Emma
Tags: romantic, satire

Plot synopsis:
Inventor Frederick Smith's wife dies during the birth of their fourth baby, Ronnie, leaving the family in the care of their faithful housekeeper Emma. Twenty years later, after Smith's inventions have made the family rich, the affable Ronnie, who is Emma's favorite, arrives home from college, announcing that he wants to quit school and become a pilot. The other Smith children, Bill, Gypsy and Isabelle, have all grown into spoiled adults, but Emma lovingly indulges them all, making excuses for their bad behavior to their father and everyone else.
As Emma leaves for her first vacation in thirty-two years with the family, the absent-minded Frederick sadly takes her to the station. She gets cold feet and decides to stay home, but Frederick won't let her and decides to go along with her to Niagara Falls. Waiting for their train, Frederick proposes and Emma accepts, even though she is afraid that people will talk. When the children learn about the marriage, Ronnie is happy for them, but the other children are embarrassed by the blot on their social record. On their honeymoon, as the happy Frederick and Emma row on the lake, they are teased by some young vacationers, prompting Frederick to take the oars from Emma. The exertion causes a mild heart attack and they return home. As the contented Frederick listens to Emma sing to him, he dies, and a short time later, the family learns that he has left his entire estate to Emma.
Though Emma wants to give the money back to the children, all of them except Ronnie turn on her and threaten to prove that their father was crazy when he wrote the will. Emma throws them out and awaits the lawsuit they threaten while the loyal Ronnie goes to Canada for a flying assignment. Because the will cannot be broken, the children go to the district attorney to have him bring murder charges against Emma, using distorted testimony by Mathilda, the maid. When Ronnie hears about the trial, he desperately flies East to help Emma but is killed while flying through a dangerous storm.
Even though her life is in peril, she won't allow her kind attorney, Haskins, to defame the character or motives of the children. Her emotional plea for them in court results in her acquittal, but Emma's relief is ruined when she learns of Ronnie's death. A short time later, Emma gives all of the money to the children, telling Haskins that she hopes that now they will think better of her. After she sadly views Ronnie's body, Isabell, Bill and Gypsy beg her forgiveness and want her to stay with them, but she refuses, saying that her work with them is finished, but no matter what happens or where they all are, they will still belong to each other.
At a new position, Emma happily attends a doctor's large family and is pleased when the wife agrees to name her new baby Ronnie at Emma's request.

Review: I have seen each of the three main video versions of Emma (this 1972 BBC version, the Kate Beckinsale version, and the Paltrow version) several times (as well as having read the book) and I love each of them.
The Paltrow version is lightest and funniest, entertainment to cheer you up; the Beckinsale version engages you as a serious drama of a beautiful young woman, is the most realistic, it is what you want if you want to feel transported back to the time the story happened.
This 1972 version's strength is that it presents the psychological complexity of the characters with more fidelity and completeness to the portrayals in the novel.
One problematic element for me is that the actress who plays Emma is about 6 years too old, and she is not as attractive as Beckinsale or Paltrow, and these factors were a problem for me on my first viewing of this version.
However, on second and subsequent viewings this was not so much of an issue, and I was able to appreciate her very nuanced portrayal of Emma's feelings and reactions and the process of learning more about human nature, and about the limitations of her own ability to imagine what the hidden feelings are of other people.
It always used to bother me that invalid Mrs. Churchill, who is so important to the story, never makes an appearance in the story, until I realized that, in effect, she had: she is the female version of Emma's father, and everything you want to know about her, you may find in him.
The very last scene of this version also develops a similarity in the personalities of Emma and Frank that is missing from the other versions and that is necessary, I think, to understand just how psychologically complex Austen's novel really is.
A very refreshing thing about all versions of Emma is that every character is genuinely good-hearted and wants good for the other characters, but their own quirks, self-centeredness, and inability to understand other people means they cause pain to each other despite their good intentions.
This old BBC serial from the 70s is a slow ramble through one of Jane Austen's great novels.
Some of it is shot outdoors, notably the Box Hill scene, but it is mainly unfussy interiors.Doran Godwin's performance as Emma is fine.
