board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

Pride and Prejudice

Post Reply   Page 3 of 5  [ 93 posts ]
Jump to page « 1 2 3 4 5 »
Author Message
Alatar
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 29 Aug , 2005 3:15 pm
of Vinyamar
Offline
 
Posts: 8278
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 4:39 pm
Location: Ireland
Contact: ICQ
 
Quote:
Plot
Hearing their new neighbour is a wealthy young bachelor, Mrs. Bennet (Blethyn) goes overboard contriving a match for one of her five daughters. Amiable Bingley (Simon Woods) duly falls for beautiful Jane (Pike). Unhappily, his even more eligible chum Darcy (MacFadyen) disdains the Bennets, his growing attraction to spirited Elizabeth (Knightley) handicapped by her ghastly relatives, scandal and misunderstandings galore...

The Full Review
On behalf of the girlie contingent, we’d just like to say, “Yay!” Sixty-five years since the last proper Pride And Prejudice played at a cinema near your great gran, seeing Jane Austen’s most popular novel energetically refitted for the big screen after umpteen TV serials is a reminder that Austen created the basic romantic comedy formula we all know and love.

Take a heroine who’s intelligent, good-humoured and loyal, but also judgmental, stubborn and a bit of a smarty-pants. Make the hero seemingly unavailable, beyond the heroine’s reach in status, wealth, looks or eligibility. Give her embarrassing relatives, talkative friends, rich-bitch rivals and an unwanted suitor. Create a misunderstanding that keeps the leads apart but is quickly cleared up with an honest explanation or last-chance declaration of love. Voila, you have a Meg Ryan/Sandra Bullock/J.Lo movie. Not only have all these elements been used time and again in the rom-com genre, the source story itself has recently been lifted into the modern day for Bridget Jones and Bride & Prejudice. But this is the first straight adaptation for the big screen since the delicious 1940 version starring Greer Garson and Laurence Olivier. And very welcome it is, with a fresh, realistic approach, earthy settings and romantic suspense — and in Keira Knightley’s superb Lizzy, a heroine for all time.

A rethink on characterisations goes back faithfully to Austen’s social comedy. Blethyn’s dippy Mrs. Bennet is vulgar, but not the comic grotesque often depicted. She’s funny and no-one can accuse her of underplaying — you certainly feel the desperation of a woman with five daughters whose prospects are grim if they don’t marry some money. Similarly, Tom Hollander’s cousin-come-a-wooing, the self-righteous clergyman Mr. Collins, is a suitor no fun girl would want, but he’s hardly contemptible.

Since no English lit-flick is complete without Judi Dench, she obligingly terrorises as arrogant Lady Catherine de Bourgh. It’s Knightley, though, who really stands out. She’s delightful as Austen’s best-loved character — the slender, clever figure who loves a laugh, such as when she sets eyes on Darcy’s palatial pile and can’t control her goggle-eyed mirth, realising it could have been hers. The emphasis is not on heaving cleavage but on wit and unstudied charm, and Elizabeth Bennet has more of those than any other heroine in the English language.

A few not-terribly-serious gripes: Matthew ‘Spooks’ MacFadyen’s Darcy is dishy, but his blushing sad-sack manner is at times more like Droopy The Dog than a Georgian grandee, while Simon Woods’ Bingley is a tad too twittish to be sombre Darcy’s buddy. And the ending looks lopped off. Yes, almost everyone knows how it goes, and not every Austen adaptation has to end with a wedding, but Jane-ites really shouldn’t be deprived of one kissy shot.

Still, debut feature director Joe Wright should be applauded for delivering a vividly realised Austen adap — one which confirms Knightley has graduated from the Jackie Bisset of the '00s to this decade’s Julie Christie.

Verdict
Not as divine as Ang Lee’s Sense And Sensibility, but engagingly comparable to the Gwyneth Paltrow-starring Emma and vastly superior to Mansfield Park.

_________________

[ img ]
These are my friends, see how they glisten...


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 29 Aug , 2005 3:48 pm
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
Well, at least they have the perception to see S&S as divine. :)

Thanks, Alatar. I'll reserve judgment, but more hopefully for now. I'm just bonkers for this novel, and happen to know something about the period because the history interests me (and because I've read a lot of high-quality fiction written or set in that time, including O'Brian's Aubrey/Maturin books, which spend a fair amount of time ashore in England). The Laurence Olivier/Greer Garson film grated horribly for me because they got the period wrong in just about every way possible.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Lacemaker
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 30 Aug , 2005 2:44 am
Offline
 
Posts: 221
Joined: Sun 13 Mar , 2005 2:44 am
Location: Almost the Shire
 
I'll definitely have to get my grubby paws on the Olivier-Garson version, just for fun.. I recently purchased the earlier BBC version that I vaguely remembered seeing on Masterpiece Theatre way back when, just to be able to compare it to the 1995 one. Very interesting to see the different adaptation approaches and interpretations. I still prefer 1995... :drool:


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 30 Aug , 2005 2:53 am
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
I have both as well, Lacemaker. I'm very fond of the earlier one because it gave me Jane Austen. Seeing it made my early-20s idiot self able at last to read and enjoy Pride and Prejudice, which led to everything else Jane Austen ever wrote and a great deal of joy in my life.

