r/movies • u/LiteraryBoner Jackie Chan box set, know what I'm sayin? • 1d ago
Official Discussion Official Discussion - Sense & Sensibility [SPOILERS] Spoiler
Poll
If you've seen the film, please rate it at this poll
If you haven't seen the film but would like to see the result of the poll click here
Rankings
Click here to see the rankings of 2025 films
Click here to see the rankings for every poll done
Sense and Sensibility (2026)
Summary
Following the death of their father, the Dashwood sisters and their mother are left facing financial uncertainty and a dramatic change in social standing. As Elinor and Marianne navigate the expectations of Regency-era society, they encounter romance, heartbreak, and difficult choices about love, duty, and independence.
Director
Georgia Oakley
Writer
Diana Reid
Based on the novel by
Jane Austen
Cast
- Daisy Edgar-Jones as Elinor Dashwood
- Esmé Creed-Miles as Marianne Dashwood
- Bodhi Rae Breathnach as Margaret Dashwood
- Caitríona Balfe as Mrs. Dashwood
- George MacKay as Edward Ferrars
- Frank Dillane as John Willoughby
- Herbert Nordrum as Colonel Brandon
- Fiona Shaw as Mrs. Jennings
- Tom Brooke as John Dashwood
- Stacy Martin as Fanny Dashwood
- Chloe Pirrie as Lady Middleton
- Turlough Convery as Sir John Middleton
- Bethany Slater as Mrs. Palmer
- Eliot Sumner as Mr. Palmer
- Ceara Coveney as Lucy Steele
Rotten Tomatoes: 75%
Metacritic: TBD
VOD / Release
October 16, 2026 (Theatrical)
Trailer
15
u/dalledayul 1d ago
Having not seen the 1995 film, I adored this. Wonderful casting, and the movie knows when to kick in when it matters. The London ball and the duel were wonderfully tense
I feel like this also struck a great balance between the drama of Pride and Prejudice and the comedy of Emma, since those are the two most recent bars to match this too. Plenty of comedy and emotion and they mixed it really well.
Daisy Edgar-Jones is building herself a very consistent and reliable filmography, I really hope she gets a role soon which lets her go all out because I think she has the potential for it.
1
u/Honest_Cheesecake698 20h ago
She does, and Esme Creed Miles shows that she has the ability to carry a film too
24
u/j-helo85 1d ago
Col Brandon is throwing Willoughby out of the house, and all of sudden they're dueling. That escalated quickly!
I don't think the Ang Lee version can be topped, but I really enjoyed this gloomier, naturalistic take on the story. It's hard to fuck up Jane Austen.
11
u/Whovian45810 1d ago
Marianne being more worried for Col. Brandon than Willoughby was the cherry on the top of the whole dueling scene, she knew Brandon would be a keeper.
I love seeing Mrs. Jennings being excited about witnessing the duel much to the chargin of the Dashwoods lol
3
u/Icy_Atmosphere_2379 19h ago
There were laughs in the cinema that the whole Col Brandon vs Willoughby duel went from 0-100 and then back to 0 🤣
22
u/elinordash 1d ago edited 1d ago
I am a big Austen fan and I really liked this. I'm not sure it will beat the Ang Lee version for me, but so much of that is about the age you saw the movie at. I think this might be the Gen Alpha fave going forward.
As much as I enjoy the 1995 cast, this cast is obviously more age appropriate to the characters. It is rare to see a movie where a family looks like they could be biological family. This film did a great job with this. Mrs. Dashwood felt a bit more like a hopeless romantic here, connecting her more with Marianne. In retrospect, that helps to explain the lack of a widowhood plan.
The hair in this movie was terrible. As a million people have said before, Elinor and Marianne would have the hair up most of the time. Here it didn't even look brushed a lot of the time. Also, Fanny was way too blonde. I get wanting to make her look different from the Dashwoods, but that hair color with those eyebrows felt incredibly anachronistic. A dark blonde would have been better.
There is a snappiness and energy to the dialogue of the 1995 version that I missed at times. Particularly in the rundown of how much John will give his half-sisters. The 2026 version is more emotional, which has its own value. Marianne felt a bit more like a real teenage girl. Not that Winslet's version isn't great, but it was a more mannered portrayal.
I liked the first dance scene in the country. It was probably anachronistic, but it felt like it got the vibe of why people like dancing. It was energizing when a lot of historic dances look stiff. The second dance in London was .... weird. It felt like a choreographed stage performance rather than an actual dance anyone would do at a party.
