IMDb user comments for
Persuasion (2007) (TV) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 7:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]

Index

69 reviews in total

---

62 out of 77 people found the following review useful:
Sombre in tone, 1 April 2007

Author: mooning_out_the_window from United Kingdom

Adrian Shergold's adaptation of Persuasion was the last in the ITV Jane Austen Season, and it ended on a high note. Very different style from the previous two, and is rather sombre in tone, as befits the story and characters in the novel. There is a voice over so as to enable the audience to get closer to the character of Anne Elliot played very well by Sally Hawkins. Rupert Penry-Jones is very good as Captain Wentworth, whose interaction with Anne is concise and to the point. They are not strangers, but they are estranged. Adrian Shergold employs a lot of hand held camera, and uses a lot of close ups in order for the audience to recognise the relationships between characters and their feelings. Quite often Sally Hawkins looks at the camera, and I felt this worked very well. My only slight annoyance with this adaptation was the director's unwillingness to have two people who are talking in the shot at the same time. Preferring to move from a close up of one to a close up of the other (shot reverse shot as it were) continuously. This works well occasionally, but when it is as often as it is in this adaption you become very aware of the camera and its movements, which detracts from the story and the conversation itself. This is my only slight problem with this adaptation. The supporting cast was brilliant, with Amanda Hale brilliantly playing Anne moronic younger sister. Alice Krige was great as Lady Russell, and Anthony Head as Sir Walter Elliot. This is to mention only a few. To say that ITV's Austen Season did not start well would be an understatement. However, with last weeks brilliant Northanger Abbey and this weeks Persuasion they have finished on a high. Each had its own tone and style, and forgetting Mansfield Park, they worked rather well. I would recommend this film to both fans of the book and newcomers to Austen's work. I have deliberately refrained from comparisons between this and the 1995 version, both are very good and this one has some very inventive camera work.

---

38 out of 49 people found the following review useful:
A very enjoyable adaptation., 22 April 2007

Author: Alex Thomas from United Kingdom

Having read some of the earlier comments I felt I had to jump to the defence of this highly enjoyable production of Persuasion. Having seen the 1995 BBC adaptation I cannot deny that this adaptation was done in a somewhat different style, however that does not take away from the pleasure gained by watching this ITV production.

I have read all 6 of Austen's novels and have read much literary criticism where her work is concerned, so like many other people who have commented on this film, I no longer compare adaptations of Austen's novels to her actual novels. Therefore I can have no quarrel with this latest film.

It has been addressed that Rupert Penry-Jones and Sally Hawkins lacked on screen chemistry, this is in a way quite true, but only because their chemistry is more understated, which is, in my opinion more in keeping to the period in which Jane Austen was writing. I do not agree with the many comments insulting the acting of almost all of the cast. In my opinion, the ITV has come up trumps with this cast and each actor and actress portrayed their character in a way which suited the overall character of the film.

Unfortunately I do have to agree with many comments on the camera work of this production which was certainly below par, however this is my only complaint.

So, overall the film was most enjoyable, the story itself being told in such a way that I almost cried at the end! I am sure that this adaptation has helped only to uphold the respect for Austen's Persuasion and her other great novels. For that any true Austen-fan can be grateful.

---

22 out of 25 people found the following review useful:
I wanted to like this, 14 January 2008

Author: Unwanted_Birdtamer from United States

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Persuasion is my favorite novel ever, and I was very much looking forward to a new adaptation of it. Trying to put aside the novel and focus on the film on it's own merits, I thought it was a fairly mediocre production that was far too rushed. The film moved along at such a speed, that it was hard for me to feel like I really cared about the characters. As has been said many times, the last ten minutes of the film were just terrible, with it suddenly becoming a Monty Python episode with almost the entire supporting cast dropping by at Anne's or stopping her in her mad marathon around Bath. I'm not usually one for nitpicking historical details or etiquette breaches, but I thought the scene where Anne resets her nephew's collarbone and carries on a lengthy conversation with her brother-in-law, her sister and her brother-in-law's father, dressed in nothing but her shift and corset, and showing no embarrassment at all, rather far-fetched.

