Jump to content

Pride and Prejudice, Jane Austen

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 86
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

And Lizzie shouldn't have given in!


Do you mean Lizzy shouldn't have married Darcy?!!! :eek: How could you possibly tamper with the perfect romance (which has the added advantage of being associated with the gorgeous Colin Firth ;) )?!?!?!?!


I love the book and I love the adaptation in different ways - I think its fair enough for each generation to see the story afresh, especially when its something people are still reading after 200 years! But I heard the director of the new adaptation describing it as 'a teen flick' which is worrying... it could either be brilliant like Baz Lurman's Romeo and Juliet, or be Clueless in period costume... and don't get me started on Kiera Knightly...!

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I meant is that becasue Lizzie was such a strong character i didn't think it was right for her to go with Darcy. I have only read Jane Eyre apart from P&P out of the classics, but in both (Although I loved the romance) thought they weren't as strong as they had been shwon throughout the book when they went to the men.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And Lizzie shouldn't have given in!


Doesn't Darcy give in first? I'm afraid I'm another Colin Firth fan and although I love the book, I adore the BBC Series. Just had to buy the DVD as I've worn out the video (sigh).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well as I'm a sucker for most things Austen related I will, I think, watch the new P&P with interest as I'm always on the hunt for new material to read and watch regarding the books and Austen so I welcome anyone doing anything most of the time. Having said that though I was put off seeing Bride and Prejudice from the reviews but I think it'll be interesting to see a modern two hour take on P&P to see how they do it. I thought Clueless was amusing but instantly forgetable. The words 'teen flick' do fill me with a little trepidation so I hope I'm proved wrong. Ah well if they don't we'll always have the BBC adaptation. But apart from gimicky spoofs like B&P as mentioned above they haven't done a film of it since Laurence Olivier played Darcy. Now if you want a film to be more untrue to P&P and the historical period you couldn't get a better one, but what a laugh - it's so entertaining I can't help loving it.

I'm looking forward to Matthew Macfayden's Darcy, I've watched him in a number of things, think he's a great actor and so I hope he brings a few interesting elements to such a reticent character. I'll reserve judgement on Miss Knightley but I've seen a few spirited sparks in her acting sometimes which if she brings them to the role will make it entertaining. The one which actually concerns me most is the casting of a young American actress as Lydia who by all accounts has had problems with her accent of course! Finally its all down to the script and the editing as much as the good acting so lets hope that Working Title do justice to the wit of Miss Austen and have a good adaptation with some cracking dialog. Fingers crossed then!!! But hey its just a bit of fun as Austen would agree, I'm sure she would see the humour in the attempts to reproduce her wit and subtle cynicism from page to celluloid.

Link to post
Share on other sites
What I meant is that becasue Lizzie was such a strong character i didn't think it was right for her to go with Darcy. I have only read Jane Eyre apart from P&P out of the classics, but in both (Although I loved the romance) thought they weren't as strong as they had been shwon throughout the book when they went to the men.


I was about to write another gushing stream of disagreement with you, but perhaps if I give some actual reasons I might have more chance of persuading you!


Lizzy and Darcy are perfect for each other - Lizzy has to be strong so that she doesn't get swallowed up by Darcy's strong character - he needs someone ballsy enough to stand up to him, she needs someone as intelligent as she is, who respects her for her character not just her looks/breeding ability! And this is brought out much more in the book than the film, this is exactly why Darcy is attracted to her - he doesn't fancy her at first sight at the ball in Meryton, it is when he discovers she is not afraid of him. And she doesn't 'give in', as she doesn't accept him at first, it is only when she discovers his true character. Well, this point can be argued, but anyway, can you imagine her married to Mr Collins? She had to marry for money, but she achieved a fairy-tale balance that Darcy is a perfect character match for her, and he has loadsa money! ;) Not very PC I know, but very romantic.


And Jane Eyre... well, that's a whole other thread, but in general, I think Jane is shown as strong enough to heal Rochester at the end of the book and she's also strong enough not to be afraid of him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Why did Mr Darcy have to put on this tough facade? If he was nice and kind etc in his heart why did he have to be outwardly mean? That must have put Lizze off because he is not acting how he is, and even if he is kinda and good if he acts all weirdly around people surely she wouldn't want to be with him?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

Apart from the fact it makes a good story (I think Jane Austen said, it had to be as believable that he was absolutely wrong for Lizzy in the beginning, as it is believable they are perfect for each other in the end)...