I liked the naturalistic vibe of this film. The lighting and scenery really worked for me.
I would definitely recommend it to other people. And I think it is worth seeing on the big screen.
11
u/rescuelullaby 1d ago
This is refreshing to hear as another Austen lover who enjoyed the movie! The review thread over on [r/janeausten](r/janeausten) is SO dour lol
3
u/onelongpath 1d ago
Oh no I’ll go look bc im curious but I don’t think it’ll change my favorable opinion, similar to the above comment. I understood the stylistic choices well (I think) and although some camera shots were too obvious (eg, panning like too suddenly to Elinor and Edward’s hands almost touching in an early scene), I went home feeling bubbly and romantic which is… rare nowadays LOL
15
u/howtospellorange 1d ago
As someone who never read the book or watched any prior adaptations and knows anything about the story or characters, I really enjoyed this! Particularly how the dashwood sisters were portrayed, as sometimes you don't get convincing sibling relationships in other movies.
33
u/LiteraryBoner Jackie Chan box set, know what I'm sayin? 1d ago
I enjoyed this but it’s really hard to beat the 1995 Emma Thompson/Ang Lee version for me. So excuse me if I spend a lot of this comparing the two, obviously there is so much to consider when a 200 year old novel that’s been adapted countless times gets a new iteration. But my relationship is mostly with that movie and there is a stark difference between the two. Ang Lee is one of the best filmmakers when it comes to body language and emotional subtlety. His movies are so much less about what’s being said and more about what’s being felt between two characters and he really nails that in S&S.
This S&S is a perfectly good adaptation, still just as faithful as the older one. The big difference, though, is that this movie is so much louder and more outward with its emotions. There’s so much more crying and kissing and loud confessions of love or duty. I don’t want to knock it for being different, that’s kind of the point of adaptation is to find something new in the work, but I do prefer the more British repression of feelings and I think part of the beauty of Austen films is how the characters carry their emotional burdens with silent grace. That’s the whole thing about Mr. Darcy, possibly her most famous character, and in the ‘95 S&S Emma Thompson does an incredible job of not making the bulk of the movie about her longing but still silently carrying it the whole film. I was a little less interesting in these more modern characters that go to loud crying so quickly or yell out loud that the very honor showed by the choice to not be with her is what makes her want to be with him. Not to mention when things are treated so seriously I do think that a lot of the innate comedy in Jane’s writing gets lost in the mix.
I also found this version very washed out color wise. I always thought ‘95 S&S and ‘05 P&P and even the most recent Emma looked so beautifully lush and colorful. Perhaps this is more realistic to the overcast British moors and coasts but I really wanted to love the visual and musical choices this was making and I just didn’t. Although it wouldn’t be fair to say that this is anything other than a solid and faithful S&S adaptation, it’s just not my favorite. 6/10.
20
u/AssignmentDapper59 1d ago
The ‘95 version is basically perfect, hard to top that one. I felt this new one tried too much to make everything obvious for modern audience, like they don't trust us to understand the quiet pain.
1
u/GetItGirrl00 16h ago
Yes agree with everything, and can I also add that there were scenes where the camera was too shaky and it was off putting to me (I get motion sickness with that sort of camerawork).
5
u/simonthedlgger 18h ago
A great film. Absolutely beautiful, the score is amazing.
The part where Marianne is wandering in the woods and the hunting dogs run by her is so cool.
"WILLOUGHBY!!!"
8
u/Whovian45810 1d ago
Daisy Edgar Jones and George MacKay were wonderful as Elinor and Edward!
I know it was hard to top Emma Thompson and Hugh Grant's take, seeing Elinor and Edward proclaim their love to each other with the kisses and then going back to the cottage, it's beautiful to see two yearners get their happy ending.
5
u/sean_psc 18h ago
Aesthetically and tonally this film often feels very Austen by way of the Bronte sisters, which works fine, and certainly sets it apart from the Ang Lee version.
5
u/Whovian45810 1d ago edited 1d ago
I really love in this adaptation is how Margaret is a bit of a smart ass, mischevous yet cheeky girl compared to her sisters.
Even though the story is mainly on Elinor and Marianne, I'm glad she gets some nice moments on screen despite usually being relegated to supporting/side character in most adaptations.
Found it adorable that Margaret is the shipper on deck in regards to Elinor and Edward plus Marianne and Col. Brandon.
