Emma: BBC vs. Hollywood

Jane Austen's classic literary masterpieces have been the apples of film producers' eyes since before the days of Netflix marathons. (Oh, Netflix. What would I do without you?) Each of Austen's breathtaking novels have been adapted into video in some way, whether the rights were snatched up by movie producers, television networks, or the folks over at Pemberley Digital. Adaptations of Jane's novels are SO popular, in fact, that several different works of film have been made for single novels. Pride and Prejudice has six or seven different video adaptations, for example. (Jennifer Ehle, Kiera Knightley, Ashley Clements, etc.) The most famous battle over Jane Austen movies is between BBC and Hollywood producers. Jane Austen fans all around the globe have, at one point or another, asked themsleves, "Which was better--the BBC TV movie or the two-and-a-half hour long film?" Today, I'm going to answer this q uestion for one of Austen's most famous novels--Emma.

In 1996, director Douglas McGrath casted Gwyneth Paltrow as Jane Austen's most flawed heroine. Thirteen years later, BBC aired their own version of Emma, a four-episode miniseries featuring Romola Garai. I watched both adaptations, and have determined which is better.

The winner is . . . BBC!

I am extremely fond of this TV movie. It really did my second-favorite Austen novel justice. Romola Garai portrayed Emma fantastically. There are a several reasons for this:

1. Emma's Evolution of Character

Emma is quite possibly Jane's most complicated character. She is extremely vain, and yet she is so charming and innocent that readers can't help but like her in the beginning of the book. But then Emma makes more mistakes, and the Box Hill catastrophe rolls around, and readers start to kinda hate her. Then she rights her wrongs, and readers completely forgive her. The most important thing for anyone playing Emma to do is keep that perfect blend of vanity and charm. Romola Garai did that perfectly, while Gwyneth Paltrow had all of the vanity and none of the charm.

2. Frank's Level of Awfulness

Frank Churchill is probably one of Austen's more infamous characters. The guy lied to everyone and humiliated his future wife! What a major tool. The BBC Frank was just that--charming at first, terrible later. The Hollywood Frank, however, wasn't that terrible. Actually, he was forgivable. I do not forgive horrible Austen characters! BBC, two. Hollywood, nada.

3. Mr. Knightley

So, Knightley (Emma would scold me for calling him that, wouldn't she?) is second runner-up to Darcy. Both the BBC and Hollywood versions were great, actually. I just really like Johnny Lee Miller, the actor who plays him in the BBC miniseries. So, yeah. Point for BBC.

Even though I LOVE the BBC movie, the Hollywood film features a better Miss Bates, in my opinion. When I read the novel, I pictured a impovertish woman who was desperate for a friend, talkative due to her nervousness. The BBC Miss Bates was a bit pitiful, to be frank. Not appealing, like in the book. The Hollywood version of her charater was just like I pictured her in the novel, sweet but nervous, desperate yet likable. One point for Hollywood!

Anyway, go watch both and decide for yourself! And then watch Clueless, which is another Ema adaptation. It's set in a 90s high school, and it's waaaay hilarious. Plus Paul Rudd is in it, which is reason enough to watch it. So basically all Emma adaptations rock. YAY, EMMA!

#bbc #emma #whoathistagcloudisgettingbig