Sense and Sensibility (1995) (mini-reviw++)


(If you’re curious, my review process. It’s also pasted at the end of this post. I don’t believe in Rotten Tomatoes. I just believe in me.)

(***all-purpose SPOILER ALERT*** there may be some in this review)

acting 8

directing 8

effects 9

editing 8

writing 9


4.2 out of 5 🐙


I’ve never read a book by Jane Austen or seen any of the movie adaptations. Until now. As it was starting, I was happily surprised to see it was an Ang Lee film. He’s one of my favorite directors. And he does so many different kinds of movies. And he usually does them all well. I don’t think there are a lot of modern directors out there with his kind of thematic diversity. I thought the movie was a lot lighter and more relatable than I thought it would be. It was funny and the acting performances were all excellent. The cinematography was stellar as it kinda has to be with a period piece. Or at least you’d hope it would be. Emma Stone wrote a great script. All in all, it has made me open to reading and watching more Jane Austen fare and that’s the best compliment I can give.







(1) Shark Wrighter (SW) Score: Based on a sum of 5 sub-scores (acting, directing, writing/story, effects: cinematography &/or animation &/or effects, editing) with 1 being terrible and 10 being terrific.

(2) Octopuses (0-5 🐙, with 5 being fantastic and 0 being feces)

(3) Octopuses are my unquantifiable feeling…not that SW score is scientific…but this one is even less so

(4) ++ This optional section includes any incredibly *brilliant observations that don’t fit into simple quantitative slices like the scores and octopuses *(they are likely NOT brilliant)


Leave a Reply