Dans l'Angleterre des années 1800, une jeune femme bien intentionnée mais égoïste se mêle de la vie amoureuse de ses amis.
Bande-annonce
Casting
Anya Taylor-Joy
Emma Woodhouse
Johnny Flynn
Mr. Knightley
Mia Goth
Harriet Smith
Josh O'Connor
Mr. Elton
Callum Turner
Frank Churchhill
Miranda Hart
Miss Bates
Bill Nighy
Mr. Woodhouse
Rupert Graves
Mr. Weston
Gemma Whelan
Miss Taylor
Gemma Whelan
Mrs. Weston
Amber Anderson
Jane Fairfax
Angus Imrie
Bartholomew
Letty Thomas
Biddy
Aidan White
Hartfield Butler
Edward Davis
Charles
Chris White
James, Hartfield Coachman
Myra McFadyen
Mrs. Bates
Esther Coles
Mrs. Cox
Suzy Bloom
Miss Gilbert
Vous aimerez aussi
Accident Man: Hitman's Holiday
Persuasion
Missions of Love
Sex Education
Un jour
Feel Good
The Bisexual
Trying
Journal d'une ado hors norme
Everything I Know About Love
Starstruck
Romantic Getaway
State of the Union
You & Me
Last Tango in Halifax
Zatima
XO, Kitty
Sex/Life
Ni wei xiao shi hen mei
Emily in Paris
The Muse of Section E
Hartley, cœurs à vif
Il Est Fou D'elle
On the Wings of Love
Commentaires
10 commentaires
XXX
.
source: Emma.
As a Jane Austen enthusiast, an avid reader and an obsessive film watcher, I was anxious to watch it as soon as it came out in cinemas. After watching the trailer, I was a little bit off put, with the sickly overdose of pastels coming from all directions, but the presence of the wonderful Miranda Hart amongst the cast made it seem a bit brighter. Nevertheless, I walked into the cinema excited. The glowing reviews on the sides of buses were enough to convince me it would be a great film. That is 2 hours and 12 minutes of my fleeting life I will never get back. To start with the positives, the costumes were historically accurate, which seemed to justify the film for some folks, but apart from that, it was downright unenjoyable. To start, I did not like the scene of Mr Knightley at the beginning where we all experienced the misfortune at looking upon the actors bare butt. For me, it felt very out of character for Mr Knightley, and certainly not something I would associate with an Austen novel. Perhaps it was supposed to showcase vulnerability? But surely there are more clearer ways of doing that than putting his rear on show. I found the character of Emma to be someone completely different from the book. Instead of a girl who has good intentions, but has her flaws, she is portrayed as nothing less of a sulky brat. I wasn't fond of Mr Knightley or Frank Churchill, the both seemed shallow and deprived of any liveliness, or any signs of life. The film is slow paced, and I like long films, I've happily sat through films over three hours long, but this one had me wishing it would end. Its pointless shots of scenery, and the immaculate detail of shops and homes were pretty, but I felt like I was watching the same thing over and over, and over again. I was not fond of the dialogue, it was drawn out, I assume we were supposed to take note of the characters facial expressions, but I ended up daydreaming and forgetting I was in a cinema and supposed to be watching a film. And the comedy. If you can even call it that, was something else. It seemed to be veering towards almost a slapstick, with the running "joke" of Mr Woodhouse's "do you feel a breeze" boring and unfunny. Not to mention the questionable facial expressions that were intended for our "entertainment"???? My heart completely sunk to the floor when they decided to have Emma's nose begin to bleed throughout one of the most important scenes. Some have interpreted this as presenting her as imperfect, or a sign of vulnerability or whatever, but to me this ruined the charm and beauty of the scene. What really caused me to roll my eyes was the passionate kiss between the protagonist and Mr Knightley. What I love about Austen, and many of the adaptions (not this one) is the way that social standards are clear for us to see, and the central couple do not rely on physicality to show us their affections (as in the book it is not talked of) but we see their affections in the way they speak, the way they look at each other, they way they interact. In this adaption however, there is no chemistry between Emma and Knightley. In my opinion, it is overrated. If you want to watch an enchanting adaption of Emma with all the charm of the book, I would suggest the 2009 version.
This movie is beautiful to look at. The shots of the English countryside, the beautiful homes, the costumes. Some of the actors are even even easy on the eyes, especially Anya Taylor-Joy, the Emma, who is also a fine actress, and really creates a character. And then there is the plot, such as it is, and the dialogue, which may come directly from Austin's novel. I don't know. Nor do I care. It's supposed to be clever. To me, it was just flat. Perhaps it was the dialogue itself, perhaps it was the way it was delivered. Go back and watch the Pride and Prejudice from 1940, with Greer Garson et al., directed by Robert Z. Leonard, with a script by Aldous Huxley. That's brilliant. I've watched it I don't know how many times, and it still holds me. This movie, on the other hand, had me begging for it to be over. I just did not care about any of the characters. Except the husband of the other daughter, Emma's brother-in-law. He suffered mightily, so I understood him.