Sally Hawkins was so tremulous and timid as Anne, with the exception of the above-mentioned collarbone scene, I couldn't see why other people relied on her so much and what exactly inspired such confidence in her abilities (other than apparently she was a fledgling doctor and seemed to have spent the eight years since her broken engagement studying medicine). Rupert Penry-Jones wasn't bad as Wentworth, but I felt he was given far too little to do, so that he wasn't very memorable at all. He also didn't seem much like a Navy man, more of a Beau Brummel type.

The supporting cast was either sadly neglected or terrible. Anthony Head was good as Sir Walter Elliot, and Tobias Menzies very charismatic as Mr Elliot, but both very wasted. The other two Elliot sisters were absolutely terrible, especially the actress playing Mary, who seemed to believe she really was in a Monty Python sketch. Lady Russell gave no indication of a strong character who would have had such persuasive power over Anne to make her give up the love of her life (even an Anne as weak and wilted as Hawkins). The Musgrove sisters were hardly there, and there was no sense in why Louisa would have held such charm for Wentworth.

I said I would try to leave the novel out of my review, but a few changes which baffled me--one being the omission of the lines about how Anne had given up dancing, especially since they have the couple waltzing at the end. That scene doesn't make as much sense without the earlier indication that Anne stopped dancing after she gave up Frederick. The other was the conversation between Anne and Capt Harville about women loving longest when all hope was gone, they moved the conversation to between Capt Bennick and Anne at a much earlier point in the film, and there's no sign Wentworth overhears them. That conversation was the whole entire spur that caused Wentworth to believe Anne still cared for him and that he should try again. There's almost no point in having in it the film if Wentworth doesn't hear it, as the audience already knows Anne's feelings and doesn't need it for confirmation. The final change was the letter scene, by having Anne try to read it as she races around Bath, it takes away the beauty and sentiment (they also cut the letter short); and the lines about how her 'sweet words' or whatever that caused him to write the letter make no sense, since he didn't overhear any vital conversation about her feelings. Wentworth's letter is one of the most beautiful passages in fiction in my opinion, and to truncate it and place it in such an awkward setting paramount to sacrilege.

---

46 out of 74 people found the following review useful:
Hit and Miss Production, 12 April 2007
Author: Jenny W

I feel I'm repeating a lot of what's already been said but I also hated the camera work, the excessive time on the journal and close ups of Anne's face which was laboured to death. The run at the end of the production made my husband laugh for ages so maybe they should have called it a comedy. When she had to run back for the second lap even I started to shake with laughter.

I also had a big problem with Rupert Penry Jones. Now I knew he was there mainly because he looked pretty (infact the producer virtually said he was picked because he turned heads!) but he lacked any screen presence and didn't convince me in the slightest that he loved Anne. He was very wooden. Ciaran Hinds is in a different league to him.

The 1995 version still stands up extremely well against this version. I watched it recently and there really is no comparison. Amanda Root was also my preferred Anne but a round of applause to Sally for enduring the director's madcap ideas.

However I would say that Tobias Menzies made a much better job of William Elliot than Sam West. He had the charisma (for want of a better word) that Ruport Penry Jones lacked in this production. I hope to see more of him in other productions. Anthony Head was also a very entertaining Sir Walter but some of the other supporting cast struggled.

If anyone asks me which version to purchase I'd not hesitate in saying the 1995 version.

---

26 out of 39 people found the following review useful:
Incandescently Charming Adaptation Will Set Your Heart Aglow, 27 October 2007

Author: coiragrigione from Switzerland

I was swept up by this brilliant adaptation from second one, when a young woman looked straight at me with melancholic eyes in an extreme close up. I was engaged, I was on her side and watched, utterly spellbound, as her story unravelled.