I still like the '95 version better though. Oh yeah. Not just for the wet shirt, either; I just like :drool: a passionate Darcy. I think I've said elsewhere that I believe Jane Austen envisioned him that way, but was too ladylike to describe the details. It's the only way the character makes sense, and she was eminently sensible. :)

As for the early film, you should see it, and I have no complaints about Olivier. But even aside from the period discrepancies, Garson's eyelashes give me the creeps—and Lady Catherine is a good guy!

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
The Tennis Ball Kid
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 30 Aug , 2005 3:49 am
Seeking Wimbledon
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2225
Joined: Sat 12 Mar , 2005 7:37 pm
Location: The East of East, Fighting Wild Were-worms in The Last Desert
Contact: Website
 
Saw the trailer yesterday...hmm.....


Haven't seen the '95 version, might have to check that out.....




TtBk

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Teremia
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 30 Aug , 2005 6:29 am
Reads while walking
Offline
 
Posts: 579
Joined: Wed 26 Jan , 2005 11:23 pm
 
Just looked at this thread for the first time; looked at the trailer; looked away in some horror.

Keira Knightley was always in some fellow's sig over at TORC, yes?

Even in the trailer she looks, darnit, like somebody who should be in some fellow's sig pic over at TORC.

Can we even imagine poor Elizabeth's reaction to this ill-coiffed floozy pretending to be Herself?

Icy look. She turns away. She does not come back into the theater ever again.

Only her youngest sisters could ever hope to like this movie.

grump grump grump

p.s. no offense to the some-fellow-over-at-TORC if he is also here. I don't mind seeing tousled-pouty-babe-types in sig pics; I just don't want them sneaking into Jane Austen films where they really, really don't belong.


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 30 Aug , 2005 7:05 am
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
Dear ttbk, if you have not seen the '95 Pride and Prejudice, you have not lived. Nor has your girlfriend.

Just sayin'. :)

As for Keira as Elizabeth. . . . :help:

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Alatar
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 30 Aug , 2005 8:41 am
of Vinyamar
Offline
 
Posts: 8278
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 4:39 pm
Location: Ireland
Contact: ICQ
 
I can't believe you gals! You sound like the worst sort of purists. Wait til the girl screws up, then complain. You can't judge her on work she hasn't done.

Sheesh!

_________________

[ img ]
These are my friends, see how they glisten...


Top
Profile Quote
The Tennis Ball Kid
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 30 Aug , 2005 12:55 pm
Seeking Wimbledon
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2225
Joined: Sat 12 Mar , 2005 7:37 pm
Location: The East of East, Fighting Wild Were-worms in The Last Desert
Contact: Website
 
I was going to put a pic of her in my sig, just to be a tease to Teremia :P, but I couldn't find any of her that I liked. :suspicious:

Primmy wrote:
Dear ttbk, if you have not seen the '95 Pride and Prejudice, you have not lived. Nor has your girlfriend.
I don't have a girlfriend. :suspicious:


Just sayin'.... :D

But, yes, I'll look for it, and then maybe a girl to watch it with. ;)

TtBk

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 30 Aug , 2005 2:40 pm
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
I'm actually kind of enjoying being all puristy. :D

The thing is, this is a short novel. Easier to get right, but also easier to screw up.

But we'll see.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Di of Long Cleeve
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 30 Aug , 2005 6:58 pm
Frodo's girl through and through
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 989
Joined: Sun 06 Mar , 2005 10:08 pm
Location: The Shire
 
Alatar wrote:
I can't believe you gals! You sound like the worst sort of purists. Wait til the girl screws up, then complain. You can't judge her on work she hasn't done.
Yeah, but it's kind of fun playing the Cranky Purist for once :devil:

That Empire review sounds encouraging. I am prepared to give Keira the benefit of the doubt, even though there is little of her previous work I like. She may surprise me. She may.

I like Empire, not least because they were so supportive of LOTR, but I never got over them awarding Attack of the Clones 5 stars out of 5. :Q WTF???!!!! So I don't place complete faith in their reviews. :D

If the 1995 BBC P&P has a flaw, it's Alison Steadman's over-acting and her portrayal of Mrs Bennet as maliciously stupid. But forget that and be swept away by Lizzie and Darcy.

