North & South discussion

~ Episode One Discussions:

I wasn't a big fan of Margaret's when the episode started. I found her to be a bit snobbish. At her cousin Edith's wedding, she says she's not bored when asked the question by Henry, but rather tired. She sort of looks down on the festivities, proclaiming to be too grown up for hair ornaments & the society wedding in London.
She then is uprooted to Milton, where she comes upon the two men at the house for rent & demands to be taken to Mr. Thornton. I found this a bit presumptuous of her. After all, she was a stranger to this town, but feels the need to throw her weight around as if she's some important individual who must be attended to.
I honestly didn't like her much at all throughout the entire episode. She was a bit too haughty, claiming her tiredness a little too much & looking down her nose at people she didn't know or try to understand. It took me a while to warm up to her, I don't know why Mr. Thornton fell in love with her pretty much at first sight.

I felt that way about her in the book, actually! I did not like her very much at all but then she became something like a Mr Darcy to the novel - her pride and haughtiness were dismantled one by one as she made her realisations about the North. What I think is telling is her rejection of the two proposals she gets - I think each candidate is rejected not (just) because she does not love either man, but because she does not think either worthy (of her or just generally). That is a pretty arrogant thing to think, and yet she does make herself a moral arbiter of everything, until the very end of the book and the adaptation when at last (especially after the affair with Frederick) she realises that what she believed possible as a moral perfection was simply her naive understanding of reality (hence the final "oh Mr Thornton, I am not good enough").

I thought that first episode did a really good job of condensing that first part of the novel, that happens in London and then in Helston. Two short scenes but they offer such a good contrast to Milton when we get to it.

Did Mr Thornton fall in love with her at first sight? He fell in love quickly, granted, but I would not go so far as to say it was first sight.

Donna wrote: "She then is uprooted to Milton, where she comes upon the two men at the house for rent & demands to be taken to Mr. Thornton. I found this a bit presumptuous of her."

Granted she was being snobbish...alot. But don't you remember that those two men talked about her father in a rather mocking way and made presumptions not knowing the facts. I would be haughty too.

But she demands to be taken to Thornton because they're telling her he's arranging everything for her and her father and she's never heard of him, that's his presumption surely? Margaret and her father have been traipsing around the town looking at places to rent and the two men are not only gossiping about them but refuse to deal with her. She has her father's authority not Mr Thornton.

I just thought she could have been a little more grateful that Thornton was trying to help the family find a house, whether she knew him or not. She didn't wait for explanations, just stormed out of the house demanding those men take her to find him. Because she was a stranger to Milton & was ignorant of the ways of The North, she could have been nicer!

Samanta wrote: "Granted she was being snobbish...alot. But don't you remember that those two men talked about her father in a rather mocking way and made presumptions not knowing the facts. I would be haughty too.
"

Me too. She's a bit snobby but she's proud and she wants to deal with Thornton directly since he won't deal with her. She has no idea he's hard at work IN the mill. She probably assumes he's sitting in an office somewhere counting his money.

I'm not sure I like the way Thornton is portrayed in this episode. In the book he does NOT have a temper. I think his abuse of Stevens is over the top cruel. Grab the guy's pipe, yell at him then kick him out the door. The producers on the DVD commentary said they felt there needed to be a reason for Margaret to dislike Thornton in the beginning.

I can understand that since her reasons for disliking him are just not acceptable in this day and age

Oh poor Margaret. I think we are supposed to see her bad side - her prejudices and rather naive ideals. But for the most part we are supposed to sympathize with Margaret. (After all, the novel was originally titled 'Margaret Hale.')
I'm impressed with how Margaret endures and actually ends up leading her family through their darkest trials. And she's only 18 or 19 when her troubles start. I feel great sympathy for her. She never really wanted to live in London as her cousin's companion, and she was looking forward to living in Helstone again - to be herself in the country.
She liked Henry, but she searched her heart and decided she didn't love him. I don't see her rejection as haughty at all. She wasn't attracted to Henry in a deep way, in fact she finds certain elements of his character trying - his suave, worldly ways.
By the time she has to deal with Thornton's proposal, she's fairly burdened with a host of struggles: adjusting to life in a region foreign to her, reduced income and household help, dying mother, dying friend, guilt-ridden father, and a brother coming to town who is wanted for mutiny. She barely has time to think, let alone sort out her feelings for a powerful cotton mill master who happens to be her dad's best friend. I'd be a basket case under all that stress. I think Margaret does the best she can under very trying circumstances and very little experience in the harsh world of Milton.
There. I've spoken up for Margaret. :)

Truth be told, Donna, I think the producers needed a reason for Margaret to go see the mill - to see the cotton fluff and the hear the noise -- and to run into John at his worst. ;)

I like movie Margaret right away but book Margaret takes some time to grow on me. I admire the way she handles all that happens to her.