There seems to be a debate over whether is not Darcy is shy to begin with... i tend to come down on the 'not shy' side... its his pride which gives him a disdainful air, underneath he has good principles.


Jane Eyre is probably more disturbing (though brilliant) as there is something repellant about Rochester. Or Wuthering Heights...those Bronte girls had a real masochistic streak!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

There's a trailer for the new Pride and Prejudice film here (it takes a long time to download if you don't have broadband, so be warned :eek: )




I didn't like it at first, but it's won me round (yes, sad enough to watch the trailer repeatedly, I'm afraid :D )


Jassie, I'd be interested in a JA quiz. Did you ever get round to doing one, and if so, where is it, please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mixed views on that. I like the more natural approach: I think too many 'period' films take a very stilted line in terms of characters' manner and action, whereas this production presents a more convincing picture. A family of young girls would have the animation that seems to be apparent here, so we don't fall into the ongoing halcyon days myth that if you were strapped into a corset in a society of careful codes of social interaction you suddenly became a sort of Stepford wife.


I think Donald Sutherland and Brenda Blethyn are inspired choices for Mr & Mrs B, and you just know Judi Dench will be a wonderful Lady C.


I share Lucyb's doubts about Darcy, though. Not because I'm a Colin addict (a 6 month course of Colin substitute cured me of that) but because on the evidence of the trailer Matthew MacFadyen just doesn't seem to have a presence. I do feel sorry for the guy, though, because there's just going to be an endless flood of "Oh, but he's not Colin" from legions of women with tattered copies of The Radio Times Colin edition under their pillows.


My biggest concern, though, is the evidence of script-tampering. Now of course you can't translate a novel to the screen without some tinkering along the way, we all know that, but what I hate is the slipping in of 'funnies' that have nothing to do with Austen. She's funny enough without throwing in double entendres from Collins' pulpit or a footman announcing "Miss Bennet, Miss Bennet, Miss Bennet and errr, Miss Bennet." Ho-de-ho-ho! Leave it alone! I loved the adaptation of Emma but there were a few examples of the same thing in that too.


The only other slight worry... oh God, I hate having to say this... is Keira Knightley. Well of course she is gorgeous (which in itself is a minor problem - I think Jane needs to be the stunner), but I'm not 100% convinced of her acting talents. I don't know that she'll capture Lizzie's subtleties.


There. I've said it, but I feel dirty now. I'm off to take my Keira substitute.


Link to post
Share on other sites

...but he's not Colin! Actually one of the reasons I like the BBC P&P version is that it did stay fairly close to the original novel, at least in most places and I like my period dramas to be, well, period really. Added to the fact that I'm not Donald Sutherland's biggest fan (although at 5'0" I could be his smallest...), I've only ever seen Keira Knightly in Pirates ofthe Caribbean and I really don't like Matthew McFad...McFeyd...Mc..oh, b*gger it - the guy from spooks - you know who I mean, then it may not turn out to be my most favourite film ever. Probably still watch it though.


And I do not have a tattered old picture of Colin which I lug around with me (mainly because my husband found me a digital version to use as a screensaver - ain't love grand?)

Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of people expressed reservations about KK and MM, but general opinion from those who've seen the film say both actors are good, and there are rumours KK might be up for an Oscar. US release date has been put back to Nov from Sept, the rumour being that this will give it a better chance at the Oscars.


Some reviews of P&P here (from an advance screening in Hamburg)




I'm reserving judgement. Whatever else, it seems to be beautifully shot - with any luck it will do for the UK what LOTR did for NZ :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had a quick look at the trailer, and agree that Keira Knightley is far too pretty to be a credible Elizabeth, considering that she is not supposed to be the beauty of the family.


As for Matthew McFadden, I didn't see enough of him to judge him as a Darcy, but he won't have to compete with Colin Firth for my approval, as the much adored Mr Firth does nothing for me whatsoever!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
there are rumours KK might be up for an Oscar.

Blimey! Well stap me vitals! :eek: Sorry, Keira; I really didn't mean it. My friend made me say it for a dare. ;)


Sounds encouraging, Amanda! You're right, it does look beautifully shot (which is so important for a film, since this is what it can excel in over the small screen adaptations) and the NZ effect would be more than welcome after all the dreadful events in London.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree about KK being too beautiful for the part, in a way, but in another way, I think she's quite boyish, and if the fashion was for curvaceous blondes, then I can see that a KK-style Lizzy might not be thought the beauty of the family.


