This is a gentle adaptation of one of Thomas Hardy's classic novels. The script is very well done by Ashley Pharoah, who despite his name is not an illiterate Egyptian who can't spell pharaoh properly, but a Somerset person, steeped in Hardy's country and perhaps cider as well, who knows. Keeley Hawes plays the young schoolteacher and organist named Fancy Day who gets all the local men excited by coming to town and casting her spell over them without even meaning to. There is nothing like one of those demure beauties to get Hardyesque men's hearts a flutterin'. A lot of the film was shot in Hertfordshire, which is shocking, considering how much there is of the West Country crying out for more Hardy adaptations to be made where they were meant to be. But as the Americans (WGBH) were involved as co-producers, they must have insisted on a budget which could not stretch as far as Wessex, not appreciating from their foreign perch the difference between the real thing and a substitute. Nick Laughland, primarily know as a television drama director, has done an excellent job of telling this story simply and with charm. The story also features the replacement of the church gallery orchestra with a harmonium, a theme stressed by Thomas Hardy more than once in his writings. It obviously greatly grieved Hardy that the charming old style of music in the country churches with violins and bass fiddle was suddenly eradicated by the rude intrusion of a device known as a harmonium, which is a kind of portable organ. This was one of the examples of heedless 'progress' wiping out centuries of the real thing and replacing it with something deeply inferior and humdrum. But as we are always being told by the politicians and business magnates that progress always equals improvement, who are we mere ordinary creeping creatures that we are to doubt such wisdom from on high and give way to cynicism? The portrayal of the little church orchestra here is a moving illustration of what was lost in transition. And as for the love story, well, that holds us in suspense till the end. Upon whom will Keeley Hawes bestow her heart? Will she marry for money and social position and wed the local squire? Will she wed the vicar and travel to Venice, which she has always longed to see? Or will she choose the earnest local boy who adores her? Three marriage proposals are made, but only one can succeed. Will she choose aright?
Add a Review
-
robert-temple-124 April 2014
-
stephoni23 December 2007Overall I liked this film: it was visually beautiful and the story was enthralling. The one criticism I have, and it is a big one, is that Keeley Hawes is miscast as Fancy Day. She is too old and world-wise. I understand she was born in 1977, which would make her 29 when playing the part. Hardy describes Fancy as "a young girl","oscillating between courage and shyness". At times the lines around Hawes' eyes and mouth give away her age, but the main failure is that she comes across as a self-assured, mature woman rather than an uncertain girl beginning her adult life, dominated by her father and dismayed by the attentions of three suitors.
-
sherilcarey24 May 2020Not perfect but its good fun and mostly clean. I most definitely appreciate and recommend it!
-
A little too light and lacking in seriousness for my taste. The cast was good (although didn't like the casting of Shinar so much). Technically it wasn't great. The lighting of the first outdoor scenes was seriously lacking. The lighting cameraman somehow managed to make exterior scenes look like an indoor stage - the lighting looked false and came from the wrong directions. Nevertheless, the storytelling was good and Keeley Hawes was a delight.
-
sshogben18 October 2007A simple love story on the surface, the deeper genius of "Under The Greenwood Tree" lies in the understated brilliance with which it encapsulates in a particularly moving and emotionally evocative way the great social revolution that underlay the 19th Century.
The young schoolmistress newly arrived in a small rural village is sought in marriage by each of the three men who fall in love with her. But in this tale nothing, not even romance, proves quite as simple as first it appears.
We discover that the woman, Fancy Day (Keeley Hawes), is herself the product of a classic misalliance. Torn between the conflicting classes and cultures of her heritage, she feels herself part of neither. Her great life challenge is finding where she belongs in the world, and this internal conflict deeply colours her struggle to choose among her three suitors.
None of the three suitors, however, is quite what he first seems either and yet each, in his own particular way, does love this woman.
The richest man in the area, Farmer Shiner (Steve Pemberton) we learn is a self-made man of a uniquely 19th Century sort. He may be descended from the traditional English yeoman farmers who had been small freeholders since Saxon days. But the technological advances of the Industrial Revolution would increasingly benefit larger scale farms over small. Farmers who, like Mr. Shiner, had the daring and foresight to increase their holdings beyond that held by their fathers were best positioned to survive and prosper under these new economic conditions.
