Pride and Prejudice
This is probably the most popular of Jane Austen's novels and I'm unoriginal enough to favour it to the others. So it happened that I saw four different versions (two series and two movies) and read the book. I don't know how I'll ever manage to fit it all in one post, but I'll try
( Read more... )
I even liked Bride and Prejudice more as a modern remake than Bridget Jones. Bridget had nothing on Elizabeth's wit and her obsession with weight was rather off putting.
I have tried some of the older movies that are considered good. Gone with the Wind is okay, tried Casablanca and I didn't mind it, but didn't get what is so great about it. Wrong period was not the greatest sin of the 1940 version for me. Why not have a different period take? But what they did to the characters, the plot...
So I take it you have seen some of the 1980 version? At times I felt 1995 version makes Elizabeth wittier than she was in the book and I had to be careful to compare the rest with book!Elizabeth and not 1995!Elizabeth. I would have liked 2005 movie much better if I hadn't read the book. It has an interesting atmosphere, but I miss the wit and the 'pride and prejudice' as you put it. I believe Austen edited the novel quite a bit and by the time she published it it was meant to be set later, but I don't mind having it in the 1790s for a change. Hm, at least I got the family feeling from other versions as well, but maybe you are right and 2005 version put up more effort in that front. So true, they hardly said anything to each other, It's a wonder Darcy fell in love at all and the ending was way too sudden. I believe a three hour movie would have been enough to do justice to the story, two was just too little time for them to actually interact.
Reply
Leave a comment