-1
u/Ok_Comment_2129 1d ago
I knew absolutely nothing about the story going in and was so perplexed and distracted by Margaret. She looks old enough to drive a motor vehicle, but acts about 5 yrs old. It wasn’t a “Carrie Ingalls” situation either, because there was one scene where she was eating blackberries but apparently struggled so much with hand-eye coordination that they were mashed all over her face and clothing.
I was the only one in theater so I started searching to see if she was meant to be developmentally disabled, but there is no mention anywhere of that. Was this just terrible casting and direction, or was the character written this way? By the time I recovered from the distraction a dozen new characters had been introduced so I just walked out.
3
u/Wedonthavetobedicks 1d ago
She's barely mentioned in the book, tbqh - very much a side character (if even that). All we really know of her is she's young and of a similar temperament to her mother.
-2
u/Ok_Comment_2129 1d ago
Interesting. Maybe she was intended to be developmentally disabled in the movie then. I’m not used to characters ignoring disability, but perhaps that is the way of the future. It was a distraction regardless.
•
u/PersimmonLost3728 2h ago edited 2h ago
Regarding The BlackBerry Scene, I noticed that throughout the movie, there are a lot of nature shots that echo Marianne's romantic view of nature. Her mother is clearly also emotion driven and indulgent of Marianne's sensibilities. That girl is lying on the grass 24/7. You can't tell me her clothes aren't covered in grass stains - and she's old enough to be engaged. Their mother has no problem with them ruining their clothes while enjoying nature. (And, being honest, I stain my clothes with food once a week and I'm actually trying not to ruin my clothes lol.) I also thought it was so fun that the scene is juxtaposed with a scene of their servant washing their clothes. It's a reminder that although this family feels their finances are bleak, there are still many people poorer than them. And Margaret is creating extra work for their servant without a care in the world. It subtly gives their financial situation some historical context and for me it lightened the mood a little.
11
u/BurgerNugget12 1d ago edited 1d ago
Just got out of this and thought it was pretty solid remake / adaptation, and really well crafted. I guess I just wish I could connect with it more, the film to me kinda lacked a spark or some passion if that makes sense. I thought the performances were good (esp George MacKay) and really dug the atmospheric shots of nature. The 2 hours also flew by. Just wish in the end it didn’t feel as flat. Also shoutout Frank Dillane! Loved him in Urchin
0
u/oldspice75 18h ago
I agree. I remember the Ang Lee version as much stronger emotionally. I think the audience falls for Mr. Willoughby along with Marianne much more in that version, so the emotional impact is more powerful
3
u/IAmSomewhere123 20h ago
I enjoyed the movie. It was fairly true to the story (some changes that ended up being ok). However, the casting of Eliot Sumner as Mr. Palmers was very distracting. Thankfully not in the film too much. It was like a 17 year old boy being married to a middle aged woman. Didn’t make any sense and was just off compared to the rest of the casting.
3
u/Raptor_2125 12h ago
Saw this earlier this year because UK got it a month or so prior but found it extremely charming and well acted
17
u/Whateveryouknow 1d ago
I couldn't stop thinking about how Marianne not only looks like she knows what an iPhone is, but that she could probably also explain whatever 6-7 means.
8
18
u/elinordash 1d ago
The actress is Samantha Morton's daughter.
To me, iphone face = injections and surgery. I think her face is natural. So it didn't feel like iphone face to me.
6
u/fred_burkle 1d ago
Her face is not natural :/ she has a LOT of lip filler. She resembled her mother a lot more when she was younger.
2
7
u/friendlypuffin 1d ago
I love the book but this movie fell really flat for me. The pacing is very quick, it feels like the movie is going through checklist of what must happen and tries to just get through it. It lasts for 2 hours but I felt it didn't leave any breathing room! In the book, going to Middleton parties and strolling through the park with everyone are such a vibe, it's slow, connections are being made and personalities of the Dashwood family come to light. In the movie, you get the exposition you need and then you are being pushed to the next exhibit - London.
Pacing aside, I loved Daisy as Elinor. I really liked casting of Mrs Dashwood, Edward, the John Dashwood family as well! Marianne actress was, for me personally, super out of place, I just imagined her a lot different. Hair and costumes were a miss for me, and why is Ms Steele dressed so fancy?
I wish the movie was a bit more colorful, but the shots were generally nice.
I thought that the movie was doing the reveal too soon, and as far as I remember the plot is much more "burst" in the book.
