Costume in Cinema: Regency

Costume designer: Janet Patterson

Buy from Amazon and support this site

Very well made Jane Campion film about Fanny Brawne, lover of poet John Keats.  I liked it as much as I can, given that (I’m sorry!!) I’m just not a fan of poetry and sickly romantics.  I know, I suck!  If you’re into that sort of thing, you’re going to love this.  Clothing plays a really interesting role in the film, as Fanny makes her own, very fashion-forward, clothes, and there are some really interesting outfits that are far more interesting than your average white-cotton Regency film.

My rating: 4 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Unknown! Contact me if you know.

Buy from Amazon and support this site

James Purefoy is hot hot hot, and he is even hotter as the dapper Beau Brummell, male fashion leader of the English Regency. Sadly, this film underwhelms, mostly because of a meandering plot that never seems to hit its stride, and what appeared to be too small a budget for the appropriate number of extras and locations. The men’s costuming, as you might guess, is REALLY nicely done; the women’s is a snooze, with the few female characters wearing the same thing over and over.

My rating:  2 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Eimer Ni Mhaoldomhnaigh

Buy from Amazon and support this site

Shockingly, I actually really quite liked this – so long as I ignored the fact that the main character — a Regency-era writer named Jane Austen — had any relationship to the Jane Austen whose books I adore. The filmmakers took the few hints that exist about Jane’s youthful flirtation with Tom Lefroy and turn it into a Big Passion, complete with lots of references to her later writings. I thought it was actually quite well done — good acting, witty script, pretty to look at. All in all, it felt like I was watching a pretty good Austen adaptation, and that’s saying something! Of course, it’s pretty much a made up story and I’m not sure if Anne Hathaway is my idea of a young Jane Austen… The costumes ranged — set in 1796, the costumer chose to put the actors in a mishmash of high-waisted “Regency” styles and long-waisted 1780s styles. It doesn’t really work, because you can’t tell if they’re trying to distinguish between ages or classes (no rhyme or reason to who is wearing which style). Most of the high-waisted dresses are cut waaaaaaaaaaaaaay too narrow. I thought the 1780s style dresses, although incongrous, were very pretty and accurate to about 5-10 years earlier.

My rating:  4 (out of 5)

Costume design: Gabriella Pescucci & Carlo Poggioli

Buy from Amazon and support this site

Really not as bad as everyone’s said!  It’s definitely a Terry Gilliam movie, with the twisted humor that entails, and you can definitely tell that the studio hacked at the script and the editing.  Nonetheless, it’s a spooky and silly tale of the famous fairytale collectors reimagined as supernatural Nancy Drews.  The costumes are fab, most especially Monica Belluci as an evil queen.  The film is set in the Napoleonic era, and costumer Gabriella Pescucci (always wonderful) does a great job of creating convincing lower class wear that is suitably influenced by the high waistlines etc. of the era.

My rating:  3 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Tom Rand

Buy from Amazon and support this site

Not really worth watching — it just doesn’t work.  I did manage to make it all the way through to the end, but it really wasn’t worth my time.  None of the performances are outstanding, the plot (as adapted) never really grabbed me, and the costuming was uninteresting.

My rating:  1 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Jenny Beavan

Buy from Amazon and support this site

MILES better than the Gwynnie feature film version, Kate Beckinsale really nails the role of Emma as well as having some darn good hats. The rest of the cast is equally fabulous, and the costuming is just as near to perfect as you can get. Fun, funny, romantic, Austen — what’s not to like?

My rating: 4 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Ruth Myers

Buy from Amazon and support this site

A very Hollywood Austen adaptation, the least on-target in terms of feel.  Gwyneth Paltrow looks good as the title character, although I don’t like her performance at ALL as much as I like Kate Beckinsale in the BBC version.  The costuming is VERY mishmash “Regency-esque.”  The only real outstanding notes are Greta Scaachi (always fabulous), and Jeremy Northam makes a more dashing and handsome Mr. Knightley than Mark Strongin the BBC version (of course, Strong is probably a lot closer to Austen’s writing the character).

