Hurray! I simply love Period Dramas, and more importantly I love the books that originated the stories, which nine times out of ten will always be my favourite, since most times, while the adaptation is great, it's just not the same as the book.

Some of my favourite book & book to screen adaptations are:

North & South by Mrs. Gaskell- the mini-series was great but I much preferred the book ending.

Cranford by Mrs. Gaskell- on the whole the mini-series adaptation of this was one I think stood up to the book quite well. Stood up as in side by side, both are fantastic. I like what the writers did to weave three of Mrs. Gaskell's shorter novels together to make it into one mini-series. Very creative of them.

Little Dorrit by Charles Dickens- I love the book, and did enjoy the mini-series but for some reason the mini-series isn't one of my favourite favourites. I'm not sure why, but I liked the book better.

Bleak House by Charles Dickens- the book and mini-series were both quite enjoyable and the mini-series was well done, but I'm not sure if I can say that I prefer the series over the book, as I have to read the book again before that.

Those are the main ones for now, although I have many more favourites and not so favourites...

Speaking of book to film adaptations, is anyone else watching BBC's Emma on Masterpiece? If so, what are your thoughts? I'll share mine in a bit, but I want to hear what others think about it first.

I haven't seen any of those except Emma...I have to say it's my favorite adaption so far. Romola Garai plays the part perfectly. The only complaints I have are that I find Mr. Elton a little creepy, Romola's facial expressions at times are either a bit odd or too modern and dramatic, and the part when Frank Churchill has his head in Emma's lap is WAY too improper for those times...But I do love it over all....

I always like books better as well...movies never seem to capture everything...

Ooo, I like these. I'm guessing that we're also allowed to talk about Period Dramas that weren't based off of literature as well?

I've seen quite a lot of period dramas, but some of my favorites are: both of the more recent versions of Pride and Prejudice (2005 and 1995), the Paltrow version of Emma, Little Women, Anne of Green Gables and Anne of Avonlea, Cranford, Amazing Grace, Bleak House, The Crucible, My Fair Lady, and we'll add The Pirates of the Caribbean for good measure.

I'm afraid I really don't understand all the fuss about North & South. I watched it one day when I was sick and it was alright, but not fabulous.

Fanny: A few of us dicussed the new Emma when it aired in the UK over in the Television thread. Perhaps I can quote myself from there at a later date.

Ooo, I like these. I'm guessing that we're also allowed to talk about Period Dramas that weren't based off of literature as well?

Yes if you want

Hm, the new masterpiece Emma isn't my favorite. It's just less charming than the Gwynneth Paltrow movie, and Harriet, Knightley, and Emma are all less likable. Miss Bates was toned down a whole lot for some reason.^^ But the costumes I thought are lovely and quite accurate to the time period.

Some of my favorite period dramas:

Wives and Daughters- absolutely beautiful, none of that "filmed play" feel; ending better than the book's.

North and South- a very good adaption, the characters all looked how I'd imagined them.

Crime and Punishment- John Hurt was a bit old for the role of Rodya, but excellent adaption of a very cerebral novel into the visual medium. The ending is perfect.

The Moonstone- classic Masterpiece, nothing too exciting about it, except I loved the book so much I loved the miniseries too, even though some dear characters were changed/omitted.

Pride and Prejudice--the '90s miniseries. It was one of the best adaptations I have ever seen. And Colin Firth is perfect as Mr. Darcy.
Cranford--an excellent story. And I really liked how they weaved the three books together.
Pollyanna--the BBC one. I loved it.
Ballet Shoes--the old one. I don't remember what year it was, but it was a much better adaptation than the new one and it captured the characters perfectly.
Sense and Sensibility--the newer one. I liked the movie with Emma Thompson, but I like the miniseries better.
Little Women--the little-known '70s miniseries with Greer Garson as Aunt March and William Shatner as Professor Baer. It was the best adaptation ever and William Shatner is the only Professor that I really like.

I could go on, but then we'd be here all day.

Speaking of book to film adaptations, is anyone else watching BBC's Emma on Masterpiece? If so, what are your thoughts? I'll share mine in a bit, but I want to hear what others think about it first.

It's good, but not the best. It feels very rushed. And either Mr. Knightly is too young or Emma is too old. They're just too close in age. I really like Harriet though.