_________________

"Frodo undertook his quest out of love - to save the world he knew from disaster at his own expense, if he could ... " Letter no. 246

Avatar by elanordh on Live Journal


Top
Profile Quote
Cerin
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 31 Aug , 2005 8:08 pm
Thanks to Holby
Offline
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
 
You guys are so funny! :D :D :D :D

You made all kinds of excuses for PJ, and listen to you now.

I guess the difference is, you already have your filmic version of P&P so you aren't in a desperate (and forgiving) frame of mind.

I don't think I've had another squealing and shrieking with delight experience quite like the one I had when I rented a sort of visually clumsy two-tape version of Pride and Prejudice some years back (David Rintour? as Darcy) without knowing the story. I thought it was just wonderful. I've also seen the more celebrated BBC version, and I thought that was wonderful, too, but it couldn't quite match that uninitiated experience.


Top
Profile Quote
sh_wulff
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 01 Sep , 2005 5:39 am
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 361
Joined: Thu 10 Mar , 2005 4:44 am
Location: light my fire
 
That review in the Times has people acting like Xenarewn has been reicarnated

I will keep an open mind

because even though Colin Friel's Darcy is a sight for sore eyes he is no match for my mental Darcy... I first read P&P in junior High and his Darcy came ever so much later.....

and I'm glad peopl enjoyed "Bride and Prejudice"..it really is a hoot

_________________

[ img ]


:grouphug: :gropehug: :grouphug:


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 01 Sep , 2005 6:17 am
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
Well, Cerin (she said, casting about wildly) P&P was set in an actual historical period, the details of which are objectively knowable, and so, so, so we can so be nasty about someone who deliberately ignores that.

<wipes forehead and sits down hard>

And furthermore there weren't collagen lips in 1803 Hertfordshire.

And you are welcome to laugh, actually. I find it rather risible myself. But there it is. :D

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Di of Long Cleeve
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 01 Sep , 2005 7:02 am
Frodo's girl through and through
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 989
Joined: Sun 06 Mar , 2005 10:08 pm
Location: The Shire
 
Cerin wrote:
You guys are so funny! :D :D :D :D

You made all kinds of excuses for PJ, and listen to you now.

I guess the difference is, you already have your filmic version of P&P so you aren't in a desperate (and forgiving) frame of mind.
Well, there are lots of reasons, Cerin. ;)

1. PJ's LOTR didn't have Keira in it.
2. LOTR is a far more difficult and complex book to put on screen than a Jane Austen novel, so I am infinitely more forgiving of changes, revisions and omissions. Infinitely more.
3. PJ's LOTR didn't have Keira in it.
4. If PJ had cast Uma Thurman and Ethan Hawke as Eowyn and Faramir (I think this was a strong possibility at one point) I'd have been bitching just as much, trust me. Although there's Liv, the Valley Girl ... and I think she did a fine job with Arwen.
5. PJ's LOTR didn't have Keira in it.

Actually ... I do wonder if I might have been so forgiving of PJ if we didn't already have the wonderful BBC radio LOTR adaptation ...

The 1980 BBC P&P is delightful. I remember watching it while I was doing my A-levels. Elizabeth Garvie was a lovely Lizzie.

Don't ever rent the BBC 1978 Emma, Cerin. It's dreadful. So wooden and stilted. Absolutely dreadful.

_________________

"Frodo undertook his quest out of love - to save the world he knew from disaster at his own expense, if he could ... " Letter no. 246

Avatar by elanordh on Live Journal


Top
Profile Quote
samaranth
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 01 Sep , 2005 8:17 am
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 268
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 10:50 pm
Location: Sydney
 
That’s an interesting review, Alatar – but I’m not sure that saying “Voila, you have a Meg Ryan/Sandra Bullock/J.Lo movie” inspires a lot of confidence in me. :P And I wouldn’t, in a million years, rank Keira Knightly up there with Julie Christie. *shakes head very soundly indeed!*

No, I’m still not looking forward to this version of Pride and Prejudice. And while it does sound like we’re just a basket of wee catty things, I think the suspicion that Keira Knightly is just not suitable for this role is pretty well founded. For one thing, she pouts too much. :P I will go and see the film at some point, but I’ll be going with my purist hat firmly on. I have a feeling it will stay firmly on my head through the whole film, unlike LOTR, when I became dizzy with the on again/off again routine.

I find it odd that the producers find the need to shift social contexts in the way they have, because this alters the way the characters interact at the most fundamental level. The politics, conventions… the manners! I’m very wary that the approach is to make the setting ‘earthier’. The articles make it sound that there is a greater gulf between Lizzie and Darcy than Jane Austen’s story implies – as Elizabeth so clearly states to Lady Catherine, she is not far outside the class to which he belongs: Darcy is a gentleman, Elizabeth is the daughter of a gentleman. I guess it’s just a case of ‘wait and see how it looks on screen’.