My rating:  2 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Rosalind Ebbutt

Buy from Amazon and support this site

When I first heard this was coming out, I thought, “Oh god, we need ANOTHER Emma?”  But on the whole, I ended up liking this more than I thought I would!  Romola Garai does a good job with the part, Johnny Lee Miller reads as a little young to be Mr. Knightley, but he’s cuter than Mark Strong in the 1996 version.  The nicest thing is the story really takes its time, which always makes me happy.  The costumes were fine — nothing horrible, nothing to write home about — and seem to almost all have been reworn from earlier Regency film/TV productions.

My rating: 4 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Sergio Ballo

Buy from Amazon and support this site

Rented it, stuck it on the DVD player, and then kept miraculously finding something to do in another room.  It was that riveting.  Can’t even tell you about the costumes — sorry!  Boring!

My rating:  1 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Maurizio Millenotti

Buy from Amazon and support this site

Good but not great story of Beethoven and his “immortal beloved(s).”  Gary Oldman definitely gives a great performance as the composer, but the movie just didn’t pull me in as it should.  Interesting costuming — more upper class Regency than we usually see in Austen-type movies.

My rating:  2 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Sandy Powell

Buy from Amazon and support this site

Another so/so movie.  Tom Cruise is WAY out of his league as the vampire Lestat, Brad Pitt works but only barely — see it instead for Kirsten Dunst in her most amazing role ever as Claudia, the child vampire.  The story begins in the 1790s, then moves to the 1870s or 1880s and then the present day.  Claudia’s gowns in the 19th century period are amazing, as are her “friend” Madeleine’s (I would happily kill for Madeleine’s green dress).

My rating:  3 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Emma Rosenthal

Buy from Amazon and support this site

A recent ITV (UK) TV production, this tells the story of a modern day woman (Amanda Price), a huge fan of P&P, who switches places with Elizabeth Bennet at the beginning of the P&P story. The costuming is close to appalling, with everyone wearing what are very obviously cheap stock rentals, and Amanda decides to assert her independence by refusing to ever style her hair in a period style (which made me want to stick a fork in her head) and wearing modern makeup, both of which no one seems to particularly blink at (hello, she’d be a whore and/or insane in period terms!). The story, however, I quite enjoyed with one caveat. Basically, because Amanda is in the story instead of Elizabeth, things go screwy and she spends most of the plot trying to set things to right. It’s fun to see her effect on the storyline and they do a good job of letting us discover bits and pieces about the characters that mesh with the plot as Austen wrote it, but are not as portrayed in the novel. That being said, I have the same complaint as I do about the many Austen sequels, which is that they color my view of the story; it’s hard not to start to integrate these details into the story in your head. But if you don’t mind this issue, I think you’ll enjoy this. I will add, however, that the guy playing Mr. Darcy is, while not entirely miscast as he plays a jerk and a lover well, really not worthy of the part. Many of the other characters are, however, quite well cast — in particular, Hugh Bonneville and Alex Kingston give fabulous performances as Mr. & Mrs. Bennet.

My rating:  3 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Andrea Galer

Buy from Amazon and support this site

The only “off” Austen adaptation of the 1990s, mostly because of changes from the tone/story of the original book, some of which succeed and some of which don’t.  I like the incorporation of Jane Austen’s juvenile writings and the spunk-ification of Fanny (probably one of the most retiring of Austen’s characters, although readers of the book will understand that that has a purpose missed in this film), but didn’t enjoy the attempts to make the movie darker and more erotic than the book.  The costuming is definitely Hollywood-ized, with Fanny in weird jumper/shirt combinations that I’ve never seen in the period and Mary Crawford in VERY modern fabrics/cuts.  Maria and Julia Bertram (played by the fabulous Justine Waddell) get some great gowns, however, and there’s a great appearance by the VERY fabulous Sophia Myles as Fanny’s younger sister.

See also my review of the ITV miniseries.