A clever script manages, with all the cuts and changes which are invariably part of all adaptations, to distill the spirit of Jane Austen's novel unerringly. Wonderful leads (Rupert Penry-Jones is a warm-hearted, dashing Wentworth and Sally Hawkins is a delightfully sweet tempered Anne Elliot) and an outstanding supporting cast breathe life and immediacy into the plot. Creative film making ideas give the production a fresh face and make for memorable, visually gorgeous film moments. The pacing is swift but never hurried. And last but not least, I loved the musical score!

Watching this sent me walking on cloud 9 for days. I have watched it several times since and am still discovering new marvels because there are many levels to explore in this gem. Don't miss it!

---

16 out of 20 people found the following review useful:
Exquisite, 10 June 2008

Author: Michael Fargo from San Francisco

This lovely production has a brooding quality that mirrors the circumstances of the author. Unlike the rest of Austen's heroines, Anne Elliot, in a delicate anxiety-ridden performance by Sally Hawkins, isn't twice as clever as everyone else. She's been "persuaded" to make the wrong choices over and over. Her own character we see emerge in the course of the story, and her defiance of convention, class and family brings us a very "modern" heroine.

Unlike the more sour comments here, I thought the production values exquisite, the cinematography mirrors both the romance Ms. Austen is noted for, but also a melancholy that is at the heart of all of her work. Beautiful scenes, for example, shot on a sea wall with a monochromatic palette very near the color of cold steel, we feel acutely the dilemma of the heroine forced to be in situation after situation where she has to face her past in the presence of her beloved. The beautiful visuals are matched, if not surpassed, by a delicate and evocative musical score.

Anne's redemption comes slowly, perhaps too slowly for the more impatient in the audience. And Rupert Perry-Jones' Captain Rupert all but stops the camera with his impressive portrayal of Captain Wentworth. More empathic than Ms. Austen's usual love interests, Mr. Perry-Jones also stops the hearts of the viewers with his agony, visible to us, but not Anne Elliot.

It would be difficult to pick a favorite out of Masterpiece Theater's "The Complete Jane Austen," but for me, this one might be it. It's economy, lovely cinematography, efficient screenplay, and splendid cast (save Amanda Hale who stops the show every time she appears on screen in a distracting, mannered performance that a director should not have accepted) especially the gentle beauty of Alice Krige as Lady Russell. "Persuasion" is free of the more clever elements that teeter many of Ms. Austen's works, and this production makes the most of a love story whose heroine earns her redemption with courage that is not facile or glib.

To those who think "the book was better," of course. So glad you have your attitude. Pity you can't let go of it and enjoy this fine little production.

---

21 out of 30 people found the following review useful:
a travesty of Austen, 3 April 2007

Author: alissende from France

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I'm not usually one to slate a film . I try to see the good points and not focus on the bad ones, but in this case, there are almost no good points. In my opinion, if you're going to make something that bad, why bother? Part of the film is take up with shots of Anne's face while she breaths deeply, and violin music plays in the background. the other part is filled with poor and wooden acting. Rupert Penry Jones is expressionless. Jennifer Higham plays Anne's younger sister with modern mannerisms. Anne is portrayed as being meek and self effacing, which is fine at the beginning, but she stays the same all through the film, and you see no reason for captain Wentworth to fall in love with her. Overall the production lacks any sense of period, with too many mistakes to be overlooked, such as running out of the concert, kissing in the street, running about in the streets with no hat on (why was this scene in the film at all? the scene in the book was one of the most romantic scenes written.). To sum it up, a terrible film, very disappointing.

---

9 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
Compels you slowly; before you realize it, you're caught up, 18 June 2008

Author: Amy Smith (ivorybigsis@yahoo.com) from United States

This current adaptation of Austen's mature novel is very endearing. Rupert Penry-Jones'adept utilization of facial expressions reveal a man who is deeply wounded and angry with good reason, yet subconsciously conflicted. His Captain Wentworth doesn't know if, and how he should proceed. He deftly portrays a spurned lover that is compelled to look back in spite of himself. Sally Hawkins expertly portrays a gentle introvert who hides a long held affection in some compartment of herself. She functions well enough in life, but she does not ,and cannot flourish, and wonders if she ever will embrace abundant happiness......The staging is accurate and the costumes lovely. Kudos to Anthony Head; he flawlessly captures Sir Walter Elliot, the most conceited, clueless genteel idiot who was ever most ingeniously conceived in the mind of a true observer of human nature and character-Jane Austen. We, the viewing public, are both sobered and amused.....

