Oops! This has been sitting in the draft folder for a month and a half!
Pride and Prejudice, 1995.
So... I may have, in the past, railed a little strongly against the 1995 mini-series. I know I'm in the minority here, and it's possibly because I'm biased for the 1980 version, but I don't swoon over this version. Which is weird, because I know I rewatched it often enough when it first came out. I think that when I hadn't seen it for a few years, some of the things that bother me about it grew larger in my mind and I kind of backed myself into a corner in discussing it until I reached the point where I thought the whole thing was garbage.
I approached this watching with an open mind and I have to admit that I don't dislike this version as much as I thought I did. The not good moments are far outweighed by the good stuff. In fact (glances around, lowering her voice to a whisper) I think it does some things better than the 1980 version.
Things that struck me the first time I watched the series was it was really beautiful, and that the general tone is bright and sparkling. It still is. The clothes, the settings, the scenery. Gorgeous. Also, the musical score is clever. The incidental music is sprightly. Although the music at the general assembly is a little painful to listen to, it points up the difference when you hear the musicians at the Netherfield ball. Nice little moments a aprinkled throughout, like the motif from Elizabeth's song playing while Darcy is thinking about her. There are moments when the ADR is wonky and therefore distracting, but the production values are generally fantastic.
My usual objection is in the casting, that, while the acting is mostly terrific, everybody is too. damn. old. The main characters seem to be in their mid- to late-thirties, but Elizabeth is only 20, Darcy is 28, Bingley is 22 and Caroline is younger. Mrs. Hurst is older than Caroline, but not in her 40s! Collins is supposed to be 25, not mid-40s. I recently did a quick Google-check, and it I'm really surprised to find out the Ehle, Firth, and Hawkins were only about 6 years older than their characters. Maybe it's because Mr. Bennet, Collins, and the Bingley sisters were way too old, or because Colin Firth has this ageless, mature quality, and it made everyone else seem older, too. What really heightens it is that Maria Lucas seems far too young, younger than Lydia, although she's certainly meant to be older. The DC says that they've cast them as their effective ages, and maybe there's something in that, but I thought it detracted from the story.
Jennifer Ehle is a playful, lively Elizabeth, but she's missing the sweetness. As the episodes go on, she is arch and fun, but then she turns cranky and it's jarring. I can quite easily imagine this Elizabeth affronting someone. Angry Lizzy is angry! Lizzy smash!
Girl can sing, though.
Colin Firth. What to say about him that won't get pitchfork-and-torch-bearing fans beating down my door? My main objection is that he's kind of hard to escape as Darcy nowadays - witness what you look at when you have Tea with Mr. Darcy at the Jane Austen Centre in Bath.
I think he's a terrific actor, but at the beginning he was meh for me. I may be a teeny-weeny bit spoiled by David Rintoul, but I think Firth's character is spoiled by the director's attempts to turn him into passionate Mr. Rochester and get him wet. A huge problem is that they cut most of the interaction at Netherfield for cheesecake shots. I think those conversations are really important for showing his true character, growing attraction, and especially, how he relates to Elizabeth before, as compared to after. The pivotal proposal scene has him too anxious instead of confident. I really like the Pemberley section, which I think they did better than the 1980 version. And yes, that mutual stare does induce a little heart-flutter. But where was the heart-felt pleasure when she finally accepts him? His face was more like "K."
Mrs. Bennet is so irritating, she's almost unwatchable. In fact, she reminds me a lot of Monty Python pepperpot.
There are a few lines where her voice seems normal, so it's a definite acting choice. I don't find myself laughing at her; I'm too busy cringing.
Th best word for Mr. Collins? Unctuous. His combo of humility and conceit comes across as creepy and oily -- so much so that even his hair seems greasy. He's supposed to be a comic character, and he does comic things, but as with Mrs. Bennet, I find myself cringing instead of laughing. However, his musical motif is also the bassoon, so that's well done.
I'm torn about Lady Catherine. She's pretty unpleasant, which is not the impression I get from the book, but this time the cringing is tinged with funny.
Jane is well done. She is really pretty (yes, prettier than Elizabeth), sweet, and mostly importantly, intelligent and not a push-over. Her relationship with Lizzy is great. I will say that the 1980, 1995, and 2005 versions all get her character right. And I like the fact that Harker's mother also played Jane Bennet, albeit in a version I will never get to see.