My rating:  3 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Mike O’Neill

Buy from Amazon and support this site

One of three ITV Jane Austen adaptations from 2007, this production attempts to be more modern and relevant (a la the Kiera Knightly Pride & Prejudice) — and, predictably, fails as a result. Billie Piper is a giggy, spunky Fanny very unlike the novel’s character (who, granted, is the hardest of the Austen heroines to get imho); the story is changed around a decent amount with some just plain weird choices (a picnic instead of a ball for Fanny’s birthday [why?], Fanny being left behind at Mansfield instead of sent home, etc.). The costuming is all over the place, with some semi-decent and even interesting gowns — but a lot of really bad ones. Mrs. Norris and Lady Bertram wear very 1780s-style gowns in the early “young Fanny” scenes, but look exactly same in the later “adult Fanny” era. Many of the women wear evening gowns during the day; and even dresses that I really liked (like Maria’s stripey wedding outfit) are offset by having modern fitting to them. Fanny wears a total mishmash, often in 1790s-esque gowns (cone shaped V front bodices with the short 1790s waistline) — I assume to show that she’s wearing old dresses, but wow – should Fanny have that much cleavage? And her hair – oh god, her hair.

It wasn’t BAD per se as a film to watch, but it wasn’t good as an Austen adaptation and I have to say the 1999 feature film (which has a lot of problems!) is better.

See also my review of the feature film.

My rating:  2 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Wendy Stites

Buy from Amazon and support this site

Not only a great, exciting, adventurous story with engaging characters and relationships, but incredibly gritty, realistic, as darn near 100% historically accurate costumes, props, art direction, set design, etc.  All boys, though.  Pity!

My rating:  5 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Andrea Galer

Buy from Amazon and support this site

Tells the fictionalized story of Jane Austen’s last period of her life as she deals with romantic regrets and the implications of her choice to be a writer, with Olivia Williams as the title character. I loved the story, acting and casting, and found it to be very emotionally moving. Sadly, the costumes (by the same designer who did many of the 2007/08 ITV productions) was SO boring and samey in all of these productions, this one included. While the costumes weren’t ugly or inauthentic, they were a big zzzzzzzz.

My rating:  4 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Grania Preston

Buy from Amazon and support this site

One of three ITV (UK TV) Austen adaptations, I liked this one the best, probably because the only thing I can compare it with is the 1986 version reviewed below. Felicity Jones worked really well as Catherine, and I loooooved JJ Field as the charming Henry Tilney (swoon)! Almost all of the casting worked really well. There were a few off notes, such as Isabella Thorpe REALLY flirting, in a very sexual way, with some men at the pump rooms which had me raising my eyebrows; and there was a bit too much of Catherine saying, “Northanger Abbey?” in a wide-eyed “Who me?” sort of way, but I liked it nonetheless! The costuming was quite nice, from what I remember (need to rewatch it to refresh my memory!).

See also my review of the 1986 TV miniseries.

My rating:  4 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Nicholas Rocker

Buy from Amazon and support this site

I really wish someone would do an updated (film) version of this Austen book — it’s the only one not to be remade in the 1990s, so we’re stuck with this BBC miniseries version.  It’s unfortunately pretty dated looking, the actress who plays Catherine never really yanks my chain, and it’s over-the-top in its interpretations of Catherine’s horror novel reading-inspired fantasies.  Worth a watch, but barely.

See also my review of the 2007 TV miniseries.

My rating:  2 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Pierre-Jean Larroque

Buy from Amazon and support this site

Pretty darn terrible, except for the genius casting of Isabella Rossellini as Josephine.  She looks great but doesn’t get enough screen time.  The rest is very TV movie of the week.

My rating:  1 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Annie Symons

Buy from Amazon and support this site

Pretty bad, even with such a great cast as Samantha Morton, Linus Roache, and John Hannah.  The story is about English poets Coleridge and Wordsworth with lots of opium addiction and general betrayal and despair.

