Kattiera Nana I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Curapedi I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

Lollivan It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Scotty Burke It is interesting even when nothing much happens, which is for most of its 3-hour running time. Read full review

secondtake Mansfield Park (1999)A remarkably clear-headed film that make Jane Austen real and alive. The heroine here is perhaps even a bit like Austen—though the actress is prettier, by all accounts—and it includes letters read by the character that are seemingly Austen's words. But what the cast and director Patricia Rozema pull off here is fabulous. There is no one reason this movie works so well, except of course the really scintillating, funny writing of Austen herself. The lead character is Fanny Price, played with true joy, angst, and subtle wit by Frances O'Connor. The two men who court her on and off are strong enough as men to be convincing, but they are perfectly still young men, barely more than boys in years, and they have those youthful flaws. Which is part of the fodder for Austen's wit.And social observation. If you don't quite catch the way she plays social classes against each other you miss part of the substance. It isn't just that the poor niece ends up at the rich uncle's house, but that this same niece has the perception to see through their facades. And to keep mum until just the right moment.This isn't a liberation film where the woman charges to victory in a big speech or by a power play. Instead—and this is one reason Austen is still readable today—the woman simply comments on the issues in a way that makes clear her more advanced views, and the obstacles slowly fall away through outside circumstances (rather than her own doing). The passivity of Fanny Price might bother some people, but that's exactly her role, as a character, in this pageant.One last point—slavery. This is the one novel of Austen's that gets her in trouble for her languid views on the uncle's use of slaves in the West Indies. The movie seems to twist this into a more modern condemnation, which helps us stay sympathetic to the whole shebang. There is even an added scene of sketches (done in a way rather like Goya's socially critical drawings of the same time, with some Kara Walker thrown in) which make clear the crisis at hand.If you want to dip into Austen through a movie, choose between this and the 2005 "Pride and Prejudice" and you won't be disappointed. Of course, if you want to read the book—that's even better. More modern and fresh than it "should" be for 200 years ago.

phd_travel This 1999 adaptation of Mansfield Park is attractively filmed and has a good cast. It's interesting to see how so many of the cast members have become successful on television since: James Purefoy in the Following, Johnny Lee Miller in Elementary and High Bonneville in Downton Abbey. Francis O'Connor isn't as pretty an actress as I would have liked to fill the role but she acts well.For modern audiences, Mansfield Park will never be widely embraced as Sense and Sensibility, and Pride and Prejudice because one has to accept a great love between first cousins. It's a shame this dated aspect stops it from being more well loved because the story is interesting and deals with adultery and divorce which is quite daring for the time. Also the Crawfords are among Austen characters some of the more interesting flawed characters. They are well played by Embeth Davitz and Alessandro Nivola.There are some differences from the novel that have been criticised in this version. Some relocations of events and reducing of characters I understand is necessary for brevity. The slavery issue is played up to make things more modern.Overall it's still a well made and attractive adaptation that doesn't have that cheap television feel of some other productions. Worth a watch.

littlebutterflygb-682-229678 How utterly annoying this film is for Austen fans. The writer/ director brings in a lesbian attraction between Fanny and Miss Crawford which is entirely out of context and far too many scenes between the two resort to lingering touches and embraces which give rise to much rolling of the eyes.There is also an element of loquaciousness from Sir Thomas which also spoils the story and shows Rozema to be ignorant of the historical context of both his and Miss Crawfords relationship with Fanny. Its all a shame really as the performances are good and the costumes and scenery delightful. Best avoided if you are an Austen fan.

kittijames This was one of my favourite Austen books, and least favourite period adaptations. The references to the period are all contradicted, and Fanny's character is quite changed and not for the better. I thought there was too much focus on the slavery angle which isn't a central theme in the book. Fanny is supposed to be a very timid, quiet girl, and her uncle kindly. Neither of these comes across in the film. Edward's straightforward romance with Fanny from the outset in this film is a mockery of the book which weaves a far more interesting and complicated story. The setting and scenery also seemed poorly thought out - Mansfield Park is described as an elegant, rich dwelling - and yet the walls are crumbling and the set looks cheap. I don't mind an adaptation that changes the story if it does it well, but all in all, I couldn't finish this movie as it was a offense to the book and a once-fantastic story.