Mansfield Park
(MGM Region 1 NTSC DVD/Region 2 PAL DVD)
(1999)
review by Thera Belle

There’s something I do that, well, I’m ashamed of, but confession is good for the conscience and so I will tell you and I hope in my confessing you do not think less of me. Here goes: I have never listened to a director’s commentary on an entire film. There. I’ve written it and now you know. I feel so much better. But of course this is a lie. Friday night I watched Mansfield Park and then I watched it again while the director, Patricia Rozema told me all about the film from her point of view. So what I’m really trying to say is I’m a liar. I just thought I’d cushion your opinion of me by confessing something really bad, like failing to listen to commentaries, before I told you I was a liar. At least, though, I’m a
straight forward liar. I’m not like Mary Crawford or her brother Henry,
people who lie without knowing what they’re doing and saying is a lie.

Mansfield Park was Jane Austen’s favorite of her novels and yet from what I’ve read it is not so highly regarded among her readers. Perhaps because it does not sparkle quite as brightly and the themes go far beyond the insular society of the English ton during the Regency Period. Rather than confine her opinions to what families and friends did to each other she expanded her world to concern what so called modern societies did to other races.

Before slavery was outlawed in England many men of business made their money in the buying and selling of human beings. And now that I’ve brought this point up I must say it is merely a cursory theme in the film and is used more as points of enlightenment and growth for our main character, Fanny Price as played by Frances O’Connor. Fanny herself is given away by her mother to the service of rich relatives because the home of her parents cannot contain so many children and it seems they prosper in offspring but not in finances. When our heroine arrives at Mansfield Park, the estate of
her Uncle Thomas, she asks her Aunt Norris how long she is to stay. In an ironic manner the old woman says that if everything works out Fanny will be there forever.

It is 1806. The first slaves came to the colonies in 1606 and almost sixty years beyond the setting of this novel the United States will outlaw slavery and the trade in “black ivory” will be a hushed secret among the rich. But it is 1806 and even Fanny finds herself in forced servitude to her rich aunt, uncle, and cousins. The only bright spots in her life are letters to her sister Susie and the close bond she’s formed with her cousin Edmund. The complexity of this relationship will drive the rest of the movie to it’s satisfying conclusion, for it is a romance and Austen did write it so take heart in knowing that eventually all will be well. That doesn’t spoil anything for you, now does it?

I once had a friend who did not like “costume dramas” and I have never understood this. He seemed to have no trouble identifying with Star Wars even though it was set in a galaxy long ago and far away but fancy up the language and put some ruffles on shirts or hoops under dresses and he was in a panic. I happen to love movies that transport me to another time and place in history and so I give extra points if I feel as if technology was capable of capturing the past and presenting it to me today. That’s why I have trouble with a lot of movies made in the sixties where the hair just looks too much like some technical school cosmetology student got hold of the actress and stacked up her hair on top of her head like she was going to
the prom. Fashion and dress were very complicated in the Regency Period and I like it when I think films have gotten it right. Mansfield Park looks right to me so extra points to hair and costume.

Fanny Price faces a bleak future. She’s a poor relation, though her mother is of the peerage. Fanny can expect to be a companion to aging women or a governess. She is not a servant but she is not included within family gatherings. It’s a nether world where a young woman of clever mind and good looks will find herself cut down again and again until her spirit is broken and she is like a useful piece of furniture, without position or opinion. But of course there would be no story if this were Fanny’s fate.

Patricia Rozema reveals in her commentary that she used not only the manuscript of Mansfield Park but letters and other stories and writings of Jane Austen to flesh out the character of Fanny. Thus Fanny wishes to be a writer and while she reads voraciously in her Uncle Thomas’ fine library she also chafes against the constraints of the society she orbits. Women, it seems, are no better than slaves and are traded like commodities in the studies of powerful men. Alliances are made, bloodlines are strengthened, fortunes are combined. Fanny has nothing to give except herself and making a good marriage would be a miracle, or a plot device.

Coming to roost among the rather common duck pond of Mansfield Park are two swans. Mary Crawford is the black swan, elegant and well spoken, alluring and beautiful. Henry Crawford is the white swan, equally as accomplished as his sister and of special importance to all the young women of the once impressive house. Fanny’s female cousins preen under his attentions and her
beloved Edmund seems fascinated by the darkly beautiful Mary. Thus a caution winds it’s way into Fanny’s heart and when Henry turns his attentions to her rather than being flattered she is perplexed, but not uninterested.