I was of the same mind as you were, Qnpoohbear - the movie Margaret I liked almost instantly, whereas the book Margaret... I like her, but it takes me a while to stop blaming her for certain attitudes. The series does a really good job of showing all the reasons for her supposed haughtiness - as Samanta said, I would be haughty too if I had heard those men discussing the affairs of my family with such disrespect!

I never had a problem with her demanding to see Mr. Thornton either. She had probably been house hunting for quite a while (the clock on Thornton's office wall showed it being a fair way into the afternoon, I think) and I don't blame her for having very little patience with those men. They clearly had little opinion of her capability in choosing a house, compared to Mr. Thornton's capability. Thornton was obviously the one they deferred to, so Margaret either had to back down having wasted her afternoon, or go to see Thornton herself. Fair enough, I say!

You are very right to speak up for Margaret, Trudy, and I agree with all your points. :) I didn't mind her rejection of Henry either, but I think you all know how little patience I have for Henry. :D Her rejection of Thorton I do have problems with, but as you say she did have a fair amount to be dealing with for a young woman at the time.

What do you all think about the way Mr. and Mrs. Hale were portrayed in this first episode? I think they are portrayed quite accurately, but reducing the time Margaret spent in Helstone to a single flashback means that we don't really see how much she had to be the adult of the family - so to speak - during that transitional period. We don't see exactly how much her parents are contributing to her worries.

(P.S. Sorry I'm so late to catch up on this one, ladies! It's been a busy week. :( )

I think Mrs. Hale was portrayed well in this episode. She's shown in contrast to her robust sister and as a weak woman on the journey to Milton. There were some deleted scenes on the dvd that are closer to the book, including the scene where Mr. Hale tells M he's giiving up his living, they're moving to Milton and she has to tell her mother.

I've seen those deleted scenes as well... on YouTube, I think! I think including them would have been a mistake in terms of the pacing of the series and the episode. But it is a shame to miss out on that important aspect of Margaret's relationship with her parents!

Becca wrote: "I've seen those deleted scenes as well... on YouTube, I think! I think including them would have been a mistake in terms of the pacing of the series and the episode. But it is a shame to miss out o..."

agreed!

I know I always defend Mrs. Hale but....could someone please explain why the business with her going to the sea is completely the reverse of the book? Or do I misremember that? I could have sworn that in the book she does go, and in the series she would be shirking her wifely duty to go. It always seems to me an unfair emendation, having Mr.Hale reprimand her for even thinking of it. Not that in the book we shouldn't be critical that she's shirking having to find a new home, but it sets here up as much more childish.

It's hard to portray Maria well when you skip the entire opening chapters of the book where we see life in Helstone, which reveal Maria's discontent, and the growing disconnect in the vicar's marriage.
I don't know why Sandy Welch threw in Maria's comment about trying to escape to the sea. Maybe to show she wanted a pampered life? And yes, you're right, they all go to the sea first before going to Milton. Maria and Dixon stay longer while Margaret and papa go Milton house-hunting.
Our very first glimpse of the Hales is inconsistent with the book, since Maria refused to go to her only neice's wedding because she didn't think she had a good enough dress.

Do you think that perhaps the screen-writers were trying a bit of a trade-off here, in order to set up Maria's character as accurately as they could within the time restriction? As Kate pointed out, the series version of Maria's request to stay on the coast does seem far more childish, but that is, I think, somewhat balanced out by the fact that Mrs. Hale was gracious enough to attend her nieces wedding.

Having Mrs. Hale attend the wedding allowed the series to tell the audience that Mr. and Mrs. Hale married for love, and to show Maria in a favourable light while addressing the issue far more swiftly. It would have taken a lot longer to explain why Maria didn't attend the wedding, and to have the family make a detour to the seaside. So though the series portrayal is - as Trudy said - inconsistent with the novel, I suspect that they switched the emphasis on both instances to portray Maria as fairly as they could in a short time frame, allowing them to sooner focus on the main story. :)

Becca, maybe you should try your hand at writing screen adaptations! :)

I haven't finished the book yet. I recently watched the series and fell in love with it. "North and South" has been on my list at Netflix forever and I never hit play. Once I did, three weeks ago, I have watched at least a little every day.
I started reading the book (still haven't read too much), but I think the series portraits Mrs. Hale as a much better person than in the book. I didn't get that impression of all the complaints about Helstone from the series. I also agree with Becca that she attended the wedding just to illustrate that she got married for love, not money or position.
As for Margaret, I can already understand her better after starting the book. She was only 19!!! She was raised basically by her aunt, that believes money and position matters more than anything else... I can understand her prejudices in the beginning, and love her more for overcoming them (as I know she will, from the series). And she does that even though Mr. Thornton isn't rich anymore (Take that, Elizabeth Bennet! lol Just kidding!)

