I think the 2007 version is pretty good. I get why people are divided by Davies' work, but if you're familiar with both his original writing and his adaptations you realise this is a writer with a very distinct voice all of his own. There's a consistent set of themes and dramatic devices running through his television dramas, and he's often stated in interviews that his literary adaptations are carefully chosen to allow a synthesis between his own style and that of the original authors. Sometimes the changes he makes don't quite hit the mark for me (Fanny Hill, for example, which feels like a shadow of John Cleland's novel) but other times they're very astute and well-matched to the original material. His use of fantasy scenes in Northanger Abbey allows him to play around with both the kind of gothic fiction Austen was parodying in the novel and his long-standing interest in non-naturalism, honouring the spirit of the original and opening it up on a dramatic level. Again, I appreciate he's not everyone's cup of tea, but I have a lot of time for him.
Northanger Abbey is secretly my favorite Jane Austen book, being that it is the only Austen I have actually read. I love the parody aspect to it. It's a fun novel. In fact, I plan to read "The Mysteries of Udolpho" after purchasing. I've tried other Austen books and have put them down. Maybe another time. Thanks for your comments. I would love to check out the film. As usual, thank for the amazing review, and hope you have a wonderful Thanksgiving :)
I haven't read The Mysteries of Udolpho or anything else by Ann Radcliffe, but I did read a different Regency-era gothic novel a couple years ago and... it was a lot, haha. Happy Thanksgiving!
I like Austen stories, but im more engaged with gothic genre from this era because its more interesting than just "rich girl gets over flaws and finds love" which is some of Austens books.
Yay JW. I love Northanger Abbey. Excellent review. The first time I read it, I was working with a huge Austen fan, (one of the original members of The Republic of Pemberley), who was beginning to convert me. P&P 95 was in its first run on A&E. Her excitement got me to watch it, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. We had several discussions both after each episode aired and as I was reading it for the first time since highschool. She then recommended S&S, which I loved. Then my first try at Emma was a bit of a dud. I disliked the character of Emma so much that I gave up before Jane Fairfax arrived in Highbury. (On my next attempt a bit later, she said I would adore Jane Fairfax, so I read it as if Jane was the heroine, and by the end I loved the novel. But that's getting way off topic.) So after the failed attempt at Emma, she said she thought I would like Northanger Abbey a lot more. That the humor might be more to my taste. That turned out to be a massive understatement. I loved everything about the novel, and it became one of my favorite collections of characters in any novel by any author. Henry is the perfect hero. Catherine was a perfect spoof of a character I really disliked, (Richardson's Pamela.) But beyond being a spoof, she was also a lovable character. To be my 4th favorite Austen heroine is no small feat. (I've since grown to love Emma the character, but I still love Catherine even more than her.) Eleanor became my favorite secondary heroine in Austen. Isabella reminded me of some girls I went to high school with. She made me laugh so much. I absolutely relish her transparency, and her rather shallow attempts at villainy. That Catherine takes so long to see through her makes it all the funnier. John Thorpe was an even better fool than Mr. Collins. I can't think of a more bumbling villain that I've ever read. The General, and Capt. Tinley were good, solid villains. And I love the Allens and Catherine's parents. Even Catherine's brother was fun in his cluelessness. Even Charles Dickens didn't pack that many characters that I enjoyed so much into any one novel. And I love Dickens' characters. It's right up with, or even ahead of, P&P, Tom Jones, and Vanity Fair for sheer volume of characters that I thoroughly enjoy. To a person who dislikes the novels Clarissa and Pamela as much as I do, this novel is a wonderful and hilarious tonic. That I then went on to read Udolpho, The Monk, and Otranto, and found them really not to my taste, gave me an even greater appreciation of the humor Austen put into the book. Wow, did I ever ramble. And I haven't even touched on the movies yet. I'm one of those people that loves the 1987 version. It's quirky, absurd, bizarre, and very heavy on the cheese. I do have to be in the right mood for it. But when I am, I get great enjoyment from it. 2007 is a substantially better movie, and like you, I absolutely loved it when it came out. Though I do think they should have made John Thorpe a lot creepier than they made him. I was smitten with the actresses playing Catherine, Isabella, and Eleanor. Enjoyed seeing the only good Fanny Price grow up to become Mrs. Allen. I thought JJ gave Henry all the charm he needed. All the other characters were anywhere from serviceable to pretty good. I was fine with the changes from the novel. I think they were mostly done within the spirit of the novel. And that's all I ask for in an adaptation. Because the mediums are so different, a line by line picturization of a novel would probably be excessively tedious. Just make sure the changes maintain the spirit of the novel, and the character of the characters. Still rambling. 🤣 OK, wrap up time. Loved the video. Your reviews are always so well thought out and insightful. As you might be able to tell, this is a story I can go on and on about. Which is part of the fun of Austen. I do love your Austen content in particular. Thanks for the video, (and for reading this far if you managed to get through all that.) And have a happy and safe Thanksgiving. 🦃
Wow! Thank you for going into so much detail with your thoughts on the book, the film, and Austen's works in general! I'm glad you were willing to dip a toe in the water with Pride and Prejudice, that you gave the books a try, that you gave Emma another chance, and that you have such a great appreciation for Northanger Abbey. I love to hear it. :D Happy Thanksgiving!