To sum up, it's a 6/10 for me. I love this book and wished I could love the movie. Have yet to watch the older S&S movie
4
u/LauraPalmersMom430 1d ago
Loved this so much more than I though I would. Incredible cinematography and natural light. Really good cast chemistry all around.
1
u/onelongpath 1d ago
I was taken by the cinematography too! I know some people want a more colorful film but idk this hit a spot for me
1
u/MaskedxAvenger 1d ago
Absolutely loved this, but admittedly I’ve never seen the Ang Lee version. I know I need to. And it sounds like I will have viewed them in the correct order!
•
u/Threetreethee 4h ago
I liked the film. i thought Daisy was wonderful. Esme was okay though her scenes tend to drag. i thought the colonel was dull but overall i liked it.
•
u/mommaste2 2h ago
This was my first S&S and I liked it, but I need to see it again. The cast was great and I'm impressed they got so many characters packed in, but some of them had only 1-2 scenes.
I don't think this will rise to the comfort movie level that 2005 P&P is, but maybe it will grow on me.
My biggest takeaway? I need a Persuasion adaptation! Dakota Johnson doesn't cut it.
•
u/auravelour 1h ago
Esmé (Maryanne) looked so much like Easy A/Zombieland era Emma Stone. they could play sisters and i'd 100% believe it. she KILLED it in this movie, as did the whole cast, but shout out to Fiona Shaw. she was the highlight alongside the younger daughter. a solid balance of humor, emotional, and good pacing. i did wish we got some more scenes of the sisters just sitting and talking about more life and female related things (since the dynamic + cast chemistry was too good) but overall, i really enjoyed this. i'd give it an 8/10, definitely buy on 4K
1
u/Mysterious_Remote584 1d ago
I've never read this book, I've never seen any other movies. I didn't know anything about this going in.
Boy is this movie mostly quite depressing. Fully half of it is one sister or the other just crying over a man.
I don't particularly like Pride & Prejudice, but I much preferred it to this one. Just kind of a downer for 90% of the runtime, and it's all desaturated and gloomy looking visually too.
1
u/RedMeme262 17h ago
I really liked it. Glad I didn't listen to the 1995 purists who said it couldn't be topped. These novels will continue to be adapted for years to come and it's always nice to see them done differently, big or small.
The ladies returning to bed after the duel scene at the window had the theater laughing and Fiona Shaw is a treasure. George Mackay must be in solid shape - hands and face were very vascular, not a demerit, just an observation me and the other half noticed.
I just wish Caitriona Balfe was in more things, she's underrated IMO. Hoping now that Outlander is over we see more of her.
-7
u/NordicTRex 1d ago
Did this story need to be told AGAIN? This is, at least, the tenth adaptation of this story. Are we out of other stories to tell?
16
u/elinordash 1d ago
This is the second big screen adaptation of Sense and Sensibility and the first in 30 years.
Meanwhile, there are 11 Fast and the Furious movies.
Let us have our once in a generation adaptation. Don't be a spoilsport.
-6
u/NordicTRex 1d ago
Once in a generation my ass. The fucking Hallmark channel did it two years ago with black actors.
5
u/firefly66513 1d ago
You can't be comparing the Hallmark channel to something made for the big screen. There really aren't a lot of big adaptations for this and it's not hurting anyone
-3
2
-1
u/j-helo85 1d ago
Jane Austen adaptations are like comic book movies for the ladies. Every generation gets their own
BatmanElinor Dashwood.
-1
u/SharksFan4Lifee 20h ago edited 15h ago
Liked it, didn't love it because of Daisy Edgar-Jones. Just not a good actor, especially for lead roles. Dragged down "Twisters" and drags this one down too.
Esmé Creed-Miles is great though!
Edit: Way to downvote an opinion you don't agree with...and then give no response.
43
u/capricorncee 1d ago
Movie fuckin ruled.
We saw it with a great, buzzy, reactive crowd last night. Eleanor Dashwood is a character that just plays so well to Daisy Edgar-Jones' strengths and I'd like to see Esmé Creed-Miles in everything now tysm. They give Marianne a flip and expansion kinda like the one Greta Gerwig gave Amy in LITTLE WOMEN. Her flightiness becomes headstrong passion. Loved the take.
And George MacKay my goodness.
Does he look like what if a sickly Victorian orphan said Shazam!? Sure. But what a dreamboat.