And either Mr. Knightly is too young or Emma is too old. They're just too close in age.

This. I like the actors playing the characters, but putting them together I find it hard to believe in a twenty year (17? someone remind me please...) age gap. I'm inclined to think that Emma looks far too old.

I think Emma's father is charming. (Which is a good thing, since I took a 'Which Austen bachelor would you marry' quiz, and they said that that's who I'd marry. )

My favourite period dramas are:
Sense and Sensibility '95
Amazing Grace
Robin Hood '38 (I think that might be stretching the definition a bit, but ah, medieval times as done in the thirties. )
Pride and Prejudice '89

And I may end up putting Emma on the list, just 'cause it's soooo pretty.

Thank you all for sharing your thoughts on Emma!

I'm trying to be careful and reserve my judgment, or my final one, until after I've finished watching Emma, but I think now that on the whole it's enjoyable and not horrid, but there are some things that I don't like about it.

The main thing I don't like about it is the modern inclusions, or not so time period correct ones- especially when Frank and Emma waltzed for a couple seconds when they were planning the ball. I know it's only a couple seconds, but still- that kind of dancing was at least 30 years too early (if you think, it was just coming in to style in Return to Cranford), and to be accurate, would they have even known how to dance like that back then, even if it wasn't in style? It seemed too improper and I didn't like it, even if it *was* for a very short moment or two. I think I can understand why the scriptwriters wanted to make the movie have a more modern feel so viewers today could enjoy it...but it doesn't always have to make me happy.

I don't think I have a problem with anyone's acting per se, it's more how the characters were written to begin with. The only two that really stand out to me are Harriet and Mr. Knightley. I'm not sure if this version of Mr. Knightley is fairly close to the book or not (perhaps a re-read after the show is in order) but I like how they wrote his character nonetheless. (And the fact that at the ball he stood in a corner watching people...it's a pet habit of mine to do that at gatherings, etc, so now I don't feel so bad about it knowing he in the show did it! ) Harriet is also nicely done, I think she really brings across some of those first rate qualities Mr. Knightley mentioned about her- instead of just being a somewhat side character who's rather flat, all for the sake of advancing Emma's storyline. Frank Churchill I'm a little disappointed in- not that the character is written wrong exactly but the actor playing him isn't exactly how I imagined him to be... I don't know.

I think to sum up my thoughts, I still like the Paltrow version of the story better, especially the Mrs. Elton from that one, and of course the main characters.... and of course because it was one of the first Austen adaptations I ever saw, and I'm rather partial to those I saw first...

Anyways! I really have been enjoying this new Emma, and it's nice to see a longer adaptation of it, but I don't think it will be my favourite of favourites. Unless the last part is absolutely stunning and wows me. We'll see.

About Emma. I agree with everyone that it's well done, but I just didn't find it as fun as the Paltrow version. Here's what I said at the time:

I kind of just want to give my thoughts of the miniseries overall rather than nitpicking. Overall, it was an enjoyable adaptation. I don't think I liked Garai's Emma all that much--I prefer the more accurately portrayed serious Paltrow Emma or even the insecurity often shown by Beckinsdale. I did warm to Miller by the end though, even if he did seem a bit weaker than shown by other actors. I really liked Ritson as Elton and most of the rest of the cast was pretty good. I thought the whole Churchill plot could have been handled better. The head in the lap was ridiculous and he was really annoying, but I think that may have been the intention. Even though I seem to have a lot of criticism, I still enjoyed it. The friendship between Emma and Knightley was very nice and I liked how the miniseries gave them the ability to include parts of the books that didn't make it into the other movies.

Fanny: I recommend this audio clip. It describes the rationale that you like so well in Harriet.

now PBS Masterpiece is airing it officially in the US and I found this really wonderful audio commentary on the characters by Romola Garai herself and the reasoning behind the way that the characters were played by each of the actors. I don't always agree, but it's great to hear the very eloquent Garai describe the rationale.

Wow! This is a topic I could talk forever about!

My favorite period dramas are : Pride and Prejudice (1995), Sense and Sensibility (1996 and 2008), Emma (Miramax and 2009), Persuasion (2007?), North and South (miniseries), Cranford, Return to Cranford, Young Victoria, and a few others that I can't recall.