Parson Maybold (Ben Miles) represents traditional birth and education, as opposed to new money, in the world of this village. But even he describes himself as a 'modern man' who believes in 'Progress'. As Mr. Maybold says in his Christmas Day sermon at the film's outset, 'The world is changing, and we must change with it.' To this end, he has hired Miss Day as village schoolmistress, so that even the poorest children in the area will learn basic skills they may need to cope with the changing world. All these values would have sounded alien just a generation before.
Yet it is the man who initially appears most straightforward who ultimately proves the most complex: Dick Dewy (James Murray), whose family have been the local carters or carriers in the area since time immemorial. When we first meet young Dick he seems simple, lighthearted, and uncomplicated. But as the story progresses, the challenge he faces becomes nothing less than the great social revolution of the 19th Century: men suddenly realising that their life choices need not echo that of their fathers. The evolving relationship between Dick and his father, Reuben Dewy (Tony Haygarth) is central not just to the film but to our understanding of the whole era. Dick's response to what I shall describe only as the 'Tea Incident' subtly presents a Declaration of the Rights of Man. Dick's later victory for self-respect thus becomes, in a sense, a victory for us all.
I find it significant that in this story the gentry, or traditional ruling class, is completely absent. This would not have been possible in an earlier generation. Jane Austen, for instance, could not have written this story. But by 1840 (when our story was set), and even moreso by 1872 (when the original novel was published), the real power structures throughout the rapidly industrializing world were changing, making omission of the gentry in both book and film not only reasonable but appropriate.
This recent BBC release of "Under The Greenwood Tree" is distinguished by brilliantly nuanced performances, not just from all principal actors but an extraordinarily strong supporting cast. Special credit is due Ashley Pharaoh for a truly inspired screenplay which is both more focused and more emotionally moving than Thomas Hardy's rather rambling original novel.
Beautifully realised in every detail, this village of Mellstock exists simultaneously nowhere and everywhere. This is a romantic idyll of a time and a place where even the village idiot, Thomas Leaf (deliciously played by Richard Leaf), could feel accepted and part of a warm and loving community whatever deep currents disturb its deceptively still waters.
10 out of 10. Highest recommendation. -
benbrae7628 August 2006Every role Keeley Hawes has tackled has been played to perfection and totally believable, and her performance as "Fancy Day" in "Under the Greenwood Tree" was no exception.
This terrific Ashley Pharoah adaptation brought Thomas Hardy's novel (albeit abridged) and it's wonderful characters and settings to life, and credit must go to director Nicholas Laughland for his careful control, particularly in not allowing the comedy pieces to develop into slapstick. The entire production was superbly acted by a perfectly chosen and brilliant supporting cast.
The music too must not be forgotten. It melded in beautifully at every turn.
One minor criticism I have is the choice of the filming location. Not that I wish to denigrate the island of Jersey (I've been there and it's a beautiful place), but it's not Hardy's "Wessex", but then I suppose there's very little left of England that is. However great credit must go to the production designer Dave Arrowsmith for making us believe it was. (Incidentally I agree wholeheartedly with his exception of ALStubbino's comments. The latter must have been watching a totally different film to everyone else.) The only real downside was that the whole joyous occasion was over too soon. Thankfully I taped it, for this is one to savour. -
finnegan-boyle10 December 2013The film 'Under the Greenwood Tree', one of the more recent ones at least, does a good job in representing its theme. That its old and needs to evolve to modern life. Is the film good? Short answer, 'There is no short answer'. Long answer is as follows.
This is a film that is quite different from the rest of the pack. It tries to be experimental with its shots. Well, as experimental as a made-for-TV-movie can be. Although there is one, 'opposite' shot. Or, in other words, a shot that is the opposite of what it should be. When Fancy Day tells Mr. Shiner that she can't marry him, the shot zooms out slowly. A shot that zooms in makes the audience feel for the character(s). This shot zooms out, making the audience care less and less for the character(s), and eventually even get bored of the character's plight and depression. And this scene is made even more awkward with the acting. Particularly, Mr. Shiner's. The actor who played him is a very funny comedian, who did the British TV show 'League of Gentlemen', but is he a good dramatic actor? No. Although his acting is not the worst in the film. That goes to the Zac Efron lookalike who plays Dick Dewy. He not only looks like Zac Efron, but has the same acting ability as well. He may be good to look at, but a game-changing actor he is not. That's not to say all the acting is bad. The acting of both Fancy Day and Mr. Maybold was quite good on their part, and they really saved the film from being an actor's hell.