On the subject of the book, it's recently struck me that P&P seems to have the prototypes of some well loved characters in fiction. Lydia being lectured by her aunt and uncle in London reminds me of Toad being lectured by Badger and Rat. Both of them are un-putdownable (although Toad has a nice line in pretending to be chastened.)


Sir William Lucas seems to be a prototype of Mr Wyse in Mapp and Lucia.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe I missed all this activity going on in the P+P thread!!!! OK, I'm a total Colin Firth addict too (except for no Radio Times under the pillow!!! i think my boyfriend would draw the line at that!!!) but I'm also quite excited about this new film...my only, very shallow problem with Matthew Macfayden is he has a really hairy back!!! :eek: We're talking gorilla-like here. I don't know if we're going to see his back in this film if you know its there its sort of off-putting! I'll be trying to figure out if it was Darcy's character which made Firth so appealling or if it was just his own appeal...er...appealling, will MM take on a new...er...appeal...


Apart from that... does the trailer still have the cheesy american voiceover guy? That really puts me off!


I think I might have been dreaming, or did I read somewhere that they change the ending?!?! I hope it was just a bad dream!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've decided I'm just going to go with the aim of enjoying it as a good laugh, a low expectation might just be the making of it!

The trailer shows the effort that Working Title have gone to with the shooting; cinematography and costumes will make it a visually interesting take on the Georgian period. It does sound like they didn't think today's cinema goers would get or appreciate JA's satirical dialog though doesn't it. I distinctly heard Lizzie say at one point 'But he's so rich...' & 'perhaps you should practice'. Even in that short clip the clever lines they have cut from Lizzie seem to suggest that they have made her appeal to a contemporary audience, rather than flattering us with more intelligence - did they learn nothing from the sucess worldwide of the BBC one?

Working Title maybe a British firm but their previous sucesses show their eye is firmly on making a hit in the US rather than one faithful to JA; I struggle to understand why both can't be done. You can see the hand the US financiers have had in it just from the trailer. Good actors, good sets and costumes all make bad dialog all the more apparent.


So despite all that I'm going to enjoy it for what it is because I rather they do something than nothing. I've no high expectations - but I will watch ANYTHING period. Maybe they want her to be the 18th C 'Bridget Jones' horror...shriek.


The fashion was for plump, curvy and blond in Georgian England so definately KK as Lizzie would not have been considered a beauty. Rosamund Pike as Jane would have attracted more notice with her features so I have to say I think they got that right despite the fact that I think they've done that inadvertently.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For all Firth fans, did you know that the lake scene was originally scripted to have Darcy swimming in the nude (correct for the period) but it was changed as they wanted to show it before the 9 o'clock watershed?


The new film shows the women in late 18th century fashions, for the most part, instead of Empire line gowns, because the director thinks Empire line gowns are ugly. I think they're really flattering :) Thackeray didn't like them either, and when he illustrated Vanity Fair, he dressed his 1814 characters in Victorian costume. :rolleyes:


Mr Bennet is shown as old in the new film because the director (I think it was the director) thought that Mr Bennet couldn't marry until his father died. Not sure why he thought that, but I'm not complaining because I like Donald Sutherland.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

I have read and enjoyed most of Jane Austin's works, along with the Bronte's, Thomas Hardy, Dickens and others. If you are patient with it these writers really know how to develop their characters, as compared to today's books that for the most part, use characters to get you to the action scenes.


I also think that no one used the english language better than these authors. I can read many random sentences and stop to think how long it would take me to compose a sentence as perfect.


Anyway, I am not into romances per se, but I really enjoy these pastoral dramas on many levels.

Link to post
Share on other sites
For all Firth fans, did you know that the lake scene was originally scripted to have Darcy swimming in the nude (correct for the period) but it was changed as they wanted to show it before the 9 o'clock watershed?


I heard something interesting about this the other day. Talking to a lady who had been to a talk given by Andrew Davies the script writer from the 1995 BBC series at the time. He mentioned he'd wanted Colin Firth to do the scene nude and it was CF himself that put the brakes on. The women in the audience all agreed that it was a typically male thing to think nude was better than tight buckskin and wet shirt! I just think although that scene has merits - it was NOT in the book and so I do have a problem with it for that reason in a purist way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

You probably noticed or heard already, just in case you didn't, the 1995 series is being repeated on BBc4 this Tuesday (13th) at various times throughout the day starting v.early in the morning! And documentaries about the making of etc. Very frustrated that as I only have 'council telly' I can't watch it (but still won't give in to the corporate machine etc. and buy a freeview box)... the programme 'Drama Connections' on the 13th on BBC 1 is also about P+P: <hyperlink>http://www.bbc.co.uk/cgi-perl/whatson/prog_parse.cgi?FILENAME=20050913/20050913_2235_4223_21858_30</hyperlink>