Now, about the new Emma. I really, really like the new Emma. Especially after I went back and read the book. Although it did have a bit too much of a "modern" feel to it, it stuck to the book more than either of the other two. I felt that Mr. Knightley was pretty much exactly like the book, and I thought he was the perfect age. (Jeremy Northam seemed a little bit too old, though I still like him!) I also liked Harriet so much better in this version. It seemed like they would always cast her as a ditzy, "blonde" type character. I liked how BBC casted her as sweet but naive. I also like how they brought out the friendship between Emma and Harriet and the strong trust that Harriet had in Emma. I agree that Frank Churchill could have been better down, but I absolutely loved the new Jane. She was definitely closer to the book. In the other versions, she seemed to be a flat, uninteresting character; but they gave her more substance and emotion. I felt I could empathize with the new Jane, but the other two. . . . I loved Mr. Woodhouse! He was absolutely perfect! I don't think any of the other versions brought out the deep relationship between Emma and her father. Also, I loved how they brought out his concern of everyone's health. I could go on and on, but I'll just finish off with my opinion of Emma. I thought Romola Garai did an excellent job of playing Emma. She might have been a bit too old, but I think they covered well. I liked Paltrow's Emma, but again they made her over-the-top emotional. I think that Garai played her convincingly. Garai brought in humor in the right amounts, whereas Paltrow again was a little over-the-top. To end, I was pretty well-pleased with this new version, though I still like the Miramax version.

~Wunder

Most of the characers were perfect. I agree with Wunderkind_Lucy that Mr. Woodhouse and Jane were great! They were the best I've seen. I also loved Mr. Knightley- like others have said, the friendship between him and Emma in this movie is fantasticly portrayed.

I'll just finish off with my opinion of Emma. I thought Romola Garai did an excellent job of playing Emma. She might have been a bit too old, but I think they covered well. I liked Paltrow's Emma, but again they made her over-the-top emotional. I think that Garai played her convincingly. Garai brought in humor in the right amounts, whereas Paltrow again was a little over-the-top. To end, I was pretty well-pleased with this new version, though I still like the Miramax version.

my thoughts exactly. Paltrow was too dramatic, and that movie version over all was more of a comedy, and I didn't really like the feel they gave the story. It was the first version I saw but it's actually my least favorite...

I liked Paltrow's Emma, but again they made her over-the-top emotional.

I actually never thought Paltrow's Emma was negatively emotional at any time, would you mind giving some examples of where you felt she was?

As for over-the-top (and since we're comparing), I'd have to say that I find sometimes the way Garai's Emma was written, especially with her facial expressions, to be too much for me sometimes, too expressed, maybe almost as if she was trying too hard to be witty/funny/clever/etc. Not exactly weird, but just it feels out of place for a period film (even one that they've tried to make feel more modern) and even border line annoying.

I suppose one of the main problems I have with the new Emma is that I didn't like parts of the approach of they who were making it- such as when they called Austen's original characters stuffy, or how there seemed to be an emphasis on making it feel more modern so that more people can relate to the characters. That's nice- but the fact remains it's above all a period film, we watch it because it gives us- hopefully- a glimpse of what life was like back then. If I wanted to watch a modern day love story film with modern day characters and actions I'd just watch many of the modern day set love story/romance/etc films that are already out there.

Kate: Thank you for suggesting the audio slide show for Emma on the PBS site! I listened to it, and while I didn't find it extremely informative it was still nice.

I actually never thought Paltrow's Emma was negatively emotional at any time, would you mind giving some examples of where you felt she was?

I didn't mean that she had negative emotions, but rather that she was maybe over-dramatic with her emotions. For example, the scene when Emma is talking with Mrs. Weston about the fact that Emma is in love with Mr. Knightley. She goes from "I hate John!" to "I love John!" almost too drastically. The over-dramatics mostly isn't situation specific but more throughout.

I do love the Miramax version as well since it was the first version of Emma that I saw, but I feel that they were trying too hard to make it a comedy. Emma is supposed to have its comic moments, but I felt that Miramax was really pushing it.

~Wunder

...especially when Frank and Emma waltzed for a couple seconds when they were planning the ball.

Is that what that was? I had no idea. I interpreted it as Frank's exuberance and general over-the-top "I don't care what people think" attitude and/or a 'let's do a dance step but we don't have music so I'll make it up as I go along'.