The Latest ‘Sense and Sensibility’ Bares Its Heart and Soul

1 Comment

Now, now, let’s be sensible (and sensuous)
(CREDIT: Focus Features / © 2026 FOCUS FEATURES LLC)

Starring: Daisy Edgar-Jones, Esmé Creed-Miles, Caitríona Balfe, Bodhi Rae Breathnach, Frank Dillane, Herbert Nordrum, George MacKay, Fiona Shaw, Stacy Martin, Tom Brooke, Turlough Convery, Chloe Pirrie, Eliot Sumner, Bethany Slater, Ceara Coveney

Director: Georgia Oakley

Running Time: 132 Minutes

Rating: PG for A Threat of Violence and Brief (Non-Revealing) Nudity

Release Date: October 16, 2026 (Theaters)

What’s It About?: It’s an enduring tale of passion and manners from one of the most beloved novelists in history. While not her most frequently adapted story, it has definitely made its presence felt for a couple of centuries. The Dashwood sisters – Elinor (Daisy Edgar-Jones), Marianne (Esmé Creed-Miles), and Margaret (Bodhi Rae Breathnach) – and their mother (Caitríona Balfe) have found themselves in quite the 19th century English pickle. After their father’s passing, their estate is set to be inherited by their half-brother John (Tom Brooke) and his wife Fanny (Stacy Martin). So they end up moving into a cottage owned by the son-in-law of a distant relative, the batty Mrs. Jennings (Fiona Shaw). Amidst all this disruption, Elinor and Marianne haven’t forgotten how much their futures could be determined by a suitor. For Elinor, the primary target of her affection is the upright Edward Ferrars (George MacKay), while Marianne finds her heart burning for the fiery John Willoughby (Frank Dillane) and the more reserved Colonel Brandon (Herbert Nordrum).

What Made an Impression?: My Relationship with Sense and Sensibility: I’m an English major who took a seminar on Jane Austen, so I’ve certainly dug deep into the text of Sense and Sensibility. But out of her six completed novels, I would rank it an underwhelming fifth. (Pride and Prejudice takes my unsurprising top slot, while the less heralded Northanger Abbey is my runner-up.) So I’ve never been motivated to seek out any of the filmed adaptations (though I have read Sense and Sensibility and Sea Monsters). But this latest version has me convinced that I’ve been missing out, as screenwriter Diana Reid and director Georgia Oakley seem to have pinpointed all of the most essential qualities for me to pledge allegiance to the Dashwood sisters.
Oh By the Way, Which One’s Sense?: The typical take on this story is that Marianne represents the first half of the title and Elinor the second half, though it’s ultimately a little more complicated than that. But this version emphasizes the more simplistic reading… to its benefit. Creed-Miles is undeniably more nakedly emotional, while Edgar-Jones is obviously more inhibited and conflicted. Now, to be clear and fair, the former does not lack reason completely, and the latter has plenty of passion. But the stark demarcation between what we see most of the time from them makes it clear why they believe they have to act the way that they do, and their supposedly necessary constrictions are guaranteed to break your heart.
They’ve Got the Gift of Gab: This is the sort of movie that you know is working because of how much of the dialogue you want to write down to ensure that you don’t forget it. I imagine that some lines are lifted straight from the source, while others could have been adjusted slightly. Either way, they sing because of who’s delivering them. From blunt observations of reality, to insightful philosophies colored by both despair and hope, to ridiculous bons mots that are necessary to survive all of the hullabaloo, you’ll be inspired to render your own courtships and dinner parties this crackling.

Sense and Sensibility (2026) is Recommended If You Like: Rediscovering the classics,  or Falling in love with them for the first time

Grade: 4 out of 5 Estates

‘Maddie’s Secret’ and ‘Rose of Nevada’ Are Surprisingly Satisfying Back-to-Back

Leave a comment

A Rose with any other Secret… (CREDIT: 1-2 Special; Magnolia Pictures/Screenshot)

Maddie’s Secret

Starring: John Early, Kate Berlant, Eric Rahill, Kristen Johnston, Claudia O’Doherty, Conner O’Malley, Vanessa Bayer, Chris Bauer, Nate Varrone, Pat Regan, Frankie Quiñones, Merrick McCartha

Director: John Early

Running Time: 101 Minutes

Rating: Unrated

Release Date: June 19, 2026 (Theaters)

