Fine Eyes Without the Perspicacity
Written: Nov 29 '05 (Updated May 19 '06)
|
Product Rating:
|
|
|
Pros: Youthful Bennet sisters, Keira Knightley, Rosamund Pike, Matthew MacFayden, Simon Woods; photography and music
Cons: The badly mangled screenplay destroys essence of the story; subplots obliterated; several bad casting decisions
The Bottom Line: Despite a lot of weaknesses, this is an attractive and entertaining adaptation of my favorite novel. It ranks below the best Austen adaptations, but is still plenty worthwhile.
|
|
|
| metalluk's Full Review: Pride and Prejudice (2005) |
At my house, the release of a new adaptation of Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice is a big event indeed. We linked up with another family of "Austenites" and made it a party event. The weekend preceding the big event, my youngest daughter, Alina (a sophomore in college), invited her friend Dorie (a high school senior) for a sleepover and the two of them had a Pride and Prejudice marathon, watching all of the available filmed versions of the story over the course of about a day-and-a-half, including Pride and Prejudice (1940), Pride and Prejudice (1980), Pride and Prejudice (1995), Pride & Prejudice: A Latter-Day Comedy (2003) and Bride and Prejudice (2005)! Keep in mind that the 1995 version is five hours and the 1980 version even longer. These young ladies also know the novel inside and out. So, let's just say that we were all primed when we got to the theater for this pretty new version of the story, starring Keira Knightley and Matthew MacFadyen, and directed by Joe Wright. On the way home later, we all rated the film overall as well as rating the way the film handled each individual character. Four-stars was the consensus view for the film as a whole, but that strikes a compromise between some five-star qualities and some significant deficits.
Let me add that I am not a purist in relation to adaptations. I expect films to make alterations in literary works in order to render them more cinematic. On the other hand, one needs to realize that Pride and Prejudice is one of the most meticulously crafted novels ever written. Austen worked and reworked the material over many years and the characters were as real to her, in a sense, as the people in her life. One of the reasons that readers take so strongly to Elizabeth, Mr. Darcy, and the other characters in this particular novel is that they are fully drawn, psychologically complex individuals who behave with the same degree of consistencies and inconsistencies as real people. When filmmakers tinker with the characters in Pride and Prejudice, they run the distinct risk of producing characters that fail to maintain the degree of psychological consistency that Austen so skillfully created. The scriptwriters for this latest adaptation of the novel simply lacked sufficient insight into the various characters that Austen had created. By contrast, the scriptwriters for the 1995 A&E miniseries version of the novel understood both the psychology of the characters and the novel's principal themes. Where they deviated from the novel (such as adding some visual scenes to flesh out Darcy's character a bit), the modifications were almost always consistent with the psychology of the characters in question.
The Story: Elizabeth Bennet (Keira Knightley) is the second oldest of the five daughters in the Bennet household. The chief occupation of her mother (Brenda Blethyn) in life is trying to find suitable husbands for her offspring, and the wealthier the better. Her task is made all the more urgent because the Bennet's estate will be entailed away upon the death of Mr. Bennet (Donald Sutherland) to the closest male heir, Mr. Collins (Tom Hollander). When a neighboring estate is newly let to the wealthy and single(!) Mr. Bingley (Simon Woods), Mrs. Bennet envisions an opportunity to match up her eldest daughter, Jane (Rosamund Pike), with a worthy suitor. Even Mr. Bennet sees enough wisdom in the idea to invite Mr. Bingley to attend the Assembly Ball in the nearby town of Meryton. Bingley arrives with his snobby sister, Caroline (Kelly Reilly), and his haughty, aloof friend, Mr. Darcy (Matthew MacFadyen). Bingley, at least, is quite unassuming and friendly with the local folk. Bingley takes an immediate interest in the beautiful Jane and Mrs. Bennet's hopes seem well on their way to fruition. In the meantime, Elizabeth overhears Mr. Darcy smugly slighting the charms of the local girls, herself included. When Darcy later invites her to dance, Elizabeth, who is intelligent and self-assured, throws a piece of his earlier remark back in his face. Thus begins an antipathy between the two that will continue to grow by additional provocations.
At just about the same time that Lizzie's distaste for Mr. Darcy reaches its zenith, with multiple factors contributing, Mr. Darcy has discovered himself falling hopelessly in love with Elizabeth. Darcy is both handsome and wealthy, residing on one of the finest estates in all of Derbyshire. Very nearly any woman in England would covet a marriage proposal from him. He has to wrestle with doubts about Elizabeth, not because he anticipates that she might reject him but because her family connections will meet with disapproval by his friends and relations, especially his aunt, the Lady Catherine de Bourg (Judi Dench) who intends that Darcy should marry her own daughter, Anne (Rosamund Stephen). Darcy's ardor is so inflamed, however, that he is impelled to pop the question, though it's less a "pop" than a painfully reluctant entreaty. Elizabeth, who had assumed that his disgust for her likely matched her own for him, is flabbergasted by his proposal, but at no loss for words in rejecting it. Not only has the nature of his proposal been insulting to herself and her family, she also believes Darcy to have done egregious harm to her friend, Mr. Wickham (Rupert Friend) and to have been the instrument of destruction of her dearest sister's potential happiness with Mr. Bingley. She also hasn't forgotten his arrogance and self-conceit while at Meryton. He'd be "the last man on earth," she tells him emphatically, "she could ever be imposed upon to marry." Astute viewers will understand that the rest of the film will be devoted to turning that perfect antipathy into pure love.
