summeriris I've watched the film twice now and I have to say, I think this is a very lightweight version of Austen, There is nothing terribly bad about it, but nothing that great either. The one exception I would make is Carey Mulligan's Isabella Thorpe. She is very good as the manipulative and venal Isabella. But she also has a tinge of the pathetic about her. She seems to be a person who is determined to make the wrong decisions. As always in Davies adaptations, it is the 'villains' who are more interesting, but not even Andrew Davies and Mulligan can make John and Isabella Thorpe more than simply manipulative and venal. Felicity Jones is suitably innocent as Catherine, Fields is kind and understanding as Henry. The great Liam Cunningham is criminally wasted as Gen Tilney though. Everyone else is very nice and the costumes are lovely. Lismore Castle makes for a suitably large and intimidating Abbey and Dublin makes for a great 19th Century Bath. In conclusion it's all very nice and pretty, (a kiss of death IMO) . The biggest gripe apart from the lack of any real tension and conflict in the plot would be Davies obligatory insertion of sexual misbehavior that is just so unlike Austen's novel. The Gothic elements introduced by Catherine's vivid dreams seem to have been heavily inspired by the 1987 version. I could be wrong about that, perhaps every adaptation has these boring dream sequences.All in all, not my favourite Austen. You should never be bored by Austen.

jotix100 Catherine Morland, the heroine of Jane Austen's "Northanger Abbey", has a lot in common with the young women at the center of the author's literary work. This novel is, perhaps, not as well known as the others she wrote. But in a way, it is a treasure, nevertheless. The abridged version of the series seen on England's ITV channel, makes perfect sense, although many Austen purist might feel it is not so. Any viewer not familiar with the novel, will probably be delighted in what comes in this sunny adaptation.Young Catherine Morland is asked by her wealthy neighbors, the Allens, to accompany them to Bath, which at the time was the place to be for the English society of that time. Bath was a great place to be for young people ready to go into the kind of social life that was so prevalent in the city. The refinement of Bath attracted all kinds of marriageable candidates.Catherine was not a sophisticated girl at the time. She had a vivid imagination, made more so, after reading the Gothic literature of the time. It only took a meeting with the handsome clergyman, Henry Tilney, for her to fall in love with him. Catherine also attracts the attention of a social climber, Isabella Thorpe and her brother John. Isabella, who was being courted by Catherine's brother, catch the attention of Henry's father, Captain Tilney, a fastidious man, telling how Catherine stands to inherit the Allen fortune, something that is music to his ears because of his great ambition to marry his children well. Catherine is set as a target for his schemes.This production was directed by Jon Jones, as adapted from the original novel by Andrew Davies. The Austen's themes about life among the rich classes and the clash between good and evil, are well in place in this handsomely photographed film. Ciaran Tanham gets the essence of what it must have been like in Bath and in the Abbey, as well as in the country where the action takes place.Felicity Jones does a splendid job in her portrayal of Catherine. She is an interesting actress that shows intelligence in all her appearances. J.J. Feild, who plays Henry, is also good in the way he perceived his character. The excellent Carey Mulligan makes an impression with her Isabella. Liam Cunningham is marvelous as Capt. Tilney. The large supporting cast does well for Mr. Jones.Recommended for people that might have wanted to know a little bit more about Jane Austen, but had not been exposed to her books.

ThatDoesntMatter I did not watch this completely. I could not bear it. Everything was wrong.At first I thought: Interesting take on Henry Tilney, make him a little more ...glib, I think, fits.But then I found it false and implausible - bad acting did not help.Mrs Allen is too sweet. Missed the chance for authentic portrayal - she is a superficial, self-centered, nice enough simpleton, such a great foundation for caricature (Jane Austen was a genius at that!) Mr Allen too wordy in general.Isabella is FAR TOO NICE. She is supposed to be chatty, self-centered in a bad way, befriending Catherine with her own motives in mind.John Thorpe - completely wrong - oh my...another chance of caricature (and fun!!!) lost.Seems to be they just took the script from the 1986 version and juiced it up a bit (not that I watched that one through...life is short, and at least I want to decide what I waste it on - not this!!!) - a Roman bath scene??? Hello??? lol Catherine - oh Catherine. I love Catherine,naive and simple as she might be. Here she flirts, pouts and suffers from hormonal overflow - yucky! That they used a voice over with verbatim parts from the novel makes this even more ---- HORRID!!!:-) As has been stated here: If you don't do Jane Austen to the book, leave it! (Or take better script writers, actors and directors - I'm not adverse to interesting adaptations - like Clueless for Emma - but this is unnecessary drab)

MelanieJS There was ability here for this film but the amount of sexual perversion displayed and alluded to in it ruined it. I will throw this DVD in the trash. This is not a good film for anyone to watch (especially not children) due to the fact that a good deal of the perverted undertone was sado/masochistic (i.e. taking pleasure in violence, threat, or pain or taking pleasure in inflicting violence, threat or pain). As in the case of rape: violence + sex = perversion and do not belong together and should not be presented as entertainment in my opinion. What made it worse was that they chose a Jane Austen novel to project this onto. Can’t they sell perversion outright? Do they have to disguise it under the appearance of a safe and respectable storyline to spread that filth. Shame on the decision makers for this project at BBC - I don’t think I will every buy another one of their releases. It is extremely sad as there appears to be a good deal of talent as far as adapting the story and scripting as well as casting, editing, and camera work and acting. The costuming was fair - however I got very disgusted and very tired of seeing so much of Isabella’s half-exposed bosom - a note to film editing: one would have been too many let alone the number that were in there. This is not a necessary component for a successful film. The talent of the screenplay fell apart at the ending which was not true to form and extremely disjointed - another 10 minutes might have helped. The bottom line: What a waste of talent and time - they ruined what could have been a very good movie with perversion. Don’t bother buying it. If you must view - rent it - somewhere - cheaply - but even the time to watch it is a waste - even if the rental was free.