Jane Austen wanted a heroine that no one would like but herself, then proceeded to create a fully rounded character who is very likeable.
The length of the mini-series enables there to be many scenes between Emma and Harriet and Emma and Mr Knightly that illustrate all their characters well.
Debbie Bowen and John Carson give excellent support.The rest of the cast of British actors are good.
Donald Eccles is perfectly tiring as Mr Woodhouse.There seem to be two ways to film Jane Austen.
If you are a Jane Austen fan and considering to buy a film of Emma i would recommend this version.
Also the acting is very good and the whole production has a Austen feel about it.
I would like to single out Donald Eccles who , as Emma's father, is very funny as is Mary Holder as Mrs. Bates..
A very loving and literate adaptation; how Austen would have liked it..
Davies was a little more nuanced in his judgment upon all characters, but nonetheless, the work Denis Constanduros produced was very true to the spirit of the novel and made use of the comedy elements in the original text.
Particularly in costume and the one character of Mr Woodhouse Constanduros produced classic comedy that was about words rather than one-liners and ridiculous situations.Also the age-difference between Emma and her Mr Knightley is very much apparent.
Knightley is not as vigorous as Mark Strong in the role, but this Mr Knightley has not the task of radiating sex-appeal, but rather radiating stability and wisdom through experience, like Austen's version.Despite the lack of technology to make shots and filming on location truly possible, they did well.
There is also no music which made it necessary for the actors and director to truly act and film the characters' feelings so the viewer could comprehend them.
However, through it, viewers are compelled to use their own brain more than with modern adaptations of the novel.Most of the contents is not toned down, only maybe the complicated business with Churchill and Jane when things are going wrong in the end.
The main point of Emma and Knightley's blindness to each other stays upward better than in the Miramax version of 1996.
I have rated this quite highly on two counts - one, the casting (largely forgotten names litter the cast including Doran Godwin as Emma, John Carson as Mr Knightley, Debbie Bowen as Harriet, Constance Chapman as Miss Bates, and Timothy Peters as Mr Elton) and two, an absorbing adaptation even if done in obviously studio (and rather cheap) sets.Running at four hours plus, this version does more justice to the book than more cursory and recent attempts have been able to.
Although both Emma and Knightley come across as a little older than they should be (21 and 39 I believe in the book), their growing understanding is believable, and you do find yourself hoping for that elusive happy ending.What does mark it down is the annoying tune!
The best version of "Emma" so far..
I really enjoyed this version of "Emma" and my pleasure was largely due to the very convincing performance by Doran Goodwin in the central role.
This Emma was very expressive, arch and satirical, very much, I Imagine, as Jane Austen must have been herself.
And unlike the ITV version, which was abominably miscast (excepting Mark Strong's Mr Knightley), this casting was near perfect.My only complaint is that too much of the action took place indoors, which made it a little claustrophobic and too much like a stage play.
The only time we saw anyone in a carriage was during the trip to Box Hill and that was all too brief.But the indoor scenes were magnificent and authentic looking, too good I'm sure to be just studio sets; they must all have been filmed on location, perhaps in the very large house pictured in the opening shots..
I have just finished watching this adaptation of Emma for the first time and I feel I must openly declare here that it seems to me quite shameful that the Paltrow and the Beckinsale versions should be more often remembered.
It is true that John Carson may not look to be the epitome of Knightleyness, but he does a most excellent job of acting like Mr Knightley, and that is what one should care about, I say.
What that does is it helps to make dialogues sound truthful, natural and issuing from people who are thoroughly engaged  both as actors and characters  in listening to each other.Another thing that has contributed to place this in my estimation as the best extant adaptation of Emma is that there is no symbolic meddling with the story (excepting perhaps on the last tableau).
And I unconditionally praise the director John Glenister, the screenwriter Denis Constanduros and the producer Martin Lisemore for having seen that simple fact about Jane Austen and for having brought the book to life so clearly and so lovingly.So three cheers for them, and five to Doran Godwin..
If you liked the book Emma by Jane Austen I do not think you will be disappointed with this dramatization.