Trudy wrote: "Becca, maybe you should try your hand at writing screen adaptations! :)"

Haha, thanks Trudy! So nice of you to say that. :) It's actually something I'd like to do one day - not as a job, really, just something that might be fun to try.

Juliana wrote: "I haven't finished the book yet. I recently watched the series and fell in love with it. "North and South" has been on my list at Netflix forever and I never hit play. Once I did, three weeks ago, ..."

I'm sure you'll love the rest of the book, Juliana! It's such a beautiful novel, I'm reading it at the moment - since I first discovered it I've made it the first book I read every year. :) The series is so wonderful, isn't it? I've got a suspicion that the Netflix version isn't complete, though...

I think you're right there, the series does have a slightly more sympathetic portrayal, in terms of the lack of complaining about Helstone. She certainly does complain about other things in the series though! I think on screen we get less of an idea of her original so-called dissatisfaction with Helstone, and more of her reluctance and horror at having the live in Milton. And I'm glad you agree with me about the wedding - it was a nice way of showing the audience that she married for love, I think, and it makes us a little more sympathetic towards her. :)

I found that about the book too! As soon as you get the impression of how young Margaret was when all this happened to her, her strength of character is even more amazing than it already was.

"I can understand her prejudices in the beginning, and love her more for overcoming them..." That's such a nice way of putting it! I agree with you completely, though I could sometimes wish that her prejudices weren't so firmly rooted to begin with. :) Didn't you just love it how she offered herself and her fortune to Thornton even knowing that he was no longer rich? (Please excuse me while I fall about giggling at that last comment about Elizabeth Bennet... LOL! :D)

lol 1995 P&P is my favorite adaptation, besides the fact that Elizabeth Bennet just fall in love with Mr. Darcy after seeing Pemberley. So awful! lol It's not like that in the book!
Hummm... You may be right about Netflix. I read you and Trudy discussing about how the series show Mrs. Hale about something of going to the sea. I haven't seen that. The bright side is that I probably have more time of Mr. Thornton to watch! :D I'll look for the DVD.
I am LOVING the book so far. I have a version that has some notes from Patricia Ingham and it's like having someone to debate about the book. The notes highlight some behaviors and facts (a little bit spoiler alert for who doesn't know the story) and link to future actions. After reading the beginning of the book, I can understand Margaret's angriness rejecting Mr. Thornton. That Mr. Lennox, in my opinion, was really thinking that he was saving her, or that he would own her just for her father's financial situation.
About Mrs. Hale, in the series, I can even relate to her complaints, since her husband decided, after more than 20 years, that he doesn't agree with the Book of Common Prayer. (Again, I am watching Netflix...) It makes Mr. Hale seems a little futile and delusional and Mrs. Hale the most grounded and realistic of the couple.
Yes, I loved it how she grabbed his hand and wouldn't let it go this time! I just didn't understand why she took Henry with her to go to Milton... Of course, he wasn't the nicest person in the world, but he was so hopeful with that trip. And, aside the fact that it was a accidental encounter, I believe she was hoping for a second chance with John in this trip to Milton. (Don't tell me if it's different in the book, please! I've read the whole day today, can't wait to know more).

I have to confess I've never actually seen the 1995 version - just the 2005 version, which I really love. :) It is funny though, how it seems to some people that Elizabeth fell in love with Darcy because of Pemberley!

Haha, we were discussing how Mrs. Hale going to the sea was in the book and not in the series... I just remember someone else in the group saying that it wasn't a full version, I've actually no idea what they have or haven't cut out! In any case, I think we can both agree that seeing more of Mr. Thornton is always a good thing, so it'd be great to have the DVD. :)

Yeah, I think having notes and debates in my book would really annoy me - I prefer to discover things slowly and for myself rather than having someone else's opinion constantly interfering. I'm sure notes would be useful sometimes, though! Margaret's refusal does seem a little more harsh in the series than in the book, and Henry... argh, don't get me started on Mr. Lennox. He annoys the crap out of me. :P

I feel really sorry for Mrs. Hale in the series, at certain times anyway. But I think the series does a really good job of showing that both Mr. and Mrs. Hale have their own strengths and weaknesses of character that either help or hinder them in their relationship. That sense of futility that Mr. Hale sometimes has I think comes from his determination to see the best in the world, and sometimes it's so hard to see him struggling under the weight of his and others troubles to maintain that quiet optimism and constant kindness.