I love the Greer Garson/Laurence Olivier version, but that’s only because I love Laurence Olivier. :-) Rather a lot, actually. I think it was this film where the time in which the story is set was shifted because the producer (or director?) didn’t like the look of Regency clothes. So Greer Garson ended up looking like a Victorian nanny, and there is not a heaving bosom to be seen.

I just did a quick imdb search to check my film facts, and found that there have been 5 other versions of this story, from 1938, 1952, 1967 , the 1980 one with David Rintoul (with I thought was a wonderful adaptation too), and the 1995 one. The 1952 version had some interesting casting choices: Peter Cushing played Mr Darcy, Prunella Scales played Lydia Bennet, and Helen Haye played Lady Catherine De Bourgh. That would have been one to see.

By the way, according to my local paper, a sequel to Pride and Prejudice (called ‘A Private Performance’) is to be published here in mid-October. If I remember I’ll have a look at it. I’m not sure I’d buy it, though – I rather like the story ending exactly where it does.


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 01 Sep , 2005 2:17 pm
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
Samaranth, there are an astonishing number of sequels to P&P—just peek on Amazon. Literally dozens. I've read maybe seven of them and really not found any worthy ones—most are simply bad, full of off notes. There is one that's actually a retelling of the story from Mr. Darcy's point of view that I did find amusing and well done, but I've read only one of the three (!) volumes and am reluctant to buy the second because the third was promised to be out almost a year ago and isn't.

The best ancillary to Austen I have found is Joan Aiken's JANE FAIRFAX, which is an excellent retelling of EMMA from Jane's point of view.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Cerin
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 01 Sep , 2005 4:20 pm
Thanks to Holby
Offline
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
 
Prim, you're not suggesting Keira has collagen lips?! :Q Or is it the actor playing Darcy. :D


Di, thanks for the heads up on the 1980 Emma. :)


*admits to finding Keira enchanting, and quickly ducks out of thread*


Top
Profile Quote
Di of Long Cleeve
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 11 Sep , 2005 3:28 pm
Frodo's girl through and through
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 989
Joined: Sun 06 Mar , 2005 10:08 pm
Location: The Shire
 
Well, colour me embarrassed. :oops:

'Cause I just watched a 30 minute programme on the making of the new P&P in ITV and I thought it looked really, really, really good. :)

Brenda Blethyn looks to be a better Mrs Bennet than Alison Steadman and I like the guy who's playing Mr Collins (this new film version does not seem to send up Mr Collins as cruelly as the BBC did.) I like Rosamund Pike as Jane too. And Judi Dench as Lady Catherine de Bourgh, I mean, come ON. :D Irresistable!

And Keira ... well, I was quite impressed with what I saw of her as Lizzy. :)

So I now repent of all my bitchiness about Keira. :oops:

Poor Keira, my first introduction to her was as Lara in ITV's absolutely appalling remake of 'Dr. Zhivago', which was a complete bloody waste of time - and Keira just did NOT cut the mustard as Lara.

But I am prepared to give her Lizzy the benefit of the doubt. Absolutely. :) I really liked the clips they showed. :)

My housemate swoons for Matthew McFadyen, the new Darcy. :) I doubt he can top the absolutely Scorching Hot Sex on Legs that is Colin Firth (who could????!!!!!) but he's a good actor. :)

Jennifer Ehle will always be my favourite Lizzy, but I am now fully prepared to give this film the benefit of the doubt and I will DEFINITELY be going to see it just as soon as I can. It opens in the UK on 24 September. :)



See, purists?

Ranting never got anybody nowhere (she said ungrammatically).

:devil: :devil: :devil: :devil: :devil:


PS. I'll allow one tiny weeny note of reservation about Donald Sutherland's Mr Bennet. I hope that was not a hint of an American accent I heard in his voice during one clip. :Q Quelle horreur! :D

_________________

"Frodo undertook his quest out of love - to save the world he knew from disaster at his own expense, if he could ... " Letter no. 246

Avatar by elanordh on Live Journal


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 11 Sep , 2005 4:42 pm
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
Well, Di, if you say so. . . . :uhoh:

You will see it before I do, so I look forward to reading your review. We have, er, a lot in common about, er, certain aspects of . . . previous . . . incarnations. . . .

If it turns out to be good, well, that's fabulous—there are already two worthwhile versions IMO, and a third is welcome as far as I'm concerned.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 3 of 5  [ 93 posts ]
Return to “Made in Dale: Hobbies and Entertainment” | Jump to page « 1 2 3 4 5 »
Jump to: