A good book-to-screen adaptation inspires new appreciation for the book it is based on.
A bad adaptation is unsatisfactory at best and enraging at worst.
My first experience with Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice was, as far as I can recall, a live stage production I saw with my family when I was ten. Exactly twelve months after that, I read the book for the first time. Since then, I have reread it three times (making four reads total), so I'm very familiar with the book.
However, although I vaguely knew about the raging debate on the 1995 mini series with Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle versus the 2005 movie with Matthew Macfadyen and Keira Knightley, I had never seen either until recently. (I would say I grew up on the 1995 version, but I realized when I sat down to watch it last month that I never actually watched the whole thing. I think I just watched the first two episodes and then picked out the scenes with Mr. Darcy in them after that.)
So, of course, I had to weigh in on the debate!
1995
Costumes, setting, and atmosphere: 10/10. No notes. They nailed it.
Casting: 9/10. Almost immaculate. I have no idea why, but I've always pictured Wickham as blond and somewhat short and stocky (and handsome, of course). Adrian Lukis is none of these things. (Please note: I'm not saying that Adrian Lukis is ugly. I'm just saying he doesn't look like Wickham to me.)
 |
| Image from cap-that.com |
Faithfulness to the book: 9.5/10. Mr. Collins does not come to Longbourn a second time in the book; he merely sends a letter about Lydia's situation (with that blood-boiling line about it being better if Lydia had died). Not sure why the mini series had him come in person. Also, there was more buildup to Mr. Bingley's proposal in the book; he visited once with Darcy and twice (?) by himself before proposing. And it pains me to say anything negative about the mini series, but I did find the ending to be somewhat unsatisfying. After rereading the book, I found that the ending was better, mostly due to the last chapter/epilogue.
 |
| Image from cap-that.com |
Random notes: While watching this, I realized something I had never considered before: how perfect Mr. Collins and Mary would be for each other, AND how Mr. Collins's prejudice towards beauty (see what I did there?) causes him to pursue Jane, and then Elizabeth, and totally ignore Mary, the least beautiful of the sisters. Also, Colin Firth does yearning so well!!! I've seen it referred to as his "creepy stare of love" and it delights me.
Conclusion: Average rating based on my arbitrary categories: 9.5/10. This version is almost absolutely perfect, and I already want to rewatch it.
2005
Costumes, setting, and atmosphere: 1/10. Felt more like an 18th century Little Women than a Regency Jane Austen adaptation. Their waists were too low for 1813, which at first I thought was confined to the Bennets as a choice to show that they're poor-ish, but then I noticed that Lady Catherine wore the same style of dress as Mrs. Bennet, so that theory went out the window along with any good opinion I had left of this movie.
 |
| What in the 1770s is that?! Image from cap-that.com |
Casting: 1/10. Mrs. Bennet wasn't annoying enough. Mr. Bennet's lack of enunciation exasperated me. And everyone looked too "modern"; this had a lot to do with the costumes and styling, but even apart from that, not one character looked or sounded the way I picture them looking or sounding from the book. Wickham, funnily enough, was probably the closest, although he still looked too "early 2000s".
Faithfulness to the book: 5/10. The movie version, of course, is starting out with the disadvantage of form right out of the gate: you simply can't do justice to Pride and Prejudice in two hours. They did a fairly good job combining events for what they had to work with. This version was very modernized, from the way the lines are given to the extras they added–like Charlotte's plain explanation of why she accepts Mr. Collins, which is less blunt and mostly exposition in the book, as opposed to dialogue. Darcy's first proposal to Elizabeth was also modernized.
Random notes: Why is it a movie adaptation thing to have loooooong moments of dramatically standing on a cliff in favor of actual storytelling? WHY DID THEY CHOOSE TO SPEND SO MUCH TIME ON BARE STATUE BUTTS INSTEAD OF STORY DEVELOPMENT!?!?!?
 |
| Images from cap-that.com |
Conclusion: Average rating based on my arbitrary categories: 2.3/10. The more modern dialogue makes the 2005 movie a good introduction to Pride and Prejudice (but since I still think you should read the book first, I don't see the point of the movie).
Comments
Post a Comment