Good Morning, Sister Jerome! Quite often, you challenge me to stretch outside of my comfort zone, and read or watch something that I ordinarily wouldn't, such as this. I might just wander into this work. Your infectious energy, as always, makes this review a delight; I would enjoy joining you for tea and conversation about everything and nothing. Maybe the film, if I can find it. It's 0302, and I will do my morning Bible reading, and crash for a few; thank you, Senorita.
Hello, Jerome! I always give Northanger a more generous view, as it was published without it being revised by Austen beforehand. Certainly, she *had* done that the time she tried to sell it first, but I think she's an author that changed a lot throughout her career, something people seem to overlook a lot? Austen is talked about as if she were a monolith, but the tone and preoccupations and even style do change with time. I sometimes wonder, for example, if Charlotte Brontë would have had a different opinion of Austen's work had she read Mansfield Park or Persuasion instead of Pride and Prejudice. The earlier works are more acerbic, the late ones, more contemplative and mournful (closer to the tone of, say, Elizabeth Gaskell). This is all to say the book reads a lot like the Juvenilia and that cannot be helped (and deserves some generosity, in justice, when being compared with the rest of the big novels). As for the 2007 movie... I think it is one of the best Austen adaptations ever made. I'm not saying it doesn't have changes, but it has as many or less as adaptations hailed as The Book Incarnate; I'm thinking specifically about P&P 95 and S&S 95, both of which I feel deviate much more -P&P's interpretation of Darcy as brooding and sportish and angsty, or the elderly lady Catherine, or the... sympathetic perspective of Mr Bennet, for example, in one, or how the different ages of the characters in S&S completely change the dynamics and meanings of the novel, like how adorkable Edward or stoic Brandon are not really that much like their book counterparts. The changes in NA07 do definitely amp up the drama, but I don't think they really step outside of the meanings of the novel. Even Tilney "confirmating" Cathy's feelings I feel makes sense; Cathy was wrong in thinking of evil as over the top mustachoed villainy, and the events teach her how evil is most often just banal and takes the shape of opportunism, greed, vanity, immodesty, dishonesty. It's "a different kind of vampirism" is just an extension of the idea that the general is cold and greedy as we have seen in his treatment of his children and of Cathy. I also think highlights Tilney's subtle transformation as the book goes on; he begins from a cynical, detached position, but he does learn to value Cathy's earnestness, and it ends in his defiance of his father in declaring his attachment to her. The "concesion" functions as a way of expliciting this change of heart where Tilney stops adopting the glib "it is what it is" attitude, to acknowledge that wrong and harm are real, serious things.
The details about when the book was written and how it got published are important to consider when discussing its quality, so thanks for emphasizing that. Thank you also for sharing your expansive thoughts on the adaptation! As I was editing this video, I felt that perhaps I came across as more critical than I meant to be. I really don't have negative feelings toward this film in general, so I appreciate your bringing up some additional strengths and offering a different perspective on how it succeeded beyond expectations.
The film was my first Jane Austen experience and it was good to take the plunge. As you said, short, condensed, kept moving along. I was struck by the cold shoulders in the tea room scene (brrr) and that Mr. Thorpe was a dead ringer for a jerk I knew in high school. So yes, cads and scoundrels galore. It seems that Bath was the Las Vegas of its day, where you can behave badly and (almost) nobody finds out. I will have to try another Austen now that I've seen what the buzz is about. Thanks J., very well done.
Great commentary on the book & film. I think my experience with NA is the inverse of yours. I didn't really understand the satire and didn't quite see the romance when I was younger--it felt flat and curious to me. Since that first reading of NA, I've read Ann Radcliffe & Fanny Burney & Maria Edgeworth, and then my NA re-reads made so much more sense & were a zillion times funnier. Now for me NA is right behind P&P and Persuasion. It's like bringing that 18th c. style into the 19th c., slowly, and with a wink & a smile. Also, I think listening to Juliet Stevenson on audiobook brought out all the humor for me, and made me realize it's not a romance, it's a satire. If Catherine & Henry are adorable along the way, so be it! but that's not the point of Austen's book for me. And yeah, Henry is a smart-ass, but I think Austen wants us to see his faults, too, AND see him redeem himself. Re: the film--all your comments are spot on. It's still a lovely film, but you are right that those changes you mention (Henry blaming his father; no reconciliation for Gen. Tilney) were a mistake. And the last line of the book is one of my favorites in all of Austen.
Your review reminded me of why I never tried to acquire a copy of this for my collection of Austen adaptation films. I really disliked the “confirmation of your delusion” addition by Davies. It’s one thing to gin up the romantic stuff, but quite another to change what made the novel notable (however slightly) in the author’s own mind. Austen was clearly using that plot point as the moral lesson of the novel. That Davies thought “sometimes there really IS something nefarious” would be a great thing for Catherine was a disappointment.
