Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Absolutely the worst movie.

It's not great by any means, but it's a pretty good movie that didn't leave me filled with regret for investing time in it.

True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

This adaptation of Jane Austen's Emma is SO much better than that Gwyneth Paltrow mess! I have tried to watch that three times and I just can't get through it.Leave it to the good old BBC to know how to do justice to a classic. Even though this is a mini-series, it is done with more heart, soul and authenticity than any other attempt. The acting is superb--the costumes luxurious and the scenery breathtaking! There is not a better way to spend an afternoon than having a cuppa and watching an episode. I am so happy I came upon this wonder, albeit a bit late (it came out in 2009).A must see for any Austen fan! Kudos!

I only just recently watched the 2009 Emma, and have previously only seen the version with Gwenyth Paltrow. When I first started watching this adaptation, I wasn't quite sure I would like it. Emma and Mr. Knightley didn't "look" as I pictured (Emma was supposed to be a brunette and not quite so tall, and Mr. Knightley was supposed to look older and just be more "authoritative" looking!).As it went on (and over multiple viewings), RG and JLM really won me over with their interpretation of the roles. Emma (and Mr. Knightley) are just so likable, and I love how clear it is throughout the movie the affection (as a "brother", friend and then suitor) that Mr. Knightley has for Emma, despite their spars. They both seem to genuinely "like" each other, as they should, having known each other all their lives. Furthermore, there is much conveyed through their body language and expressions that I didn't appreciate until I went back and re-watched some scenes.I have many favorite scenes, but the ball at the crown inn is a highlight (sigh, so much is felt without a word being said!). I also especially love the proposal scene, as Mr Knightley looks so vulnerable and dejected when he finally asks her if he ever has a chance (and why wouldn't he, when she just told him to stop talking!). I really felt for him, and was so happy for him that he finally got all that he deserved!There were a few things I didn't like, one being the pivotal scene where Mr. Knightley reprimands Emma at Box Hill. It wasn't terrible, but in the book, it is supposed to pain him to do so. In this movie, he seemed only to be yelling at Emma. Also, Jane Fairfax didn't act or look like the Jane Fairfax I envisioned. I didn't love some of the new scenes that were added. (For example, the scene were Emma declares that she and Mr. Knightley cannot marry, I found to be a bit melodramatic)Some of the criticisms for this version include comments that some of the mannerisms are too modern for the period, but I'm OK with that. To me, they made the characters more relatable.Overall, I really liked this adaptation. Not perfect, but great in many ways!

