Austen, Meet Bronte (Pride & Prejudice [2005] (DVD))

Member Name: venice105

Product:	Pride & Prejudice [2005] (DVD)
Date:	14/10/06 (241 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: Proves there is always room for another Austen adaptation

Disadvantages: Not as thrilling as it should be, no wet breeches!

When I first heard they were producing another version of Pride & Prejudice, starring Keira Knightley, I must admit I had mixed feelings. I didn't see the point, as for me the BBC's 1995 version had put such a memorable stamp on it. It received fairly universal praise at the box office, however, which I admit did peak my curiosity. I had forgotten about it until this past weekend, when a friend and I rented it out to watch on a "girlie night".

For the uninitiated, Pride & Prejudice is based on the novel by Jane Austen, and tells the story of the Bennett family. The arrival of two wealthy young men in their neighbourhood causes much social and romantic upheaval, what with the Bennetts having five young daughters of marriageable age.

The film, as mentioned, stars Keira Knightley in the lead role of Elizabeth Bennett, with Matthew MacFayden (of BBC series Spooks) as Mr. Darcy. From the opening scenes it would seem that the director, Joe Wright, was intent on wiping out comparisons where possible by using a completely different style to the BBC version. The Bennett household is portrayed as chaotic and unkempt, and unquestionably rural. In case there were any question of this he even has shots of pigs wandering around the house (oddly mirrored in a recent viewing of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake!). Not to worry, though, the film doesn't get carried away to the extent of that rural backwoods drama! It is unquestionably more earthy and less glossy than the BBC version, which is possibly a more accurate portrait of the period than the BBC version.

Keira Knightley is actually the perfect age for the role, her girlishness still comes to the surface from time to time, which adds a lightness to her version of Elizabeth. I thought the female casting was more accurate than the BBC version, the actress playing her elder sister, Jane (Rosamund Pike) is more traditionally beautiful than Knightley, which is true to the book. Knightley is so thin she sometimes resembles an insect with her head too big for her body, to me she is quite awkward looking at times. Perhaps they heightened this with wardrobe to emphasise the character, her fringe is always in her face and her general appearance is quite unpolished. This does make the film feel more realistic, the Bennett sisters were country girls, not society ladies, after all.

From time to time, however, these efforts at realism overshadow the drama onscreen. For instance, the key scene of the first dance where Bingley and Darcy are introduced lacked punch. The first barbed exchanges between Mr.Darcy and Elizabeth are at times barely audible over the din of the party. This, for me was pretty detrimental. The spark between the two characters is crucial, and it is sorely missing from the beginning. Darcy's introduction as quite an unpleasant character is sadly overshadowed by the surrounding hub, and the setup for the continuing conflict between the two characters is virtually nonexistant.

This isn't helped, either, by the director taking liberties with the book. In this version, Elizabeth actually approaches Darcy and asks for a dance! The horror! (To anyone unfamiliar, in the book the initial rejection of Elizabeth as a suitable dance partner is crucial as she is put forth to Darcy, and he declines, therefore rejecting and humiliating her in front of others). In this version, she asks him casually and has a small giggle about his brushing her off. The director attempts to show her feeling rejected later on, but has effectively destroyed the emotional impact by messing around with Austen's superb ability at portraying social intricacies. Oh dear.

The film is of course going to have edited much of the book out to be a feature length. In an ideal world it would be a mini-series, as the subplots in this book do lend much of the character and humour. Judi Dench is wasted as Lady Catherine DeBourgh, lending what she can in her two short scenes. The character of the toady cousin Mr. Collins, who sets his sites on Elizabeth, is also less effective here. The entire Wickham storyline is skimmed over, and so lacks the enlightening effect on Darcy's character which it had in the book and BBC version.

Brenda Blethyn (Secrets&Lies, Little Voice) somehow finds a new nuance of batty - impressive as she has managed this in everything she has done. Her courseness is quite robust, the first we've ever seen a belching, pished Mrs. Bennett! Donald Sutherland, as Mr. Bennett, is a fairly bland presence, perhaps because his wife is not quite as nagging in this version. Elizabeth's four sisters really have very little presence, and her friendship with Charlotte is less present, taking away the element of Lizzy's possible future as an old maid or marrying for convenience.

It does have style, however, and while this doesn't make up for substance, it does make it pleasant to watch. It is filmed beautifully, the landscapes are very dramatic and striking. This is where artistic license again comes into play. In one scene Elizabeth stands atop a plunging cliff, and the feeling of being in Austen's world seems quite faint. I have no recollection of Lizzy on a cliff, she's far too sensible for that! And the jagged landscape shots are almost gothic - this is where it began to remind me a bit more of Cathy and Heathcliff than Elizabeth and Darcy.