Joining in 2 months later to give a counter viewpoint on the matter. The way I read the book, as much as it was a parody of gothic novels, it was also a statement in their defense. The narrative voice at times ridiculous the genre and other times speaks against those who patronize it. And while I do agree that going so far as to say that Catherine was right diminishes the lesson she had to learn, I don't think Austen intended the lesson to become "stop reading books" or "don't read too many books", especially of the looked down upon genres of the time. (In an aside, that was *my* main problem with the movie - having *this* the message she took from her mistake and actually going as far as burning the books. I don't think she would have approved. But I digress) The way I interpreted it, in this book Austen was all about subtleties. Catherine fails to see Isabella for who she is mainly because she takes her words at face value, not sensing the hypocrisy behind them. With her brother, on the other hand, her instincts were better, but she still failed to grasp how much selfish and conceited he was. And I think that Austen implied a similar thing happening with her accusations against the general. Because of course there was no basis for them, and she should learn not to jump to conclusions without any proof and to look for facts to form a theory and not the other way around. However, the general *is* a villain. He's not a murderer, but he is cruel, not only towards Catherine but towards his own children too. And it is implied in Henry's words that his wife had a lot to bear with him. It's also telling that he's one of a few (if not the only) Austen villains to be completely sinister with nothing comical about him (like a gothic villain). So, my interpretation was that Catherine instincts in regards to him, mainly to be fearful and wary, were right. But because she lacked the understanding of subtleties in life, and having her imagination sparked, she jumped to the wrong conclusions. Funnily enough, the film also fails in its failure to capture this subtlety. By having Henry declare her to be right (in a certain way, yes, but still) it undermines the whole point. (Sorry for the longevity, but I love this book with a passion...)
Thank you, Jerome! I was disgusted with John Thorpe from the moment he is shown on screen , but I have to admit he was well cast. As soon as his sister is introduced into the story , you know she is going to make all the wrong decisions. I think it is time for me to re-read the book , as I don't recall how Austen presented her! I am just rambling here! But, just so glad you chose to review the book and film!
Hi Jerome! I quite love this film version of "Northanger Abbey" for several reasons, not the least of which is that it introduced me to the delightful Felicity Jones and JJ Feild. I agree that sometimes Andrew Davies takes liberties or makes additions in his classic adaptations, but they usually work for me (not always) because they usually stay true to the spirit of the original work, if not the details. Often times they seem like events that could totally happen in the lives of the characters even if Austen, Dickens or whoever didn't actually write them. This one works for me. I do get out of shape more when an adaptation makes clear departures from the essential nature of the characters, such as in the recent adaptation of "Persuasion", which I thought was an atrocity.
Hello and happy Sunday :) I was in hospital again for a few days during the week so couldn’t watch much because their WiFi wasn’t great but I was released in time for the weekend and was able to rewatch Northanger Abbey yesterday in anticipation of your review and it’s as enjoyable as I remembered it to be, not a great adaptation but fun nonetheless. I have to say that I’m constantly amazed and in awe by how great you are at this, I’ve said it countless times I’m sure but I was taken aback again while watching this review especially as you were explaining what was changed and how it ultimately altered the stories original intent, you did it so well. I haven’t read the book in a long time but like you I wouldn’t say it was a favourite but I did enjoy it at the time quite a bit, perhaps my opinion of it would change after reading it again. My grandparents lived very close to place called Kylemore Abbey and I’d often imagine Northanger Abbey when on the grounds and wonder could they look similar. Ashford Castle is close too and it’s a beautiful place to visit. The Quiet Man was filmed in the area and the cast would stay at the Castle. Apart from Henry Tilney being a bit rude at times and overly condescending I do like him lol. I sometimes feel more akin to other Austen characters like Darcy because they have a tendency to get in their own way and make things more difficult for themselves and those are traits I unfortunately see in myself but I’d like to be a bit more like Tilney because things go a little easier for him because of his way, except for the rudeness although I guess most of the male characters in Austen’s novels can be rude. For me It would be a nightmare to be described that way, I worry when trying to add something to a conversation that I may come across as someone who likes to hear themselves speak when I’m usually just trying to not come across as a doofus lol. I can be smiley and expressive though so that’s something Tilney and I have in common, well unless I’m rude and condescending and unaware of it, I hope not lol. The ability to see ourselves or traits we have in these characters is probably one of many reasons these books have remained classics. I had forgotten who was in the cast because I hadn’t seen the film in so long. Jones made a really good Catherine and Carey Mulligan great too. If ITV were to make this film now they wouldn’t be able to afford them. I liked how you described the way Mulligan was dressed and her height being a factor in the way we viewed the character, Isabella did seem much more mature than Catherine. Liam Cunningham was a little over the top with his performance but you’re right that it’s a tough role to handle. Funnily enough when I picture Cunningham in films it’s usually as a good father like in The Little Princess or a respectable teacher/father figure in a film like War of the Buttons. War of the Buttons was a popular Irish film that would air on TV a lot when I was a child. The film is on RUclips. Andrew Davies looks like an Austen character himself or even a Dickens character. I hope you and your family have a very happy thanksgiving 🦃 ~ Thank you Ms Weiselberry ~
Uh-oh, I hope it wasn't anything too serious and still recovering well. I'm glad you enjoy this movie too (and got to squeeze in another viewing before I posted!). Thanks for offering your own insight on it. I heartily agree that the relatability of the characters, whose personality flaws and struggles often reflect our own, has given Austen's novels remarkable longevity. I think we're encouraged to see little bits of ourselves in each of her heroes and heroines and to take something from the moral lessons they learn. While Henry Tilney is more of a static character (especially compared to Darcy or Wentworth), his steadiness and good nature are admirable qualities, so we can learn something from him as well as from Catherine and her overactive imagination. Oh, you're right, Davies does look like he could have been in the background of one of his own Austen or Dickens adaptations. Ha! Thank you! Have yourself a happy Thursday! :D
@@Weiselberry Nothing serious, I’m okay. I was so excited by my quick recovery that I rushed back to normality too soon and I became nauseous and was admitted again as a precaution, it was basically a forced rest became I’d gone most of the previous week without much sleep or food but I’m back to my regular self again. Thank you! I’ll do my best to have a happy Thursday lol
@@bartolomeuomacduibheamhnad6855 Whew, I'm relieved to hear that. You were just too eager to get back in the saddle, eh? Take it easy and stay hydrated!
