kopec_chavez This is an amazing series: the perfect casting, the acting,the music, the script! I love it all

deirdrechalmers The acting was quite good. All the principle characters were well represented. The problem was, Jane Austen's dialogue is perfect, as are all her set pieces. No updates are required, no new wives, older sisters, or children she did not herself see fit to place in her story. Duels, characters showing up where they are not meant to be. And all of it pointless, adding nothing to the story, the plotting or the characters. How is the story improved by Sir John Middleton suddenly having a wife, and Lucy Steele an older sister? Watch the 1995 version.

Anastasia Kharlamova Though the 1995 adaptation still remains my favorite, this one does have some advantages over it. First, of course, there are the younger actors cast as Elinor and Brandon; as much as I admire Emma Thompson and Alan Rickman, it's a fact that they were about 15 years older than their characters. Second, the miniseries format which allowed more scenes to fit in. Third, the addition of Elinor's drawing hobby - after all, she's a living and breathing 19-year-old, not Rational Sense personalized.The costumes and sets are all splendid. Almost no complaints here, though the poverty of Barton Cottage was, I believe, a bit exaggerated – with rooms so tiny there is barely enough space for the family, let alone their guests.But the main flaw of this adaptation, in my opinion, is that it gives too much away too early. We see Willoughby seducing and leaving Eliza Jr. in the first scene, and his sly smile, shifting eyes and plainly arrogant remarks later makes one wonder just how he completely bewitches everybody. On the other hand, Marianne is shown much more sympathetic with Colonel Brandon from the start, and after the duel scene no one can doubt which of the men will end up with her.Edward is shown much less shy than in the 1995 film. It allows him to converse with Elinor more freely, but then he (all of a sudden!) begins to mumble and stammer during the famous "talk about his education". Why the change?Finally, the scene with Marianne's sickness is much less dramatic. It seemed that the director wished to get her quickly to her happy ending, so, although she's raving in fever, there is always a feeling that there is no real danger. I think that this miniseries is a wonderful adaptation for those who are already familiar with the plot. Somehow it's like a big fanfiction in the "missing scenes" genre. It's for people who want to see Elinor not so rational and Edward not so shy; Colonel Brandon and Marianne's romance developing earlier and, well, less subtly; Willoughby the Villain from the beginning etc.But I wouldn't recommend it to these who don't know the novel or other movies based on it. Spoils all the intrigue, especially in the case of Marianne and her suitors.

canuckteach Caught this on a weekly PBS presentation - was glued to it at once. Had to buy the DVD, and re-watch it a few times over. It's so good, we discovered, by accident, that you could listen to the DVD with no picture, and enjoy it as a radio drama with amazing sound effects (branches waving in the breeze, birds singing). So lifelike were the performances, I started dreaming about the characters.Being an Austen newbie, I didn't realize how young the S&S characters were supposed to be--so, it came as a revelation to me that Elinor and Marianne were under 20, and that Col. Brandon was only mid-30's! But cut me some slack - I'm reading the novel now. Oh my: was Jane Austen a virtuoso? right up there with Shakespeare. by the way: I thought I would hate the 1995 S&S movie the next time I took it off the shelf, but I'm re-watching it now, and it's 'ok', once you get around the (more) advanced age of the key cast members.So, here's the rundown, comparing 1995 S&S, and this 2008 version: *Edward is more lovable and less 'clumsy' than Hugh Grant's portrayal (I always thought that Grant's clothes looked like they were wearing him)* there's a duel scene between Brandon and Willoughby - it fits perfectly, but wouldn't have worked with the 2 respective cast members of 1995 S&S * Willoughby is smaller and younger-looking than we saw in 1995.. and although oddly attractive, he has a furtive look about him.. conversely, Brandon is a full-sized handsome fellow with a look of steel under a velvet glove..* Willoughby's conversation with Elinor near the end of the story is restored - I think this screenplay resolves things very well, maybe better than Austen's novel..* like the book, it takes a long time before it is revealed how Lucy managed to land a 'Ferrars' fellow.. this happened a bit quicker in 1995..* look for a delightful scene where Edward, contented with his new, humble situation in life, cheerfully chases chickens..!Enjoy...! p.s. wasn't that Lucy Steele street-smart? first question I asked after initial viewing: "does Lucy get to keep the money?" everyone (female) thought I was so mercenary for asking about money..! sorry - but after 2 centuries, lots of readers are still debating it! what a coup!