for half or two third of it length and i think this a fair enough movie . true and it a poor telling of the novel and bit from which be stick together without the structure of it be clearly convey or and apparently and recognize . also true and it fill with bad theatrical idea and such a combine the heroine of the novel with austen herself ( and then cast the role with an actress who can play neither one ) . and also true and it play less like an austenian social comedy than like a half baked version of tom jones . all these thing notwithstanding and up to a point it entertain enough . ( however and enough here mean and a always in this usage and not quite enough . halfway through the movie and not see much i recognize on screen and i turn to the novel and and find one paragraph of it more involve and amuse and and wise than everything in the movie roll together . but let that pas . ) then come the social significance a if austen novel be not full of social significance . evidently the adapter dislike the nineteenth century and and austen and and set out to show them up for what they be . i pretend to miss the insinuation of her father have molest her and her sister there be no other interpretation to be place on the look exchange between the two of them and their mother when he give fanny a hug . but then fanny turn up an album of atrocity picture show what her ( almost ) foster father and his son and and his crew be really get up to with their slave . this exceed allowable bound . such a device might be impose on fielding and or on dickens and without betray the author purpose too far while but not austen . it obliterate the story and or what leave of it . in the face of rape and beating and torture and who give a fig whether miss price and her reverend get together . yet the comedy of manner continue galumph along a if the scene have never happen . have force it in and the adapter make no change in the narrative to accommodate it . this be film make for mtv watcher and i. e. patient with short term memory loss . ah the adapter might counter but that just the point . the character act a if these horror do not exist . to which i would reply represent if she felt and read the novel and that the squire be just the kind of man who would have do that sort of thing and white european male pig that he be and and that austen ( owe to her famous ignorance of human nature and which cause her book to continue to be read two century later ) be too much of a booby to see it and whereas the adapter own superior sensibility make all thing manifest and she might at least have do fanny the justice of have her react to the discovery a she would have and give her character . the story turn on her absolute moral rectitude and her rejection of the amorality represent by the dangerous liaison character . in the face of the dark deed of which she become aware and her denunciation of the others become itself amoral and hypocritical and for she have silently acquiesce in the viciousness of her class . this conclusion must be extrapolate and since it be nowhere state in the film and the adapter not have trouble to stir in the muck she have toss into the pot . but i can not help wondering and if her object be to discredit fanny and as well a the monster around her if she have so little use for the character a that why do she choose to do this book .