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Content

    • By Seraphina
      **Spoilers** Be warned! (would have used the cool spoiler tag but pretty much the whole post is for people who have already read the book)
      I've just finished re-reading Mansfield Park and I'm having dilemmas over the whole Fanny/Edmund/Henry thing! I find the ending quite unsatisfactory, but I can't put my finger on why.....I'm not sure I wanted Fanny to marry Edmund, I almost feel like she should have married Henry, but I'm not sure that would have been satisfactory either...I'm confused!
      Does Edmund really love Fanny or is he just settling for second best? Does Fanny only love Edmund because he's the only person who has constantly made her feel special throughout her life? Is she grateful rather than in love? (although SHE obviously believes she's in love, is she mistaken?).
      Austen implies that, had Henry not run off with Maria and Mary's character subsequently been revealed to Edmund that Mary and Edmund would have married and Henry would have eventually won Fanny over. Would this have been a happier ending for Fanny or not?
      I remember hating Fanny Price the first time I read Mansfield Park, but I have to admit she grew on me a little bit, and I don't hate her so much as I'm exasperated with her. I kept picturing the wee woman with the funny glasses that never speaks in that tv show Teachers! She's a bit annoying but I did want her to be happy and I'm not sure her marriage with Edmund will be so.
      What do other people think? I only finished it about 20 minutes ago so all the issues are pretty fresh in my mind and I haven't consolidated my ideas yet. The whole marriage thing comes pretty quickly at the end, doesn't really give you a chance to reflect! Obviously having read it before I knew what to expect but I couldn't remember how it came about. Edmund's attachment seems a little sudden - he thinks of her in a seemingly a-sexual, sisterly way for 99% of the novel, so it's a little hard to accept when he decides he actually loves her as a wife!
      So will Fanny and Edmund be happy?
    • By Momo
      Emma - Jane Austen - 1816
      She might be right there. However, there is something likeable in Emma, after all. She is rather selfish and starts a lot of different things only to abandon them later but she means well with other people. She might be too intelligent for her time, women were not supposed to think.Emma is the Jane Austen's only heroine without money problems, that's already a difference to her other novels. Maybe that's what makes it so interesting.
      (thread first started 15.01.07)
    • By Momo
      The Watsons - Jane Austen - 1803/1805
      Being a huge Austen fan, I just had to read this even though it is an unfinished copy. At the end, there is a short summary of what Jane Austen told her sister how she would have wanted to finish the novel. 
      I quite agree with the writer of the quote that this would have been a wonderful piece of work, certainly just as good as her other great novels. It is so sad that she didn't live longer to write more fantastic stories.
    • By megustaleer
      Although not a favourite of some die-hard Janeites, Austen's pastiche on the then fashionable Gothic novel Northanger Abbey is an enjoyable read.
      Catherine Morland meets and falls for a nice young clergyman in Bath. Befriended by the man's sister, Catherine is invited to their home (Northanger Abbey). Having an overactive imagination fed on the Gothic tales she has been reading, Catherine behaves as though she was in one of these overblown stories, and the fledgling romance flounders.
      Eventually all is resolved, and everyone who should lives happily ever after.
      Northanger Abbey is the current 'Classic Serial' being broadcast in 3 parts on Sunday afternoons on BBC Radio4, (starting today) at 3pm, and repeated the following Saturday evenings at 9pm.
    • By David
      Restored Thread
      Amanda Grange 13th May 2006 09:35 AM
      I thought I'd start a thread on Persuasion, because it's often people's favourite Austen, and there's so much to discuss.
      One of the remarks often made about Austen's books is that they ignore the events going on in Europe at the time, but I disagree with this. The plot of Pride and Prejudice revolves, to a certain extent, around the militia, and Persuasion is very firmly based in the events of the day.
      Wentworth's naval career is integral to the plot. He is, before the book opens, bold, fearless, and newly promoted. This is important because it makes two entirely opposite opinions of him credible. Anne sees the bold, fearless optimism and the future success, and falls in love with it. Lady Russell sees the overconfidence, the uncertainty of his life and the long periods of loneliness ahead for his wife. When she meddles, I don't dislike her for it - well, not much - because she is genuinely worried for Anne's future happiness.
      His career also makes it credible that Sir Walter would despise him, whilst still consenting to his marrying Anne. This is necessary, because it means that, on the one hand, we can see that Anne would find it difficult to stand out against her family's disapproval, and on the other, it is Anne who has to eventually turn him down. This leads to the hostility that keeps them apart in the future.