I really enjoyed Northanger Abbey when I saw it. Never read the book, but it sounds like the tweaks altered the integrity of the story to make for a more entertaining film.
Northanger Abbey, directed by Jon Jones -- if that is his real name! I will keep in mind that this is a "riff" on Austen rather than true Austen. Felicity Jones? Sign me up. Happy Thanksgiving, Rome.
Ohh I just bought this book at the thrift store a few weeks ago! I best hold off until I read it and watch the movie! Looking forward to watching this!
Maybe, in order to get the most complete experience, but I don't feel it's necessary in order to enjoy the book. Austen had impressive foresight in making her parody accessible for future generations reading long after the gothic style was no longer in vogue. I didn't know anything about those books when I first read Northanger Abbey, but it was narrated in such a way that I easily got the gist.
Persuasion and Northanger Abbey always vie for my favorites! I love the parody, the characters, the sense of humor throughout. I like the adaption, mostly. It has moments I'm not a fan of, but I love JJ Feild as Henry!
Some of the actors are repeat Austen actors. JJ Fielding was also in Austenland, which you mentioned. Carey Mulligen played Kitty Bennett in the Keira Knightley Pride and Prejudice.
Northanger Abbey was suppose to be a parody of the popular gothic novel of the time. It does not seem like that to modern reading but back when it came out it would.
Bath time.Northanger Abbey 2007 proved to be most agreeable company.Felicity Jones is adorable.I was quite taken with JJ Feild and Catherine Walker as the Tilley siblings.Despite not being familiar with either actor.I have listened to Liam Cunningham talk on the Dog Soldiers 2002 commentary track.He was lively and amusing.Quite unlike the General he plays here.The quick asides revealing the imaginings of tawdry gothic literature are amusing.But they also feel at odds with the rest of the movie.Thank you for providing such an informative and economical comparison between book and film.I have not read the book.So I have been wondering.I don’t think that one rather can read too many books.Although it might be possible to read too many snowbound books.Your thoughts? Thank you and have a happy Thanksgiving.
Thanks for sharing your assessment of the film! I'm glad you found it enjoyable too. Yeah, I'm not sure there really is such a thing as reading too many novels, although, haha, yes, one can max out on snowbound books. :) Thank you!
@@Weiselberry Oh! I wrote Tilley instead of Tilney.The shame. Northanger Abbey has made me wonder if it is important for a man to have an extensive knowledge of muslin? Or does no one care about that anymore? Thank you very much.
@@earthcreature5824 Ha, that's okay, I got it. Regarding muslin, though, I'm afraid there's not much opportunity for intellectual discussion on that front these days, haha. :)
@@Weiselberry The only thing I know about muslin is that it has been mentioned in the writings of Edgar Allan Poe.I have been thinking about your shifting thoughts regarding the wit of Henry Tilney.We kind of enjoy snarky humour directed at others.When we are young.As we get older.We think more about how that biting wit affects the feelings of the people on the receiving end.You entertain and you make me think.Thank you.
It sounds like Henry started out doing quite a bit of mansplaining. I haven't read the book or seen this movie but I am delighted to watch your review of it. Have you ever tried writing a screenplay of one of these novels? Might be an interesting exercise. ❤
No, I adapted a screenplay of a Georgette Heyer novel once for a school project and that was enough to teach me that, while I enjoy watching and analyzing adaptations, I don't much care to write them myself. :)
I am obsessed with you, but I cannot even watch you whole videos at times. There are weeks I cannot even watch your new ones, I see them, and they trigger me somehow... No psycho here, do not worry, I live in another country and all... you are safe LOL Thing is... your personality and interests... you are AMAZING... I believe I should not become addicted to the best things in life... so.. I cannot even watch this video today... TODAY... I will later... but I had to say this... you are quite a LOVELY, FEISTY, FUN, SHARP, and INSPIRING, beautiful woman. I also have a Sony HDD Handheld Video Recorder from the 2000s that records in 4:3. This is UNCANNY. I guess that it. You are the very definition of UNHEIMLICH to me. So yeah I guess I prove there are crazy people out there, lol. Please do not be spooked. Please do not stop sharing.
I think the 2007 version is pretty good. I get why people are divided by Davies' work, but if you're familiar with both his original writing and his adaptations you realise this is a writer with a very distinct voice all of his own. There's a consistent set of themes and dramatic devices running through his television dramas, and he's often stated in interviews that his literary adaptations are carefully chosen to allow a synthesis between his own style and that of the original authors. Sometimes the changes he makes don't quite hit the mark for me (Fanny Hill, for example, which feels like a shadow of John Cleland's novel) but other times they're very astute and well-matched to the original material. His use of fantasy scenes in Northanger Abbey allows him to play around with both the kind of gothic fiction Austen was parodying in the novel and his long-standing interest in non-naturalism, honouring the spirit of the original and opening it up on a dramatic level. Again, I appreciate he's not everyone's cup of tea, but I have a lot of time for him.
Mr Tilney is far and away my favorite Austen heartthrob.
Your videos are very enjoyable and make me want to look into these literary classics. You would be a great literature teacher. Happy Thanksgiving!
Aw, thanks! Happy Thanksgiving!
