FacebookTwitter
Hatrack River Forum   
my profile login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » Pride & Prejudice (Page 0)

  This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   
Author Topic: Pride & Prejudice
katharina
Member
Member # 827

 - posted      Profile for katharina   Email katharina         Edit/Delete Post 
Tatiana, considering who you're talking to, I think you're preaching to the choir. [Smile]
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tatiana
Member
Member # 6776

 - posted      Profile for Tatiana   Email Tatiana         Edit/Delete Post 
[Smile] Maybe I'm worried about any Marrianes who might be feeling the confounding lure of that great and spacious building, covering itself in the guise of maturity and good sense.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
katharina
Member
Member # 827

 - posted      Profile for katharina   Email katharina         Edit/Delete Post 
I am comfortably sure (somewhat from experience) that true Mariannes would have a nervous breakdown before they could ever force themselves to do it.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tatiana
Member
Member # 6776

 - posted      Profile for Tatiana   Email Tatiana         Edit/Delete Post 
<<<<hugs Katie>>>> If not before, then afterward for sure. [Smile]
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
katharina
Member
Member # 827

 - posted      Profile for katharina   Email katharina         Edit/Delete Post 
Right. I think the point of Mariannes is that they trust their own minds and opinions more than anyone else's. If they are letting themselves go so completely against themselves, then I question how true Marianney they were.

That's partly why I don't mind that she married Colonol Brandon. She was sick, but she didn't have a lobotomy, and she was in no danger of being turned out on the streets; she had family that would never let that happen. She was also still young and beautiful and charming. She wasn't desperate. Since with all of that she did marry Colonol Brandon, then I think she must have loved him enough that she wanted to. [Smile]

Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tatiana
Member
Member # 6776

 - posted      Profile for Tatiana   Email Tatiana         Edit/Delete Post 
"I think the point of Mariannes is that they trust their own minds and opinions more than anyone else's."

Okay, I like that characterization, if you add the proviso that they may have tried over and over from earliest childhood to follow the minds and opinions of trusted authorities, only to have found it to be disasterously wrong in their case.

I think the real Marianne will find the same thing to be true in her marriage, I think she will find that she made a horrible mistake. It was her own choice, even if somewhat coerced by circumstances, so she will learn and grow from that mistake. But what about poor Colonel Brandon? Doesn't he deserve better? Doesn't he deserve someone who really loves him?

To me, this story is about how one true soul can be subverted by adversity, by someone of evil character in whom she put her trust, and by some others who love her and mean well, but have no clue what it's like to be her, and what life choices are right for her. I see the ending and it's horribly tragic.

It's a different book for you, but that's okay. [Smile]

Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
katharina
Member
Member # 827

 - posted      Profile for katharina   Email katharina         Edit/Delete Post 
I think for your scenario to be true, Marianne would have to be very dishonest both with herself and Colonol Brandon in order to marry him without loving him. That seems like a disservice to her, to think her capable of it.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
El JT de Spang
Member
Member # 7742

 - posted      Profile for El JT de Spang   Email El JT de Spang         Edit/Delete Post 
I've never read Pride and Prejudice.

Although I hear it's the literary version of a chick flick. Is that not true?

Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
katharina
Member
Member # 827

 - posted      Profile for katharina   Email katharina         Edit/Delete Post 
The same way Lonesome Dove is a pulp western and Anna Karenina is a soap opera.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tatiana
Member
Member # 6776

 - posted      Profile for Tatiana   Email Tatiana         Edit/Delete Post 
If she loves him then why aren't we shown that story? Why aren't we really even shown who he is, or how she came to fall for him? Why don't we see him through her eyes with all his charms and the unique traits that caused her heart gradually to go out to him and be won over? I think it's Pretty clear that it's because those things never did happen.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
katharina
Member
Member # 827

 - posted      Profile for katharina   Email katharina         Edit/Delete Post 
Tatiana, you seem determined to think that she made a horrible mistake.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tatiana
Member
Member # 6776

 - posted      Profile for Tatiana   Email Tatiana         Edit/Delete Post 
You seem determined to think she didn't. I don't think it's necessary that we agree about this, but I do believe in my reading of the story.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
katharina
Member
Member # 827

 - posted      Profile for katharina   Email katharina         Edit/Delete Post 
I don't think that she necessarily didn't, but I do think it is a possibility, considering how dishonest she would have to be to marry solely for money.