My rating:  1 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Alexandra Byrne

Buy from Amazon and support this site

Hands down my favorite Austen film — this just gets it RIGHT in terms of character, mood/tone, story, costumes, sets, everything.  GO SEE IT RIGHT NOW.  I never fail to cry at the big climax, Amanda Root and Ciaran Hinds are PERFECT as the lead characters, and it’s just a joy to watch.  Notice especially how Mrs. Musgrove, when at home in the country, wears more 1780s-ish clothing (straight front corsets, longer waists), than the other characters or when she’s in Bath.  I love touches like that!

See also my review of the 2007 ITV production.

My rating:  5 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Andrea Galer

Buy from Amazon and support this site

A pretty darn decent adaptation of the Austen novel, which is impressive given that it’s part of the ITV series. Sally Hawkins is great in the part of Anne, Rupert Penry-Jones is super hot and quite good at Capt. Wentworth; the two look more the age of the main characters than the 1995 feature film’s cast. Most of the rest of the cast is unremarkable, however. The story is compressed and feels like it rushes to the conclusion, and some plot points are changed unnecessarily. However, I have to say that this is (so far) the best of the ITV adaptations (I’ll update this statement after I watch Northanger Abbey!).

See also my review of the 1995 feature film.

My rating:  3 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Jacqueline Durran

Buy from Amazon and support this site

Oh my.  Well.  Hmm.  The good? Rosalind Pike as Jane is perfect, both in looks and acting. Finally they got that Jane is prettier, which makes the rest of plot make so much more sense!  Partially because his character is written so well, but also because he’s a great actor, I loved Tom Hollander as Mr. Collins.  It was great fun to see a new take on the character, and his mannerism were just priceless.  Keira Knightley was cute in an if-I-scrunch-up-my-nose-will-you-like-me sort of way.  Rupert Friend as Wickham was hot hot hot in an Orlando Bloom sort of way.  And while the tone was different from the book, I have to admit I palpitated a bit at the first proposal-in-the-rain scene.  And Mr. Bingley was SO cute! 

The bad? Do we have enough room?  1. The desperate attempt to make the story seem relevant does not explain the sad lack of manners and decent hairstyles, the constant mud pit/pig shots, nor Keira/Elizabeth’s homespun gowns.  2. Elizabeth Showed Up At Netherfield Park With Her Hair Down!!  3. WTF was Caroline Bingley wearing at the assembly and Netherfield ball scenes – her slip?  4. Sorry, Matthew MacFadyen is homely and sallow, altho his sad Mr. Darcy interpretation was kind of cute.  5. The need to constantly hit us over the head with what should be unspoken themes really grated — ie “Jane is just shy!” and “I’m afraid I’ll be a spinster, so don’t you judge me!”  The whole point of Austen’s era, and the joy of reading the books/watching the adaptations, is that THINGS ARE NOT DISCUSSED the way they are now.  If they were, there’d be no story!  Elizabeth and Darcy would have one knock down fight, everything would come out, they’d live happily ever after!  6. What was with the running around in nighties in the pre-dawn, with psychic Mr. Darcy striding across the field ready to enfold Lizzie in his manly arms?  7. Yes one must cut out/compress unnecessary plot bits to fit ye olde movie time limit, but establishing Wickham as a viable love interest for Elizabeth, and the full implications of Lydia’s elopement, are MAJOR PLOT POINTS.  They should not be skipped in order to make room for more pig/mud shots! 

The costumes? A mixed bag.  Some were very nice, esp. the 18th c. style corsets still worn in the 1790s.  But most of the Bennets looked like charwomen (could Mr. Bennet not afford a razor?), and see above re: Caroline Bingley and Elizabeth/homespun princess.  I did like seeing the 1780s styles on Mrs. Bennet and Lady Catherine.

See also my review of the 1940 feature film, the 1980 BBC production, and the 1995 BBC production.

My rating:  2 (out of 5) (but watch it just to have fun snarking!)