@@Weiselberrysame🎉
Northanger Abbey is secretly my favorite Jane Austen book, being that it is the only Austen I have actually read. I love the parody aspect to it. It's a fun novel. In fact, I plan to read "The Mysteries of Udolpho" after purchasing. I've tried other Austen books and have put them down. Maybe another time. Thanks for your comments. I would love to check out the film. As usual, thank for the amazing review, and hope you have a wonderful Thanksgiving :)
Thanks, Joe!
I haven't read The Mysteries of Udolpho or anything else by Ann Radcliffe, but I did read a different Regency-era gothic novel a couple years ago and... it was a lot, haha. Happy Thanksgiving!
I'm not a huge Austen reader, but this has been on my to-read list for a while, mainly because of the Gothic element.
I like Austen stories, but im more engaged with gothic genre from this era because its more interesting than just "rich girl gets over flaws and finds love" which is some of Austens books.
Yay JW. I love Northanger Abbey. Excellent review. The first time I read it, I was working with a huge Austen fan, (one of the original members of The Republic of Pemberley), who was beginning to convert me.
P&P 95 was in its first run on A&E. Her excitement got me to watch it, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. We had several discussions both after each episode aired and as I was reading it for the first time since highschool. She then recommended S&S, which I loved. Then my first try at Emma was a bit of a dud. I disliked the character of Emma so much that I gave up before Jane Fairfax arrived in Highbury. (On my next attempt a bit later, she said I would adore Jane Fairfax, so I read it as if Jane was the heroine, and by the end I loved the novel. But that's getting way off topic.)
So after the failed attempt at Emma, she said she thought I would like Northanger Abbey a lot more. That the humor might be more to my taste. That turned out to be a massive understatement. I loved everything about the novel, and it became one of my favorite collections of characters in any novel by any author.
Henry is the perfect hero. Catherine was a perfect spoof of a character I really disliked, (Richardson's Pamela.) But beyond being a spoof, she was also a lovable character. To be my 4th favorite Austen heroine is no small feat. (I've since grown to love Emma the character, but I still love Catherine even more than her.) Eleanor became my favorite secondary heroine in Austen.
Isabella reminded me of some girls I went to high school with. She made me laugh so much. I absolutely relish her transparency, and her rather shallow attempts at villainy. That Catherine takes so long to see through her makes it all the funnier.
John Thorpe was an even better fool than Mr. Collins. I can't think of a more bumbling villain that I've ever read. The General, and Capt. Tinley were good, solid villains. And I love the Allens and Catherine's parents. Even Catherine's brother was fun in his cluelessness.
Even Charles Dickens didn't pack that many characters that I enjoyed so much into any one novel. And I love Dickens' characters. It's right up with, or even ahead of, P&P, Tom Jones, and Vanity Fair for sheer volume of characters that I thoroughly enjoy.
To a person who dislikes the novels Clarissa and Pamela as much as I do, this novel is a wonderful and hilarious tonic. That I then went on to read Udolpho, The Monk, and Otranto, and found them really not to my taste, gave me an even greater appreciation of the humor Austen put into the book.
Wow, did I ever ramble. And I haven't even touched on the movies yet. I'm one of those people that loves the 1987 version. It's quirky, absurd, bizarre, and very heavy on the cheese. I do have to be in the right mood for it. But when I am, I get great enjoyment from it.
2007 is a substantially better movie, and like you, I absolutely loved it when it came out. Though I do think they should have made John Thorpe a lot creepier than they made him.
I was smitten with the actresses playing Catherine, Isabella, and Eleanor. Enjoyed seeing the only good Fanny Price grow up to become Mrs. Allen. I thought JJ gave Henry all the charm he needed. All the other characters were anywhere from serviceable to pretty good.
I was fine with the changes from the novel. I think they were mostly done within the spirit of the novel. And that's all I ask for in an adaptation. Because the mediums are so different, a line by line picturization of a novel would probably be excessively tedious. Just make sure the changes maintain the spirit of the novel, and the character of the characters.
Still rambling. 🤣 OK, wrap up time. Loved the video. Your reviews are always so well thought out and insightful. As you might be able to tell, this is a story I can go on and on about. Which is part of the fun of Austen. I do love your Austen content in particular. Thanks for the video, (and for reading this far if you managed to get through all that.) And have a happy and safe Thanksgiving. 🦃
Wow! Thank you for going into so much detail with your thoughts on the book, the film, and Austen's works in general! I'm glad you were willing to dip a toe in the water with Pride and Prejudice, that you gave the books a try, that you gave Emma another chance, and that you have such a great appreciation for Northanger Abbey. I love to hear it. :D Happy Thanksgiving!
Good Morning, Sister Jerome!
Quite often, you challenge me to stretch outside of my comfort zone, and read or watch something that I ordinarily wouldn't, such as this. I might just wander into this work.
Your infectious energy, as always, makes this review a delight; I would enjoy joining you for tea and conversation about everything and nothing.
Maybe the film, if I can find it.
It's 0302, and I will do my morning Bible reading, and crash for a few; thank you, Senorita.
Hello, Jerome!
I always give Northanger a more generous view, as it was published without it being revised by Austen beforehand. Certainly, she *had* done that the time she tried to sell it first, but I think she's an author that changed a lot throughout her career, something people seem to overlook a lot? Austen is talked about as if she were a monolith, but the tone and preoccupations and even style do change with time. I sometimes wonder, for example, if Charlotte Brontë would have had a different opinion of Austen's work had she read Mansfield Park or Persuasion instead of Pride and Prejudice. The earlier works are more acerbic, the late ones, more contemplative and mournful (closer to the tone of, say, Elizabeth Gaskell). This is all to say the book reads a lot like the Juvenilia and that cannot be helped (and deserves some generosity, in justice, when being compared with the rest of the big novels).