This mini-series did a very good job of capturing a great deal of the humor of Jane Austen (she is incredibly funny!) which is not all that easy to translate from her elegant prose to the camera and dialog of video rendition.
I think the mini-series is friendlier to a good adaption of Jane Austen's novels rather than the movie.
Technical resources have changed in 30 years, but think of the resources on offer here: stunning costume, well-designed and beautifully lit sets, superb actors who not only look but sound good, delicious writing that captures so well the essence of this lovely book - I'd rather see this a dozen times than an overpolished piece of slick location filming where all you end up with is pretty pictures of a supposedly 'all star cast'.
Doran Godwin gives an expressionist portrayal of Emma which suits the character, and John Carson is a likable Mr. Knightley.
All in all the casting is mere perfection; Thimoty Peters is a funny, yet realistic Mr. Elton; Debbie Bowen as Harriet Smith might be to much of a good thing, but then again Constance Chapman is most excellent as Miss Bates.
In more updated Jane Austen films, things might seem a bit artificial, as if the characters live in glossy prints.
Certainly Austens times were just as "real" and shitty as ours, and this comes to front in this brilliant, yet quite forgotten, miniseries of Emma.
I did enjoy the Gwyneth Paltrow film though that's probably the least effective adaptation-wise, and while the 2009 series with Romola Garai had one or two scenes that didn't work I loved that one too.
But I consider this Emma the best version.
I too would've liked a few more outdoor scenes to have more of a glimpse of the outside world, and Debbie Bowen does play Harriet a little too broadly.
The writing is thoughtful and witty, and the story is leisurely and gently told in a deliberate way and in spirit and in most details it is true to Jane Austen.
Doran Godwin may be too old for the titular character, but what mattered more to me was how she interpreted the role, and I think she did a very good job with Austen's most multifaceted character.
Mr Woodhouse is very funny and splendidly played by Donald Eccles(though I personally think Michael Gambon in the 2009 series was a tad more dimensional), while Ania Marsan, Robert East and Constance Chapman give the best Jane Fairfax, Frank Churchill and Miss Bates I've seen, great performances and their characters are very well developed.
Given that the film makers were not limited to two hours, they were able to be faithful and true to the book.
I really appreciated Emma's expressing out loud to various characters the thoughts and feelings that in the book she keeps to herself.
Her ranting about Mrs. Elton to Knightly and his endearing amusement in her irritation was a wonderful touch.I'm not sure I cared for several of the characterizations here as compared to how they're described in the book or played in other adaptations.
Her shouting at Miss Bates in her first scene is completely out-of-character, however her emotional stress and discomfort comes through much better here than is described in the book and really seems more authentic.
I really wondered if Gwyneth Paltrow saw this and decided to base her portrayal of Emma on Doran Godwin's.
This is what period adaptations used to be like in the Dark Ages.I checked this out in preparation for the eagerly awaited Sandy-Welch-plotted version due from the BBC later this year.Ouch!
Emma is a novel which I like a lot.I like all of Jane Austen novels since reading Pride and Prejudice when I was 13-14.This production looks very nice and bright,which fits the spirit of the book.Doran Godwin may not be young or beautiful enough for Emma,but she played Emma very good.John Carson is even older as Mr.Knightley ,but he did a good job .There should have been a bit more chemistry between him and Doran Godwin.There is some nice comedy here with Mr.Woodhouse and especially Miss Bates.The rest of the cast does a good job.Truly nice .9/10.
I have seen this version of Emma at least 3 times, and on this viewing, bumped my rating up 2 stars.
Though she gives Emma more complexity and is the truest to Jane Austen's portrayal, her older looks, pasty complexion, and lack of charm, fight with the positive.
Older but best miniseries of Austen's "Emma".
Of the four film and TV miniseries productions available of Jane Austen's "Emma," this one is the second best.
This and the 1996 independent film that stars Gwyneth Paltrow are the only two that bring out the best of the comedy and characters as Jane Austen wrote and saw them.
Doran Godwin was exceptional as Emma Woodhouse.
Donald Eccles played Mr. Woodhouse to perfection – as one could see him coming right off the pages of Austen's novel.