You can expand your reading to include more than one possiblity.

Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tatiana
Member
Member # 6776

 - posted      Profile for Tatiana   Email Tatiana         Edit/Delete Post 
I see it as the eternal archetype of the Elinor (perhaps even Jane's internal Elinor) telling the eternal archetype of the Marianne "just be like me and you'll be happy" only it's a terrible mistake, fallacy, and misunderstanding on the part of the Elinor, as it always is when this story plays out in real life. You see that Jane wanted to tell the story of how a Marianne became an Elinor and was happy, but in the end even she could not make it convincing, and she had to gloss over the ending in a single chapter, a happily-ever-after tying up of loose ends that rings entirely false.

If she really loved him, then surely the real story here is not Willoughby-Marianne, but rather Marianne-Colonel Brandon. The fact that M-CB is almost a postscript at the end tells the truth about what's going on, I think.

Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
jeniwren
Member
Member # 2002

 - posted      Profile for jeniwren   Email jeniwren         Edit/Delete Post 
My reading of it is that the point was that Mariane chose the one who treated her well and was devoted to her over pure emotion. How she felt about him is somewhat irrelevant. It is clear, I think, that she at least liked Brandon. And it's clear too, I think, that Brandon understood Mariane and accepted that she would probably never feel for him what she felt for Willoughby. In that way, it could be said they both compromised their highest ideals for marriage, but found something acceptably comfortable. I don't think it could be reasonably assumed that Mariane settled simply for money.

It's pretty clear that Jane Austen did not think highly of marrying purely for better circumstances, as illustrated most starkly by her portrayal of Charlotte Lucas.

So if you're a pure romantic, you could say that Mariane's choice was tragic, but at worst, she at least made a better choice that Charlotte. [Smile]

Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
katharina
Member
Member # 827

 - posted      Profile for katharina   Email katharina         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
I see it as the eternal archetype of the Elinor (perhaps even Jane's internal Elinor) telling the eternal archetype of the Marianne "just be like me and you'll be happy" only it's a terrible mistake, fallacy, and misunderstanding on the part of the Elinor, as it always is when this story plays out in real life.
I think your own experiences are blinding to the other possibilities in the story.

In any life, there is more than one story to be told. Not every love story needs to be about the love of someone's life. I suspect the really exciting love stories often are not. There is not much angst and drama in "they met, made each other happy, and read poems by the lake." A good story needs conflict, but a good relationship doesn't necessarily.

Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tatiana
Member
Member # 6776

 - posted      Profile for Tatiana   Email Tatiana         Edit/Delete Post 
I love this discussion. To me this discussion is one facet of the same central idea that we have talked about in other ways before.

Remember when I was so horrified that you said if you were Mary you'd have wanted your son Jesus to grow up to be a normal carpenter, marry, have kids, and be happy, and that you would not have wanted him to be the Christ? Does that mean Mary would have been denied the blessings of the atonement because she tragically, of all people, refused to accept the truth about who her son was? That she persisted in seeing her son's life as a tragedy instead of an eternal triumph?

A vastly different scale, but the same idea to me. I really think that would make a great book, come to think of it. I wish I were a good enough writer to write it.

Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tristan
Member
Member # 1670

 - posted      Profile for Tristan   Email Tristan         Edit/Delete Post 
*Bump*

Has this movie been shown in the US yet? I was searching for the Hatracker's opinions, and this was the only thread I found.

I've seen it, and overall I was pleased. I think they did a good job of fitting the story into movie format without cutting anything essential. Keira Knightly WAS prettier than the actress portraying Jane (at least according to modern -- that is, my -- standards; I can well imagine that the opposite would be considered true in the 18th century, and in any case I don't care about that) and her mouth was no more annoying than usual. I did not like the crying scene, though. It felt as if it were played for cheap laughs rather than drama.