As for the 2007 movie... I think it is one of the best Austen adaptations ever made. I'm not saying it doesn't have changes, but it has as many or less as adaptations hailed as The Book Incarnate; I'm thinking specifically about P&P 95 and S&S 95, both of which I feel deviate much more -P&P's interpretation of Darcy as brooding and sportish and angsty, or the elderly lady Catherine, or the... sympathetic perspective of Mr Bennet, for example, in one, or how the different ages of the characters in S&S completely change the dynamics and meanings of the novel, like how adorkable Edward or stoic Brandon are not really that much like their book counterparts. The changes in NA07 do definitely amp up the drama, but I don't think they really step outside of the meanings of the novel. Even Tilney "confirmating" Cathy's feelings I feel makes sense; Cathy was wrong in thinking of evil as over the top mustachoed villainy, and the events teach her how evil is most often just banal and takes the shape of opportunism, greed, vanity, immodesty, dishonesty. It's "a different kind of vampirism" is just an extension of the idea that the general is cold and greedy as we have seen in his treatment of his children and of Cathy. I also think highlights Tilney's subtle transformation as the book goes on; he begins from a cynical, detached position, but he does learn to value Cathy's earnestness, and it ends in his defiance of his father in declaring his attachment to her. The "concesion" functions as a way of expliciting this change of heart where Tilney stops adopting the glib "it is what it is" attitude, to acknowledge that wrong and harm are real, serious things.
The details about when the book was written and how it got published are important to consider when discussing its quality, so thanks for emphasizing that. Thank you also for sharing your expansive thoughts on the adaptation! As I was editing this video, I felt that perhaps I came across as more critical than I meant to be. I really don't have negative feelings toward this film in general, so I appreciate your bringing up some additional strengths and offering a different perspective on how it succeeded beyond expectations.
❤❤❤❤
I love your book reviews and movie adaptations Jerome. Keep it up and happy early Thanksgiving
Thank you! Happy Thanksgiving!
The film was my first Jane Austen experience and it was good to take the plunge. As you said, short, condensed, kept moving along. I was struck by the cold shoulders in the tea room scene (brrr) and that Mr. Thorpe was a dead ringer for a jerk I knew in high school. So yes, cads and scoundrels galore. It seems that Bath was the Las Vegas of its day, where you can behave badly and (almost) nobody finds out. I will have to try another Austen now that I've seen what the buzz is about. Thanks J., very well done.
Hope you and your family have a happy Thanksgiving, J! 🦃 🍁 🍂 🦉
Thank you! Happy Thanksgiving to you too!
Great stuff as always. Happy Thanksgiving to you and your family!
Thank you! Happy Thanksgiving!
Great commentary on the book & film. I think my experience with NA is the inverse of yours. I didn't really understand the satire and didn't quite see the romance when I was younger--it felt flat and curious to me. Since that first reading of NA, I've read Ann Radcliffe & Fanny Burney & Maria Edgeworth, and then my NA re-reads made so much more sense & were a zillion times funnier. Now for me NA is right behind P&P and Persuasion. It's like bringing that 18th c. style into the 19th c., slowly, and with a wink & a smile. Also, I think listening to Juliet Stevenson on audiobook brought out all the humor for me, and made me realize it's not a romance, it's a satire. If Catherine & Henry are adorable along the way, so be it! but that's not the point of Austen's book for me. And yeah, Henry is a smart-ass, but I think Austen wants us to see his faults, too, AND see him redeem himself. Re: the film--all your comments are spot on. It's still a lovely film, but you are right that those changes you mention (Henry blaming his father; no reconciliation for Gen. Tilney) were a mistake. And the last line of the book is one of my favorites in all of Austen.
I love the movie adaptation of Northanger Abbey. The book, on the other hand, was just okay. In fact, I can barely remember the book :/
That's understandable. At the risk of sounding like That Person, though, I will say that maybe you'd like it if you read it again, haha. :D
Your review reminded me of why I never tried to acquire a copy of this for my collection of Austen adaptation films. I really disliked the “confirmation of your delusion” addition by Davies. It’s one thing to gin up the romantic stuff, but quite another to change what made the novel notable (however slightly) in the author’s own mind. Austen was clearly using that plot point as the moral lesson of the novel. That Davies thought “sometimes there really IS something nefarious” would be a great thing for Catherine was a disappointment.
Joining in 2 months later to give a counter viewpoint on the matter.
The way I read the book, as much as it was a parody of gothic novels, it was also a statement in their defense. The narrative voice at times ridiculous the genre and other times speaks against those who patronize it.
And while I do agree that going so far as to say that Catherine was right diminishes the lesson she had to learn, I don't think Austen intended the lesson to become "stop reading books" or "don't read too many books", especially of the looked down upon genres of the time. (In an aside, that was *my* main problem with the movie - having *this* the message she took from her mistake and actually going as far as burning the books. I don't think she would have approved. But I digress)
The way I interpreted it, in this book Austen was all about subtleties. Catherine fails to see Isabella for who she is mainly because she takes her words at face value, not sensing the hypocrisy behind them. With her brother, on the other hand, her instincts were better, but she still failed to grasp how much selfish and conceited he was.
