PRIDE AND PREJUDICE -- a total delight- Page 2

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 11/12/05 at 6:54am

Wow. I had no idea that Jane Austen was such a cult figure two hundred years later. I'd sure she's lovely and all, and I'm sure the BBC series is superb -- all S I X H O U R S O F IT -- but this film really is vibrant and exciting as an adaptation. I realize nothing beats the "real thing" but for 2005 audiences, this is a lovely, lovely primer.

[StephanietheStar]

Posted: 11/12/05 at 10:36am

ahh...I think Kiera Knightly IS perfect...she's gorgeous..and makes me extremely jealous..

I like her..

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 11/12/05 at 10:37am

I like her now.

[broadway86]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 10:01am

Saw it last night. The movie is great, and Keira is fantastic. Easily, her best work. I've read the book before, but I still got giddy at certain parts.

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 10:14am

Easily, her best work.

That's not really saying much.....

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 10:37am

Exactly.

[sweetestsiren]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 11:15am

Easily her best work.

I don't know, I actually thought that she was brilliant as Claudia in Interview with the Vampire, if that counts. If she tops that, I'll be happy with the movie.

[broadway86]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 11:42am

That's not really saying much.....

That's why I said "easily". Regardless, she was phenomenal as Lizzie Bennett. I also liked her in Domino. Updated On: 11/14/05 at 11:42 AM

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 12:27pm

I wouldn't see Domino with someone else's eyes. The trailer made me laugh out loud at her hopelessly charisma free woodenness. And don't even get me started on Tony Scott.

[broadway86]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 2:00pm

I hated the movie, and I DESPISE Tony Scott as a director. But... Knightley was good.

hopelessly charisma free woodenness

That's what I used to think of her, as well. Until Pride & Prejudice. Have you even seen it? If not, then do so.

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 2:29pm

I've seen clips and trailers and it bores me rigid. Plus it's already been and gone in the UK. I might rent it on DVD.

And as for Tony Scott, what I want to know is why if he was so close to Domino and thought it was so important to tell her story, why did he completely fictionalise it?

[EponineThenardier]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 2:43pm

Pattifan, funny you should mention Wickim and Lord of the Rings. I thought he looked a bit like Orlando Bloom the first time I saw him.

[Plum]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 3:44pm

The guy who played Wickham looked like Orlando Bloom, except actually pretty and with more facial mobility than a piece of plywood. But otherwise, he was just like Orlando Bloom.

For once, I totally got to see the movie before you guys. Ha! Pride and Prejudice is easily my favorite Austen, and while I've never seen the mini-series and I'm all for judicious slicing in film adaptations, I thought the Pemberley trip was done strangely. And the just-about-to-kiss thing after the first proposal was wrong, wrong, wrong, but it's forgivable. The guy palying Darcy was fantastic, and Knightley was actually quite acceptable.

[Glebb]

Posted: 11/16/05 at 10:52pm

This was a wonderful thing to see on Sunday. :)
What are the fashions of that period called?
Empire? Colonial? Regency?

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 11/16/05 at 11:53pm

pocultureboy: Give it a shot. Hundreds of positive reviews can't be wrong.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 11/17/05 at 12:53am

I was so intrigued by the recent film, that I rented the BBC miniseries and just finished watching it. As I say in my original thread, I was not at all familiar with this story before seeing the new film adaptation. The BBC series is lovely. It's well acted, and I assume very thorough. I greatly enjoyed Jennifer Ehle, especially.

But now (and I put on a shield of armor because people throwing box sets at you is nothing if not dangerous) I have to say that having seen both...

I prefer the new film version. Partly, because I think on a level of craft its amazing that they were able to get pretty much the entire gist of that 6 hour mini series into a 2 hour 15 film. From a screen writing standpoint, the assignment is daunting and was handled unbelievably well. Text book example well. As a screenwriter myself, I'm just incredibly impressed.

I'd say the cast for the series and the film are equal. Both stellar, both offering vibrant, vital takes on the roles.

But obviously the production values -- the costumes, Cinematography, art direction are far superior in the film version.

I think both are worth seeing. But the film manages to capture the essence of the piece so beautifully and so creatively - I thought it was a little more alive.

Somebody will have to explain the outrage over the kiss in the new film, because they kiss in the miniseries. I take it this is somehow a departure from the book?


Updated On: 11/17/05 at 12:53 AM

[sweetestsiren]

Posted: 11/17/05 at 1:24am

I haven't seen the new version yet, but I think that the kiss at the end isn't a big deal... actually, I don't think it was there at all in the British release of the movie, which annoyed some people. But if they are just about to kiss after the first proposal, as Plum said, that's definitely strange--Lizzie is supposed to be basically repulsed by his conceit, not to mention it being generally very improper for the time period. I just don't see how that would work.

[Taryn]

Posted: 11/25/05 at 8:51pm

Bumping this because I finally saw the film and LOVED it. I'm a huge fan of the book and the BBC miniseries, so I definitely came in with some preconceived notions, but I sill loved it.

