disappearance (non-inclusion) of the youngest sister, Margaret.

Well as a lover of Jane Austen one would be hard pressed to do a reproduction of one of her books and disappoint me. S&S was a pretty well done miniseries, most BBC miniseries are well done. There was a much more book and a more through representation of all the minor characters in this movie than in the 1995 Sense and Sensibility directed by Ang Lee and staring Kate Winslet, Emma Thompson. However the 1981 BBC miniseries was seriously lacking in a couple vital points, the omission of the youngest Dashwood daughter, Margaret and this viewer found the leads of Marranne and Elinor to be so abysmally portrayed I really didn't care a bit about what happened to their characters. These women weren't lovable or very likable. Overall, between to two leads, Tracey Childs as Marriann was the better portrayal. Irene Richard's portrayal of Elinor was so dead pan and empty of any emotion, at all, that much of the movie containing her was difficult to sit through. Over all, for the Austen fan this is a must see movie, but only for the more complete story and representations. Especially the devilishly catty Miss Lucy Steele who in the Ang Lee S&S is very under portrayed.

An excellent adaptation of the Austen novel, though the production values can`t compare with the later film. The script is faithful to the original. The performances by the male leads are a bit bland.

I have reviewed every adaptation of Sense and Sensibility and find that they are all good in their own way. Many have commented about each version, but I believe the 2008 version is the best version. It had the cast skills of the Emma Thompson 1995 Screenplay and the accuracy of the 1981 adaptation. Many find the 1981 version boring, but I disagree. It is ill-cast. But the screenplay is very good. (I even read that people were angry that Margaret was absent in this version. Actually, she is absent in the book as well. Why Austen even included her in name I cannot understand.) Anyway, if you take the cast of 1995 and put them into the 1981 screenplay, you come out with the 2008 adaption. Hope this is not too confusing.

Having watched the 1995 movie for the first time a few days ago,I decided to watch this fine BBC production again,and found it the more satisfying of the two.

The acting was of a good standard;Tracey Childs splendid as Marianne,and Bosco Hogan's interpretation of Edward Ferrers far exceeded Hugh Grant's peculiar effort in the Ang Lee film.The direction and location filming in Dorset/Somerset and the authentic early 1800's feel more than compensated for the budget constraints.

Also,Willoughby's telling confession to Eleanor as Marianne lay seriously ill upstairs was,thankfully,retained,unlike the 1995 version.

A good miniseries,more Jane Austen than it's "grander" successor!Nine out of ten!