      It's interesting that this is the only Austen (IIRC) in which the woman is about to marry a man who is the poorer of the two, and of a lower standing socially. Usually, the women marry men who are richer and higher, socially, than they.
      Wentworth's career then takes him away for years, which allows the plot of rejection and reconciliation possible. It also allows him to rise in the world, which isn't essential to the plot, but helps with the happy ending.
      David 13th May 2006 11:34 AM
      You're right, Amanda, a lot of people cite Persuasion as their favourite, and I can see why that might be. It feels like the most mature of Austen's novels in many ways, although this is possibly why it doesn't top my list.
      For me it lacks much of the lightness of touch and the humour that characterise the other novels - not that it's absent, just relegated to a far more minor theme in the orchestral movement. I find Emma charts just the right course for me between the sweet sparkle of Pride and Prejudice and the more thoughtful, quiet and reflective tones of Persuasion. I'm also not quite so taken by Anne, who doesn't have the feisty spirit of Lizzy or the fascinating flaws and huge journey of self-discovery of Emma.
      Of course it is still a great novel and I love it, but not to the same degree!
      There is a greater awareness of contemporary events in Persuasion, and I think that's part of its maturity. I would have to disagree that P&P concerns itself in this way, though - the militia are there not with any consciousness of actual military roles, but as the embodiment of the girls' romantic dreams, as well as representing one of the two main vocational avenues for men - the army, as opposed to Collins and the clergy. We would no more think of them going to war than we would think of Mr Collins ranking God higher up the ladder of authority than Lady Catherine!
      Momo 13th May 2006 12:33 PM
      When it comes to a great author like Jane Austen, it is hard to pick your favourite. Some of her novels are quite different to her others, and Persuasion surely is one of them.
      I have never read an Austen novel as a teen or young adult and so hae always judged from the adult point of view. Maybe that's the reason why Persuasion is my favourite.
      Jane Austen has always been critizised because she writes about people of a certain social status only. Yes, she does, and that's good. Because that was about the kind of people she knew, the kind of world she lives in. And that's why her novels are so great. She knows what she's writing about.
      What I like most in Persuasion is the way she captured the problems women were facing at the time. Especially the part where she explains to Captain Harville the difference between men's and women's feelings and their way of living. I thought she managed to come across so well, you just could feel her thoughts.
      And nobody ever said that her novels were historical ones. They are, but only of the small world she lived in and knew.
      Pride & Prejudice is much more lively, Emma as well, and I love both of them. But if I was allowed to take one of Jane Austen's books only to a desert island, Persuasion it would be.
      Darkstar 13th May 2006 12:58 PM
      Persuasion is certainly my favourite Austen, perhaps because it is her most mature work (IMHO). P&P and S&S are great fun, and I enjoyed Northanger Abbey, but Emma never did much for me.
      Amanda Grange 13th May 2006 01:00 PM
      I'm not sure how I got a smilie at the top of this post, but I can't seem to get rid of it.
      Yes, I love this speech:
      "Your feelings may be the strongest," replied Anne, "but the same spirit of analogy will authorise me to assert that ours are the most tender. Man is more robust than woman, but he is not longer lived; which exactly explains my view of the nature of their attachments. Nay, it would be too hard upon you, if it were otherwise. You have difficulties, and privations, and dangers enough to struggle with. You are always labouring and toiling, exposed to every risk and hardship. Your home, country, friends, all quitted. Neither time, nor health, nor life, to be called your own. It would be too hard, indeed" (with a faltering voice), "if woman's feelings were to be added to all this."
      The thought seems to have been in the air at the time, because it's very similar to Byron's, "Man's love is of man's life a part; it is a woman's whole existence," only, of course, Persuasion came first.
      I like the differing views of women Austen gives us, though. Mrs Croft sails the seas with her husband.She's very well travelled, leading to one of my favourite exchanges in the book, between her and Mrs Musgrove: "(I) never was in the West Indies. We do not call Bermuda or Bahama, you know, the West Indies."
      Mrs Musgrove had not a word to say in dissent; she could not accuse herself of having ever called them anything in the whole course of her life."
      David 13th May 2006 01:03 PM
      Some lovely quotations, Amanda!
      (As for the smilie at the top, under the text box there are smilies with check-box circles. You need to click on "No icon".)

  • Create New...