Costume designer: Dinah Collin

Buy from Amazon and support this site

What can be said that hasn’t been said?  The cause of Austen mania, Darcy mania, Colin Firth mania, Regency mania — it’s all right here.  I borrowed the VHS from a friend in the midst of packing to move, expecting to put it on in the background — needless to say I spent 6 hours (or whatever) sitting on the hardwood floor of my empty living room just RIVETED.  I can watch this over and over for it’s fabulously fun and romantic story line — and the COSTUMES!  HELLO!  Aside from too many low necklines during the day and some definite choices about which characters wear which types of gowns/fabrics, it’s OUTSTANDING.

See also my review of the 1940 feature film, the 1980 BBC production, and the 2005 feature film.

My rating:  5 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Joan Ellacott

Buy from Amazon and support this site

Okay, realize that this review comes from having watched the 1995 P&P Over and Over and Over. Surprisingly quite good! Elizabeth Garvie does a good job portraying Elizabeth’s wit, Jane Bennet is appropriately pretty and sweet, and the costumes (while nothing to get overly excited about) are fine. David Rintoul is, however, not the best Darcy – he does a good job seeming/looking pompous and conceited in the first half, but never really mellows — and let’s just say that his pants seem to fill out rather TOO well (what is a blushing, virginal Regency maid supposed to look at when there’s such a view?).

See also my review of the 1940 feature film, the 1995 BBC production, and the 2005 feature film.

My rating:  3 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Jacqueline West

Buy from Amazon and support this site

I LOVE Kate Winslet, but this movie just made me want to stick a fork in my eye.  The story of the Marquis de Sade and his relationship with a maid in an insane asylum yadda yadda.  See it if you’re interested in watching Winslet run around in a Really Period late 18th century corset for the entire movie (although I’m not sure I buy that her character couldn’t afford SOME kind of dress), but beware — it’s a whole lot of Geoffrey Rush doing his Geoffrey Rush thing.

My rating:  1 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Theresa Rymer

Buy from Amazon and support this site

A fascinating, if depressing, look at a real historical person: Anne Lister, an English landowner who was a lesbian, and who kept a coded diary on which the film is based. The acting is good; the costumes are well done, if relatively plain (as befits the era and the characters). It’s definitely worth watching, if for no other reason than to widen your knowledge of early LGBT history.

My rating: 4 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Jenny Beavan & John Bright

Buy from Amazon and support this site

Another favorite film of mine.  Emma Thompson’s adaptation of Austen’s book is hands down one of the best I’ve ever seen.  Really sad, touching, romantic, bittersweet story of two sisters and their families and loves.  And NO, it’s NOT about Elinor Dashwood learning to express her emotions — it’s about Marianne Dashwood learning to moderate hers!  Kate Winslet is RIVETING as Marianne, Emma Thompson really nails the feeling of Elinor (even if the role was rewritten to make Elinor older) — and the rest of the cast is fabulous too.  Great costumes set in the 1790s — adapted a bit for a modern audience in that the skirts aren’t quite as full as they could be, but still beautiful and an interesting look at a period that most films skip over.  Love the hats!

See also my review of the 1981 BBC production and the 2008 ITV production.

My rating:  5 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Dorothea Wallace

Buy from Amazon and support this site

It’s hard not to compare this with the 1995 adaptation, which I’ve seen probably 200 times (all before viewing this one) — apologies!  Overall, I enjoyed the storytelling — the fact that it’s a mini-series rather than a movie gave it room to include more characters and events than the movie, and it stays more faithful to Austen’s original storyline.  It was nice to see Lady Middleton, Miss Steele, and Mrs. Ferrars included, although I did miss Margaret.  I preferred some of the characterizations as well, especially Edward Dashwood — much more convincing as a shy but good man, and somehow it was more clear why Elinor fell in love with him — and Colonel Brandon, helpfully looking his proper age of 35ish as opposed to Alan Rickman’s totally unconvincing late 40s/early 50s.  On the other hand, I found Marianne to read as terribly young (more true to the age of her character in the book), but as such pretty darn irritating and unsympathetic — the heartbreak I felt in Kate Winslet’s portrayal just seemed like youthful melodramatics here.  On the whole I liked Irene Richard’s portrayal of Elinor, although she could be rather one-note in some scenes.  Now, the costumes — sorry kids, but they’re VERY high school costume shop.  Lots of what looked like cotton broadcloth (probably wasn’t, but that’s what it looked like) and cheap synthetic glitzy bits on the more well-to-characters.  Nonetheless, worth a watch for Austen fans!

