What?! What is this movie... Maybe it could have been better if it was not titled Persuasion or meant to be Austen.

I'm not sure what the goal was here but if it was to make Anne nearly dislikable, they have succeeded. Not sure what was up with Wentworth but at least there you have some type of pinning. But then also, it was like they made him nearly too sad or something. Anne & Wentworth both felt miscast with Dakota and Jarvis. Neither gave the type of miserable or toying longing needed for those characters and the story. Or maybe that could have been down to the writing or direction as well. Props for trying to add in diversity with some of the other players - especially with Golding, as Mr. Eliot.

In trying to modernize, they tell you the story or how the next scene will play out with Fleabag-esque talks to the camera or using modern language that ruins the beauty of Austen's words at times. Not that the style cannot work bc Fleabag is great but instead of giving her inner thoughts, it was as if they were telling the audience something and playing it out with commentary as if we cannot or would not gather the details, personalities, or characteristics otherwise. And it bordered on antagonizing, the piss-poor narration, instead of allowing the audience to feel with the characters and learn about things.

Persuasion is already a slow churn but this somehow made it worse. It was as if they focused on all the wrong elements at all the wrong times. The shots of the buildings were good I guess.

If you love British drama, run for the hills.

It's supposed to be a British drama and so you expect.... ya know... drama. Especially compared to the 2007 version, which captures the absolute misery and pining of Anne, the new Anne just doesn't seem miserable enough. They spent more time trying to have her come off as witty but just ends up kind of an asshole. In general, her character also doesn't have any particularly compelling qualities to win you over, so when she's supposed to be all miserable I'm kinda just thinking, "Well.... sucks to suck?". Similarly the 2007 Elliot comes off as strong, competent, authoritative, and sexy and man do you feel for Anne. Like damn, you really screwed up Anne but like I feel really bad for you at the same time, we're in this together hun, let's go wallow. By comparison when the new Elliot comes back, you don't really feel like she's missed out on much. He's basically an average bro, like initially kinda cute if you look hard enough, but the personality of a thumb. His wanna-be Darcy brooding just comes off as constipated.

I think a lot of the problem is the writing, which spent too much effort trying to add comedy (which it failed at), but Persuasion, while it has funny moments, is mostly supposed to be a DRAMA and TRAGEDY and reflect how yeah sometimes people make absolute shit decisions and you are going to pay dearly for your mistakes and it doesn't always get better with time, and that shit suuuuucks. You don't get much of a feel for that.

My biggest beef is that they BUTCHERED one of my all time favorite romance quotes... and with no obvious purpose.

The original in the book and the 2007 movie: "There could have never been two hearts so open, no tastes so similar, no feelings so in unison, no countenances so beloved. Now they were as strangers; nay, worse than strangers, for they could never become acquainted. It was a perpetual estrangement"

The new version: "There could have never been two hearts so open, no tastes so similar, no feelings so in unison, no countenances so beloved. Now they were as strangers; nay, worse than strangers, they were.... ex's."

Just WHY. It was the wrong moment to try to modernize this. Do they think their watchers can't handle words like "perpetual"? How patronizing. It really ruined an already mediocre movie for me. The real tragedy is that someone paid money to produce this Bridgerton (which I also hate) knock off. I recommend watching the 2008 BBC Sense and Sensibility for some proper misery and pining to help flush out all this garbage from your system if you failed to read this review before watching.

That was so bad AHAHAHA. \*hides behind a tree and cries\*

I think I read somewhere that the creators behind this were going to take on some of the other Austen romances and HAHAHA (I’m scared).

Early in this film, Lady Russell tells Anne: _"I say this with love: abandon all hope."_ Coincidentally, this is my advice to people who watch this movie with the expectation of enjoying it.

I have a file on my Notes app full of complaints but I'm going to do the healthy thing and delete it soon. But before that, there's one thing that I just have to say (and please keep in mind that I was pretty excited for this movie after the trailer released because we already have two absolutely perfect & straight from the source material versions of _Persuasion_ - which for the record, is one of the best & angstiest Austen stories - i.e. the 1995 and 2007 adaptations, and modernizing the story is such a cool idea...if only it's done well):

Ben Lloyd-Hughes who played Mr. Colbourne on _Sanditon_ season 2 pretty much hit the nail on the head when he said the following:

> "Playing any good Jane Austen scene is all about what’s not said. It’s all about the subtext and the ellipses and the unrequited aspects of it, and I really loved that. I love that dynamic. ==I love not having everything in the text that just spells it out, and having to almost tell one story with your eyes, and another with the words,== and then another with your physicality, your body language, and your interacting with that person."

A large part of what makes _Persuasion_ compelling is the restraint, and the inability to say everything that you feel due to the constraints of communication, expectations of propriety, and honestly: straight-up shame & embarrassment. It's the disconnect between what you want to say and the itty little bit that you _can_ say. Not only does _Persuasion (2022)_ in fact spell out everything through the text/dialogue, but in case you didn't get it, Dakota Johnson will also break the fourth wall and go through it even more explicitly in case you're a bit hard of understanding — this film simply does not trust that audiences are smart enough to grasp what's going on. I swear: this film could've been a whole lot better if only Johnson didn't talk to the screen so much. :upside_down:

TL;DR: Ever wondered what Austen's angstiest love story would be like without the angst & chemistry? Well, you no longer have to guess.

There are two groups of viewers who profess to hate this movie, and I have some sympathy for one of those groups. The Jane Austen purists are furious about it (“furious purists” - say that three times quickly). The story has been updated — sort of. That is, we find modern language and expressions popping up here and there, but clearly it still takes place in the past. It possesses a modern sensibility but still resides in the past.

There is more wit and humor in this version, and I am fine with that. If I feel like watching an adaptation closer to the original novel, there are the 1992 and 2007 versions to fall back on, after all. There will always be there.

Don’t get me wrong; there were one or two places where even I thought they had played too fast and loose with the characters: such as when Anne Elliot embarrasses her brother-in-law in front of a large gathering for dinner by saying he had been interested in marrying her before settling upon sister Mary. That seemed too mean-spirited for the character they were building and we come to know.

So the Austen lovers are upset in the same way that historians were when most historical movies change history or the real life people involved. I get that feeling even if I don’t share it.

The group I don’t sympathize with are the racists, aka the haters. They sometimes try to shield their racism by talking about “woke” culture, or whatever. But the simple fact that they can’t see past the race and skin color to the individuals’ performances is exactly why it is important to have non-whites playing some of these roles. Where are these hating snowflakes when talking about the thousands of movies over the decades where all roles were played by whites? Wait, what? That doesn’t offend them equally? Big surprise.

MORE SPOILER-FREE REVIEWS @ https://www.msbreviews.com/

"Persuasion seems to be another typical case of book adaptations: anyone familiar with the original material will struggle to appreciate even the slightest change; those without previous knowledge of Jane Austen's novel might be able to enjoy the film for itself. As someone belonging to the latter group, I found myself surprisingly satisfied.

Despite following all the narrative paths in the most predictable, cliche manner possible, Dakota Johnson's fabulous performance and some unexpectedly humorous interactions are enough to make the viewing rather pleasant.

Far from being innovative or unique, but it still serves as a recommendation for fans of the genre."

Rating: B-