Sense and Sensibility (1981) Movie Review

Read my reviews of the 1971, 1995, and 2008 Sense and Sensibilitys here, here, and here respectively.

It seems that the BBC doesn’t always quite know when to stop…or else they just have a surpassing fondness for Sense and Sensibility, since they have done three adaptations of it over the years. To be fair, after this 1981 version they took a twenty-seven year break before trying it again. I suppose we can expect another one around 2035 or so.

Last week I reviewed the 1971 S&S, then re-watched the 1981 version (I had seen it before, but didn’t remember too much). I think it is a marked improvement over the 1971 version, at least in many ways. It feels somewhat less staged, a lot of the acting is better and less stiff,  and some of the plot-related things that annoyed me in the 1971 S&S weren’t present here.

Marianne, for instance, was better than in ’71…but…I still didn’t like her that much. I don’t know. She just didn’t feel like Marianne to me. I didn’t quite get the sense of uncontrollable vivacity and high spirits and open-heartedness that one is supposed to get from Marianne. She wasn’t bad, but her performance didn’t quite click for me. She was very pretty, which Marianne is supposed to be, so that was a plus.

Elinor was good, though I think she may have been a little too unfeeling at times. For instance, when Marianne is all upset after getting Willoughby’s letter, Elinor tries to get her to control herself and Marianne is uncooperative, which is as it should be. But then Elinor just leaves the room, seeming to have a “Well fine, try it your way, Marianne” attitude which I didn’t think seemed very Elinor-ish at all.

(Random fun fact: I first saw Irene Richard as Charlotte Lucas in the 1980 P&P (which she also did a good job with, by-the-by).)

Mrs. Dashwood was good; I have no complaints. Margaret was, AGAIN, excluded. (And in this version they even include at least one of the Middleton children, and mention little Harry, though you don’t ever see him. WHY INCLUDE A MIDDLETON CHILD AND NOT MARGARET.)

I realized as I re-watched this that I really, really like this Edward. He’s better acted than in the ’71 S&S, and I think he really gets across the vibe of being awkward and shy and un-dashing, but also sweet and well-meaning. You can really like this Edward. He seems like a nice fellow. (He’s also not amazingly handsome or anything, which is good, since Edward’s not supposed to be amazingly handsome.)

I was also fairly pleased with how they portrayed Edward and Elinor’s relationship at Norland. It was not plainly obvious that Edward liked Elinor, which is good. In the book, Elinor is unsure if Edward actually likes her or not – she feels like she’s getting mixed messages, which is rather how it came across here. It did seem like Elinor was chasing Edward a bit, which I didn’t like, but hey.

I liked this Colonel Brandon more than the ’71 one as well; he felt more like a real person to me. I don’t think we really got to know him and his character well enough, but that may have just been because we didn’t see enough of him. He seemed like a pleasant, sensible fellow from what we did see, though.

You really didn’t see enough of Willoughby, either, but he was also an improvement over ’71. He didn’t quite seem Willoughbyish enough to me, but he wasn’t bad.

His confession scene was much better, too. You get a sense of his being dismissive of his own guilt, but you can’t help but feel a bit sorry for him anyway. The bit where he’s leaving and is about to impetuously rush out, then pauses to say, “God bless you – both” was perfect. I didn’t like that Elinor told Marianne that Willoughby still loved her (and no one, neither Elinor, Marianne, nor Mrs. Dashwood, seemed to recognize that as a problem at all?), but at least she didn’t let Willoughby know she would tell Marianne that, like in the ’71 version.

Lucy Steele was less obviously obnoxious, which was good. Anne Steele was, if anything, not quite silly enough – I thought she actually seemed rather sweet.

Something I didn’t like was this scene between Edward and Lucy, in which it seems that Lucy is legitimately concerned about Edward’s breaking off the engagement, and Edward is refusing to talk to her. While no, Edward did not like Lucy (nor should he), I don’t think he’d just ignore her when she tried to talk to him. Also, whether or not Lucy would have been concerned about Edward’s keeping the engagement, she wouldn’t be broadly hinting at her concern after Elinor was back in the room (which she did in this version). Lucy always made such a point of rubbing her engagement in Elinor’s face, going on about how attached Edward was to her, etc. If she thought there was any chance Edward wouldn’t keep to his engagement, there’s no WAY she’d let Elinor on to the fact.

Besides, I just don’t like that they made it seem like there was a possibility Edward wouldn’t have been honorable and kept his engagement. There WASN’T.

Mrs. Jennings (who I also first saw in the 1980 P&P, as Mrs. Bennet) was adequate, though I don’t think she seemed quite boisterous and Mrs. Jenningsish enough. They did make a point of highlighting how she stayed to help nurse Marianne, which I was glad of.

The Palmers were better than in the ’71. I liked Mrs. Palmer. In some versions I feel that it’s rather implausible that Mr. Palmer would ever have married her, but in this one it’s a little more conceivable that he could have not realized how air-headed she was until it was too late.

Mr. Palmer was still not quite what he should have been. Here, it seems that he’s rude to all and sundry just because he dislikes his wife and because he’s unhappy, which isn’t quite right…he doesn’t like her, of course, but a large part of the reason he’s so abominably rude in public is due to a kind of vanity; he wants to be distinguished from other people somehow, so he does it by being extraordinarily ill-mannered. When they’re all at his home in Cleveland, he’s supposed to be much politer (though still not over-fond of Mrs. Palmer or Mrs. Jennings). Of course, we didn’t see him at Cleveland at all in this version, so I suppose I can’t completely judge.

I liked John and Fanny (well, that is to say, I thought they were portrayed well. I didn’t really like them; they’re not likable people). They were different from the ’71 John and Fanny, but just as good (if not better). Robert Ferrars was very good; he definitely got across the right vibe of being a total self-absorbed fop.

I didn’t like Sir John so well…I’m not sure exactly how to describe it, but he didn’t seem like Sir John to me. I know I’ve been using that very vague complaint far too many times in this post, for which I apologize…but it’s true. Lady Middleton was better than in ’71, though. Again, she seemed more like a real person. And at least we saw one Middleton child, whereas in the ’71 one we kept hearing about him but never actually saw any sign of him.

I can’t really think of many big issues with the scripting and plot changes that I haven’t mentioned already…Marianne and Colonel Brandon’s ending is a little disappointing, as there is no sign of an engagement or wedding in sight, but that’s probably better than implausibly rushing their romance along. Oh, and I didn’t like Marianne’s melodramatic farewell to Norland, but after all the melodrama of Marianne in the 1971 version, it didn’t seem that bad. Elinor and Marianne’s defense of Edward to John Dashwood seemed a bit over the top, too…”I’m sorry if we embarrass you, John; you’ll be glad to know we’ll be leaving London soon” or whatever it was they said. I would have preferred something a bit subtler.

On the whole, I would recommend watching this version – this has the best Willoughby confession scene, a very book-accurate Edward, and some other good performances. So…give it a watch. And stick around to see my review of the 1995 Emma Thompson version next Tuesday. : D

Have you seen the 1981 Sense and Sensibility? What did you think of it?