Redundant and unnecessary.

I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

For any book purist there is much to nitpick about this version of Persuasion. Filled with odd script and directorial choices which include Anne breaking the fourth wall and staring into the camera, a determination to make the film visually dour, and a last minute long-take sequence that borders on the sheer absurd, it is nevertheless anchored by some fabulous acting and chemistry. And isn't that all we really want from an Austen adaptation? Sally Hawkins plays Anne Elliot, a 27 year old spinster from a wealthy family who was once engaged to the handsome but titleless Frederick Wentworth. Years later Anne is now considered withered, plain and doomed to spinsterhood (Regency England was so harsh to 27 year old women!). On top of it all her impractical and vain father has squandered much of the family fortune. Into this mess ventures Wentworth, as handsome as ever and now graced with a fortune that makes him a very eligible suitor indeed. Everything seems cold between Anne and Wentworth and she resigns herself to watching him marry a much younger woman... but sparks fly between the old lovers and hope grows in Anne again. The story is one of my favourite Austen books but be warned! If you liked the novel this adaptation eschews huge chunks in order of brevity. And yet I can't help loving this adaptation and it's probably my favourite one. Hawkins is a perfect Anne and Rupert Penry-Jones is an excellent Wentworth. The two of them exchange enough burning glances to light a spark in this rather dour adaptation. With such perfect chemistry it's only a pity that they are surrounded by a better film.

Coming from a person that loves Jane Austen movies and not ever to read her actual books, this movie was absolutely boring. I am used to the main character being.. Interesting, or the plot and the side stories to help with that. Anne was so boring I wanted to shoot myself, she barely speaks and she keeps blinking as though she has something in her eyes (drove me insane). She would often open her mouth and nothing would come out. Her hairstyle was dreadful, she was an unattractive female so it was very hard to believe that a good looking rich man would desperately want a quiet, unattractive woman that seems to have no backbone and that is easily "persuaded" to do what others want her to do. This is so far my least favorite of Jane Austen's movies, pride and prejudice is the best, following sense and sensibility.

This version is far worse than the 90's version. I did not like the actress that played Anne in this version. Frederick was acceptable, although could be a little more weather-beaten, but Anne was not good. She seemed desperate with all the crying and running around. In the book, Anne is affected by his presence in the beginning and reminiscing the past and her decision, but she is not crying and longing for him! She actually wants to avoid him! She grows to feel the full extent of love again and is behaving as a lady ought to behave in these times. In the 2007 movie version Anne is deeply touched by the news that Fredrick is back from the sea and she even cries! Book's Anne is more composed. The fact that in the movie, they made her write a diary seems enough to show her feelings about Fredrick, crying wasn't necessary.

I agree with those reviewers who suggest that it is pointless comparing the film adaptations with source novels. I would add that they do not live and die in comparison to previous adaptations either.The acting of the two leads has been criticised for lacking chemistry but I thought that the repression, surely a better title, is a vital part of the story. Here are two people who are afraid of expressing their true feelings.The scene near the end where Anne goes running is her expressing herself. The letter from Wentworth was the same for him. It is a love story of the time and should be viewed as such I think.I enjoyed it. Against my better judgement I agreed to see the BBC adaptation the following evening and will accept that it was better overall. But that doesn't take away the enjoyment that the ITV version can bring.It is a difficult to accept some of the mores from 200 years ago. I felt like kicking Wentworth's beam ends and telling him to act like a man. But then, nice though Anne is, I have to say that she's not the most exciting of heroines. I can accept that part of the story is how a brave and fearless sea captain, fresh from battles with the Spanish and French, can be put onto the back foot by love for a women, and the accepted norms of society, but even so one does feel like shaking him at times. My wife reckons he's the best looking Wentworth ever (a bit like a younger me she said but modesty forbids me to repeat it.) The camera-work was intrusive. In the opening scenes, with Anne running around, reflected at the end of the adaptation, I could see the point of hand held but it did get in the way at other times. And long lingering looks do not do it for me unless there is some deep need for them.An interesting take on a well established favourite so a brave attempt.The adaptation is well worth the few pounds the DVD costs. The only advice I'd give is to see it before the BBC one.6 stars might be seen as a little harsh but it is not a classic.