(no subject)
I went to see Pride and Prejudice today. I managed to spot knirirr in at least two scenes, and my sister was dead impressed, especially by the snuff scene.
I have to admit that it was surprisingly good, despite all my initial reservations about it. Any attempt to cut a book down to two hours of screen time must inevitably involve a lot of pruning, so in that sense it will never be as complete as the BBC adaptation, but the only material casualty of this was Mr Wickham, who, as dyddgu remarked, is so cut down as to make the Lydia elopement rather confusing. We're not even completely sure which of the two flirty sisters is Lydia, yet are supposed to empathise with Lizzie's reaction to her elopement. The confines of time also required the throwing-together of various scenes, resulting in Mr Darcy literally popping up from nowhere - however, my brother feels that that's practically his job anyway, so no harm done. Judi Dench as Lady Catherine de Bourgh is fine, but her part is so small that she doesn't get a chance to do much with it, and Mr Collins similarly is denied his BBC scene-stealing opportunities. Finally, and inevitably, Matthew McFadyen is not Colin Firth. He doesn't do too badly at times, and nearly passes the 'Darcy test' I devised, namely of creating a completely different atmosphere simply by smiling, but he's not as believable.
Right. On with the positive. Obvious one first. As I have occasionally admitted under duress, Keira Knightley is possibly the prettiest girl currently working in film. As I have freely admitted without duress, Elizabeth Bennet is possibly the most, for want of a better word, desirable female character in literature. With the catalyst of an excellent acting performance added to the mix, the result was, unsurprisingly, pretty pleasant. There was a kind of male nervousness pervading the cinema that some form of critical mass might be reached, resulting in an attractiveness implosion that would suck the cinema into a black hole of comeliness. Her characterisation, fortunately, differs from Jennifer Ehle's, so I'm not forced to make any comparisons. Her Elizabeth is a lot more giggly, but in a fun-loving, sisterly way that works well.
Various other members of her family were showcased pretty well by the film too. Donald Sutherland turned in a pretty good performance, and I have to admit that I wouldn't have known he was American had I not been informed of it beforehand. Brenda Blethyn, as Mrs Bennet, also does pretty well, and I begin to appreciate the difference between her and Alison Steadman. Rosamund Pike as Jane is excellent. She's apparently got younger since her Bond role, and complements Knightley's Elizabeth beautifully. To me, she initially seemed slightly too good for the oddly dim Mr Bingley, until I looked at his words and actions more reasonably and realised that he wasn't being dim, just (as my sister put it) 'wonderfully geeky'. Even Mary, usually the boring sister, is treated quite well, and given some touching moments that you had to look much harder for in the BBC version. Intentionally or not, she is also the prettiest of the three non-Jane-or-Elizabeth sisters, though that may be personal bias on my part. Charlotte Lucas' acceptance of Mr Collins is also made slightly more poignant, as opposed to the smoothly pragmatic character we see in the TV adaptation.
A few words on the characteristics of this film adaptation. Thankfully, they avoided the temptation to put any kind of modern spin on the story. People have highlighted the odd impropriety committed by the film characters, but given the current trends I think we should be thankful for what we have. It's particularly interesting to note that there is not a single kiss in the film, since it ends before their marriage. Commendably clear-sighted, since the whole point about the relationship is what isn't happening, and how this is expressed in words. The scenes are interesting - denied the opportunity of blowing things up or filming nights of torrid passion, the director clearly decided to cast the environment as an extra, with the proposal scene in the rain (not bad), the final acceptance in the fog (slightly too coincidental) and Lady Catherine's arrival in the middle of the night (possibly taking things too far).
A final thing to say is that one of the fun things about interpreting Pride and Prejudice, in whatever format, is trying to work out at what point exactly Elizabeth's feelings begin to turn in favour of Darcy. Here, slightly unfortunately, it's hinted from the start that she likes him, and her perception of his behaviour is simply an obstacle in the path rather than something that blinds her to the existence of the path altogether.
Hmm. That came out as rather longer than I intended, and I haven't even said everything I could say. But I will say that the film pleasantly surprised me. It's not really in competition with the BBC version for full Austen satisfaction, but as a two-hour adaptation it does very well indeed.