---

8 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
a lively adaptation, 18 January 2008

Author: broadneck from United States

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I watched the 1995 version of BBC's Persuasion and I liked it a lot. However, I decided that Persuasion was my least favorite of Jane Austen's six novels. This was not because the movie wasn't well done, but if we're talking about a romance that lasts almost a decade, I would like my hero and heroine to truly connect in terms of their looks and intelligence. A romance should possess some youthful quality despite of the age. It doesn't matter how old people are, it's really about the girl wants the boy and the boy gets the girl. I think the 1995 version's romance between Captain Wentworth and Anne Elliot was more cautious.

I saw the 2007 version and watched it over and over again. I love it! The more I see it, the more I see things in the movie that I missed the first time I watched it. I think it's witty and humorous. I'm a Jane Austen addict and I'm happy that there are versions out there to explore other possibilities. No movies can ever do a book justice or be exactly like the book. Something in a book would always be trimmed and adapted for a movie. Most people read Austen's novels and interpret the characters differently. I think this is why she was such a genius at creating her characters. They are multi-dimensional and no one is all good or all bad, and they're really human. If the movie makers are really true to the book in telling the story, then the movie is in danger of being stale and boring. We would not have the descriptive passages from the books and we would end up with just dialogs.

Of course in Jane Austen's time, it was improper for a girl to run around chasing after a man or even kissing him in public. I laughed when Sally Hawkins (Anne Elliot) fell and when she was running around Bath looking for Rupert Penry-Jones (Captain Wentworth). The entertainment value is there. Rupert Penry-Jones' Captain Wentworth is aloof and being a naval captain, he doesn't display his emotions easily. You'll need to look at his eyes to see that he's jealous or to see his joy of seeing Anne and trying to conceal it. He is cold because deep down he is resentful of being turned down by Anne. He didn't have the reassurance that she would ever accept him. When he asked to call on her at precisely at 11:00 a.m., he was really angry with her possibly being engaged to Mr. Elliot. It was a pretense to ask about her relationship and not about the duty to deliver a message. There was a lot of underlying tension.

Then, the scene went into everyone all of a sudden showing up not understanding Anne was desperately trying to talk to Wentworth in private. They became emotional and physical obstacles to Anne reaching out to her man. I think the scene was well done and her frustration was communicated to the audience. The tempo was superb. At last, she caught up with the captain but then her brother-in-law was talking too much and one would wish he would get the message and leave them be. Finally, when Rupert Penry-Jones took off his hat, he almost took my breath away. I can understand now why Anne would wish to sail away with this man and why she spent over 8 years pining for him. So, maybe there is some merit to the captain being youthful. The book does describe him as being handsome and it is a major point of why Sir Walter began to accept him. And really, I don't see why Penry-Jones' performance was necessarily colder than the others. I thought they all are and this was how Jane Austen usually described her heroes. They tend to be men of a few words. I wouldn't like it if the heroes are giddy and over acting. I think both Sally Hawkins and Amanda Root portrayed Anne well. They're different but both gave a good performance.

My only complaint on the movie is that it is too short and everything seems to move too fast. 2 hours would have been better as to give the audience more time to connect with the characters. Still, the 2007 version has a lively tone, and it's not like Dickens' novels that deal with murder, kidnapping or other horrible things that happen to people. We couldn't make fun of them, but Jane Austen's love stories are full of characters that have plenty of room for irony or humor.