I loved that too! I love the look on Mr. Thornton's face when she takes his hand, and the fact that Margaret is too shy to look up at him. I think she took Henry with her to Milton because she wanted his help in explaining her financial proposition. She wasn't self-confident enough as yet to be sure of getting it right, and I think she was trying to be particularly careful not to give Mr. Thornton the sense that she owed him anything, thinking he still thought badly of her lie to the police inspector.

I won't spoil anything about the books ending, but when you'd finished I would love to hear what you think of the series' ending as opposed to the book! There's a lot of debate about that particular topic, and it'll be interesting to see which side you end up on. :)

Endings ... Without giving too much away, I find Henry Lennox to be a more sympathetic character in the book, particularly as it relates to his actions at the end of the book. The series needs a slimey bad guy, so Henry takes that role, particularly as to his behavior at world fair (series).
Let's just all agree that the ending in the series is one of the all time best - that train scene is magical. We could all go on and an and on ....
However, give the book's ending a good read. Mrs. Gaskell's description of how Thorton says her name "Margaret!" is, in my opinion, one of the most passionate expressions of love in literature.
The bit about Mrs. Thornton - "That woman!" is quite funny as well.

I agree with you there, Suzan - Henry is certainly a more sympathetic character in the book. That being said, there are points in the book where Henry is far more closely examined than in the series, so at certain points in the book I dislike him even more than I do in the series.

Anyway, yes, I agree that the series ending is magical, one of the most beautiful and romantic scenes ever seen in a period piece. :) <3 I agree that the books ending is brilliant too, though! One thing I was disappointed about in the series - the only time Mr. Thornton actually says "Margaret" is to Mr. Higgins, not actually to Margaret herself. *sigh*

Welcome, Juliana, to the N&S love! Yes, by all means purchase the DVD. The instant versions available on Netflix and Amazon are missing some 20 minutes of runtime, and you don't want to miss a moment of this masterpiece.
As you read through the book, and even when you're finished, you may really enjoy reading our recent group read discussion of the novel. It's enlightening to have others add their comments and insights. There's just so much going on in N&S. Here's the link: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/group...
As to why she was traveling to Milton with Henry, it was the easy choice since he was her financial lawyer but the other reason she had him come along is that in that era it would have been highly improper for her to travel unaccompanied.
I agree, Suzan, that it's much easier to sympathize with book Henry. He wasn't really aware of who Margaret really was and what she really wanted. He was what a Victorian girl was suppose to find as a good match. The fact that Margaret chose Thornton is more powerful with this contrast of possible husbands and lifestyles. The reader/viewer is suppose to see the gap in her choice. We see the stark contrast in the clever Great Exhibition scene in the film. Margaret is beginning to lean North....

Oh Becca, I watched the much-heralded 1995 P&P about a year after I found N&S because it seemed to be everybody's other favorite. Well, I must admit after N&S, everything else just doesn't cut it. It really is a terrible thing to have such a high standard! lol.
My second favorite BBC mini-series period drama/romance is the 2006 Jane Eyre with Ruth Wilson and Toby Stephens. Not surprisingly, the screenplay writer is the same as for N&S: Sandy Welch. She does an incredible job of distilling the essence of the book into film and she's brilliant at bring to the fore all the sexual tension half-hidden in Victorian prose.

Trudy wrote: "Oh Becca, I watched the much-heralded 1995 P&P about a year after I found N&S because it seemed to be everybody's other favorite. Well, I must admit after N&S, everything else just doesn't cut it. ..."

Haha, with Pride & Prejudice adaptations my only problem is that I'm stubbornly attached to the 2005 version, and having watched just a little of the 95 version I found it rather stuffy. Really I should just stop talking about it until I've seen both versions, but somehow I never seem to have the time! And you're right, I don't think any other period drama will ever measure up to N&S. :)

You know, I was actually planning to watch that Jane Eyre adaptation next month! A friend of mine recommended it to me when we were talking about classics and Robin Hood (sort of simultaneously) last year. Toby Stephens is in a few episodes of Robin Hood, so she told me about the adaptation of Jane Eyre he was in, and I agreed to watch it as it sounded really good. I'm looking forward to it even more now, between your praise of it and knowing that Sandy Welch did the screenplay!

