Read my review of Northanger Abbey (the book).

There will be spoilers ahead.

General thoughts

From the beginning of this movie, I was predisposed to like it. While the book was not my favorite Austen work, the movie has several points in its favor. I loved Felicity Jones after seeing her in the Star Wars movie Rogue One in 2016. JJ Feild was wonderful in Austenland, my first exposure to his work. Screenwriter Andrew Davies also wrote several of my favorite period pieces, including the 1995 Pride and Prejudice miniseries, Elizabeth Gaskell’s Wives and Daughters, and the 2007 A Room With a View.

The fourth wall breaks Austen employed regularly in the book irritated me, but I do know that feature was one of the biggest appeals to fans of the book. I found those passages felt much more natural and suited to the voice-over narration the movie used.

One of my biggest complaints with the books was the pacing. While I’m sure plenty of readers were sad to see large portions of the book cut — as any bookworm is when their favorite books are translated to screen — I much enjoyed having the progress of the story expedited.

This particular Austen movie felt more grounded in reality than others I’ve seen. I could really picture myself in this regency world. I think this was due partly to the large number of less recognizable — or at least less polished and made-up — faces in the cast. Catherine and her friends were surrounded by people who looked easily like someone I might pass on the street. The movie lacked the Hollywood glamour and veneer seen in many movies and shows produced today; the storytelling was made better by that (though I suspect it was largely a result of the made-for-television budget.) The creators of the movie also grounded the scenes with extras, carriages, crowds, and such where the book had them.

Characters

The naive nature of Catherine Morland was much more charming in Felicity Jones than the character I’d formed in my head, reading the book. She also appeared slightly less gullible in the movie. Her delivery suggested movie Catherine may have suspected Isabella’s and Thorpe’s true natures long before she understood in the book (though she showed the same shock when the truth came out).

Mrs. Allen’s detailed attention to fashion and hairstyles, which bored me as a reader, fit the visual beginning of the movie much better (and was drastically pared down). Mr. Allen’s grounded, sensible manner was portrayed well by Desmond Barrit.

The chemistry between JJ Feild and Felicity Jones was delightfully enjoyable to watch. Henry was just as agreeable and charming on screen as he was on the page (with one conversational exception, referenced later in this post).

The pall General Tilney’s presence cast over his children was very striking in Liam Cunningham’s performance. The general sometimes reminded me visually of an older version of Wickham from the 1995 Pride and Prejudice production.

Carey Mulligan as Isabella Thorpe made me almost like the character. How can anyone not enjoy Mulligan’s bright wit and cheery face, even when employed as a selfish, manipulative false friend? I think some of Isabella’s manipulations in the book were cut, so that probably also improved her movie character. She reminded me at times of Fanny from the North and South Elizabeth Gaskell miniseries, or of Cynthia from Wives and Daughters (also an Andrew Davies work). Her flirtation with Captain Tilney was certainly just as alarming and uncomfortable in the movie as in the book.

Adaptational changes

Watching Catherine’s fantasies and the novels she read played out on screen, with herself as the heroine and the people she knew in roles she believed they suited, greatly added to the experience of the story. I don’t know, not having read the passages myself, whether they were at all accurate, but I enjoyed them.

I didn’t really like the way John Thorpe was portrayed in the movie, from an adaptation perspective. He certainly wasn’t likable, but I felt he wasn’t unlikable enough. He didn’t go on boasting and talking about horses and carriages and money like he did in the book, and many of his scenes were cut. I hated his book character completely, but that was the point — and it wasn’t carried over as strongly on screen.

The movie introduced and established Eleanor Tilney’s love interest more clearly. Their relationship felt like a tacked-on afterthought in the book.

I was surprised to see viewers cued in to the falsehoods John Thorpe fed into General Tilney’s ear as it happened. The entire mystery of General Tilney’s sudden anger at the end of the book was, to me, possibly the most gripping plot point. Similarly, though viewers aren’t immediately told the truth, Eleanor says when her father sends Catherine away that she already knows his reasons, and “they do him no credit.”

Climaxes and endings

The closer the movie drew to the book’s end, the more changes were made to the telling of the story.