It think this movie visualised the difference between the the social circles of the Bennetts and Darcy/Bingley more strongly than the mini-series. Especially the first ball came across as a LOT more rustic and farmerish than my (admitedly vague) recollections of the elevated style of the mini-series. I'm not saying they were wrong to do this, but it was a little jarring.

Bingley seemed a little (too) immature, and Mr. Bennett a little slovenly; I liked this Mr. Colin better than the the guy in the mini-series, but Mary was definitely too pretty in the movie. I hesitate to compare Darcys, but Mr. Spooks (that's where I recognise him from) did a good job. The scenery was marvelous and I want Mr. Darcy's house. And if no one will give me that, I'd be content with the humble abode of the Bennetts.

Posts: 896 | Registered: Feb 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
calaban
Member
Member # 2516

 - posted      Profile for calaban   Email calaban         Edit/Delete Post 
It has been showing in the US for a while. Considering my love for the miniseries, and the trepidation I felt at the prospect of a poorly made rendition of such a classic, I was pleasantly suprised by the film.

The performance of Firth in the miniseries left me doubting that anyone could play Darcy ever again. However, I completely enjoyed Macfadyen in the role. He, along with all the characters, showed more emotion than I expect many of the time period dared. It could be considered a flaw, but I enjoyed it. Depite being less than suited to my perception of Elizabeth, Knightly held her own. Thankfully this prevented me from having Pirates of the Carribean flashbacks and allowed me to see the film as its own production without judging it by the miniseries too heavily.

It is unfortunate that the length of a feature film is such that it prevents the development of certain characters that enrich the story in the miniseries. But the core story is so strong that the omissions are handled well.

I thought the film was spectacularly romantic. I have always loved the misty countryside and stormy nature of England. I especially enjoyed the bridge scene as the sun rises.

Posts: 686 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Farmgirl
Member
Member # 5567

 - posted      Profile for Farmgirl   Email Farmgirl         Edit/Delete Post 
Hmmm...

I thought I had posted in this thread (or maybe another one on the same topic) about this.

We watched P&P as a family at the theatre in December. Absolutely loved it.

quote:
I want Mr. Darcy's house
Forget the house, Tristan. I want Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy himself! Matt Macfadyen was wonderful in this role.

FG

Posts: 9538 | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Bob the Lawyer
Member
Member # 3278

 - posted      Profile for Bob the Lawyer   Email Bob the Lawyer         Edit/Delete Post 
I'm beginning to think that I'm the only person in the world who hated this movie.
Posts: 3243 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Teshi
Member
Member # 5024

 - posted      Profile for Teshi   Email Teshi         Edit/Delete Post 
Do you actually hate the movie or did you hate the story?

Also: You may be one of the few people who would hate it who actually went to see it, which is pretty commendable.

Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Bob the Lawyer
Member
Member # 3278

 - posted      Profile for Bob the Lawyer   Email Bob the Lawyer         Edit/Delete Post 
I love the story, I just feel that this was a terrible telling that was both acted and directed poorly, with unfortunate decisions made in the rewrites.
Posts: 3243 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Teshi
Member
Member # 5024

 - posted      Profile for Teshi   Email Teshi         Edit/Delete Post 
Ah, then I forgive you and the horse you rode in on.

I haven't actually seen this movie.

Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
martha
Member
Member # 141

 - posted      Profile for martha           Edit/Delete Post 
I think it would be hard to make a Jane Austen movie I wouldn't enjoy to some degree. It's all very well to read the books, but seeing the expressions on actors' faces as they deliver the punny or insinuous or loaded lines is just delicious.

I was impressed with a different take on social (read: financial) status in this movie. In the miniseries and the other movie, the Bennets live very comfortably in their grand house, though it might not be as grand as their neighbors'. In this new movie, their house is rustically crumbling (peeling paint in every room) and iirc the girls do some amount of housework (cooking). So that added to the urgency of finding them all well-to-do husbands.

Really the only thing I actively disliked about the movie was the very last scene, on his veranda. ("Mrs Darcy"?!? ugh.) There were other moments when it was clear the director had taken advantage of his (her?) artistic licence, moments that made it a movie "based on the novel by Jane Austen." But none of these really bothered me except that very last sappy scene.