In those days a man approached the father or guardian of a young woman and asked for her hand and this father or guardian would go to the woman and tell her he had accepted the proposal. She would acquiesce and the process of marriage would begin. It was rare to say no and even if she did say no there was no good reason for this, especially if the suitor was suitable. So when Uncle Thomas comes to Fanny and tells her she is to marry Henry Crawford and she says no we begin an interesting montage of the entire family attempting to get Fanny to change her mind. Even Edmund, who is all but promised to Mary by now, does not come to Fanny’s defense and so she is alone, disgraced, sent back to that crowded, destitute place that is the home of her parents. And there Henry comes to court her.

Alessandro Nivola plays Henry Crawford like a spoiled schoolboy. He approaches life as if it were golden and his playground. It is hard to understand why Fanny would turn him down again and again. He is so obviously ardent about a match with her but she will not relent. At one point he tells her he has changed but it is this change that frightens her most. If he can change so utterly to please her then he lacks direction of his own and his character is suspect. It is only in a moment of fear that Fanny agrees, says yes, but by the next morning she has changed her mind. A contradiction in her character to be sure but only a minor one. At least she has the courage to stop what would be a disaster.

The true love of her life is Edmund, her cousin. I suppose in those days it was quite common to marry ones first cousin. Today it would be illegal in some places and a scandal everywhere. But then suitable mates were from a very small circle and marrying cousins was nothing, really. A geneticist from today would caution them against having offspring but it is to be supposed that fox hunting would never have gained such popularity if the people who hunt them weren’t so intermarried.

Edmund is played by an understated Jonny Lee Miller. At the time this film was made he was still married to Angelina Jolie. Perhaps that’s what all the pain in his eyes is about. Who knows. He certainly isn’t telling. He appears only briefly in the featurette about the making of the film. And it doesn’t really matter because he is more than capable of playing the sensitive, confused, but ultimately good Edmund. As a second son he will inherit nothing and must get work. Law, the military, or the clergy are suitable for him. Naturally, he chooses the clergy because he looks really good in dark colors and a white shirts and because he is really that nice.

As he will be a preacher it is rather hard to understand why Mary Crawford, as played by Embeth Davidtz, would choose him. She could have her pick of men, or can she? Though never revealed there must be some dark secret to her past. She is certainly a vivacious, manipulative young woman and though you would like her as a friend you would never turn your back on her for fear of being stabbed. In Fanny she finds something to play with, perhaps thinking the shy girl can be dominated. But she is wrong. She is wrong about a great many things yet so sure of herself her downfall will come unexpectedly to all concerned.

I have gone on rather long about the story but there is so much more to the film. There is the wit and wisdom of the period, an English countryside so beautifully realized it will take your breath away, and superb acting. There are moments of such pure truth that have nothing to do with the script but come right from the actors themselves. And the idea is reaffirmed that acting is not easy, that an actor is not someone who can memorize lines or do things to shock an audience. Acting is in inflection and emotion and the
glance and the sigh and a quiet voice has more impact than a shout. To make me believe is to succeed and I believed in these people.

The commentary never overwhelms the film. Rather it punctuates the plot and points out details I would have missed. For instance, one actress plays two roles and I would never have known if I hadn’t been told. Truth be told I have never been that fond of Jane Austen but I must say I admire those works turned into film. Her dialogue is as fresh today as it was two hundred years ago, her plots as captivating.

The DVD provides a featurette along with the commentary and the theatrical trailer. I don’t remember seeing the film advertised and I first encountered it on A&E and wanted to see the entire thing not cut up for television. I wasn’t disappointed. At times it’s very understated and subdued then it becomes a joyous exploration of the characters before turning dark or poignant and funny again. This was a time in history when just a breath of scandal would ruin a woman but the very dress and manners spoke of a sexual promise just waiting to be fulfilled. Another contradiction and a fine line between propriety and promiscuity. How interesting it is to find people then, in 1806, were just as complex as they are today and though the time lacked the modern conveniences it did not lack for good company.