Movie Review - Emma. (2020)

Like the recent adaptation of Little Women (2019), this film is also an adaptation of a book that has been arguably done to death. Jane Austen's Emma (1815) is a novel that has perhaps been adapted more times than Little Women, but more so for television. There hasn't been as many film adaptations. With that, music-video director Autumn de Wilde in her feature debut, along with screenwriter Eleanor Catton in her debut as well, probably felt they didn't need to reinvent the wheel. Their goal was probably to be as faithful as possible with perhaps some flourishes here and there. Yet, this film doesn't feel as outstanding as most period or historical pieces. It's also perhaps unfair to speak about this film in the wake of Greta Gerwig's Little Women, which was an incredible and unique take on the material.

Gerwig's version was bold and fresh. From the writing of it, to the direction and to the editing, her take was singular and felt new. It was different from prior versions and really shook things up. Wilde's film doesn't do that. It doesn't really shake things up and there's nothing really bold and fresh about it, aside from the actors in it. Strangely, the bold and fresh interpretation of Austen's novel came 25 years ago with Clueless (1995). That 1995 version took what was a story set in the 1800's and adapted it for present time, even changing the country and setting. Even a Bollywood version of Austen's novel called Aisha (2010) was more of a bold and fresh take than this one.

Anya Taylor-Joy (Split and The Witch) stars as Emma Woodhouse, an English girl living in the days of the early 19th century. She's described as being handsome, clever and rich. She's also described as being 21 years-old. She lives with her widowed father in a grand estate. She doesn't seem to have much interests or passions that drive her. She says that she's staying at home because she needs to take care of her father who appears middle-age but doesn't seem that infirm. Plus, he has a myriad of servants at his disposal, so it's not clear why she's concerned, if her concern is genuine. She could just be staying because she has a wealthy and comfortable lifestyle.

She does have one interest. She fancies herself a matchmaker. She's not exactly Cupid, but she does think she has a knack for finding a person's pair or potential spouse. It's not exactly clear why she thinks she has this knack. She and her father attend a wedding at the opening of the film, which she perhaps takes credit for accomplishing, but if that's the only evidence, then her issue would definitely be a supreme sense of hubris. This is obviously a dominant theme in Austen's works, particularly with her novel Pride and Prejudice (1813). If hubris is her flaw, that's fine. The film proceeds to be a comedy of how that flaw trips her up, as her matchmaking skills for the rest of the film prove to be actually horrible and not good at all.

Johnny Flynn (Beast and Clouds of Sils Maria) co-stars as George Knightley. I wasn't quite sure of his relationship to Emma and her father, though at one point, she calls him brother. He's obviously not a biological relative, as it's established that his antagonism toward her will only lead to the two of them being romantically involved. He further underscores the point that the matchmaker is unable to make a match for herself. Yet, besides being there to contradict, argue or scold Emma, it's not clear either what Knightley, as he's called, does for a living. He just seems to be a rich, white guy who can come and go as he pleases, but he hangs around Emma and her father for no particular reason.

The back-and-forth between Emma and Knightley starts when they disagree on a matchmaking that Emma does for a friend of hers. There are two young men whom Emma sees as potential suitors for her friend. There's one that her friend is more inclined, but the other is one that Emma thinks is better. Knightley though thinks the former is a better match. I never really understand why Knightley cares so much unless he's so devoid of a life that he needs to involve himself with whatever Emma is involving herself.

Callum Turner (Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald and Green Room) plays Frank Churchhill. He's a tall, good-looking guy who breezes in and then breezes out. He seems to be nothing more than a romantic, red herring. You think that he could be the betrothed to either Emma or her friend but again he's just a red herring, which I feel like the film could have done without. He seems only present because he was present in the book.

Miranda Hart (Spy and Call the Midwife) plays Miss Bates, the village's busybody. She's also the town gossip as it were. She's always ingratiating herself with Emma, much to Emma's chagrin or sheer annoyance. Hart though is the comic relief and scene-stealer that injects a lot of life into the film. Even though this film is essentially a rom-com, Emma's relationship with Miss Bates is the relationship that pulls the most pathos.

Unfortunately, Gerwig's Little Women has spoiled me on a historical drama where the only point is people deciding who they're going to marry. Gerwig's film pointed out the sexism and problematic nature of a woman's existence being solely focused on who her husband will be. Gerwig's film shows that there is more to women than being a wife. To see this film be only about women worrying who's wife they'll be feels really regressive. It would've been fine, if the characters didn't feel like pieces on a checkerboard just being moved around. There just doesn't seem to be that much depth or development to them. It doesn't feel like we delve into their lives or their heads to really connect with them. There's also a lot of dominoes falling of unrequited love that felt frustrating over time and not as entertaining or delightful.

Rated PG for brief partial nudity.
Running Time: 2 hrs. and 4 mins.