1996 brought us a bright and fun feature film adaptation of "Emma" starring Gwyneth Paltrow and Jeremy Northam which appealed to the romance-centered Austen-fan. In Frebruary of 1997 a more sober and text accurate adaptation with Kate Beckinsale and Mark Strong appeared. Scripted by Andrew Davies (Of Pride and Prejudice 1995 Fame) it calmed the Austen- purists who burst into flames of rage at the Hollywood Travesty which they dared to christen "Emma".Frankly, I don't care for either of those adaptations. Even though much of the dialogue in both version was ripped straight from the page, Northam was to easy-going, Strong was too harsh, and neither Paltrow, or Beckinsale were able to make Emma likable. This is because her character was pulled from the page and never given any spirit.Then, in 2009, ITV gave us this version. ITV's adaptations of Austen novels have not, in the past, been received well by Janeites. And neither was Emma. Which I think is a shame. Romola Garai was a fantastic Emma. She succeeded where Paltrow and Beckinsale both failed in my opinion. She made Emma spirited and likable, in spite of her numerous faults. She was the "picture of health" as Mrs. Weston describes Emma in the book. As for Jonny Lee Miller, he is the only Knightley for me. He portrayed an ideal balance of Mr. Knightley's qualities. Knightly is one of my favorite Austen heroes (second only to Col. Brandon) because Miller's performance is exactly what I imagined as I was reading the book. And for those of you who complain about how Jonny Lee Miller looked too young for Knightley, I would remind you that Knightley is but seven or eight-and-thirty: the same age as Miller when he played the part in 2009.Laura Pyper might not be as fair skinned as some other Jane Fairfaxes, but I found her to be the only one of the three actresses I've seen in the role who really made me believe that Jane was exhausted from the emotional strain of keeping her engagement a secret. Rupert Evans played a most agreeable Frank Churchill - he had a charisma that drew me, as a viewer, in.I liked Michael Gambon as Mr. Woodhouse, Emma's charming (if ridiculous) hypochondriac father. Let me just clarify - I NEVER, but NEVER like Gambon in ANYTHING. Yet by some miracle, which I can only assume is the character transcending the actor, I find him the least annoying of the Mr. Woodhouse portrayals I've seen. Tamsin Grieg was an amazing Miss Bates, displaying a different visual model that Prunella Scales or Sophie Thompson, but still wittering on without a thought. And words do not describe what an amazing Weston Double-Team Robert Bathurst and Jhodi May were. Bathurst wasn't too old and he didn't over-act the part like other actors have done; and Jhodi was far more likable than Samantha Bond or Greta Scacchi ever could be.On the other hand, I do NOT care for how Blake Ritson played Mr. Elton - he was neither agreeable or pleasant. As soon as he slunk onto the screen, his true character was apparent. This detracted from his sub-plot with Harriet Smith. Harriet, in a truly great casting choice, was played by Louise Dylan who, though extremely pale in the part, was quite well suited to it. As for Mrs. Augusta Elton, I can only say that though I disapprove of too much editing, I count the removal of the Maple Grove references to be a blessing. I'm fine with reading it, but hearing that over and over again makes other versions vexing to watch. It works better on the page than it does on the screen; it didn't detract from the essence of the character - to say that would be over-reacting. Christina Cole was superb in the part. She was just as presumptuous in interfering with Jane Fairfax's affairs as she was in the book, and she was certainly as self-centered, desiring to be the focus of attention in any scene in which she appeared.I will not say that this adaptation gets EVERYTHING right. I do not smile upon reassignment of lines or breaches in historical accuracy (such as characters kissing in public or Frank resting his head in Emma's lap). I also do not approve of simplifying dialogue (but that is a wide subject, which this review has not the space for).I find this series to be the most accurate to the book, in tone if not in text. It has a depth of emotion that the other versions lack. Emma's loneliness upon Miss Taylor's leaving was shown in good detail - as it should be, since Austen devoted so much description to it in the novel - and yet that was barely shown in the 1997 Kate Beckinsale version. In the 2009 adaptation, Emma is shown imploring Harriet to exert herself and move on from Mr. Elton after he returns, married, to Highbury. (this was also deemed to trivial to include in the 97 version.) Another excellent example of acting on Garai's part is Emma's very affected reaction to Knightley's rebuking of her conduct on Box Hill. Whatever other's may say about the "egregious" kiss in the last episode, this proposal scene is one of my favorites in this series, and possibly in Period Drama history. Miller and Garai's performances are so much more comfortable than Strong and Beckinsale's because it's not so clichéd. Miller's delivery of the lines "You know I can't make speeches; If i loved you less, I might be able to talk about it more" was infinitely superior than Mark Strong's.I find this adaptation to be Most Agreeable. It has some first rate qualities and I therefore award it 87 points out of 100.

Other viewers have commented this title much more competently; I come to merely express outrage. "Modern adaptation"? The modern thing about it is the characters yelling at each other; being not just mannerless but plainly rude to each other and thus violating (not adapting) the author. It is below Gambon to ever have been in this. I had to shut it off after a few minutes, because it hurt my ears more than the action film on the next channel. I have acquired the English language to some degree by watching screen adaptations of English literature - which made me fall in love with the language. This 'Emma' is not just a violation of Austen: it is a crippling of language AND culture. It is about as much a carrier of culture as your next Legally Blonde.