See also my review of the 1995 feature film and the 2008 ITV production.

My rating:  2 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Michele Clapton

Buy from Amazon and support this site

Yet again, I can’t avoid comparing this with the 1995 version, and again this one comes up lacking. It felt like they were trying too hard to make this feel different from the Emma Thompson film. The editing and dialogue made things feel a bit too rushed. Elinor and Marianne were relatively good; the actor playing Willoughby was NO Greg Wise. Still, if I didn’t have the 1995 version to compare it to, I’d probably like it, and it’s worth a watch. The costuming was nice – wonderful to NOT see yet another Andrea Galer yawner – but there was nothing memorable; Marianne could have put her hair up a bit more.

See also my review of the 1981 BBC production and the 1995 feature film.

My rating:  3 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Rosalind Ebbutt

Buy from Amazon and support this site

Yet another I really tried to like but didn’t.  Natasha Little does well as Becky Sharp, but maybe it’s because she’s a somewhat unlikable heroine that it just didn’t grab me.  Plus the music was WAY too heavy handed — have your volume button ready!  Update:  I wrote this before seeing the 2004 feature film or reading the book, both of which I now LOVE.  So I tried to go back and rewatch this in case I might be more open to it — but seriously, I couldn’t take the INCREDIBLY LOUD HORN-BASED MUSIC.  I made it about 5 minutes before I had to turn it off!

See also my review of the 2004 feature film.

My rating:  2 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Beatrix Aruna Pasztor

Buy from Amazon and support this site

I agree with every other costumer’s review that A) the costumes aren’t terribly period (colors too bright and too Indian-influenced, too many dresses cut in similar styles, etc.) B) the hairstyles aren’t period (very 1830s in my opinion) and C) they changed the main character of Becky Sharp from conniving to plucky. All that being said, as one who has never read the original source material and didn’t really care for the 1998 adaptation (see above), I quite enjoyed this! I liked the pluck-ification of Sharp and felt Reese Witherspoon did an excellent job of playing the character as written, and although the costumes weren’t 100% accurate, I really enjoyed the beautiful taffetas and jewel-toned colors. If you’re not too attached to the book, go ahead and have a guilty pleasure.

Update: Okay, okay. Now that I’ve read the book (which was great!), you’re right – they totally reinterpreted the character of Becky Sharp, as well as Rawdon.  Who cares, I still liked the movie (okay, some people care, but I still liked the movie!)

See also my review of the 1998 BBC production.  For an even longer review, check out our Frock Flicks podcast on Vanity Fair.

My rating: 4 (out of 5)

Costume designer: James Acheson

Buy from Amazon and support this site

First, I have to confess that although I love Jane Eyre, I’m not really a fan of gothic. I tried to read this book a number of times when I was young, and I never really got past the second page. That being said, I was surprised that I quite liked this film (although I definitely don’t want to read the book, now that I know the plot). Ralph Fiennes works well as the tormented Heathcliff, and Juliette Binoche is quite good as Cathy-with-a-slight-French-accent. Most important, the costumes were really good (designed by James Acheson, who did Dangerous Liaisons) — the first half of the movie is set in the 1780s, the second half in the 1800s. Lots of good stripey robes à l’anglaise. The only off bit was that Cathy the First’s hairstyles were a bit off — too hairspray-y and weird bangs.

My rating:  3 (out of 5)

Costume designer: Amy Roberts

Buy from Amazon and support this site

I enjoyed this more than the 1992 version – but I still don’t want to read the book! Tom Hardy was good at being tortured as Heathcliff, I didn’t want to hit Charlotte Riley as Cathy too often, and I thought the portrayal of Isabella was quite touching. Nice costumes, nothing terribly exciting… although I am biased, as I find Regency somewhat uninspiring.

My rating:  3 (out of 5)