I have to admit that it was surprisingly good, despite all my initial reservations about it. Any attempt to cut a book down to two hours of screen time must inevitably involve a lot of pruning, so in that sense it will never be as complete as the BBC adaptation, but the only material casualty of this was Mr Wickham, who, as dyddgu remarked, is so cut down as to make the Lydia elopement rather confusing. We're not even completely sure which of the two flirty sisters is Lydia, yet are supposed to empathise with Lizzie's reaction to her elopement. The confines of time also required the throwing-together of various scenes, resulting in Mr Darcy literally popping up from nowhere - however, my brother feels that that's practically his job anyway, so no harm done. Judi Dench as Lady Catherine de Bourgh is fine, but her part is so small that she doesn't get a chance to do much with it, and Mr Collins similarly is denied his BBC scene-stealing opportunities. Finally, and inevitably, Matthew McFadyen is not Colin Firth. He doesn't do too badly at times, and nearly passes the 'Darcy test' I devised, namely of creating a completely different atmosphere simply by smiling, but he's not as believable.
Right. On with the positive. Obvious one first. As I have occasionally admitted under duress, Keira Knightley is possibly the prettiest girl currently working in film. As I have freely admitted without duress, Elizabeth Bennet is possibly the most, for want of a better word, desirable female character in literature. With the catalyst of an excellent acting performance added to the mix, the result was, unsurprisingly, pretty pleasant. There was a kind of male nervousness pervading the cinema that some form of critical mass might be reached, resulting in an attractiveness implosion that would suck the cinema into a black hole of comeliness. Her characterisation, fortunately, differs from Jennifer Ehle's, so I'm not forced to make any comparisons. Her Elizabeth is a lot more giggly, but in a fun-loving, sisterly way that works well.
Various other members of her family were showcased pretty well by the film too. Donald Sutherland turned in a pretty good performance, and I have to admit that I wouldn't have known he was American had I not been informed of it beforehand. Brenda Blethyn, as Mrs Bennet, also does pretty well, and I begin to appreciate the difference between her and Alison Steadman. Rosamund Pike as Jane is excellent. She's apparently got younger since her Bond role, and complements Knightley's Elizabeth beautifully. To me, she initially seemed slightly too good for the oddly dim Mr Bingley, until I looked at his words and actions more reasonably and realised that he wasn't being dim, just (as my sister put it) 'wonderfully geeky'. Even Mary, usually the boring sister, is treated quite well, and given some touching moments that you had to look much harder for in the BBC version. Intentionally or not, she is also the prettiest of the three non-Jane-or-Elizabeth sisters, though that may be personal bias on my part. Charlotte Lucas' acceptance of Mr Collins is also made slightly more poignant, as opposed to the smoothly pragmatic character we see in the TV adaptation.
A few words on the characteristics of this film adaptation. Thankfully, they avoided the temptation to put any kind of modern spin on the story. People have highlighted the odd impropriety committed by the film characters, but given the current trends I think we should be thankful for what we have. It's particularly interesting to note that there is not a single kiss in the film, since it ends before their marriage. Commendably clear-sighted, since the whole point about the relationship is what isn't happening, and how this is expressed in words. The scenes are interesting - denied the opportunity of blowing things up or filming nights of torrid passion, the director clearly decided to cast the environment as an extra, with the proposal scene in the rain (not bad), the final acceptance in the fog (slightly too coincidental) and Lady Catherine's arrival in the middle of the night (possibly taking things too far).
A final thing to say is that one of the fun things about interpreting Pride and Prejudice, in whatever format, is trying to work out at what point exactly Elizabeth's feelings begin to turn in favour of Darcy. Here, slightly unfortunately, it's hinted from the start that she likes him, and her perception of his behaviour is simply an obstacle in the path rather than something that blinds her to the existence of the path altogether.
Hmm. That came out as rather longer than I intended, and I haven't even said everything I could say. But I will say that the film pleasantly surprised me. It's not really in competition with the BBC version for full Austen satisfaction, but as a two-hour adaptation it does very well indeed.