Like the majority of the prospective viewers of "Emma," I have not read Jane Austen's book. I hope, however, that they, like me, will be keen to do so after seeing the film.
A craze for Austen has recently afflicted closet Anglophiles, shameless romantics and English majors who just need to refresh their memories. Cashing in on this has had its downside: Audiences delighted by last year's Oscar winning "Sense and Sensibility," the recent "Persuasion" and the '90s update "Clueless" might come in their droves, but they will inevitably make comparisons. Despite sterling efforts "Emma" is not as good as any of them.
This is surprising as many believe this is Austen's best novel. Emma Woodhouse (Gwyneth Paltrow) is addicted to match-making and her calculating attempts to manipulate those around her. Singled out for special attention is her gentle and dim-witted friend Harriet Smith (Toni Collette) whose malleable temperament makes her an easy target for Emma's endeavors: as the trailer crassly proclaims "Cupid is armed and dangerous"
The sharp point of Emma's arrow is rivaled though by that of her barbed tongue. Deliciously bitchy whether the occasion calls for it or not, she is always quick to comment. She remarks, for example, that the local reverend must have met his wife while doing charitable work in a mental asylum.
Unfortunately for those around her she is frequently off target(both in match-making and in cattiness), scattering casualties around the Surrey countryside. Failing to take her own susceptibility to love into account, Emma very nearly shoots herself in the foot.
In the title role Paltrow does well; to the modern viewer Emma's problem is clearly that 19th Century rural England does not offer very much to the upper middle-class woman. One visit to a sick widow a day is not going to occupy the mind of a lively, intelligent young girl and Paltrow successfully conveys the extent of Emma's pent-up energy and desperate need to be busy. As one character tells her by way of rebuke, "better be without sense than misapply it as you do."
She does not however shy away from Emma's more unpleasant characteristics, vividly depicting a spoiled, snobbish girl who would hardly head your list of ideal party guests. Paltrow trusts the audience pick up on Emma's essential kindness though; moments of closeness between father and daughter hover on the fringes of scenes, revealing a tender relationship even allowing for the older man's idealized view of his child.
Without exception, the surrounding cast is excellent. High caliber actors from the British stage have stepped in to fill various cameo roles, as if, that it is an Austen costume-drama legitimizes their decision to accept a huge paycheck from Hollywood.
Sophie Thompson, member of The Royal Shakespeare Company, proves herself worthy of notice not simply as the ubiquitous Emma's younger sister. In the un-glamorous role as a garrulous spinster she treads the thin line between caricature and characterization with aplomb, managing to engender sympathy both for herself and those who must suffer her.
Collette, the Australian actor who received rapturous reviews for "Muriel's Wedding", emerges from beneath wispy curls and the occasional bonnet as Emma's frumpy friend/victim. Her modest performance is accomplished, providing a dramatic antithesis to Paltrow.
Disappointingly, despite this hard work the "Emma" fails to come off. As a film it is a standard romantic comedy with a brittle coating of acerbic wit. As a book, I hope it is a lot more, maybe Austen's prose adds to the plot a twist of sophistication and complexity that cannot translate to celluloid. It is an enjoyable film, entertaining and well-acted but no definitive version.