Rose of Nevada

Starring: George MacKay, Callum Turner, Rosalind Eleazar, Francis Magee, Mary Woodvine, Edward Rowe, Adrian Rawlins, Yana Penrose, Emily Daglish-Laine, Mae Voogd

Director: Mark Jenkin

Running Time: 114 Minutes

Rating: Unrated

Release Date: June 19, 2026 (Theaters)

Maddie’s Secret and Rose of Nevada are two indie flicks that arrived in American theaters on the exact same date (6/19/26) and that both lasered in on something very specific in my personality, and I think that everybody who reads my words should know that. The former, in which John Early writes, directs, and stars at the nexus of food-content parody and melodramatically open-minded storytelling is perfectly queer in a way that just feels so right to me as a big-hearted pop culture obsessive (who just so happens to be straight). Meanwhile, the latter is about a boat that inexplicably goes back in time, with correspondingly disorienting sound design. It’s a trip that I imagine I won’t ever stop fully ruminating upon. So now you know all that about me! And the more you know… 

Grades:
Maddie’s Secret: 4 Recipes out of 5 Secrets
Rose of Nevada: 444 Roses out of 555 Infinity Nevadas

Did I Wolf Down ‘Wolf’?

Leave a comment

Wolf (CREDIT: Focus Features)

Starring: George MacKay, Lily-Rose Depp, Paddy Considine, Eileen Walsh

Director: Nathalie Biancheri

Running Time: 98 Minutes

Rating: R

Release Date: December 3, 2021 (Theaters)

Wolf is basically what I’ve been waiting for ever since I started reviewing movies by asking myself if I wanted to do what’s being offered in the title. This is a movie about a human man who believes that he’s a wolf! Do I also want to be a wolf, even if only for a little while? That might be fun, but that’s not exactly what this movie is really about … or is it? Jacob (George MacKay) sure looks like a Homo sapien, as do all of his fellow patients at the facility where they’re being treated for species identity disorder. But there are moments that really make you wonder if a lupine soul somehow did find its way into a human vessel. Alas, the abusive tactics reminiscent of troubled youth programs practiced by the facility’s director aren’t likely to help us find any answers. Anyway, I quite enjoyed Wolf introducing me to a whole new world and would have liked to have been able to explore it even more (the ending’s a little abrupt).

Grade: 7 Howls out of 10 Whiskers

‘1917’s’ Gimmick is a Technical Feat, But It Gets in the Way of Some Potential Storytelling Resonance

4 Comments

CREDIT: Universal Pictures and DreamWorks Pictures

Starring: George MacKay, Dean-Charles Chapman, Colin Firth, Mark Strong, Andrew Scott, Benedict Cumberbatch, Richard Madden

Director: Sam Mendes

Running Time: 119 Minutes

Rating: R for Explosives and Gunfire Flying Through the Air

Release Date: December 25, 2019 (Limited)/Expands January 10, 2020

The World War I men-on-a-mission-to-stop-a-mission film 1917 is one of those flicks, like Birdman or Alfred Hitchcock’s Rope, that is shot and edited in such a way as to make it appear like one long continuous take. It also has a race-against-the-clock premise, as British Lance Corporals Blake (Dean-Charles Chapman) and Schofield (George MacKay) are sent to deliver a message to another British battalion to call off an attack and thus prevent them from walking into a German trap. Chapman and MacKay display the right sort of nervous energy for a seemingly impossible, deadly task, but honestly, I wish there had been more bells and whistles on their journey. Specifically, it would have been a big help if there had been a clock in the corner of the screen letting us know how much time they had left to successfully deliver the message. That might seem out of place for a film that gets much of its power from disorientation and uncertainty, but when the premise is clear and simple, it helps to have the stakes be clear and simple as well.

Overally, 1917 is impressive and accomplished, but in a manner that often gets in the way of itself. The “almost” nature of the one-shot gimmick is not hard to suss out, as there are plenty of moments when someone turns towards a wall, or the picture becomes total darkness, and it’s clear that a cut would be very easy to do at this moment. Still, a series of several long continuous takes is tough to pull off, and the urgency that technique conveys fits with the subject matter. But … why not cut? Why not let us see the doomed battalion before they realize how doomed they are? The power of this story is in the dramatic irony of fate’s fickleness, and we get only a small portion of that by sticking on one path. Ultimately then, 1917 is a long fancy showcase to show off some filmmaking skillz instead of a fully realized narrative vision.

1917 is Recommended If You Like: The Revenant, Dunkirk, Video game cut scenes

Grade: 3 out of 5 Orders