If you've ever tried to read a VCR manual that was translated from English to Japanese and then back to English you understand what's wrong here.
This is more an adaptation of Clueless to be set in the time period of Emma rather than a proper, stand-alone Emma.
Sorry, I'd have to strongly disagree with you there. The only slightly correct statement you made was that it was "awe-full"...as in, I was so full of awe and amazement after watching it, that I and many others, cannot praise it enough!
"Music is the wine that fills the cup of silence"- Robert Fripp.
Damn, you beat me to it.
Ring the bell, close the book, quench the candle.
I didn't think it was bad, in fact, I liked it.
my god its full of stars
Am I seeing things or does Greta Scacchi have a mustache in this film? It would seem that producers would want to wax that one. I couldn't concentrate on what she was saying without looking at her upper lip. Sorry to be negative, but ewwwww......
shareI absolutely LOVE how you spell awful incorrectly, and then you criticize a perfectly good movie, comparing it to a English to Japanese VCR manual that was probably extremely easy to understand in the first place. If you have actually read Emma, you can tell how well done it is. I personally think it is the best adaptation of a Jane Austen novel, excluding the 5 hr. Pride and Prejudice. Gwenyth Paltrow does a fabulous job as Emma, and almost all important scenes are included into this film. It took a huge amount of time and money to make this film, and it is not fair to call it "aweful." Do not bother trying to tell me off, or come up with some stupid insult, for I will not be on this board any longer. Goodbye.
shareHah! yeah, I can't spell at all!
Many of the Jane Austen films are fantastic, especially Pride and Prejudice and even Mansfield Park(though mansfield park is peculiar at bits), but this one falls short of what may have become overly high standards as a result.
I read Emma and rather liked it, I didn't like the flim.
The box didn't inspire much confidence saying "if you liked Clueless you'll love Emma."
please don't assume I'm gonna flip out and insult you for disagreeing with you.
First of all, you are the politest insulted-person I have ever come across on imdb! You should be proud.
I kind of love and hate this movie at the same time. I saw it when I was about 12 and loved it. I watched it every day for a week. Then I got given the complete works of Jane Austen and loved all of them so much. When I went back and watched all the movie adaptations of her books I realized, as many have done before me, that they are all totally wrong. (Excluding of course P&P95).
So while I still think this is an excellent movie and I will be forever in it's debt for introducing me to my favourite author, it is lacking as a Jane Austen adaptation. The clothes, the language, the buildings, the customs; everything is completely inaccurate. I do wish movie makers would realize that Austen't novels are perfect as she wrote them. They don't need to be 'improved'. But still, though it drives me insane, I love this movie. Wierd, I know.
I'm relatively sure you know what the kid means by aweful, it means that this movie was complete dookie, as it it lacked tits or machine guns or rocket launchers or full frontal nudity or anything else that would have at least made it more interesting than women talking about crap no one cares about for what was at least two hours of my life. If I wanted that I could just mosey on down to JoAnn fabrics and start a conversation about who found the nicest fabric for the cheapest price or whos husband hadn't already killed himself under the pressure of a midlife crisis.
shareWhaaat? That was so random. Are you on the right board? Fabric and mid-life crises?? There's nothing like that in this movie! And if you want a movie with "tits or machine guns or rocket launchers or full frontal nudity" why would you lok for it in one set two hundred years ago?? What were you expecting?
shareyeah, I don't go on The Hours' board and demand to know why there's no zombies. I like this kind of movie. I didn't like this one.
sharehe was being sarcastic
share"Awe-ful?"It's an excellent adaptation of the novel and very charming. "Clueless" was based loosely on the story, but it's got a very different way of speech, setting, etc. I loved "Clueless," but you might as well be comparing apples and oranges. Did you see "Clueless" first by any chance? Sounds like it.
shareRyan, thanks! Even though I don't agree with your point, I LMAO at how you wrote it.
my god its full of stars
dookie?
shareUsually changes from novel to film don't bother me as long as it works on film. What works in literature does not always work on the screen.
At any rate, though not my favourite, I didn't think this movie was aweful :) I like it a lot, actually
Many of these posts seem a bit off the wall 2 me. I liked this flick, plain and simple. Adore Gwynnie in almost anything. Love the time period in which the tale is set. Northam rocks, as always. Prefer Bronte to Austen but both geniuses, especially compared to current 'stuff.'
share