Catherine’s suspicions of the general and the secrets she expects to find at Northanger Abbey seem more believable in the movie. The music and lighting especially lend to a true sense of building suspense. Camera angles and editing do the same, though more subtly than the music. I can’t say whether I liked this or not. As a rule, I prefer faithful adaptations, but I also found the book disappointing here, so I’m torn on the movie. I do lean more toward the opinion that the movie took the change a bit too far.

In the book, Catherine opens a trunk before going down to dinner, only to find that it has linens inside. Later, she opens a cabinet and finds only old washing bills. In the movie, she opens the chest once — but is startled by a maid and ceases her search. She returns to the chest later to find old papers inside, but her candle is blown out by the wind before she can examine them. These all build the idea of mystery and horror at the Abbey that, in the book, was clearly just in Catherine’s head. (Movie Catherine does realize the papers are only “laundry lists” in the morning.)

This departure goes further when Catherine enters the late Mrs. Tilney’s room. In the book, it was described as a cheery, well-furnished, comfortable room, quite disappointing Catherine’s expectations of some horrible scene. In the movie, it is poorly lit, appears sparse and empty, and is coated with a thick layer of dust.

Henry’s confrontation of Catherine after realizing what ideas she has been building were the second most striking difference between the book and movie, in a disappointing way.

In the book:

If I understand you rightly, you had formed a surmise of such horror as I have hardly words to—Dear Miss Morland, consider the dreadful nature of the suspicions you have entertained. What have you been judging from? Remembering the country and age in which we live. Remember that we are English, that we are Christians. Consult your own understanding, your own sense of the probable, your own observation of what is passing around you…Dearest Miss Morland, what ideas have you been admitting?

In the movie:

Henry: If I understand you rightly, you have been suspecting my father of a crime so dreadful—

Catherine: You said yourself the house was full of secrets!

Henry: And so you decided that my father must be a murdurer! (pause) And to you, at least, he’s shown nothing but kindness. Catherine, how could you? What sort of a fevered imagination must you have. Perhaps, after all, it is possible to read too many novels.

Henry’s speech in the book is an appeal to Catherine’s knowledge, experience, and good sense. He is clearly upset, but still asks only that she ground herself in reality and recognize the absurdity of her suspicions. In the movie… he shames her and says, quite pointedly, that she reads too many books. It diminished his character and his relation to the heroine.

The most surprising difference came immediately after this scene. Perhaps I misinterpreted the events of the book, but I believed Isabella’s infidelity to Catherine’s brother James went no further than flirting and placing hopes on Captain Tilney. The movie shows Isabella and the captain sleeping together. Wouldn’t that have received much more attention and concern in the book, in that time period? Wouldn’t it have been quite scandalous?

Once Catherine returns home, she throws her copy of the Udolpho book into the fire. This didn’t sit well with me. Catherine certainly didn’t cast off her love of novels in the book — she simply learned to better distinguish between fantasy and reality, and grew up in the process. This feels like it connects back to the changes made on Henry’s speech to her.

Henry’s visit to Catherine’s family went differently in the movie than I’d pictured it, but the details of the dialogue were not laid out, so would of course be filled in differently by each reader’s mind.

A kiss was shared on screen which did not occur in the books, but that’s to be expected from Austen screen adaptations.

It irked me that the requirement of Catherine’s parents that General Tilney consent to the marriage, and the subsequent events that allowed Henry and Catherine to marry with his father’s consent, were cut out. The movie skipped straight from the proposal, with narration, to the christening of their first child (which was not in the book). This change also changed the meaning of the narrator’s closing line, which is lifted from the book almost directly: “I leave it to be settled whether the tendency of this story be to recommend parental tyranny, or reward filial disobedience.” In the book, Henry proposes to Catherine against his father’s wishes, but they wait to marry until the general consents. In the movie, they proceed with the wedding immediately, with no more mention of the general after Henry declares himself done with his father.

Final thoughts

On the surface, this movie is a largely accurate adaptation in terms of plot progression and character depiction. However, it strays at times from the book’s intended messages and themes—which are arguably more important than plot when translating stories between media. Most notably, Henry rebukes Catherine for reading too many novels, and she symbolically renounces them with a book burning. This undermines her core arc in the book, which is not leaving her love of novels, but rather learning to enjoy them without informing her picture of reality.

A fan of the Northanger Abbey book would probably not find this a truly satisfying adaptation. If you’re simply looking for a period film on a quiet night in, however, it is charming and agreeable enough.