28 September 2026 – I went with Cinema Club to Showcase Cinema to see ‘Sense and Sensibility’ today.
The synopsis on the cinema website was as follows:
“From Focus Features and Working Title comes an irresistible new take on Jane Austen’s iconic Sense and Sensibility: a charming, witty, and deeply relatable story of love and sisterhood”
I did not personally find it deeply relatable, but perhaps being the only male in the cinema, tells its own story on that one. I could see some of the charm and wit, for sure, but not in a very notable way.
The leading members of the cast were: Daisy Edgar-Jones, Esmé Creed-Miles and Caitriona Balfe; and the film was directed by Georgia Oakley, who is also known for directing ‘Blue Jean’. Diana Reid wrote the screenplay, and the book was written by Jane Austen.
The plot, setting and acting held-up well to the telling of the story, but the most impressive, and entertaining, acting was that of Fiona Shaw as Mrs Jennings, although Turlough Convery was also good as Sir John Middleton. I was not particularly impressed by this film, and felt it was ok, but not great, I would not, therefore, particularly recommend it, and yet, it was not terrible either.
My companions were much more enthusiastic about the film, and seemed to enjoy it considerably more than I did, although one of them, who was the only one of us who had seen the Ang Lee version, described that 1995 film as better than this one.
Mark Kermode spent a lot of time comparing the film to the 1995, Ang Lee version, as do many of the critic comments listed by Claude (see below).
He enjoyed the misty, earthy feel to the film, and found it visually brooding, reflected in the musical score. He had a very emotional reaction to the film, crying a lot at the end of the film, and he noted that there were lots of expressive dancing.
He also agreed that Fiona Shaw stole the show in every scene she was in. And overall, he gave the film “a big thumbs-up”.
I gave it a score of 6, whilst IMDB gave it 7.2, and the Rotten Tomatoes score was 7.8 (78%).
I also asked Claude to provide a summary of critic comments for this film, which is reproduced below.
Fraser
AI Contribution: Claude provided a summary of critic comments, reproduced here, in addition to converting a Microsoft document into this web page. Please note that I did not check these results for accuracy.
Please provide a full summary of UK film reviews of the 2026 film version of ‘Sense and Sensibility’, showing sources
Searched the web
The 2026 Sense and Sensibility, directed by Georgia Oakley, has split UK critics more sharply than the aggregate scores suggest. The Telegraph gave it five stars, The Times gave it two, and most other outlets sit around three to four. It premiered in Leicester Square on 15 September and opened in UK cinemas on 25 September, with the US release set for 16 October. Wikipedia
Overall picture
On Metacritic, it has a Metascore of 72 (“generally favorable”) from 15 reviews, 60% positive and 40% mixed, with none negative. Rotten Tomatoes has it at 75% from 28 reviews. Almost every review measures it against Ang Lee’s 1995 film. A Gold Derby round-up found critics generally positive, but the consensus is that it doesn’t match Lee’s version with Emma Thompson and Kate Winslet. Sense and Sensibility Reviews – Metacritic
The most positive reviews
-
- The Telegraph (Robbie Collin), 5 stars. The strongest rave. Collin calls it a wild and beautiful successor to Lee’s film, sharply adapted and beautifully directed, and “real landscape cinema”. He found the performances poised but fresh and unrehearsed, which makes them human and often funny. His summary is “Austen with the bonnets blown off.” yahoo
-
- Time Out (Olly Richards), 4 stars. Richards found it more brooding than Lee’s version, with wild landscapes carrying the Dashwoods’ inner turmoil, and the two leads convincing as sisters even though they don’t look alike. He says it is more serious than most Austen but still funny, especially Fiona Shaw’s Mrs Jennings. Its only weak stretch, surprisingly, is the London section. timeout
-
- The Independent, 4 stars. Headlined as a version not meant for Austen purists. It praises Creed-Miles and Edgar-Jones as a winning Marianne and Elinor in a very modern take that heightens the yearning and earthiness of the book. It credits Diana Reid’s script for keeping the modern touches unobtrusive, and singles out Shaw’s barnstorming Mrs Jennings. Sense and Sensibility review
-
- Little White Lies (Anna Stafford), about 3.7/5. Stafford calls it a wildly beautiful successor: rugged, romantic and refreshing. She says Oakley isn’t trying to compete with Lee’s version. lwlies
-
- Smaller UK sites were also warm. Film Focus Online called it engaging, beautifully made and charming, ideal for a Sunday afternoon. Loud and Clear Reviews thought it was at its best in the group scenes and praised the chemistry between Edgar-Jones and George MacKay. filmfocusonline loudandclearreviews
Mixed reviews
-
- The Guardian (Peter Bradshaw), 3 stars. Bradshaw describes a more downbeat, reflective version, cooler in mood but interestingly austere and thoughtful, with some strange casting. He found Herbert Nordrum’s Colonel Brandon unengaged, but named Shaw’s Mrs Jennings the scene-stealer. His verdict: it always looks and sounds good, but some of the sensibility is missing. Critics say new ‘Sense and Sensibility’ doesn’t match Ang Lee’s classic
-
- Empire. Empire calls it handsome but derivative, a mix of influences that never finds its own identity. It praises the 35mm photography, the opening focus on women’s lack of economic security, and the warm rapport between Edgar-Jones and MacKay. It says the film loses energy once it becomes a straight romance, which isn’t very funny. Sense And Sensibility (2026) review: A handsome but derivative take on Jane Austen
-
- HeyUGuys, 3/5. The review praises Edgar-Jones’s poised, restrained Elinor, the cinematography and the two lead performances. It says the film never commits to either a conventional period drama or an edgier retelling, and lacks the 1995 film’s warmth. heyuguys
-
- Dork. The review finds the film’s best moments in Edgar-Jones and MacKay, but says its narrow emotional range and reduced humour leave the sisters little room for pleasure. readdork
Negative reviews
-
- The Times (Kevin Maher), 2 stars. He called it “Austen by numbers”, emotionally flat, uneven and oddly conventional, and felt the six leads seemed to be in completely different films. Hadley Freeman, also in The Times, found it simply dull. goldderby janeausten
-
- Daily Mail (Brian Viner), 2 stars. He argued the film had lost Austen’s charm. headtopics
-
- The Sun (Dulcie Pearce). She warned that Austen purists hoping for something like the Thompson and Winslet version would be disappointed. headtopics
-
- The Spectator (Deborah Ross). In a wryly patronising review, she concludes the 1995 film can’t be surpassed, while congratulating the new generation for trying. rottentomatoes
Common threads
-
- Praised: the naturalistic, 35mm-shot countryside; Edgar-Jones’s restrained Elinor; her chemistry with MacKay’s Edward; and Fiona Shaw’s Mrs Jennings, which even mixed reviews liked.
-
- Criticised: too little humour and a sombre tone; an uneasy mix of period drama and modern edginess; some casting, especially Nordrum’s Brandon; and the 132-minute length. Only Collin’s Telegraph review argued outright that it matches or rethinks the 1995 film.
Sources: