Everything is a bit miserable, and I am not just talking about the autumnal weather. Politics is caught in a doom loop, melancholic songs are topping the charts, and world happiness levels are lower than they were fifteen years ago, particularly amongst young people. So, perhaps it’s only fitting that we have a moodier take on an Austen classic in 2026.

Welcome to Sense and Sensibility, written for the screen by Diana Reid and brought to life by Blue Jeans director Georgia Oakley. This latest remake of Jane Austen’s 1811 classic comes over thirty years after Ang Lee’s award-winning film adaptation. But does Reid and Oakley’s movie live up to either of these masterpieces?

Celebrating Sisterhood 

Sense and Sensibility (2026) follows two sisters, the impulsive Marianne (Esme Creed-Miles) and the restrained Elinor (Normal People and Twisters’ Daisy Edgar-Jones), as they navigate heartbreak and financial insecurity. Its themes continue to be ‘so relatable’ to a modern-day audience, says Edgar-Jones, which is why the story of the Dashwood siblings stands the test of time.

For anyone questioning whether we need another remake of this book, let me reassure you that Reid shows us a different side of this story not seen before. In an interview, the screenwriter said that her main aim was ‘centring the sisters’ so that they are the ‘spine of the narrative.’ Romance is not their main goal, but merely a ‘reward’ both achieve when they learn to balance their heads and their hearts. Edgar-Jones and Creed-Miles’ on-screen relationship, largely helped by the fact that they have worked together on previous projects like 2018’s Pond Life, is both tumultuous and tender, so audiences instantly feel invested in their intertwining stories.

‘The real growth happens within their relationship,’ Reid told Town and Country.

This is not the only change that Reid and Oakley have made. Their film has a decidedly gloomier, more ruminative atmosphere than the ‘90s adaptation. For example, the film begins with the announcement that Mr Dashwood has died away from home, leaving his wife and her three daughters, including Marianne and Elinor, in a financially precarious situation. Unlike Lee, who chose to gloss over this development, the 2026 adaptation does not shy away from addressing women’s lack of financial autonomy during this period.

Their father’s inheritance does not pass to his wife. Instead, it goes to his first male heir and the son of his previous marriage, John Dashwood (Tim Cooke), and his selfish, spendthrift wife Frances (played odiously well by Stacy Martin). It is amidst this gloomy backdrop that the story properly begins, because Frances’ brother is the kindhearted and emotionally restrained Edward Ferrars. Naturally, Elinor and Edward soon begin to fall in love. Speaking of his role, George MacKay reflected that Edward is not your typical modern romantic lead, ‘brimming with confidence.’ The Beast actor said that he admired his character’s ’courtesy and respect […] especially nowadays,’ perhaps in reference to the recent rise of misogynistic celebrity influencers and politicians like Andrew Tate, Clavicular and Donald Trump.

MacKay carries the role with a breeziness that Hugh Grant was never able to achieve. There is a quiet magnetism to Edward and Elinor’s budding romance, but neither party can bring themselves to acknowledge it. And soon, they are removed from each other’s company by circumstances beyond their control. As John decides to evict his relatives from their home, the Dashwoods are forced to move to a humbler house in the South West just to make ends meet.

Atmosphere — And Not Much Else

Visually, the film begins to come into its own thanks to the artful camera work and painstaking attention to detail. Wide, sweeping shots of pastoral scenes, old stone buildings set amongst shadowy forests, and zoom-ins on a spider’s web dappled with raindrops all help to evoke that ‘luscious and sensuous’ feeling, as actress Fiona Shaw put it. Here one truly dips into a different time. Notably, the film’s indulgently moody atmosphere would not look out of place in a Brontë adaptation.

The wild Devon landscape tousles our leading ladies’ hair, reflecting the Dashwood sisters’ unpredictable change of fortune. It is here that they meet the kind John Middleton, who agrees to take the women in, and their raucous, pug-carrying, widowed neighbour Mrs Jennings, played splendidly by the aforementioned Shaw, whom you will probably recognise from ‘Killing Eve.’

The plot begins to thicken when Marianne sprains her ankle while out walking in the woods. Rescued by the dashing Willoughby (Frank Dillane), who carries her home and steals the show, Marianne instantly and passionately falls in love with the handsome stranger. Dillane plays his roguish character well, with his slightly overbearing (for contemporary audiences) and improper (for 19th-century readers) attachment to the younger Dashwood sister. His presence infuses this otherwise demure film with a much-needed burst of energy. However, our fleeting hero soon leaves for London with no expectation of returning. Elinor and Marianne are now both far away from their loves, their future once more uncertain.

However, fortune begins to smile on the Dashwood sisters when Mrs Jennings announces that she is going to the capital and invites them along. Both do not hesitate to jump at this unexpected opportunity to see Edward and Willoughby again. Naturally, their reunion takes place at a ball. Here, problems start to arise. The dance is supposed to be sensual, but feels stilted and forced. It’s as though the management team sat down and said, ‘Come on, it’s an Austen remake, there has to be a ballroom scene!’ However, this ball fails to achieve the neck-prickling tension of Mr Darcy and Lizzie’s dances in the various Pride and Prejudice adaptations. This ball scene is strictly functional, serving as an emotional climax to the film.

Many twists and turns later, including Marianne nearly dying of a fever, both sisters find their happy ending. Edward and Elinor finally overcome their previous trepidation and confess their love for one another. Marianne realises how fickle passion can be when she meets the taciturn but reliably steadfast Colonel Brandon, played by Scandinavian actor Herbert Nordrum. Unfortunately, Nordrum’s Colonel is so flat he almost fades into insignificance and is no match for Alan Rickman’s unforgettable screen presence.

Too Sensible and Tame?

Shaw, who is also due to make an appearance in Netflix’s imminent adaptation of Pride and Prejudice, told Radio Times that the film chooses to focus on ‘the landscape and the two sisters.’ This is certainly one of its merits, and allows this remake to feel fresh. But despite very decent performances from MacKay and its leading ladies, sexual chemistry alone cannot sustain a film that’s over two hours long. Perhaps this is where Sense and Sensibility (2026) falls short. While being a perfectly serviceable film to watch, it lacks that special touch to make it memorable. Though everything looks and works as expected, no single scene shines to establish this version as a new cult classic in our minds.

Disappointingly, once the end credits roll, we already begin to forget the film. My advice, if you’re looking for something truly unforgettable, pick up a copy of Austen’s original novel. It will not disappoint.

DISCLAIMER: The articles on our website are not endorsed by, or the opinions of Shout Out UK (SOUK), but exclusively the views of the author.

cinema Reviews