Posts: 1785 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
oolung
Member
Member # 8995

 - posted      Profile for oolung   Email oolung         Edit/Delete Post 
Don't throw tomatoes at me, but I think in a way I like the 'new' Mr Darcy better than Colin Firth. But that's probably because I've seen Firth in so many movies that he became too familiar [Smile] The new one, though, suited this movie brilliantly. As did Keira Knightley (except for a few moments). The important thing is to remember that the movie is so much shorter than the mini series so it simply couldn't be as faithful to the original. So they simply did it their own way. And it did turn out great. The feel of the movie is much more... I don't know: romantic and moody, while at the same time it's still funny. So I treat it more or less like the Lotr movie: it's great, as was the book, but the two are slightly not the same thing [Smile]

I read one review which put me off: the reviewer was clearly surprised that the movie was funny. Either he hasn't read the book, or he didn't understand it. He completely missed the point that the original story WAS FUNNY as well, and it was MEANT to be.

As for other Austen movies: anyone's seen the dreadful "Mansfield Park" movie? It would've been soooo much better if only the director hadn't thought it would be a good idea to insert some "contemporary issues" <sigh>

Posts: 218 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Megan
Member
Member # 5290

 - posted      Profile for Megan           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Don't throw tomatoes at me, but I think in a way I like the 'new' Mr Darcy better than Colin Firth.
*throws tomatoes*

Seriously, I haven't actually seen the new one, although I suppose when it comes out on DVD, I'll rent it (so that I'll have the right to mock it, of course).

I've seen Mansfield Park; yeah, it was bad. It's not my favorite of her books, either, but the movie was awful.

Persuasion, however, was marvelous.

Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Narnia
Member
Member # 1071

 - posted      Profile for Narnia           Edit/Delete Post 
Mansfield Park was bad because it was a completely different story that happened to have a character called "Fanny Price" who was nothing like Austen's Fanny Price...and they tried to pass it off as Austen's Mansfield Park. I really love that book and the movie was ridiculous.

The new P&P is delightful. I love both versions (BBC and the new) for many different reasons. The new one has a little more romantic pay off (even without the kissy scene at the end) which is nice, though not especially true to Austen's style. [Smile] I really liked it. Enough to see it 3 times in the theaters.

Here's a thread I started a while back that more fully gives my opinion on the subject. [Smile]

Posts: 6415 | Registered: Jul 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Bella Bee
Member
Member # 7027

 - posted      Profile for Bella Bee   Email Bella Bee         Edit/Delete Post 
So did they change the ending of the American version after all? I had heard rumours that they might.

In the British version there is no kiss between Elizabeth and Darcy - they only embrace, and then it ends at the moment she gets permission from her father for them to marry.

Did they add a new sappy ending?

Posts: 1528 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Taalcon
Member
Member # 839

 - posted      Profile for Taalcon   Email Taalcon         Edit/Delete Post 
I just watched the entire A&E miniseries yesterday. Awesome. Although Collins and Mrs. Bennett both made me want to hurl objects at the screen every time they were speaking.

And I was reminded that Mr. Bennett is still a personal hero of mine.

Posts: 2689 | Registered: Apr 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Megan
Member
Member # 5290

 - posted      Profile for Megan           Edit/Delete Post 
Of course! That's the reaction those characters are supposed to inspire! [Big Grin]
Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Teshi
Member
Member # 5024

 - posted      Profile for Teshi   Email Teshi         Edit/Delete Post 
Mr. Bennett is your hero? He's a large part of the problem!
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Narnia
Member
Member # 1071

 - posted      Profile for Narnia           Edit/Delete Post 
Mrs. Bennett is really terrible in the BBC version. So over the top and melodramatic, I didn't like her at all.

Bella Bee, yes, they did leave the ending in the US version of the film. It shows Elizabeth and Darcy on Darcy's huge front porch at night and there's a cute and romantic albeit pointless kissy scene. [Smile] I heard that it pissed off British test audiences, so they yanked it from the UK showing.

