Emma.
- 2020
- Tous publics
- 2h 4m
In 1800s England, a well-meaning but selfish young woman meddles in her friends' love lives.In 1800s England, a well-meaning but selfish young woman meddles in her friends' love lives.In 1800s England, a well-meaning but selfish young woman meddles in her friends' love lives.
- Nominated for 2 Oscars
- 8 wins & 53 nominations total
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
I felt quite tired at the start of this film; it enters with a lot of sweeping movement, fast talking, and grand sets and costumes which offer far more detail than can be taken in. It had been a long day for me, but it did feel like it was a film trying to do too much. I was wrong in this first impression, but the approach of movement and pace did continue, and it gave the film a feel of being superficial and relying on pace and energy. To be fair, it makes this approach work and it is moves and looks delightful. It offers lots of nice touches that make it more than this, but it is ultimately not anything shockingly different from what you'd expect (which it probably shouldn't be anyway).
The delivery of Emma as having more of a sharp edge is a nice touch, as it lets the viewer see what is charming about her, but also that she is not aware of the negative aspects of her own character, and thus does not control them. This adds a lot to the narrative that others do not, and Taylor-Joy does very well with the role. She is supported well, although mostly by those doing one or two things really well (eg Nighy and Hart). The design of the film is wonderful - great costumes, and locations throughout. In the end it does have a fast and breezy tone that I did take a minute to get into, but in the end it was cheering and quite lightly delightful as a film.
The delivery of Emma as having more of a sharp edge is a nice touch, as it lets the viewer see what is charming about her, but also that she is not aware of the negative aspects of her own character, and thus does not control them. This adds a lot to the narrative that others do not, and Taylor-Joy does very well with the role. She is supported well, although mostly by those doing one or two things really well (eg Nighy and Hart). The design of the film is wonderful - great costumes, and locations throughout. In the end it does have a fast and breezy tone that I did take a minute to get into, but in the end it was cheering and quite lightly delightful as a film.
I saw this before seeing the Queen's Gambit, so I wasn't yet won over to the brilliance of anya taylor joy. This film did not win me over at the time. I thought she came across as overly haughty and disconnected. You may say that Emma is meant to be an un-likeable character, and that may be true, but I think a truer version of Emma would be of a young woman whom we know has lost her way and who is treating people less than honourably, but who is doing so because of her own fears and insecurities and who journeys through the course of the story to understand this more and to endeavour to be better in the future. There should be an empathetic and redemptive aspect to her despite her meanness. This was wholly lacking in this. And I now think it is far more about the production than taylor joy's portrayal. The film was overly focussed on looking good and missed connecting the characters with the audience. It reminds me of Bridgerton in that all the time and effort was spent on making things look great but the characters are pretty lifeless. Johnny Flynn was the best I thought he got the personality of Mr Knightley really well, but again the production didn't allow this to come through as well as it might. I really respect the attempt to bring Austen to modern audiences, I am not a purist, however this just regretfully isn't a great adaptation of the story nor a great movie. Watch the Romola Garai version of Emma.
Based on a timeless novel Emma by Jane Austen, this latest movie adaptation of her book is a beautiful, gorgeous and entertaining re-make that should easily please Austen fans old and new as it looks phenomenal. Its cast, led by the terrific and wonderful Anya Taylor-Joy, are/is utterly splendid. "Emma's" script is adapted by novelist Eleanor Catton (The Luminaries) and manages to capture much of Austen's own comedy, translating it elegantly to the screen. The result is a stylish and eminently watchable movie adaptation. In addition to the script, the production values are stellar, while movie is visually stunning and impeccably researched - it really felt like an authentic window into the 1800s. At the end, film - updated in all the right ways - is filled with an abundance of genuine charm. For those who are fans of the period drama this is a must see, while this gentle film, also, deserves to introduce Austen to a whole new generation.
Rating: 7+/8-
Rating: 7+/8-
Aaand here we have another misinterpretation of Jane Austen's Emma.