And I think that Austen implied a similar thing happening with her accusations against the general. Because of course there was no basis for them, and she should learn not to jump to conclusions without any proof and to look for facts to form a theory and not the other way around.
However, the general *is* a villain. He's not a murderer, but he is cruel, not only towards Catherine but towards his own children too. And it is implied in Henry's words that his wife had a lot to bear with him. It's also telling that he's one of a few (if not the only) Austen villains to be completely sinister with nothing comical about him (like a gothic villain). So, my interpretation was that Catherine instincts in regards to him, mainly to be fearful and wary, were right. But because she lacked the understanding of subtleties in life, and having her imagination sparked, she jumped to the wrong conclusions.
Funnily enough, the film also fails in its failure to capture this subtlety. By having Henry declare her to be right (in a certain way, yes, but still) it undermines the whole point.
(Sorry for the longevity, but I love this book with a passion...)
Thank you, Jerome! I was disgusted with John Thorpe from the moment he is shown on screen , but I have to admit he was well cast. As soon as his sister is introduced into the story , you know she is going to make all the wrong decisions. I think it is time for me to re-read the book , as I don't recall how Austen presented her! I am just rambling here! But, just so glad you chose to review the book and film!
Hi Jerome! I quite love this film version of "Northanger Abbey" for several reasons, not the least of which is that it introduced me to the delightful Felicity Jones and JJ Feild. I agree that sometimes Andrew Davies takes liberties or makes additions in his classic adaptations, but they usually work for me (not always) because they usually stay true to the spirit of the original work, if not the details. Often times they seem like events that could totally happen in the lives of the characters even if Austen, Dickens or whoever didn't actually write them. This one works for me. I do get out of shape more when an adaptation makes clear departures from the essential nature of the characters, such as in the recent adaptation of "Persuasion", which I thought was an atrocity.
Love this review. This movie is my favourite adaptation of this novel, I must admit.
Hello and happy Sunday :)
I was in hospital again for a few days during the week so couldn’t watch much because their WiFi wasn’t great but I was released in time for the weekend and was able to rewatch Northanger Abbey yesterday in anticipation of your review and it’s as enjoyable as I remembered it to be, not a great adaptation but fun nonetheless.
I have to say that I’m constantly amazed and in awe by how great you are at this, I’ve said it countless times I’m sure but I was taken aback again while watching this review especially as you were explaining what was changed and how it ultimately altered the stories original intent, you did it so well. I haven’t read the book in a long time but like you I wouldn’t say it was a favourite but I did enjoy it at the time quite a bit, perhaps my opinion of it would change after reading it again. My grandparents lived very close to place called Kylemore Abbey and I’d often imagine Northanger Abbey when on the grounds and wonder could they look similar. Ashford Castle is close too and it’s a beautiful place to visit. The Quiet Man was filmed in the area and the cast would stay at the Castle. Apart from Henry Tilney being a bit rude at times and overly condescending I do like him lol. I sometimes feel more akin to other Austen characters like Darcy because they have a tendency to get in their own way and make things more difficult for themselves and those are traits I unfortunately see in myself but I’d like to be a bit more like Tilney because things go a little easier for him because of his way, except for the rudeness although I guess most of the male characters in Austen’s novels can be rude. For me It would be a nightmare to be described that way, I worry when trying to add something to a conversation that I may come across as someone who likes to hear themselves speak when I’m usually just trying to not come across as a doofus lol. I can be smiley and expressive though so that’s something Tilney and I have in common, well unless I’m rude and condescending and unaware of it, I hope not lol. The ability to see ourselves or traits we have in these characters is probably one of many reasons these books have remained classics. I had forgotten who was in the cast because I hadn’t seen the film in so long. Jones made a really good Catherine and Carey Mulligan great too. If ITV were to make this film now they wouldn’t be able to afford them. I liked how you described the way Mulligan was dressed and her height being a factor in the way we viewed the character, Isabella did seem much more mature than Catherine. Liam Cunningham was a little over the top with his performance but you’re right that it’s a tough role to handle. Funnily enough when I picture Cunningham in films it’s usually as a good father like in The Little Princess or a respectable teacher/father figure in a film like War of the Buttons. War of the Buttons was a popular Irish film that would air on TV a lot when I was a child. The film is on RUclips. Andrew Davies looks like an Austen character himself or even a Dickens character.
I hope you and your family have a very happy thanksgiving 🦃
~ Thank you Ms Weiselberry ~
Uh-oh, I hope it wasn't anything too serious and still recovering well. I'm glad you enjoy this movie too (and got to squeeze in another viewing before I posted!). Thanks for offering your own insight on it. I heartily agree that the relatability of the characters, whose personality flaws and struggles often reflect our own, has given Austen's novels remarkable longevity. I think we're encouraged to see little bits of ourselves in each of her heroes and heroines and to take something from the moral lessons they learn. While Henry Tilney is more of a static character (especially compared to Darcy or Wentworth), his steadiness and good nature are admirable qualities, so we can learn something from him as well as from Catherine and her overactive imagination.
Oh, you're right, Davies does look like he could have been in the background of one of his own Austen or Dickens adaptations. Ha!
Thank you! Have yourself a happy Thursday! :D
@@Weiselberry Nothing serious, I’m okay. I was so excited by my quick recovery that I rushed back to normality too soon and I became nauseous and was admitted again as a precaution, it was basically a forced rest became I’d gone most of the previous week without much sleep or food but I’m back to my regular self again.
