Pride and Prejudice

I'm astonished that this edition has received the praise that is has. It isn't a bad movie, but it is not as good as many of the reviews suggest. As some people have pointed out, the movie was clearly made with people who have never read the book nor seen the definitive BBC production. We went trying as hard as possible not to compare the two, but, of course, the movie falls far, far short. Inevitable, of course, as the Jennifer Ehle, Colin Firth drama is just so, so good. The first thing we did after seeing the movie was to immediately watch the DVD again -- and so understand just how much the movie failed.
It does have some good points, but let's start with the bad: casting. Donald Sutherland as Mr. Bennett??!! Give us a break! Sutherland is a good actor, but this isn't his part. Does the character change his name to 'Gordon'? The movie begins with Donald looking like something out of a wild west movie and desperately trying not to sound like he couldn't quite do a British accent, let alone an upper class, eighteenth century one. As the movie progresses Sutherland's role is far more suited to Mr. Hurst, complete with ever present glass of wine and slurred lines, than to Mr. Bennett, to the point that you wonder if he was given the wrong acting directions. Yes, he comes across as kind and caring, but not educated or sharply intelligent. Almost a movie killer.
Unfortunately, the list goes on. Keira Knightley is the perfect Jane Bennett, so why on earth miscast her as Elizabeth? So with the two leading Bennett roles so horribly wrong, the movie was more than a little silly.
Having said that, while his performance is markedly different from the brilliant Colin Firth, Matthew MacFadyen does an excellent job. The directing is poor -- the silly way he falls instantly in love at the first glance is too shallow and hollywood to be good -- but he's innocent, while at the same time being a true Darcy. Excellent stuff. Simon Woods does a great job as Mr. Bingley, and Brenda Blethyn is good as Mrs. Bennett, although, again she will be compared to the definitive.
The story is necessarily chopped to fit into the time, but it is also poorly reconstructed. Mr. Wickham has at most 3 minutes on screen, despite the importance of the character in defining how Elizabeth and Darcy are supposed to feel about each other -- very poorly produced.
Finally, however, there is the photography and the locations. These are excellent and, I suspect, far more authentic than the BBC production with a much more earthy, unpolished feel than no doubt was the case in the late 1700s.
Sadly, the movie comes across as a made for America, Hollywood fudge on what it could have been. Knightley is of course one of the best young actresses around and although she should have played Jane, her performance is still excellent. She just can't pull of the dazzlingly intelligent, sharp witted character she is supposed to.
So, all in all, a movie worth seeing, but only if you've never seen the BBC production and only if you don't care whether or not it follows the book. It seems thrown together as a production and perhaps should be left to be viewed on a DVD rather than the big screen. But, if that's the case, get the BBC production at Amazon instead. You'll never regret it.

Tags: Pride and Prejudice; Movie