The script was fairly good in the film. It was hardly a Tarantino script, but it made due. It stayed quite faithful to the book, although many of the more supernatural events were taken out, which is a good thing. However, there were a few a few too many clichés in the film, that could've been taken out. And the chopping down of the original rural idyll into a family friendly Victorian melodrama which is all too predictable, did not do the book any justice. It could get boring after a while. Anyone who has read the book knows the characters aren't cardboard cut-outs, and wouldn't have known who Fancy was going to choose. Anybody watching the film would know from a mile away. -
I normally approach Hardy adaptations with extreme caution as they have the ability to tarnish the brightest of moods. I read some of the previews and persuaded myself to give it a go. To my joy and astonishment this was a fantastic Christmas treat which the reviewer above clearly failed to understand. Whoever wrote it has clearly no real authority on Hardy whatsoever. The pages of the novel came to light perfectly on the small screen. Hawes was a perfect Ms Day, playing delightfully and genially into the audience's hand. However, for me the performance that stole the show was Pemberton playing a fantastically funny Shiner. He portrayed it with both depth and humour and lit up the screen every time he graced it. The scenery was stunning, the plot had depth and kept me and my family gripped throughout. I thoroughly recommend it to anyone with a warm heart, as it certainly warmed mine.
-
AlStubbino9 December 2005No attempt has been made to echo Hardy's humorous and deeply affectionate appreciation of the English countryside and it's people around the time that he was born.
This is a trite and bland rendition of a novel that is rich and warm with a loving nostalgia for a way of life which the writer saw had disappeared into the Industrial Revolution.
The story has been chopped and changed into a melodramatic, Victorian love story and the script is banal and cliché-ridden.
The actors playing the rustic villagers do a good job but are let down by unimaginative direction, lighting and decor.
The young lovers are ' cardboard cut-out '.
The opportunity to make a wonderful ' English ' film has been passed over.
The work suffers from Television companies' desire to sell soap powder as cheaply as possible. -
dave-arrowsmith228 December 2005As the designer on the production I take exception to the comments displayed in the ALstubbino review of "Under the Greenwood Tree". I can tell the writer of the last review that great care and extensive research was undertaken to achieve the sets and decor on the production, down to the smallest detail. I don't know what or where or how he/she has based their negative opinion perhaps they would like to enlighten us all as to where we went wrong!!. I enjoyed the production and for a TV drama think the production value and direction excellent. Under the greenwood tree is a fine adaptation of the original Hardy novel , not the novel itself, and as a TV drama stands up well, I would recommend it to anyone as a good family film.
-
I wasn't going to watch this, as although I'm a fan of Thomas Hardy,most of his stories have an unhappy ending,and i thought for Boxing Day i wanted to watch something cheery.I was really delighted as the drama was lovely from beginning to end,and it did have the ending you wanted to see.A lot of thought went into this drama,the costumes,the class stereotypes were well presented,it really put you in touch with how people lived in those days and their strange customs.The script was well written and the acting first rate.I have never read this book,but i have read others by Thomas Hardy,and it seems to me that here he has stuck to a much simpler story,without getting carried away with his pen or quill as he some times did,although that is just my opinion.I hope there will be many more dramas like this on TV,i thought this was an excellent choice to show on boxing day,i don't know how any one could have found fault in it,okay so it may not have been accurate to the book,but then what dramas are 100% accurate to the books.I think most people would believe this was a nice story to watch at Christmas.
-
sbr28630 April 2006It is a long time since I read the book, and this movie version was good enough to inspire me to read it again. The acting was very convincing - for all the key roles.
My two reservations are technical, First, I found it distracting that the setting was so very different from Hardy's Wessex - I understood Mellstock to have been a large village, the street-scape of the location used made it look like a town - and/or a French or Italian town at that. From this site (IMDB), I see that the filming location was Jersey, so that explains the continental connection, I guess. I appreciate that probably no Dorset village would pass for Mellstock, but I would argue that somewhere in the Cotswolds would have been sufficiently close to be accurate. Second, on the version I saw (PBS in the USA) the music soundtrack was so loud that it was intrusive. However, too loud music soundtracks is typical for PBS documentaries too - so perhaps this issue is not the responsibility of the original producer in the UK.
I would probably vote higher than 4, were it not for my desire to counter the apparent ramping up of this movie's score by those associated with its production. -
karen-hallam21 January 2006This film, although made for TV, will be a classic, just like the 1995 Pride and Predudice directed by Simon Langton. The sets seemed remarkably authentic, and all the cast were excellent. I particularly enjoyed every scene in which James Murray appeared, he is gorgeous. The chemistry between the two main characters is clear for all to see. Ben Miles who played Parson Maybold was very believable and you could actually feel his inner turmoil, acting at its best. I think that this film could be on your next Christmas present list, either to enjoy yourself or to buy for that very special Aunt, or Mother. I have watched it 3 times in two days.
