What I Watched: Sense & Sensibility (2008)

I have been on an Austen kick lately, and slowly watching my way through the more recent adaptations of her novels. That, combined with the return of Game of Thrones, has inspired me to make this a regular feature on the blog over the next few months. Every Friday, I will be sharing my Deep Thoughts on what I’ve been watching that week and what I plan to watch next (in case anyone wants to play along at home). Join me for some light-hearted pop culture chat, wontcha?

This week, we are talking about the 2-part 2008 adaptation of Sense &
Sensibility. Or, as I like to call it, the One Without Col. Brandon. I mean, ok, yes: there is still a Col. Brandon in it, but it’s not my
Col. Brandon (RIP, Alan Rickman) so it basically doesn’t count. But this is a fantastic adaptation nonetheless, and I am here to persuade you that you have to see it. Join me as we talk through it!

S&S is the story of the Dashwood sisters – the sensible Elinor and the impetuous, romantic Marianne – who are forced to leave the comforts of their genteel upbringing after their father dies and the (entailed) estate goes to their half-brother and his harpy-ish wife, and who must learn to navigate the now-dangerous waters of the marriage market with little more than their wits and charm. Next to Pride & Prejudice and
Persuasion, this is my favourite Austen novel – just edging out Northanger Abbey from my top 3. Austen was a keen observer of Georgian society, particularly on the socio-legal issues of interest to women, namely marriage, familial dynamics, and estate planning; her observations are sharp, but sympathetic to her subjects, and often edged with humour. In that regard, she has a lot in common with my favourite Victorian (English) novelist, Anthony Trollope. It’s easy to look at their work as proto-rom coms, and miss the social commentary simply because it isn’t as “on the nose” as modern audiences might expect, and because they were attuned to the social issues of their day (not ours).

It goes without saying that the benchmark for S&S adaptations is the 1995 Ang Lee version – just as the 1995 BBC adaptation is the benchmark for Pride & Prejudice. Comparisons in this case are unavoidable, but before we get to that, let me say a bit about the series as a whole. It’s a pretty faithful adaptation of Austen’s novel, and the roughly 3 hour running time is just right; the only part I felt was a bit rushed was the Marianne-Brandon bits at the end, but as we have already established, I wasn’t too particularly invested in those. It’s beautifully shot, and the costuming is lovely; though I
can’t speak authoritatively on its historical accuracy, it looked “right” to my eyes.

One common criticism of the series I have read online is the “sexing up” of the story through the opening scene, which features a
relatively graphic seduction bit. Don’t let your imagination run too wild; we are talking at best, PG13 stuff. It does feel out of tune with the rest of the series, which never again tries anything so unorthodox – unless you count Edward Ferrars cutting wood (not a euphemism) in the rain in a soppy shirt as racy stuff. I suppose the intent of that opening was to show the reality behind the things that are otherwise only hinted at by the characters but … eh. I don’t watch Austen adaptations for bodice-ripping material, so I could take this or leave it.

OK, now on to the important stuff.

How do the main characters stack up against the 1995 version? Well, for the most part … better, actually. This is not a criticism of any
of the 1995 actors, all of whom are super talented and all that. It’s just that, when you stop and think about it, with the possible
exception of Kate Winslet, all of them were far too old for their parts. And that even goes for Alan Rickman, who was in his late 40s
playing someone who was supposed to be mid 30s. [I know, I was surprised to realize that too. Marianne acted like Col. Brandon was this ancient guy when he was, in fact, younger than I currently am. Oh, to be 17 again!] I adore Emma Thompson, and she completely nailed the beats of Elinor’s emotional journey, but she did not look 19 (!!)
in any way shape or form.

The actors in the 2008 version are an improvement; they’re all still too old, but within the range of what I would call “Hollywood’s idea of young people”. Hattie Morahan (Elinor) in particular impressed me
so much, because she had one of the hardest jobs – making people forget Emma’s performance. She succeeded, in my opinion. The subtlety of her facial expressions was wonderful; Elinor is a reserved young
woman, but it’s imperative for the audience to be aware of her inner turmoil. Charity Wakefield as Marianne was ok; she did not improve on Kate’s performance, but she acquitted herself OK. She didn’t have a
lot of chemistry with either of Willoughby (Dominic Cooper) or Col. Brandon (David Morrisey), which took out much of the wind from the sails of her overall storyline. I have thought about this a lot, though, and I think the main reason why the 1995 movie was better in this regard is Rickman’s performance as Col. Brandon. Neither
adaptation spends a lot of time showing us the progression of Marianne’s change of feelings towards him; in fact, one of my
complaints with the 1995 movie is that we don’t spend more time watching that romance blossom – honestly, I could watch Alan Rickman read a book for hours. Anyway, my point is that we are invested in
their relationship because Rickman totally makes the audience fall in love with Col. Brandon in the first few scenes, after which all of us are just waiting for Marianne to wake up and figure out the obvious.

Or, if you’re like me, secretly hoping that Elinor and Col. Brandon realize that they are actually meant for each other. Don’t @ me. It’s at least 50% of the reason why I can’t quit Love, Actually no matter how many times someone trashes it in a (mostly true) think-piece. [Side note: I am still mad about the whole cheating subplot. My Col.
Brandon would NEVER.]

Ok, but you know what was really, really great about 2008 S&S? Edward Ferrars. I know, I know. Edward Ferrars, a top Austen hero? Said no one ever. But, in this version, it’s true. Don’t get me wrong; Hugh Grant was attractive enough as Edward, but he really leaned into the reserved, wet blankish side of the character. 2008 Edward, as played
by Dan Stevens, is a different story; he’s reserved and honourable, yes, but also funny and charming, and a bit moody. As with Elinor, you sense there is a fire smouldering under the prim and proper appearance. Also, hello, when did Cousin Matthew become a total smoke show? I sat through 3 seasons of Downton Abbey wanting to throw things
at his and Lady Mary’s heads (a more tortuous love story I have never seen, honestly), and never felt any particular spark. Half an hour into S&S, I was, like, damn Elinor – get it!

Come to think of it, we also spend a lot more time with Edward, and see more of him and his actions, in this adaptation than the 1995
movie, which helps to show his character to good advantage. We see his backbone in dealing with his atrocious family, and his inner conflict over his feelings for Elinor. For all that, I am ready to forgive the wood chopping scene, which is corny as hell. [Also, Colin Firth did the wet shirt thing better – sorry, Dan!]

Last and, sadly, least: Col. Brandon. No one was going to top Rickman’s performance, but it seemed like no one involved with the
2008 production even tried. Morrisey’s Col. Brandon is dour and hardly speaks at all. And, sorry for being wholly superficial, he isn’t nearly sexy enough to make up for all that. If I were watching this adaptation as my first introduction to S&S, my assumption would have to be that Marianne decided to settle for the security of a rich older
husband after her escapade with Willoughby – and not that she finally found the love of her life.

Your turn: share thoughts about 2008 S&S in the comments. How did this version stack up against the 1995 movie for you? Were you as thirsty for Edward Ferrars as I was? And can anyone ever top Alan Rickman’s
Col. Brandon?

Next time, I will be tackling the 2009 adaptation of Emma – my least favourite Austen heroine. Should be fun. And next week, it’s Game (of Thrones) on, Baby!