Strengths and Weaknesses:
Let's start with some of the film's strengths:
• The casting of the five Bennet sisters, from the point of view of physical appearance and age, is the best of the film versions of Pride and Prejudice. In the novel, Lydia is only 15 and Elizabeth just 19. Kitty and Mary are in between those two and Jane, the eldest, is probably about 20 or 21. This is the first film of the novel that has provided viewers with actresses that look credibly the ages they were supposed to be. Greer Garson, who played Elizabeth in the 1940 version, was 36! Even Jennifer Ehle scarcely comes across as 19.
• Rosamund Pike as Jane Bennet is as perfect as I can imagine anyone in this role. She has both the requisite beauty and the implacable demeanor that the character requires. One can easily picture Bingley picking her out of a roomful of people as the love of his life. One key issue in casting Jane is that she must be even more beautiful than Elizabeth in one sense of the term "beauty" but less beautiful in another sense. Jane has to be more of a classic beauty, while lacking Elizabeth's ability to enhance her physical beauty by a playful wit and personality. Rosamund Pike is not only perfect for her part, but is also right in comparison to Keira Knightley.
• Keira Knightley is as pretty as Elizabeth should be and has the right glimmer in her eye and sparkling personality. Knightley does a commendable job with the role, on a par with Jennifer Ehle, within the limitations of the script. What fails to come across is the character's incisive intelligence, which, unfortunately, is key to the story.
• Simon Woods is delightful as Bingley, both humorous and endearing. The scene in which he paces back and forth interminably is rather pitiful.
• The soundtrack is delightful. The cinematography for the outdoor scenes is sometimes spectacular. For the dance scenes, there is too much emphasis on close-ups, giving the film a hyperkinetic quality that is more akin to our times than the nineteenth century.
Now, the deficiencies:
• The scriptwriter (Deborah Moggach) for this version obviously had very little understanding of the central themes of the book. Key issues are glossed over and other important though less central aspects of the novel are lost altogether. Emma Thompson did something of a rewrite of the script, for which she received a "special thanks" in the credits, but I have to assume, based on her work on Sense and Sensibility that her contribution must have improved the script rather than contributing to the deficiencies. A major deficit is that Elizabeth is provided with too little reason to change her mind about Darcy, after his first proposal. First, she's never provided with any sufficient reason to understand Darcy's point of view in relationship to separating Bingley from Jane. Second, Elizabeth never gains first-hand information about Wickham in this film with which to bolster Darcy's account of Wickham's involvement with Georgiana. Third, the conversation with the Pemberley housekeeper, which was key to establishing Darcy's true character, was omitted. Fourth, the pleasant, non-condescending treatment that Darcy afforded Mr. and Mrs. Gardiner was reduced to a single line, inviting Mr. Gardiner to go fishing. Fifth, Georgiana's strong endorsement of her brother at Lambton was diminished. Sixth, neither Elizabeth nor we learn much about the considerable effort that Darcy put in to recovering Lydia from the clutches of Wickham. Without tangible reasons for Elizabeth reassessing Darcy's character, we are reduced to Hollywood's basest kind of logic about relationships: physical chemistry.
• Elizabeth – The most exceptional quality of the central character in Pride and Prejudice is her perspicacity. Elizabeth has a gift for seeing through nonsense and she has a deep interest in observing and understanding people. She is also an exceptionally self-possessed young lady who is not intimidated by the self-importance that people like Mr. Darcy or Lady Catherine impute to themselves. She is well bred in the sense that she would never throw herself at a man. She is also pretty to look at, with exceptionally fine eyes, but, in the novel, it is her mental and psychological qualities that first attract Darcy's attention, after which her appealing looks, which he initially dismissed as merely "tolerable enough, I suppose," grew on him. In this new adaptation, very little of Elizabeth's intelligence or refinement comes through. Very few of her pithy insights into human nature survive in the film. In fact, overall, she's basically as much of a twit as her younger sisters. Her courage now seems to arise from sassiness more than confidence in her own perceptiveness. Instead of being self-possessed, she races from a room yelling, "Leave me alone for once in your lives!" Instead of the pride of refinement, we see her snooping about at Pemberley, peering in on Georgiana playing the piano. In the novel, her foremost dread in going to Pemberley was that she might run into Darcy and she was mortified when it happened. Here, in the film, it follows from her initiative. Toward the end of the film, she twice takes the initiative to indicate her interest in Darcy. For example, when Darcy mentions that he'll be going away in a few days, Elizabeth says, "So soon?" She is reduced to begging for a renewal of his affection, which Austen's Elizabeth would never have allowed herself to do. In short, Elizabeth is reduced, in the film, to just another pretty girl and Darcy's attraction to her becomes typical Hollywood chemistry.
