Sense and Sensibility’s Lost Spark

The latest adaptation of Jane Austen’s timeless romance, Sense and Sensibility, has just hit screens under Georgia Oakley’s direction. It promises to breathe new life into the classic tale but ultimately feels like a pale imitation of Ang Lee’s enchanting 1995 retelling.

One striking aspect of this adaptation is its attempt to center the story on the older Dashwood sisters, Elinor and Marianne. This shift in focus is not entirely unwelcome – Austen’s novel does indeed place great emphasis on these two characters’ relationships. However, Oakley and screenwriter Diana Reid’s decision to foreground their bond comes at a cost: the supporting cast of characters, once so vividly rendered by Emma Thompson’s masterful script, are relegated to the background.

The sisters themselves receive a more nuanced portrayal, with Daisy Edgar-Jones and Esmé Creed-Miles delivering solid performances as the rational Elinor and emotional Marianne. Their struggles against societal norms in Regency England start to feel repetitive and overly familiar after a while, making it difficult for audiences to connect with them on an emotional level.

In contrast to Lee’s adaptation, which expertly balanced the sisters’ storylines with those of the supporting characters, Oakley’s film makes these secondary figures – including Marianne’s unrequited love interest Willoughby and Elinor’s potential suitor Edward Ferrars – feel like cardboard cutouts rather than fully fleshed-out people.

George MacKay shines as the courtly and compassionate Edward Ferrars. His gentle diffidence pairs beautifully with Edgar-Jones’ delicate reserve, making their climactic scenes together poignant. However, this subtlety is lacking in other areas – particularly in Frank Dillane’s portrayal of Willoughby.

Dillane has proven himself to be a talented actor in films like Harris Dickinson’s Urchin, but here he’s hampered by a one-dimensional script that fails to capture the complexity of this iconic romantic hero. Instead, he’s reduced to being an opportunistic cad who breaks Marianne’s heart – a characterization that feels more like a caricature than a nuanced portrayal.

The film’s failure to capture the humor and wit of Austen’s novel is another notable shortcoming. While it’s true that the book contains its fair share of melancholy, Oakley’s adaptation leans so heavily into this tone that it starts to feel overwhelming. Even characters like Mrs. Jennings, typically a source of comedic relief in Austen adaptations, are reduced to mere background noise.

Fiona Shaw’s take on the role is particularly disappointing – her loud and abrasive performance fails to capture the kindness and generosity that underlies Mrs. J’s overbearing manner. This missed opportunity is especially notable given Shaw’s impressive track record as an English character actress.

Ultimately, Sense and Sensibility feels like an adaptation more concerned with paying homage to Austen’s original novel than with bringing its timeless themes and characters to life in new and innovative ways. While it has some standout performances – particularly from MacKay and Edgar-Jones – the film’s overall lack of spark makes it feel like a pale imitation of its 1995 predecessor.

As we move forward into an era where adaptations become increasingly common, it’s worth asking what this trend says about our cultural values. Do we prioritize novelty over nuance? The thrill of discovery over the comfort of familiarity?

The answer to these questions will depend on one’s individual perspective – but for those who have a deep affection for Austen’s original novels, Sense and Sensibility’s lost spark is bound to be a major letdown.

In a wider cultural context, the trend towards adaptations can be seen as both a strength and a weakness. On the one hand, it allows new generations of audiences to connect with classic stories in fresh and innovative ways. However, on the other hand, it also risks reducing these timeless tales to mere background noise – relics of a bygone era that are only worthy of revival because they’re familiar.

As we look to the future, it’s clear that adaptations will continue to play a major role in shaping our cultural landscape. But it’s equally clear that if we want to do justice to the original novels that inspire them, we need to be more thoughtful and innovative in our approach – rather than simply relying on nostalgia and familiarity to carry us through.

Sense and Sensibility may not be a groundbreaking adaptation, but it serves as a reminder of the risks and challenges involved in bringing classic stories to life for new audiences. Will Oakley’s film inspire a new wave of adaptations that take bold and innovative approaches to these timeless tales? Only time will tell – but one thing is certain: if we want to do justice to Austen’s original novels, we need to be willing to take risks and push the boundaries of what’s possible in adaptation.