I love the 2005 movie version of P&P as well. Such beautiful cinematography. The 1995 version IS stuffy in comparison.
I actually enjoyed the 1980 version of P&P much better. At least the hero and heroine don't look like they're almost thirty!
Margaret Hale in the 2004 version is not really much like Gaskell's description, but I think Daniela did a wonderful job. It could have flopped, but she held her own against a now-legendary performance.

Oh thank goodness, someone who agrees with me! That's exactly why I love the 2005 P&P - the beautiful cinematography, the lovely soundtrack, and their willingness to cut out original lines of dialogue to make the story movie length. I just love how it brings P&P to life so brilliantly! It's really good to know that my impression of the 1995 version being "stuffy in comparison" was a correct impression. :)

I've not seen the 1980 version either! Do you think I should?

I agree with you there, I think Daniela gave a really strong performance. She certainly earned her place among all the other brilliant performances. And I am aware that people complain about her difference in looks to Gaskell's description, but I saw the series before I read the novel so at first it didn't matter to me. After I'd read the novel, the looks still didn't matter to me, because Daniela really felt like Margaret... she became Margaret through her acting, regardless of looks.

Well, it's not an established fact that it's stuffy, that's just your and my impression. There are countless Austen fans who just love that adaptation.
I'm not necessarily recommending everyone to go see the 1980 version of P&P, it may not appeal to all. I just found I enjoyed it more than the 1995 version. I'm not a huge P&P fan, so I can't articulate why very well. It may be that I found Jennifer Ehle's Lizzy too ... precocious? Not sure. I just don't sympathize with that Lizzy very well.
Concerning Margaret Hale, I just read (and answered) a recent blog comment that said that Margaret always looked tired in the film and that it annoyed her!

Very true - it's just so nice to find someone with the same impression, because a lot of Austen fans I come across tend to love the 95 version. *sigh*
I'll have a look at the 1980 version if I ever come across it. Jennifer Ehle... I don't know, from what little I saw of her she didn't seem to have Lizzy's liveliness that came through in both the novel and in Keira Knightley's Elizabeth.

:O What? Really? Margaret didn't always look tired in the film! Perhaps she looked weighed down often enough, but that is consistent with the story and character. After I watched N&S with my family, my mother said she didn't really like Margaret's actress because she was too "expressionless"... I had to firmly hold my tongue on that one too.

Well it's no secret that I love the 1980 P&P (you can buy it on Amazon but you have to get the dutch region 2) and I really don't like either of the later versions. ;)

Have you seen/read Wives and Daughters?

Louise Sparrow wrote: "Well it's no secret that I love the 1980 P&P (you can buy it on Amazon but you have to get the dutch region 2) and I really don't like either of the later versions. ;)

Have you seen/read Wives and..."

Oh yes, I remember you saying you liked that version! :)

No, not yet! I really must get onto it, but annoyingly enough the university bookshop I tend to get my classic novels from only ever seems to have "North & South" and "Cranford" in the Collector's Library editions that I buy. -_- So irritating.

Wives & Daughters is a wonderful read. Much more Austenesque than N&S.
I loved it, although it's different in pace, setting, and intensity.
I bought the Barnes & Noble edition and thoroughly enjoyed the introduction.
Btw, I strongly dislike the Patricia Ingham introduction in the Penguin edition of N&S I have. I disagree heartily with some of her points and thought she rather ruined the story by picking it apart in certain over-analyzed aspects.
I was so pleasantly surprised to actually enjoy an academic intro for W&D. So much so, I emailed the author to tell her.

Evidently I really need to make "read Wives and Daughters" one of my New Years resolutions this year. :) Something written by Gaskell but more Austenesque than N&S sounds absolutely lovely. Is that the one that she didn't quite finish writing, though, or am I mistaken?

I think I've heard complaints about Ingham's introduction before, from several people, so I'll make sure to steer clear if I ever see it. Who was the author of the W&D author you liked?

An American, Amy King, wrote the intro to W&D in my edition. No big spoilers and she opened my thought to some of the themes to look for.
And yes, Gaskell died very suddenly and left her work unfinished, but fortunately she had gotten to a point very near the end. The film adaptation is very well done. Great acting.

