Conceit and Unobjectivity?

[imwalde]

Pride and Predjudice is my favorite book. (Although Middlemarch could be a tie.) And I ADORE the A&E miniseries with Colin Firth, which I have seen no fewer than a billion times. All of this is in the interest of full disclosure, so you know where my opinion of the new movie is coming from.

And my opinion is, meh. Not bad. Not great, but not bad. I was afraid I'd hate it, and I didn't. I thought they did a decent enough job condensing the material into 2 hours, although I felt there was some plot awkwardness, but maybe that's because I knew how it should be. But it didn't feel like Pride and Predjudice, it just felt like any other period romance. One of the reasons Lizzie is such a beloved character is that she is smart and witty and independent, but that's barely true in the movie. Ok, that's not entirely fair, but it is fair to say that Darcy barely sees that side of Lizzie. Essentially, if you only saw the movie, you'd think that he dug her because she was pretty, not for her mind. AND DARCY LOVES LIZZIE FOR HER MIND, DAMMIT. She does show some spunk, eventually, but he's already digging her because of the beauty thing. Hmph.

If this had been just another movie, called Vanity and Bias or whatever, I probably wouldn't mind so much, but it's just that the source material is perfect, so it grates.

Also, although the chances are slim that many people seeing the movie are going to be unfamiliar with the book, I genuinely think people might be confused. There are whole bunches of supporting characters who get barely a mention/explanation, or only a mention in passing. The director was clearly trying to go for a less staged, more natural style of delivery. People talk over each other, or very quickly. And that may be all well and good, but a few times, I have no idea how newbies were supposed to catch the info being spedread at them.

And something else, the Bennett family is waaaaaaaay poorer in this version than I had imagined/previously seen. Like, there's livestock and laundry in their yard. That's not a criticism, just interesting.

Keira Knightley isn't too terrible, and Matthew MacFayden is an interesting take on Darcy. More awkward and pining, but good. I think I'd have a better chance of really liking it (instead of not disliking it) if I had gone in thinking about it as just a period drama, not an adaptation of my favorite book.

Anyone else seen it yet?

Comments

[kid-prufrock.livejournal.com]

I really wish I could watch it, actually, though for rather crass reasons (sighing, simultaneously, at Keira Knightly, period costumes, and the British -actors-as-such).

I also think I might agree with you about both of the books you note. I read Pride and Prejudice pretty late, actually — I got a small volume at a used bookstore that could just fit loosely into my pocket, and I took a great, great pleasure in reading it between showings while working at the movie theatre.

[imwalde.livejournal.com]

Yeah, she is very pretty. And there's a scene when she's caught out in a rain storm that I suspect you won't hate. ;)

Ah, Middlemarch. It had been on my shelf from a used book store for years before I finally picked it up, and I thought it would be a good-for-me book. But I psychotically loved it. Like, I'd be reading it, and then passing acquaintances would be forced to stop and have me read to them the most perfect sentence ever in the English language. Except for then George Eliot would write an even better sentence, and I'd have to reset the whole scale.

I've read plenty of books that are called masterpieces and I'm taught to appreciate them, even if they don't really do it for me. But Middlemarch? It's a goddamn masterpiece, they were absolutely right. I want everyone to read it, because after I read it, I felt like I had made a new friend, you know?

Pride and Predjudice I've read a dozen times, Middlemarch only once, so until I've reread it, I can't really say it's my favorite book. (But it's going to be!)