-
catherine-albrecht30 August 2014This was a most annoying story. I thought that the character of Fancy Day was very shallow. We all know that she would marry the wealthy guy. Come on. We all know this would have been her choice in reality. By the end, I didn't care anything about this stupid woman. I really get tired of movies that have people fall in love at first sight. Dick Dewey was also a shallow, ridiculous character. He was taken with her beauty. So typical of a guy, both then and now.
I was yet again not impressed with the story and script. I loved the costumes, etcetera. I will say this: the theme music did not fit at all with this film. It obviously was music from another more modern time. -
rowan_red17 December 2006On a chill Christmas Eve, a young woman rides into the English village of Mellstock. Miss Fancy Day (Keeley Hawes), who has been educated away, has returned to the village to help take care of her ailing father.
As the beautiful new schoolmistress, she becomes a focus of fascination in Mellstock. Not only is she the new teacher, but her presence threatens to shake the old order in Mellstock. The parson plans to replace the old men's choir, by Fancy's playing the modern new Harmonium in church, much to the villagers' surprise and consternation.
So, excitement over Miss Fancy Day begins! Not only does she disturb the choir, but she becomes the focus of the attentions of three men. Her father has groomed her to marry well. His eyes are upon sturdy, wealthy Farmer Shinar (Steve Pemberton) as her suitor. Fancy knows of her father's enthusiasm for Mr. Shinar; still his gruff, business-like proposal comes as a shock to her, but she promises to consider it.
Parson Maybold (Ben Miles) is another suitor. He is handsome, well-bred, and educated; but his lofty, intellectual airiness is so indirect, that Fancy doesn't realize his feelings for her.
It is with the young Dick Dewy (James Murray) that Fancy becomes friends. He comes from the lively home of the humble carrier, bustling with kids, and dogs, and friends who encompass the choir. His heart is taken by Fancy that first Christmas Eve, and he endeavors to win her by bettering himself. He also puts his best foot forward, by boldly venturing a kiss (not a bad move, considering he is devilishly handsome!). But Fancy's father vigorously objects to him.
Fancy is put into a predicament, trying to decide which path to take. The charms of the English country village are the background for this tale. The film moves through each season's music, work, and festive rites, as the story of Mellstock, and how Fancy becomes a part of it.
This film comes from Thomas Hardy's lovely homage to the English countryside. Under the Greenwood Tree is a wondrous work of humor, beauty, and heady romance. -
wordsmith_571 January 2009Being in the mood for a period romance, I was a bit cautious when I realized this was an adaptation of a Thomas Hardy story. They tend to end unhappily, especially when there are divided love interests. Fortunately, Under the Greenwood Tree is light, even humorous, in parts. Truly I had no idea who Fancy would marry, the wealthy farmer, the austere parson, or the poor (yet brash and handsome) harrier. In the tradition of Pride and Prejudice, Sense and Sensibility, there is the mix of position, miscommunication, and the delightfulness of authenticity of period. A treat to watch. The acting, script, and setting all played well together. If you adore period romances, then this should go on your list to watch.
