Mansfield Park - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Mansfield Park Reviews

Page 1 of 1
½ February 16, 2016
By far, one of the worst adaptations of an Austen novel. Sylvestra La Touzel's Fanny is robotic and condescending. Nicholas Farell's Edmund has the face of a seasoned alcoholic, which I can only attribute to misguided makeup.

Skip this production in favor of any other. I especially enjoyed Patricia Rozema's Mansfield Park, which incorporates many Austen-isms and delivers Jane Austen with an impish sense of fun.
February 8, 2016
I've never seen a movie more boring/long yet taking less time to delineate any kind of plot. And very little discernible difference in character.
December 7, 2013
Bleh... this was dreadful! Fanny was very homely and overly dramatic, Edmund was hideous... the ENTIRE bloody family was hideous... I was very disappointed with this version (an not because of their appearances, but the overall production seemed thrown together). It felt like a stage-play at times... I was disappointed.
May 3, 2011
Now having seen so many other BBC adaptations of Jane Austen novels made into TV mini-series, I've become rather used to the play-like production quality.

The casting - which I now consider perhaps the most important part of a screen adaptation of a book - was a mixed bag. I thought Fanny was very well portrayed, but I never did get used to swarthy Edmund. Henry Crawford was too stiff and had too much of an air of arrogance; he was not at all as easy going as I expected. A fine job was done with Aunt Norris and poor Mr. Rushworth, but Mr. Yates bordered on ridiculous, and Lady Bertram was downright so.

The first episode of the mini-series depicted the childhood years well, and I liked the way the series used Fanny's letters to William to move the story along.

After doing such a great job with the rest of the book in the first five episodes, the sixth and final episode was a little disappointing. The conclusion seemed to come about suddenly and without much basis, and we didn't see Sir Thomas's reflections on parenting, nor his ultimate satisfaction in Fanny in light of his disappointments elsewhere.
½ November 13, 2010
Based on my least favorite out of Jane Austen books, this is a good adaptation, although at times was stiff, almost lifeless, but was pretty much in the spirit of the book, non the less I think is the best adaptation of the book to date.I didn't like the way it looked, somehow washed up and the pace was dragging. The acting was fine and I like that they didn't try to make Fanny more than Austen intended to be: she was a kind and good creature, but she was a bland character, she wasn't exceptional in any way, beauty or wit.And their love story never appealed to me, although I do understand that was something normal back then.
½ October 24, 2010
if you're all for blatent passion and lots of adventure, this is not the film for you. But if you fell in love with Fanny, Edmund and William in the novel you will love this film. The acting and set style takes a little getting used to as it seems more at times like a filmed play but it grows on you immensly if you're anything like me. The latest film attempt at this classic novel has nothing on this 5hr version.
August 27, 2010
This movie is so bad a rendition, it's almost funny. Ms. Le Touzel turns in one of the worst performances I've ever seen in any movie, any genre. Did they never study the dailies on the set? The continual use of her hands to punctuate her every word makes her look like she should be lecturing an errant child rather than acting in a classic love story. This Fanny comes across as so morally upright and holier-than-thou, she's better suited for taking her vows as a nun than as a wife. She should have used her hands less and instead tried emoting a facial expression on occasion. Also, I don't know who did Nicholas Farrell's makeup, but in this version, Edmund has the complexion of an alcoholic, and he also emotes little personality. I did, however, get a particularly good chuckle early on when the poor pug was visibly shoved at young Fanny in a mock display of viciousness. I'm not sure the dog got the joke, though.

I didn't know Austen could be so generally dull.
June 26, 2010
boring boring BORING!
The Janeites that are purists point to this film as better than all others. While, I own that the film is quite faithful to the book, the liberties taken in the 1999 version make that one a far better rendition. This version had lousy sound, cheesy acting, weird casting and lacked movement of plot.
December 2, 2009
More faithful to the book than the Frances O'Connor version (no revealing late-night walks around the house) and longer (six one-hour episodes), this nevertheless means that the story does bore in places. Henry Crawford is adequately roguish and Mary, adequately manipulative. Edmund was suitably clergy-like. Yates was, simply, a giant prat. Angela Pleasance's Lady Bertram was stupendously insipid. Or high on grass. I can't tell. But the biggest let down was the rather dithering heroine, who reminded me more of Emma's Miss Bates than the young, pure goody-goody Fanny Price. Oh if only she wouldn't flap so much! You want to reach into the screen and hold her and yell STOP WITH THE HANDS, GIRL! JUST STOP IT!

But overall, pretty good effort.
August 27, 2009
I think that I will pass on this older version for now and watch the newer movie.
August 14, 2009
This is the best version of Mansfield Park that I've seen so far, but I think it could definitely have been better. However, all BBC Jane Austen movies are good and this one is no different. It's just not as good as the newer movies, such as Pride and Prejudice and Northanger Abbey.
½ July 10, 2009
BBC do i need to say more?
½ July 4, 2009
Very very very slow moving. Fanny seemed very homely and I could barely hear her. But it does walk through, or maybe creep, though the book. You get a lot of the story that other adaptations sometimes skip or breeze by.
½ February 16, 2009
Fanny Price is not the flashiest of heroines; in truth, I'm not really a fan. But this adaptation is true to the story and characters of Austen, and despite being one of my least favorite of her novels, is an entertaining tale.
February 3, 2009
Bleh... this was dreadful! Fanny was very homely and overly dramatic, Edmund was hideous... the ENTIRE bloody family was hideous... I was very disappointed with this version (an not because of their appearances, but the overall production seemed thrown together). It felt like a stage-play at times... I was disappointed.
August 27, 2008
Good, except that I did not like the way Sylvestra Le Touzel played the role of Fanny. She seemed stiff and fake.
August 21, 2008
Fanny isn't suppose to be homely. Through the book she is said to get prettier and prettier. She only starts as an awkward child who hasn't had the best air or food. Maybe I should watch this version.
½ August 18, 2008
I enjoy this version of the novel. I like Fanny, but at times I tend to get aggravated at Edmund.
Page 1 of 1