Teenage Catherine enjoys reading Gothic Novels. She visits Bath and meets Henry and his sister Eleanor. Upon returning home, Eleanor invites Catherine as her companion. There Catherine's beg... Read allTeenage Catherine enjoys reading Gothic Novels. She visits Bath and meets Henry and his sister Eleanor. Upon returning home, Eleanor invites Catherine as her companion. There Catherine's begins to suspect a dark secret at Northanger Abbey.Teenage Catherine enjoys reading Gothic Novels. She visits Bath and meets Henry and his sister Eleanor. Upon returning home, Eleanor invites Catherine as her companion. There Catherine's begins to suspect a dark secret at Northanger Abbey.
Featured reviews
Jane Austen's novel is a satirical sweep at the Gothic novels then the fashion for young ladies to read, and her heroine Catherine Moreland is no exception. In her fantasy world there are always happy endings and intrigue, and she expects to find this as she accompanies the Allens to Bath.
However, this adaptation misses the point of Austen's novel entirely, and is dull and ponderous (even at its short running time of an hour and a half). Katharine Schlesinger is irritating as Catherine, all wide eyes and empty head; while Peter Firth is nothing like my idea of Henry Tilney. Good to see Googie Withers, Robert Hardy, et al in supporting roles though, even if they are given little to do.
And who on earth thought electronic music would be suitable to play over the opening credits? An appalling choice and totally out of step with the source material.
However, this adaptation misses the point of Austen's novel entirely, and is dull and ponderous (even at its short running time of an hour and a half). Katharine Schlesinger is irritating as Catherine, all wide eyes and empty head; while Peter Firth is nothing like my idea of Henry Tilney. Good to see Googie Withers, Robert Hardy, et al in supporting roles though, even if they are given little to do.
And who on earth thought electronic music would be suitable to play over the opening credits? An appalling choice and totally out of step with the source material.
Normally BBC productions of Jane Austen are pretty good but Northanger Abbey is just odd. What were they thinking? This film has little of Austen's charm and ironically mimics the Gothic novels that Austen so wonderfully mocked. Not only that, the "gothic" sequences are tacky, over-the-top, and frankly silly. The actress playing Miss Morland is poorly cast with no obvious appeal to attract the attentions of an eligible bachelor, and though I rather liked the creepy Peter Firth as Mr. Tilney, he is not a bit like the novel, even when delivering dialog straight out of the book. Robert Hardy as General Tilney turned in one of his few terribly "ham" performances. This film was so bizarre and strange that I actually watched it again just to savor how freakishly wrong it was.
Sometimes, changes to novels when they're made into films are not only necessary, but a good thing. However, in the case of Northanger Abbey, it's a very, very bad thing. Not only is the story itself ripped to shreds, but the satire is almost completely absent from the film, and it's mixture of romance and intrigue doesn't even touch upon the biting commentary that Austen put into her work. It fails to be amusing or satirical at all, and instead turns the character's fascination with her fantasy world into mostly a drama.
This affects the romance as well. It's meandering and aimless. Chemistry and interest are never established. The reasons Tilney is attracted to Catherine are completely absent from the film, leaving the audience to wonder what it is he sees in her at all.
Hopefully some day soon, we'll get a more faithful version if Austen's satire.
This affects the romance as well. It's meandering and aimless. Chemistry and interest are never established. The reasons Tilney is attracted to Catherine are completely absent from the film, leaving the audience to wonder what it is he sees in her at all.
Hopefully some day soon, we'll get a more faithful version if Austen's satire.
Over all the movie was "ok." It ruined the story from the book and made it seems like the director was making fun of the whole story. I love Jane Austen and i've just about read all of her books. Northanger abbey is one of my favorites and I wanted so much to see it one film. So I bought the movie thinking I was going to love it but when I watched it I hated it. The movie turned the relationships upside down and gave her these stupid day dreams that just left you confused and tired of the movie. The end left you wondering if she was dreaming or if it was real. Over all if you love Jane Austen I would definitely tell you NOT to watch it. It's not worth it.
The filmmakers were clearly on drugs. That's the only explanation I have. How else do you explain this travesty of a Jane Austen adaptation? Northanger Abbey is a parody of a Gothic novel. But this film was made as if it WERE a Gothic novel. The bizarre music and dream sequences to me suggest drug-induced hallucinations rather than a naive, innocent girl with an overactive imagination, as Catherine of the novel is...
The actress who played Catherine just stands around bug-eyed all the time. Peter Firth looks at least 10 years too old to play Henry and he actually seemed a bit on the gay side to me. I don't see the attraction between him and Catherine. John Thorpe's portrayal was rather odd but Isabella actually wasn't that bad. But nothing could save this PIECE OF CRAP movie! One more thing- This film invents a character not in the book, a French friend of General Tilney's, "The Marchioness." Why exactly they added her is beyond me. Must have been the drugs. She is scary-looking beyond belief, with white foundation, red lips and black lines randomly painted on her face (dimples?).
You'd think this would at least be entertaining in a "so bad it's good" quality but unfortunately, it's not. It's just BAD.
The actress who played Catherine just stands around bug-eyed all the time. Peter Firth looks at least 10 years too old to play Henry and he actually seemed a bit on the gay side to me. I don't see the attraction between him and Catherine. John Thorpe's portrayal was rather odd but Isabella actually wasn't that bad. But nothing could save this PIECE OF CRAP movie! One more thing- This film invents a character not in the book, a French friend of General Tilney's, "The Marchioness." Why exactly they added her is beyond me. Must have been the drugs. She is scary-looking beyond belief, with white foundation, red lips and black lines randomly painted on her face (dimples?).
You'd think this would at least be entertaining in a "so bad it's good" quality but unfortunately, it's not. It's just BAD.
Did you know
- TriviaThe "little shoemaker" Mr. Allen refers to while reading the newspaper is Thomas Hardy, who was tried for sedition in London in 1794 for leading a parliamentary reform movement.
- Quotes
John Thorpe: What's this, Pussy? Are we to be supplanted?
- ConnectionsFeatured in The Real Jane Austen (2002)
- SoundtracksThe Lancer's Quadrilles: Ladoiska
(uncredited)
Composed by Kruetzer
[first dance in Bath Assembly Room on Catherine's first visit)
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official sites
- Language
- Also known as
- Jane Austen's Northanger Abbey
- Filming locations
- Bodiam Castle, Bodiam, East Sussex, England, UK(Northanger Abbey)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content