-
TheLittleSongbird3 November 2013It is true that as an adaptation Under the Greenwood Tree(2005) has little to do with the book(a gem of a book and one of Hardy's most charming and accessible, and if there is a preference to book and adaptation it'd be the former). Any adaptation does deserve to be judged on its own, there are a lot of film/TV series out there that are not very good adaptations of the source material but have many great merits to make them work on their own. Under the Greenwood Tree(2005) is one such adaptation. It looks fantastic, the costumes are evocative, the scenery is vibrant and colourful and the photography shimmers. That a lot of scenes were incredibly atmospheric is something to admire too. The music is similarly wistful and beautifully orchestrated, as well as being composed simply to make it easier to remember, most importantly as well it is fitting with each scene. There is a fair bit of repetition, but because the quality of the music is so lovely this viewer was past caring. The a-cappella men's chorus rendition towards the end is guaranteed to warm your heart. The writing has a lot of gentle humour and a light-hearted charm, and more winning is the optimism brimming through. The story is paced well, is charming and gentle in spirit, helps you relate to the characters and their relationships to other characters(Fancy and Dick's especially has appealing intimacy and the passion is certainly there). There is more of an emphasis on the romance than in the book, but there is a really passionate and affecting nature to it that it works. The acting has no real qualms either. Keeley Hawes is older and not as coquettish as her novelistic counterpart, however she is pretty, full of personal charm and that she is very sympathetic will win you over once you enjoy the adaptation for what it is. James Murray is dashing and the outgoing and yearning side to his character worked. Ben Miles gives a very poignant performance that you identify with him, commanding every scene he appears in. Steve Pemberton is a very amusing Shiner, and Tony Haygarth and Tom Georgeson are effective father figures. Overall, Under the Greenwood Tree(2005) is a real pleasure to watch and ideal family entertainment, and I do feel that the dislike it gets for its lack of fidelity to the book is undeserved. 10/10 Bethany Cox
-
soph_oli_12022 December 2005Under The Greenwood Tree is a very enjoyable film that tells the story of three men falling in love with a new teacher in the village. it shows how she changes within the story and it is a very good adaption of the novel by the classic author; Thomas Hardy. It is very strange watching this film when you live in jersey as all of the locations are familiar to you. I would have given a 10 but it didn't have the dog running through the may pole fair- which took a very long time to film as the dog was more interested in the chickens! Also i found the story moves quite quickly, but if it was made longer the audience may lose interest. at least this way you can finish watching it in excitement as it is a perfect drama for Christmas. it shows all the for seasons with great detail.
Filming Under The Greenwood Tree was a great experience and was the best summer of my life I made some good friends and thought all the crew was great. The film made me realise that the crew are the most important element to a film and i would just like 2 say thanks 2 them all! xx -
axsmashcrushallthree27 November 2006This production is based upon the wonderful Thomas Hardy novel. Don't expect the novel, but expect to receive its inspiration in multitudes via Ashley Pharaoh's adaptation.
The acting is superb and the chemistry between Hawes and Murray is as good as it gets, selling their evolving relationship completely. As beautifully photographed, designed, and directed as "Under" is, I found the editing to be impressive in particular. It's quite a feat to pull off this entire story (or any Hardy work) in about 90 minutes without a hitch while maintaining the propulsion of the plot. In general, editing is an extremely underrated occupation, and without the work of Mr. Steven Singleton, this particular production would have been the sorrier.
We just saw this on "Masterpiece Theater" for the second time, and it has the makings of a classic. 10/10. -
Fancy Day (Keeley Hawes) returns to her small town in England to become the new school mistress and to care for her elderly father. Its Christmastime and, on her first night in her rented flat, a group of carol singers arrive to perform lovely music. Looking out the window, she smiles at the gentlemen. One of them is thunderstruck. This is Dick Dewy (James Murray), the handsome son of a poor peddler/delivery man. In the coming days, Dick makes his affections known. But, alas, Mr. Day wants Fancy to marry someone richer and more reliable, as his own wife took off to places unknown. Besides, Fancy is a very educated young lady and will be playing the organ at the church services. Not surprisingly, since Fancy is likewise beautiful, another man sets his eye on marrying her as well. He is a rich landowner, Mr. Shriner, and announces his intentions while conceding she need not answer right away. When Fancy believes Dick is a bit too forward, she tries to quench his affections. In short order, it is also known that the parson may have eyes for her, too. Now, what a quandary it is to have three men begging for your hand! Who will she choose? This light but realistic tale, from the one and only Thomas Hardy, has been brought gloriously to the screen by the BBC. Hawes and Murray are topnotch and so is the rest of the cast. The scenery is breathtaking while the costumes and sets transport the viewer back to a different time, different place but, where human emotions and foibles remain universal. Then, too, the script and the direction never lose power. As one of Hardy's earlier works, its lighter tone is welcome even as one values the realism of such tragedies as Tess of the D'Urbervilles and Far From the Madding Crowd. Are you a cinema fan to the core? There is no way you will ever want to miss this fine film.
-
live-and-let-live29 January 2022I happened on this absolutely charming adaptation of Hardy's novel one Friday night, so cold here in Iowa in January. I thought that I had found every free on Amazon piece of British novelization, but alas, no. And here, in this beautiful story, I am full of joy, wishing there were more, and more...
-
juanmuscle19 January 2022I never read the novel but this was seemed like it was a nice lil' foreshortened version, I have read some of his works and they imo too sweeping and comprehensive to swiftly narrow it down to some parochial visual adaptation but , anywho lol, this was nice!