Adaptations like these are off-putting. Yes, I must admit it took Sandy Welch to reveal her to me too, but after having had my eyes opened in 2008, then returning to the book - it is all there.
I love my Emma, she is very dear to me. I take objection to her being portrayed as arrogant and snotty and superficial and haughty. Those are NOT her faults. This film, like all the others, makes her all vain, not just a little.
And my dear beloved George's dry humour - where was it? Nowhere, that's where! They butchered the 'Mrs Knightley"-scene!
Emma's infatuation with Frank Churchill was not made clear at all.
Why make Isabella a b***h?
What's with the red-coated girl parade? What is this? 'Don't look now'??
No, no, no! The ball is not where they fall in love. To have something that's a slow developing realisation on both parts thrown in our faces so obviously is an insult.
Emma's relationship with Harriet is wrong.
The film is long and boring. The filmmaker made it laughable, but not in an endearing way. This film has no heart.
And through all the colours and unnecessary opulence, at the end they turn the sweetest love scene into slapstick, after turning George into a wuss.
And now, after having watched it for completeness's sake, I may forget about it.
It needn't have been made on my account, and it does disservice to my dear Emma. This one I cannot love.
Two good things about it, therefore two stars: George wasn't completely off at times, I liked that they put in the scene with George and Mrs Weston and George with Mr Martin. Bill Nighy was fun. Everything else is forgettable.
Adaptations like these are off-putting. Yes, I must admit it took Sandy Welch to reveal her to me too, but after having had my eyes opened in 2008, then returning to the book - it is all there.
I love my Emma, she is very dear to me. I take objection to her being portrayed as arrogant and snotty and superficial and haughty. Those are NOT her faults. This film, like all the others, makes her all vain, not just a little.
And my dear beloved George's dry humour - where was it? Nowhere, that's where! They butchered the 'Mrs Knightley"-scene!
Emma's infatuation with Frank Churchill was not made clear at all.
Why make Isabella a b***h?
What's with the red-coated girl parade? What is this? 'Don't look now'??
No, no, no! The ball is not where they fall in love. To have something that's a slow developing realisation on both parts thrown in our faces so obviously is an insult.
Emma's relationship with Harriet is wrong.
The film is long and boring. The filmmaker made it laughable, but not in an endearing way. This film has no heart.
And through all the colours and unnecessary opulence, at the end they turn the sweetest love scene into slapstick, after turning George into a wuss.
And now, after having watched it for completeness's sake, I may forget about it.
It needn't have been made on my account, and it does disservice to my dear Emma. This one I cannot love.
Two good things about it, therefore two stars: George wasn't completely off at times, I liked that they put in the scene with George and Mrs Weston and George with Mr Martin. Bill Nighy was fun. Everything else is forgettable.
Recently got a chance to watch this. I like the film with Gwyneth Paltrow, and absolutely love the BBC miniseries, so I was cautious watching this, especially with the several bad reviews. I don't know if it was because I went in with low expectations, but I was delighted by this movie! Admittedly if you don't know the story, it can move fast, but to be fair, the book is long and tedious, with a lot to fit in two hours, which is one of my problems with the 2008 movie. The visuals and fashions of this movie are beautiful, and Emma's character did show improvement unlike some of the comments I saw. This one definitely captured Jane Austen's humor, and you can be guaranteed to laugh a few times. The BBC mini-series is still my top rated, but the 2020 "Emma." is, in my opinion, a notch above the 2008 "Emma", but would definitely recommend all adaptations, especially the book.
Did you know
- TriviaAll of the music performances in the film are real, played by the actors in character. None is staged.
- GoofsThe Sequence subtitled Winter begins with a carriage drawing up in front of a large tree in full leaf.
- Quotes
Miss Bates: Mother, you MUST sample the tart!
- Crazy creditsThe film's title has a period at the end, meant to signify the movie as a "period piece" set in the original era.
- How long is Emma.?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Emma
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $10,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $10,055,355
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $234,482
- Feb 23, 2020
- Gross worldwide
- $26,314,547
- Runtime
- 2h 4m(124 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content