It should be noted that this early miniseries gave considerable time to his character, where most later productions saved time by reducing his film time.
At four hours, this TV series didn't add anything that the best film (1996 with Gwyneth Paltrow) might have missed, but it expanded some of the scenes and developed a couple of the characters a little more.
Even though it is a few decades back, it would be sure to please those who enjoy Jane Austen and any of the other productions of "Emma." And, for any who haven't yet seen the 1996 independent film with Gwyneth Paltrow, be sure to do so.
Doran Godwin is a rather plain Emma who stuck me as having little real charm, wit or animation, and John Carson is about 10 years too old for Mr. Knightley.
Robert East, as Frank Churchill, seemed ill fitted at 40 to the part of the dashing young rake, and Ania Marson, while pleasant enough looking, hardly presented the figure of the highly accomplished Jane Fairfax with her poor voice set against poorer piano playing.
For the most part, this whole production could have been a stage reading without missing much in the way of performance, with a small number of exceptions.
Fiona Walker's Mrs. Elton was suitably insufferable and pushy, Debbie Bowen's dithering Harriet Smith was all right, Donald Eccles also did all right as Mr. Woodhouse, and Constance Chapman's Miss Bates was decent.
I don't think any of them surpass the performances in other versions, but they at least stand up to the comparison.I suppose for an Austen fan, any Emma is better than none, but of the four I've seen (Beckinsale, Paltrow and Garai being the other Emmas), I'd rank this one a pretty distant fourth..
Yes, it's got the usual sub-par production values and theater-like acting custom from the period dramas of the time, but I've thoroughly enjoyed other adaptations made in the same way.
I never saw any real emotion from her- it was all so artificial.This is really one adaptation that I found so boring a lot of the time that I couldn't even find enough to say about it.
So, I rented the 1972 version of Emma, hoping for another really great evening of Jane Austen.
I felt like I was sitting on the front row of an old, rustic theater watching a stage production.
So, today I am returning this video and checking out the other two versions, hoping again for a great evening of Jane Austen..
As a huge Jane Austen fan I wanted to see this lesser known version of the story and found it for $3 online which should've been my first warning.
I'm not saying a good film/series can't be made on a low budget but this ends up being like a badly produced amateur play rather than a mini-series.
If you like Jane Austen and/or the story of Emma, stick to the Gwyneth Paltrow version which despite it's brevity is a very good portrayal of the story..
However the character is almost written as such in Jane Austen's novel, so it's not completely her fault.
I also would like to blame that we as modern audiences have become spoiled on "life-like" movies, like some posters obviously have, that this style of filming has become under appreciated.However upon a second or third viewing this version grows on you.
I like the way Doran explores the complications, paradoxes and perplexities of Emma's character much more than Gwenyth Paltrow's quick shallow one faced version.
Although I will say that Gwenyth has much more of Emma's charm than Doran ever does.The nice slow pace reminds me quite well of the style of Jane Austen's novels.
For proper character development to occur, one almost has to sit through watching actual real life occur, which no one wants to do anymore, because there isn't enough "time in the day" to have the patience for it.
But enough rambling.Jane Austen's books are not so much about romance (as modern film interpretations seem to think) as they are about the self-discoveries and journeys each heroine and hero undergoes into learning more about life, the person they come to love, themselves, and the world/community around them.
The Doran Godwin version especially explores this, and after you get used to the style of filming one can take away from it the lesson that Jane Austen intended in her writing, that nosy gossiping and idle busy bodying cause more grief, harm, and drama than there needs to be.
After all that's what Jane Austen's books are all about, a celebration of marriage, virtues, and middle class English country living.I also like how Jane's character is explored and I find Ania Marson to be the best cast Jane Fairfax of the three versions.
She explores Jane's weariness at having to conceal almost everything in her life and her suppressed frustration at the interferences of other more vocal characters (Miss Bates and Mrs. Elton), quite well.
I also think that Robert East who portrays Frank Churchill is the best of the three versions as well, capturing his similar sly Emma-like nature as well as his gentlemanly manners quite well.So if you have nothing to do for a night or an afternoon, this version is a nice way to appreciate Jane Austen's most well written book.