---

12 out of 18 people found the following review useful:
Persuading me to read the book instead, 5 July 2007

Author: doctortrax from Nottingham, UK

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I love Jane Austen's stories. I've only read two of them (P&P and S&S), but after having seen this adaption, I'm reaching for "Persuasion" from my bookcase just to make sense out of the story, and also, because I refusing to believe Jane Austen could have written such nonsense. For me, I thought that if you base a film on a Jane Austen novel, you can't really go wrong. It will turn out great pretty much by default. I was wrong.

First of all, where are the characters that you sympathise with and like? You have to have at least one likable character to get the audience to invest their emotions in them, and this did not deliver. Sure, I wanted Anne and Wentworth to get together, but only because that's what you know the purpose of the story is, them getting together. Instead, I had to resist urges to throw my teacup at the TV and to continue watching it to the end.

Anne was utterly annoying throughout, and in the end, I really have no idea why Wentworth was so smitten by her, as there seemed to be nothing there for him to be attracted to. She was meek, bland, dull, socially inadequate and came across like a sheep following everyone else's instructions rather than having a mind of her own. This can still work for a lead character, if you do it well. This wasn't done well.

The other characters were just displaying various degrees of narcissism, of which Mary was the worst, with a full-blown narcissistic personality disorder. Where Mrs. Bennet in P&P had similar flaws, she was still endearing, whereas Mary was more of a freak-show. More loathsome than funny.

Wentworth was very handsome and seemed like a decent kind of guy. For the most part of the story, I was just wondering what kind of person he was and why he's in love with Anne, as surely, he's the kind of guy who would want a person who is a little bit more... alive? Acting-wise, not too much to say, as I reacted more to the characters being portrayed rather than how good/bad the people acting were. Anthony Head was excellent, but as soon as I saw he was in it, I expected no less.

Also found the story very confusing. It wasn't until the end of the movie where it seemed as if Elizabeth was not Anne's stepmother, but in fact a sister (I'm still not 100% on that). The whole Anne/Wentworth back story was also a bit fuzzy. They had been together but then broke up and they're both bitter about it? How come? I was wondering this for quite some time, and the explanation seemed to be she dumped him because she was persuaded to do so by someone? But it was said in a kind of "by the by" way that it was almost missed, as if it was somehow unimportant. How can it be unimportant when it's the very core of the story?? There was also a lot of name-dropping, but no real feel for who the characters were. This Louisa person for instance, who was she? A friend? Family? What? It wasn't made very clear who the different characters are and their relationship with one another. Lady Russell was there a lot, but why? Mrs. Croft and Wentworth were brother and sister, which felt very unrealistic as Mrs. Croft looked old enough to be his mother.

The final kiss, yes it was a bit strange them kissing in the street, but I didn't really think about it, because I was too busy yelling "GET ON WITH IT ALREADY!!" at the TV, because Anne's lips trembled and trembled and trembled for what felt like ages before they actually met Wentworth's. Have SOME hesitation there, but only for a couple of seconds or so, not half a minute.

Then there's the issue of camera work. As a regular movie watcher, you don't pay attention to angles and such unless you decide to look out for it. I didn't decide to do so here, but I still noticed them. To me, that means the filmmakers are not doing a good job. A lot of conversations were with extreme facial closeups, something that should only be used when there's a really important point to be made. In this adaption, it was over-used and therefore lacked meaning. The hand-held feeling on occasion also didn't really work in a period drama. The camera work in the running scene in the end also felt too contemporary. (Not to mention the running itself.) This was the only Austen adaption I caught in ITV's Austen season. Makes me wonder if it's worth watching "Northanger Abbey" and "Mansfield Park" or if I should just read the books and leave it at that. I'm sad to say, this is a Jane Austen adaption I did not enjoy. Maybe I'll watch the 1995 version instead. The BBC are renowned for having done beautiful Austen adaptations before, after all.

---

---

Page 1 of 7:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]

Add another review

---

Related Links

Plot synopsis	Ratings	Awards
External reviews	Official site	Plot keywords
Main details	Your user reviews	Your vote history