Thank you! I’ll do my best to have a happy Thursday lol
@@bartolomeuomacduibheamhnad6855 Whew, I'm relieved to hear that. You were just too eager to get back in the saddle, eh? Take it easy and stay hydrated!
I was a freshman when it aired Sunday's night that spring was my jam.
Thanks for this neat book and movie discussion!
Good review. You have the best eyebrows.
I really enjoyed Northanger Abbey when I saw it. Never read the book, but it sounds like the tweaks altered the integrity of the story to make for a more entertaining film.
Northanger Abbey, directed by Jon Jones -- if that is his real name! I will keep in mind that this is a "riff" on Austen rather than true Austen. Felicity Jones? Sign me up. Happy Thanksgiving, Rome.
Happy Thanksgiving!
Ohh I just bought this book at the thrift store a few weeks ago! I best hold off until I read it and watch the movie! Looking forward to watching this!
I suspect that I would need to read some period gothic novels to fully appreciate this book.
Maybe, in order to get the most complete experience, but I don't feel it's necessary in order to enjoy the book. Austen had impressive foresight in making her parody accessible for future generations reading long after the gothic style was no longer in vogue. I didn't know anything about those books when I first read Northanger Abbey, but it was narrated in such a way that I easily got the gist.
I have never heard about this JA book before, but you make me want to check it out.
Thanks for a nice walk through of both book and movie adaption.
Persuasion and Northanger Abbey always vie for my favorites! I love the parody, the characters, the sense of humor throughout. I like the adaption, mostly. It has moments I'm not a fan of, but I love JJ Feild as Henry!
Big Jerome Weiselberry fan btw
Some of the actors are repeat Austen actors. JJ Fielding was also in Austenland, which you mentioned. Carey Mulligen played Kitty Bennett in the Keira Knightley Pride and Prejudice.
Northanger Abbey was suppose to be a parody of the popular gothic novel of the time. It does not seem like that to modern reading but back when it came out it would.
Hello JW. Just thought I'd wish you and your family a Happy Thanksgiving🎉
Thanks, Sam! Happy Thanksgiving to you and yours!
Bath time.Northanger Abbey 2007 proved to be most agreeable company.Felicity Jones is adorable.I was quite taken with JJ Feild and Catherine Walker as the Tilley siblings.Despite not being familiar with either actor.I have listened to Liam Cunningham talk on the Dog Soldiers 2002 commentary track.He was lively and amusing.Quite unlike the General he plays here.The quick asides revealing the imaginings of tawdry gothic literature are amusing.But they also feel at odds with the rest of the movie.Thank you for providing such an informative and economical comparison between book and film.I have not read the book.So I have been wondering.I don’t think that one rather can read too many books.Although it might be possible to read too many snowbound books.Your thoughts? Thank you and have a happy Thanksgiving.
Thanks for sharing your assessment of the film! I'm glad you found it enjoyable too. Yeah, I'm not sure there really is such a thing as reading too many novels, although, haha, yes, one can max out on snowbound books. :) Thank you!
@@Weiselberry Oh! I wrote Tilley
instead of Tilney.The shame.
Northanger Abbey has made me wonder
if it is important for a man to have an
extensive knowledge of muslin?
Or does no one care about that anymore?
Thank you very much.
@@earthcreature5824 Ha, that's okay, I got it. Regarding muslin, though, I'm afraid there's not much opportunity for intellectual discussion on that front these days, haha. :)
@@Weiselberry The only thing I
know about muslin is that it has been
mentioned in the writings of Edgar Allan
Poe.I have been thinking about your
shifting thoughts regarding the wit of
Henry Tilney.We kind of enjoy snarky
humour directed at others.When we are
young.As we get older.We think more
about how that biting wit affects the
feelings of the people on the receiving
end.You entertain and you make me
think.Thank you.
love your content. Books and Films provide different context.
Thanks!
Thank you for your effort.@@Weiselberry
It sounds like Henry started out doing quite a bit of mansplaining.
I haven't read the book or seen this movie but I am delighted to watch your review of it.
Have you ever tried writing a screenplay of one of these novels? Might be an interesting exercise. ❤
No, I adapted a screenplay of a Georgette Heyer novel once for a school project and that was enough to teach me that, while I enjoy watching and analyzing adaptations, I don't much care to write them myself. :)
It's a slippery slope going from being an adaptation to becoming a "bodice ripper". Glad this doesn't go that far.
You're great
I was raised in a house full of women, seen my mother go though 3 husbands, she loved one.
Coolest 😊
I am obsessed with you, but I cannot even watch you whole videos at times.
There are weeks I cannot even watch your new ones, I see them, and they trigger me somehow...
No psycho here, do not worry, I live in another country and all... you are safe LOL
Thing is... your personality and interests... you are AMAZING...
I believe I should not become addicted to the best things in life... so.. I cannot even watch this video today... TODAY... I will later... but I had to say this... you are quite a LOVELY, FEISTY, FUN, SHARP, and INSPIRING, beautiful woman.
I also have a Sony HDD Handheld Video Recorder from the 2000s that records in 4:3.
This is UNCANNY.
I guess that it. You are the very definition of UNHEIMLICH to me.
So yeah I guess I prove there are crazy people out there, lol.
Please do not be spooked.
Please do not stop sharing.
Hello, I dont think that I have watched this video of yours.
You often seem like an Austen heroine yourself.