It's a different story than the book and the miniseries. You just have to accept that. The film doesn't have the time to truely have the same growth of character that Lizzie and Darcy have in the book and miniseries. It's much more a case of mistaken notions and misunderstandings. Darcy doesn't really start as a proud, conceited bit-of-a-jerk who changes into a better person for having known Lizzie. He's much more of a shy, misunderstood part whose difficulties with social situations are taken as arrogance. Of course, love changes people, but Darcy doesn't have quite the transformation as he does originally. But you know what? I think it works just fine.

This, of course, puts much more pressure on Lizzie. With Darcy being a pretty good guy from the get-go, her own disliking of him comes much more from misunderstanding him, believing lies about him, etc., instead of him at least deserving SOME censure from her. (In the film, her honest problems with him are relegated down to his discouraging Bingley from pursuing Jane--a case of him misunderstanding her affections for him that is played much more as an honest misunderstanding than the "arrogant presumption" of the original.)

I think this is why Lizzie's consistent attraction to Darcy works in this new version. When he asks her to dance, her consent is clearly more a case of oh-my-God-I-can't-believe-I-just-did-that than not being able to think of an excuse. She's attracted to him DESPITE disliking him, which lends a delicious sexual tension to the film. Keira Knightley and Matthew MacFadyen have some god-honest chemistry here, and it just lights up the screen. Keira is truly enchanting as Lizzie, and I suspect she might be the dark horse come Oscar time--as the whole film might be.

I did have a few problems with the movie, mainly Wickham. Sure, he was good-looking in a very playboy, finely-boned features kind of way (which I already don't care for as much), but he lacked the open charm I think Wickham needs. He didn't have a lot of screen time, but he didn't do much with the time he had. I wanted an outgoing, engaging, positively charming young man who would inspire confidence and belief. The thing sticking out in my head is when Lizzie describes his manner as "open and artless" or something to that effect. I just don't think that was captured, unfortunately.

Other things that stuck out... Simon Woods as Bingley also stuck out to me as being positively awkward and adorable. Lizzie's tragic line of "So soon?" when Darcy tells her he's leaving the next day the day that Bingley proposes. It reminded me a lot of the end of Sense and Sensibility, when Alan Rickman's brilliant Colonel Branden is so touched by the gift Marianne gives him by saying she hopes he won't be gone long.

I think one of the best things about the movie was just the entire mood and pacing. Although there was obviously a lot pared down from the book, there was still a lot of stuff happening in the movie, and yet everything seemed to unfold at this beautifully gentle pace without rushing or hurrying. The camera work, while admittedly getting rather close to something out of Bronte than Austen, was gorgeous. (I, personally, loved the Wuthering Heights-esque rain and fog, although I know some of the Austen purists were bothered by it.)

Finally, Matthew MacFadyen isn't quite as fun to look at as Colin Firth, but...really, how many men are? I loved him anyway.

[Love4Cheno]

Posted: 11/25/05 at 9:56pm

While I will not be writing a dissertation on this adaptation, let me just say: I LOVED THIS FILM.

I am at home for Thanksgiving, bored out of my mind in the suburds. So, I thought, "Hmm, I enjoy looking at Keira Knightly (I think she's stunning). Why not?" However, I was not expecting such an assured, biting performance. Keira is a born Austin heroine.

The cinematography was so sumptuous, the direction fresh and inventive, and so unlike the stiff work that I have come to attribute to Austen adaptations (and like Munk and others, please shut the F up about the Colin Firth version, WE GET IT).

This film was entertaining, engaging, and magical. And a total shock to me.

I've seen the BBC version, and while very good, it is NOT the be-all, end-all.(Though a gaggle of 20-30-something women in my front row will argue otherwise).

Updated On: 11/28/05 at 09:56 PM

[StickToPriest]

Posted: 11/27/05 at 7:01pm

Begrudingly saw the film today, and I adored it.

It was fantastic in all aspects.
Charming, funny and sweet, but not overbearingly so.

I had not made up my mind on KEria Knightley before this movie, but I can now say I'm a fan and she has a good shot at an Oscar nod.

A very enchanting film.

I'd recommend it in a heartbeat.

[Liz_Bennet]

Posted: 11/27/05 at 9:19pm

Dude. I feel like I should have been onto this thread a lot earlier. Just because of my nom de plume here.

I expected to hate this but I enjoyed it a whole lot! I thought it somewhat confused about its period- some of the cinematography and a few of the ways the characters expressed themselves struck me as a good 30 years too late for the period. The Big Cliff that Elizabeth stands on is an obvious example of this, but I also thought that the characters subscribed too throroughly to the idea of a marriage for love. I liked how the film picked up a lot of social class cues that many Austen adaptations miss, so this felt even more like a distortion. They cut the line where Elizabeth says that she first began to change her mind about Darcy when she saw Pemberley, which I think is very important. It's not just a joke.

I never understood quite why the BBC version is supposed to be so great. Yes, it's very good (and I did watch all of it in one sitting once), but I have a short attention span and have never thought Colin Firth the hottest man on the planet, so I was very open to this one. Both the sets and the cast are on the whole prettier. I think it tells the story just as well as the miniseries in about a third of the time, and in some parts noticably better. Unless you're an extreme purist, you should like this one a lot.