Posts: 6415 | Registered: Jul 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Megan
Member
Member # 5290

 - posted      Profile for Megan           Edit/Delete Post 
Oh, I loved Mrs. Bennet in the BBC version! I liked the over-the-top-ness and the melodrama, because I thought that reflected how she was in the book. [Big Grin]
Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Narnia
Member
Member # 1071

 - posted      Profile for Narnia           Edit/Delete Post 
But see, you haven't seen the new one yet. I think the 2005 Mrs. Bennett gets the annoying thing across while still not sounding like fingernails on a chalkboard. [Wink]
Posts: 6415 | Registered: Jul 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Megan
Member
Member # 5290

 - posted      Profile for Megan           Edit/Delete Post 
Yes...but to see the new one, I'd have to see Keira Knightley as Elizabeth. The very thought of that makes me twitch. That's why I haven't seen it yet.

Once it comes out on DVD, I'll sit down and watch it in the privacy of my own living room, where I can mock the bad parts and enjoy the good parts in peace.

Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Narnia
Member
Member # 1071

 - posted      Profile for Narnia           Edit/Delete Post 
[Smile] I know what you mean. I will venture a prediction that you'll enjoy it in spite of yourself. [Big Grin] Let me know when you get around to seeing it, I'd love to hear what you think of it.
Posts: 6415 | Registered: Jul 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Megan
Member
Member # 5290

 - posted      Profile for Megan           Edit/Delete Post 
Ok. [Smile]

(I probably will enjoy it; it's just the one thing that stopped me from seeing it in theaters...but Elizabeth is a biiig thing.)

Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Bob the Lawyer
Member
Member # 3278

 - posted      Profile for Bob the Lawyer   Email Bob the Lawyer         Edit/Delete Post 
The movie actually works quite well as a silly romantic comedy, Megan (although not as well as the two versions that set out to be silly romantic comedies). So you might well enjoy it on that level. As a good rendition of the book, not so hot. It's an important distinction that matters more to some people than others [Smile]
Posts: 3243 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Narnia
Member
Member # 1071

 - posted      Profile for Narnia           Edit/Delete Post 
I disagree Bob. I reread the book about a week before I saw the movie and the script was very....verbatim. Not as verbatim as BBC, but they didn't have 6 hours to work with.

What I loved about this particular version was the realism in their surroundings. A family with a farm estate and no other source of income would NOT have a house that looked like the Bennett's house in the BBC version. They toned it down a bit which made Netherfield, Rosings Park, and Pemberly look like the huge estates they are in comparison. They did the same thing with the clothing, props, and the first town ball. It was much more realistic in my opinion. They did combine several events and shorten others, but that has to happen for a 2 hour movie.

Austen purists get irked at the added romanticism (it's very romantic, even without the kissy ending), but I don't. Having just reread the book, I can totally see Darcy acting like that, even though the way they brought them together in the movie wasn't the same. Darcy does have a 'speech' (which he did have in the book, we just didn't know what he said) and it is such that we are made light-headed. [Smile] I'm ok with them doing that because I think P&P is the most romantic of Austen's books and should look like that on film.

However, I really love the BBC version also and for completely different reasons. [Smile] I don't think we can have too many versions if they're all as well done as these two are.

In my opinion of course.

Posts: 6415 | Registered: Jul 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Teshi
Member
Member # 5024

 - posted      Profile for Teshi   Email Teshi         Edit/Delete Post 
Mrs Bennett, IMO, is supposed to be extremely silly and extremely embarrassing.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
katharina
Member
Member # 827

 - posted      Profile for katharina   Email katharina         Edit/Delete Post 
Narnia, I agree with you completely. I loved the movie, and I wasn't expecting to. There's a place for both versions.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Fyfe
Member
Member # 937

 - posted      Profile for Fyfe   Email Fyfe         Edit/Delete Post 
I enjoyed it--and yes, I liked McFayden better than Colin Firth but that's because I don't like Colin Firth in almost anything--but it seemed to me that the film the director really wanted to make was Wuthering Heights. Much rain over English countryside and windy moors.

