Los Angeles Times

An argument against ‘Persuasion’

Oh, Netflix — what have you done to one of Jane Austen’s finest works and heroines?

- JUSTIN CHANG

To begin with a perhaps quintessen­tially Jane Austen question: Which of these two do you prefer?

Sample A: “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.”

Sample B: “A heartbeat ago, there were no two people more in rhythm than Wentworth and I. Now we’re strangers. Worse than strangers — we’re exes.”

Tricky, I know. Let’s try another:

Sample A: “The worst of Bath was the number of its plain women. He did not mean to say that there were no pretty women, but the number of the plain was out of all proportion.”

Sample B: “It’s often said that if you’re a five in London, you’re a 10 in Bath.” Oof. Last one, I promise. Sample A: “My being the mother is the very reason why my feelings should not be tried. I am not at all equal to it. You saw how hysterical I was yesterday.”

Sample B: “The thing about me is, I am an empath.”

To clarify the obvious — something the movie under review has no problem doing — the “A” excerpts are from Austen’s magnificen­t novel “Persuasion.” The “Bs” are from the movie, which I suppose you could also call “Persuasion,” insofar as it appears to have lifted sentences from the novel and fed them through some kind of Instagram-filtering, catchphras­e-generating, textsummar­izing idiot bot.

Like even the lousiest Regency-era frippery, it has its intermitte­nt pleasures, most of them visual. No movie that finds Dakota Johnson modeling high-waisted frocks against the Lyme Regis seawall or the lush Somerset countrysid­e could be called a complete waste of time.

To be more charitable still: A movie in which Johnson falls on her face, upends a gravy boat over her head and climbs the stairs grumpily nursing a bottle of wine might be a source of some theoretica­l amusement. But she would have to be playing someone other than Anne Elliot, the oldest, wisest and scarcely most accidentpr­one of Austen heroines.

Johnson, to be sure, projects a subtle intelligen­ce and gravity more than worthy of this beloved literary character and her unusually bitterswee­t, ruminative love story. That’s why it’s dispiritin­g to see her Anne cast in the more genericall­y sassyklutz­y mold of so many contempora­ry rom-com protagonis­ts — some of whom already have Austen spliced into their own cultural DNA.

Like Phoebe WallerBrid­ge’s Fleabag, this Anne throws all manner of winks, smirks and droll asides at the camera, regularly demolishin­g the fourth wall (but happily leaving John Paul Kelly’s ornate, fondant-hued production design intact).

And like Bridget Jones, this Anne delivers reams of cheekily self-effacing voiceover when she’s not drowning in self-pity. When Anne buries her face in a pillow and pines for Capt. Frederick Wentworth (Cosmo Jarvis), the handsome sailor whose proposal she rejected long ago at the insistence of her comprehens­ively stupid family, you half expect to hear a harpist’s rendition of “All by Myself.”

I wouldn’t object to such anachronis­m on principle — “All by Myself” is certainly easier on the ears than “The thing about me is, I am an empath” — and certainly not on purist grounds.

One film’s style must not be the rule of another’s, and some very fine ones, from this year’s delightful “Fire Island” to the immortal “Clueless,” have subjected Austen’s work to cultural, temporal, geographic­al and vernacular liberties.

Even those movies that remain in period garb have shown themselves capable of a disarming, distinctly modern comic energy, in particular Autumn de Wilde’s luscious “Emma” and Whit Stillman’s delirious “Love & Friendship,” possibly the finest Austen adaptation and certainly the funniest.

And so the problem with this “Persuasion,” prettily but blandly directed by Carrie Cracknell from a script by Ron Bass and Alice Victoria Winslow, is not that it translates its source material into an easily digestible, Netflixfri­endly comic idiom.

It’s that said translatio­n is so hopelessly at odds with what the movie thinks it’s giving us: a portrait of an endlessly perceptive, tolerant, dutiful and self-sacrificin­g woman, navigating her way back — through a familiar Austen-esque maze of unsavory relations, pragmatic courtships and complicate­d inheritanc­e schemes — to the love of her life.

There’s a sliver of promise in the idea of Johnson playing a slyer, snarkier Anne than usual, someone who remains unfailingl­y dependable and well mannered while quietly unloading on her pompous father, Sir Walter (Richard E. Grant); her peevish older sister, Elizabeth (Yolanda Kettle); and her chronicall­y malingerin­g younger sister, Mary (a sharp Mia McKenna-Bruce). But the barbs are strained and second-rate, and nothing about them suggests the workings of a particular­ly keen mind, let alone Anne’s famously generous spirit.

Cracknell and her collaborat­ors seem less inspired than frustrated by the social strictures of 19th century Britain, and they are keen to inject them with their idea of a modern sensibilit­y. This means that Anne and Wentworth, fatefully thrown back into the same social circle after eight years apart, cannot spend the length of a film diligently avoiding any mention of their past romance. They must talk, they must spar and they must even DTR, God help us (or universe help us, to adopt this movie’s rigorously faith-neutral parlance).

Some of the supporting characters benefit from this heightened emotional directness, and from the more racially inclusive casting prominent in recent English period dramas, from “Bridgerton” to “The Personal History of David Copperfiel­d.”

Nikki Amuka-Bird, who played a villain in that movie, embodies a warmer authority here as Anne’s (too) trusted confidant, Lady Russell. Nia Towle brings warmth and wit to the productive­ly expanded role of Mary’s sister-in-law, Louisa Musgrove, whose friendship with Anne complicate­s her own attraction to Wentworth.

As Wentworth, Jarvis is as handsome as required, though nearly as drippy as he is scruffy. Fun as it is to watch Anne fiddle with his sextant, you almost prefer her scenes with her dreamy/ scheme-y cousin, Mr. Elliot, who in this retelling is bracingly straightfo­rward about his financial motives.

He’s played by Henry Golding, whom I reckon we can call a 10 in a movie that rarely rises above a three. Golding deserves more roles, and not just of the “Crazy Rich” persuasion.

 ?? Nick Wall Netf lix ?? DAKOTA Johnson, left, Richard E. Grant, Yolanda Kettle in “Persuasion.” What would Jane Austen think?
Nick Wall Netf lix DAKOTA Johnson, left, Richard E. Grant, Yolanda Kettle in “Persuasion.” What would Jane Austen think?

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States