I hardly have something else to say! ;) every one give very good opinions and point of view, very interesting the reading ^^. I only can say that I enjoy when you can see in the adaptation of the book, the spirit of the writer and the profundity of the subject is developing in every aspect with meaning. I try to explain some of my feelings because I live in every time when I read the book or see the series ha ha! I am a sentimental! XD he he! ;) I hope can understand me! xo!
Noe

Trudy wrote: "An American, Amy King, wrote the intro to W&D in my edition. No big spoilers and she opened my thought to some of the themes to look for.
And yes, Gaskell died very suddenly and left her work unfi..."

I'll keep an eye out for her introduction then, I like introductions that manage to be useful without spoiling anything. :)

Ah, I thought so. Very sad indeed! :( I'm really interested in seeing exactly how close to the end she got, and of course I'll be looking for the film adaptation after I've read the novel - perhaps even before, I haven't decided! I take it there is only one adaptation?

Noelia wrote: "I hardly have something else to say! ;) every one give very good opinions and point of view, very interesting the reading ^^. I only can say that I enjoy when you can see in the adaptation of the b..."

Thanks Noelia, I'm pleased that you are finding our comments interesting. :) I believe I understand what you mean, and I quite agree with you, it is wonderful when a series adaptation so perfectly captures the original feeling, meaning and characters from the novel. I absolutely love that about the series North & South - I'm very sentimental too! :D

Ahhhh, the 2005 vs 1995 P&P discussion :-) I love both versions ... while the 1995 version stays true to the book, I much prefer the 2005 film. I loved the miniseries so much .... thought Colin Firth was the perfect Darcy and could never be knocked out of the #1 spot ... until Matthew came along :-) Colin's portrayal of Darcy was exactly how I envisioned him while reading the book. After seeing the film I realized that I much preferred the shy and vulnerable approach Matthew took .... and yes, the cinematography and musical score were gorgeous. I've never seen the 1980 version.

Becca, the Ruth Wilson/Toby Stephens version of Jane Eyre is my favorite (and I think I've seen most of them). I didn't realize that Sandy Welch did the screenplay but now I'm not surprised .... she did a wonderful job .... you really do have to see it. Not only is it beautifully done, but Ruth is the perfect Jane and Toby is the perfect Rochester.

For years P&P was my favorite period piece .... until I saw North and South ... nothing compares to it .... everything about the series was absolute perfection .... the screenplay, the costumes, the cast, and that exquisite soundtrack ... I think the musical score is so strong and vibrant that it is almost a character in the story.

Timothy Dalton version of Jane Eyre is right up there, although the acting is a tad it's a little over dramatic.
I loved that Jane (apologies for not knowing actress name) is a wee girl with a ton of spunk. Rochester physically dominates her, but she stands her own. When Rochester proposes that they run away and pose as brother and sister- oh, what a great scene in this particular acceptation.
Toby Stevens is a great Rochester because he adds a wicked sense of humor. I wish I could say that I think the Stevens/Wilson version is my favorite, because I love the actors; but I didn't find this version to be as faithful to the book. Wilson was a little too glamorous --- and then there is the whole kissing thing. Is it me? I'm obsessed with how they kissed - never fully on the mouth, always sort of off to the side ....

Oh , and apologies for my wretched typos!

Ohhhh.... I finished the book.
I think N&S just ruined Jane Austen, books and series for me! :)
I have so much to say that I don't even know where to start.
Becca and Trudy, I agree with almost everything from both of you... but P&P. For me, the 05 version is, at times, too teenager-movie.
But anyway, after N&S... Who wants to comment P&P!?!?!
Since this topic is episode I, I will be reviving every single topic in this group, so much I want to share.
But, anyway, episode I.
After reading the book, one of my disappointments is that one of the best lines of this episode is not in the book. Hell is not white in the book! lol
I think the scene where she first meets Mr. Thornton and he beats Stevens (I dare say Stevens deserve to be beaten for using such an awful wig! lol) is completely off John Thornton's personality in the book. But then again, nowadays, who would understand Margaret's prejudice just because John (we are in a first name relationship already, excuse me!) is a rich factory owner. TV is for everybody, and not just readers. Any regular person nowadays would think "in love with me, handsome, rich and has his own business: I won the lottery!" lol
I would never guess, from the series, that Margaret was raised by her aunt, that she was barely in touch with her parents and brother growing up.
Anyway, book and series, for me, although very different, complimented each other.
I ignored Gaskell's description of Margaret the whole time (although, for me, just the dark hair was different), because Daniela Denby-Ashe is my Margaret.