The key scene where Darcy declares his love for Elizabeth is shot at night in candlelight, giving it an intimate feel. I believe in the book it was tea-time, so arguably it may have been dark, but the darkness in this scene is shown as an inky, midnight-type darkness from the window which Elizabeth stands beside. It does stand out as unusual for Austen's time, and more befitting of the Brontes' dark romances (Wuthering Heights, Jane Eyre, etc.). In this version, Lady De Bourgh also visits Lizzy in the wee small hours, which I for one found implausible in the context of Austen.

I would go so far as to say if watching this film with the volume turned down, you'd be forgiven for thinking it was a Bronte tale. When Darcy appears through the mists of the morning dawn, it is as if Heathcliff's ghost is stalking Elizabeth. Austen purists would argue this sort of moody, gothic atmosphere has no place in a Pride and Prejudice adaptation. I am undecided - I think this film is, if nothing else, proof of how difficult Austen can be to adapt successfully, and perhaps the director was trying to give it a bit of oomph lost in the editing of key plot strands. It is sumptuous and lovely to look at, but it could have been much more cohesive.

For me, Mr.Darcy wasn't given enough screen time to establish much of a presence. He's quite fanciable (or as my friend commented - "ding dong!"), and MacFayden does have his moments. He seems more of a moody schoolboy than Colin Firth's wounded soul version of Darcy, however. Plus he doesn't come out of a lake in his white shirt and breeches, so let's face it he was pretty much doomed to pale in comparison! His chemistry with Elizabeth is there, but not expanded on nearly enough to raise the dramatic stakes to the dizzying heights of the BBC version.

Their love -hate relationship is muted in comparison; he never seems to truly rankle her the way the character is meant to. The scenes between them where Elizabeth realises she has been hasty in her judgement of him do posess great awkwardness and charm. It is a shame there weren't more scenes between the two, for instance the scene where Darcy delivers a letter responding to her refusal of him is a complete hash. In the book they meet in the woods and have another memorably uncomfortable encounter. In this version he appears like a ghost in her bedroom at night, she sees his image behind her in the window and when she turns he is gone. Another missed opportunity to show the characters the audience wants most to see together - perhaps it was an effort to heighten the suspense, but for me, another misstep.

I've done an awful lot of moaning and grumbling, haven't I? Apologies, but this was one of my early favourite books, obviously I bring much expectation to any film version of it. I actually did enjoy this film generally, there are far worse films about and I would happily watch it again. The acting is quite good. Knightley is slowly growing on me, despite her propensity for pouting at any given opportunity. Her Lizzy possesses less of the wit and self-assuredness displayed in other versions; she comes across as more of a cheeky schoolgirl. Which it could well be argued she is, given her young age. Her characterisation is heartfelt, however, and I do feel the actors were hindered by the film itself. They are given much less to do with the amount of editing, it is as simple as that.

The cinematography is simply gorgeous, so much so it is hard to begrudge the fact that much of it seems out of keeping with the gentler, pastoral images more naturally associated with Austen. Rolling, green hills and manicured gardens are replaced with ominous landscapes and craggy clifftops. Darcy's hair is always a mess, as is Lizzy's. It's all a bit rough around the edges, which does lend it a modern sauciness. In the scene where Elizabeth first visits Darcy's mansion, she wanders around a room full of naked sculptures, clearly ogling them before settling on the bust of Darcy. In the book and other versions, the scene involves paintings, not sculptures. It is all much more touchable and earthy than we are used to seeing in Austen.

As a film, Pride and Prejudice is stylishly done and pleasant to watch. It is paced well, and unfolds easily despite the missing bits. For me, it lacked the intensity and prolonged suspense of the central romance that drives the story. If judging it for faithfulness to Austen, it is flawed to say the least. However, it brings some new ideas that modernise it for a younger audience and may help get rid of the fusty image Austen holds for some. I would still choose the BBC version over this one any day, but for a quick fix this is certainly an enjoyable, if less filling alternative.

*******this is a film only review******************

This film runs at 127 minutes and has a U rating

It is an affordable £5.97 on Amazon



Cast:

Keira Knightley .... Elizabeth 'Lizzie' Bennet
Talulah Riley .... Mary Bennet
Rosamund Pike .... Jane Bennet
Jena Malone .... Lydia Bennet
Carey Mulligan .... Kitty Bennet
Donald Sutherland .... Mr. Bennet
Brenda Blethyn .... Mrs. Bennet
Claudie Blakley .... Charlotte Lucas
Sylvester Morand .... Sir William Lucas
Simon Woods .... Mr. Bingley
Kelly Reilly .... Caroline Bingley
Matthew Macfadyen .... Mr. Darcy
Pip Torrens .... Netherfield Butler
Janet Whiteside .... Mrs. Hill
Sinead Matthews .... Betsy







*******SPOILER ALERT!!!!***********
(But for some) an Important note: The British version does not include a kiss at the end, whereas the American one does! (this did incite much female yelling at telly on our viewing, I admit - "No snog?!" was shouted in unison.)

Summary: Watchable version of Austen's classic