Jen

P.S. On a tangentially related note, thank you, Tatiana, for recommending Northanger Abbey. I got it from the library today and am about halfway through, and enjoying it immensely. Much better than Emma. I never liked that book.

Posts: 910 | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Amilia
Member
Member # 8912

 - posted      Profile for Amilia   Email Amilia         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Persuasion, however, was marvelous.
I second this. Persuasion is my personal favorite Austen book; the movie is also very good.

I have not yet seen the new movie, so I cannot comment. Loved the BBC/A&E miniseries; we have held family reunions specifically to watch this movie. Harking back to some of the comments earlier on the thread (re: men not liking Austen) . . . one of my uncles used to make fun of all of us sitting around watching P&P. Until one day, I don't remember why, he decided to actually watch it. Instant fan. All of his sisters got a copy of the movie for Christmas from him that year, and after that he would join his wife in the TV room during the P&P reunions.

Posts: 364 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Tatiana
Member
Member # 6776

 - posted      Profile for Tatiana   Email Tatiana         Edit/Delete Post 
Glad you liked it, Jen! [Smile] Her writing is not as polished, but I liked the people a lot. And Henry Tilney is quite swoonfully nice. Jane says some very funny things, and overall it's a fun book to read.

The allusion to Catherine playing "base ball" is the first mention of that game that we have. I read that somewhere. <laughs>

Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
oolung
Member
Member # 8995

 - posted      Profile for oolung   Email oolung         Edit/Delete Post 
I thought they did the 'poor family' part a bit over the top (but that may be because I got used to bbc version so much). Also I think the group scenes were brilliant, so full of life and energy it almost felt as if I were there. And I very much liked the new Mr Collins: he was still preposterous without being unbelievable. Great job!
Narnia, I agree with your opinion [Smile]
One thing I don't understand, though: why did Mary got to be prettier than Lydia and Kitty?!?! [Smile]

As for the male audience: I think it's part of Austen genius that (in spite of her books being of a rather girlish type) so many men enjoy hem so much. Because it's not all about romance: there's so much of witty observations!

the Mansfield Park movie: I could accept making Fanny a mixture of the book character and jane Austen herself, but adding all the stuff about slaves and why the older brother was such a mess was just completely out of tune with the meaning of the story. Waste of screen time.

Posts: 218 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Bob the Lawyer
Member
Member # 3278

 - posted      Profile for Bob the Lawyer   Email Bob the Lawyer         Edit/Delete Post 
I think I'm just going to resign myself to the fact that I'm the only person who thinks Keira Knightley is a terrible actor. I felt there was no truth in her role, there was no nuance. And as for unnecessary additions, I'm thinking specifically of the ending and the rediculous scene where Madame de Bourgh comes to the Bennet house in the middle of the night. Both of which added nothing to the movie. Not to mention the good 15 minutes of closeups on Keira's face, Keira walking, or Keira spinning. Some people can get away with that, but Keira has no charisma on camera (as far as I'm concerned) and these scenes were boring and, again, added very little to the film.

I just keep coming back to the fact that it's a pretty good movie because the source material is so good. It is not a pretty good movie because it was well performed or directed.

Edit: Or maybe I just have an irrational dislike of Keira Knightley that I can't get past. That could be possible. Everyone has someone.

Posts: 3243 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Megan
Member
Member # 5290

 - posted      Profile for Megan           Edit/Delete Post 
No, you're not the only one. Though I haven't seen P&P yet, I haven't liked her in anything else I've seen her in. I've liked things in spite of her, but I agree with you: I don't think she's a good actress.
Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Bella Bee
Member
Member # 7027

 - posted      Profile for Bella Bee   Email Bella Bee         Edit/Delete Post 
I found her less annoying in this movie because she wasn't doing that weird thing with her lips as much.
But yes, I thought that they could have found someone better for Lizzie.

Still, she's up for an Oscar, so her performance must have been good. [Wink]

Posts: 1528 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Megan
Member
Member # 5290

 - posted      Profile for Megan           Edit/Delete Post 
Unfortunately, those two things are not always necessarily linked. [Big Grin]

Seriously, sometimes the Oscars really do involve completely inexplicable choices for awards.

Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   

   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2