• Donald Sutherland as Mr. Bennet – The damage done to the character Mr. Bennet by the film is enormous. Mr. Bennet of the novel is a clever man of intelligence and wit. In fact, it is evident that Elizabeth inherited her insightfulness from her father. Mr. Bennet has a special relationship with Elizabeth based on their similar turns of mind. Granted, Mr. Bennet is also cynical and his relationship with his wife is downright ugly. Mrs. Bennet is shrill, uncouth, and weak-minded, and Mr. Bennet oscillates between caustic put-downs and isolating himself in his study to escape her. In this new film, Donald Sutherland portrays Mr. Bennet as doddering and detached. We see nothing of a special relationship between him and Elizabeth until the scene near the end when she assures her father that she actually loves Darcy. We see next to nothing of the tense relationship between Mr. and Mrs. Bennet in this film.
• Brenda Blethyn as Mrs. Bennet – Mrs. Bennet is supposed to be a "handsome woman," whatever her other failings (which are many). How on earth could the Mr. and Mrs. Bennet depicted in this film produce offspring as lovely as Rosamund Pike's Jane or Keira Knightley's Elizabeth?
• Jena Malone as Lydia Bennet. Malone does a decent job, but her character has been reduced to little more than a cipher. We just don't get much of her undisciplined, free-spirited recklessness. Her priceless lines, when she returns to Longbourn married to Wickham, were eliminated.
• Matthew MacFadyen as Darcy. I'll leave the issue of his attractiveness to the ladies. I gather from what I've read and the gals in the group with whom I saw the film that he's enough of a hunk to excite female fantasies. I thought the actor was fine, but the presentation of Darcy as a character was quite flawed. He's supposed to be aloof at the Assembly Ball, but not sneering. Then, later, at Rosings, when he pays a call on Elizabeth, he's shy and anxious, but not an agitated fool as he's depicted in this film.
• Rupert Friend as Mr. Wickham. Friend does all right but the character is destroyed. Wickham is supposed to be superficially personable in a manipulative kind of way – a conman of sorts. Instead, he comes across in this film as a person with some genuine quality. Neither Elizabeth nor we ever have reason to change that opinion, other than Darcy's say-so in relation to Wickham's earlier treatment of Georgiana.
• Tom Hollander as Mr. Collins. Hollander is not nearly smarmy or odious enough for the role. Hollander comes across as a pretty decent chap, though a bit inept. He's too short for Elizabeth, but that's a pretty cheap basis for his unsuitability. In the novel, Charlotte is a person of a lot more genuine quality than Collins. She's had to settle for him because her prospects, as a rather plain woman of 27, are not good, but readers understand that she deserved better, in a just world. In this filmed version, Charlotte and Mr. Collins' come across as a well-matched pair. Mr. Collins slip-up in referring to "intercourse" during a sermon was stupid scriptwriting.
• Judi Dench as Lady Catherine de Bourg should have been one of the film's strengths. Nobody can doubt Dench's qualifications as an actress. Her part, as written, is so small that little of the character's menace comes across.
• Kelly Reilly as Caroline Bingley is nowhere near as effective as previous actresses in the role.
• The nude statues at Pemberley were totally out of place in an Austen film, once again turning the whole romance into lust instead of appreciation for one another's minds.
• The kissy-kissy, closing scene with Darcy repeating the words "Mrs. Darcy" over and over is utterly inappropriate. Darcy fell in love with Elizabeth precisely because she could match his wits, stand up to both himself and Lady Catherine, and counter his own tendencies toward arrogance and pride with well engineered reproofs and gentle laughter. Instead of the testament to women as the intellectual equals of men that Austen's novel provided, we get Elizabeth reduced to an appendage of her husband: "Mrs. Darcy, Mrs. Darcy" when it should be "Elizabeth, Elizabeth." The kissing and nuzzling is fine, but not the emphasis on the inequality of the husband-wife relationship at that point.
Bottom-Line: A two-hour version of Pride and Prejudice cannot hope to do the same kind of justice to the story as the five-hour miniseries was able to provide. It's not even close. Then again, I consider the A&E version of the novel to be one of the ten finest films ever made, so very few films can stand comparison with it. The new version with Keira Knightley is one that I will purchase as soon as it becomes available and will watch over and over again. I'll be delighted to have it as an addition to the available versions. It's a terrific film, despite numerous flaws in comparison with the definitive version. It even beats the A&E version in a few particulars, while falling short in a larger number of ways. Do I recommend seeing this film? Absolutely. It is a delight! Watch it, fall in love with Jane Austen, then check out the definitive film version and read the novel as well.
Recommended:
Yes
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
metalluk
|
 - Top 100 |
|
Location: Saunderstown, RI, USA
Reviews written: 930
Trusted by: 230 members
About Me:
Five ... Four ... Three ... Two ... One ...
Blastoff!
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.