Lydia is good here, too. Beautifully, watchably obnoxious. I was really surprised to find out that Julia Sawalha is older than Jennifer Ehle, because she does seem to be a Hollywood 15, at least -- and looking that fact up led me down a YouTube rabbit hole of British teenage comedy-drama whereby teens are responsible for running a very professional newspaper. Because that's realistic. Nevermind. Lydia's good.
I also like Charlotte in this version. And the Gardiners. Mr. Bennet is fun, too. And Colonel Fitzwilliam is awesome.
Mr. Bingley is likeable, but a bit of a doofus. I'm not really sure why Jane is so attracted to him, and since we never get to see him hold his own with his sister at Netherfield, he just seems wishy-washy.
Bingley's sisters are not quite right; we never get to see how charming they can be. Instead they turn their super-snide powers on at the beginning and leave them at full power throughout.
Wickham is not as handsome as he should be, but is very charming. The scene after he marries Lydia and is trying to find out how much Elizabeth knows is well-acted. You can tell the wheels are turning in his mind. It's fun to watch.
As for the additional scenes... my first reaction to them, all those years ago, was: "What the...? Yeah, that's appropriate in a period film." This time, I just rolled my eyes. I get it; Davies wanted to sex up the story. I'm not completely opposed to them; in fact, I did like the bit with the bath -- no that bit*, but the part afterwards when he sees Elizabeth playing with the dog. I thought that was a nice touch. And other parts, where they are each remembering actions or things the other said, were also a good way of showing us that Elizabeth, for instance, is starting to think of Darcy differently. But I think the whole let's-get-Darcy-wet thing takes too much attention away from the story.
And unfortunately it leads to stuff like this.
What I do mind, and what fuels my ire when talking about this version, is giving away the surprise of Darcy finding Wickham and Lydia. That really, really bothered me, because at this point we should be with Elizabeth, wondering what is happening to Lydia and whether Darcy could ever love her after this. Leaving the audience in no suspense is not well done of the production. Davies did this in the recent version of Sense and Sensibility, too, by showing us that Willoughby was a baddie up front. It's bad story-telling. Grrr. PhysicsGirl smash!
Okay, more good things. The wedding, with the where-are-they-now recap, was nice (but the exposed cleavage made m think Lizzy would have been very cold). The invented dialogue that covers necessary exposition or conversations that Austen merely described is very natural. And it's very faithful to the book, except for the cutting of some kind of important dialogue.
So, eating my words a little bit. It's not as bad as I said. In fact, it has much to recommend it. Happy now?
*Okay, maybe a little that bit, too.
So... I may have, in the past, railed a little strongly against the 1995 mini-series. I know I'm in the minority here, and it's possibly because I'm biased for the 1980 version, but I don't swoon over this version. Which is weird, because I know I rewatched it often enough when it first came out. I think that when I hadn't seen it for a few years, some of the things that bother me about it grew larger in my mind and I kind of backed myself into a corner in discussing it until I reached the point where I thought the whole thing was garbage.
I approached this watching with an open mind and I have to admit that I don't dislike this version as much as I thought I did. The not good moments are far outweighed by the good stuff. In fact (glances around, lowering her voice to a whisper) I think it does some things better than the 1980 version.
Things that struck me the first time I watched the series was it was really beautiful, and that the general tone is bright and sparkling. It still is. The clothes, the settings, the scenery. Gorgeous. Also, the musical score is clever. The incidental music is sprightly. Although the music at the general assembly is a little painful to listen to, it points up the difference when you hear the musicians at the Netherfield ball. Nice little moments a aprinkled throughout, like the motif from Elizabeth's song playing while Darcy is thinking about her. There are moments when the ADR is wonky and therefore distracting, but the production values are generally fantastic.
My usual objection is in the casting, that, while the acting is mostly terrific, everybody is too. damn. old. The main characters seem to be in their mid- to late-thirties, but Elizabeth is only 20, Darcy is 28, Bingley is 22 and Caroline is younger. Mrs. Hurst is older than Caroline, but not in her 40s! Collins is supposed to be 25, not mid-40s. I recently did a quick Google-check, and it I'm really surprised to find out the Ehle, Firth, and Hawkins were only about 6 years older than their characters. Maybe it's because Mr. Bennet, Collins, and the Bingley sisters were way too old, or because Colin Firth has this ageless, mature quality, and it made everyone else seem older, too. What really heightens it is that Maria Lucas seems far too young, younger than Lydia, although she's certainly meant to be older. The DC says that they've cast them as their effective ages, and maybe there's something in that, but I thought it detracted from the story.
Jennifer Ehle is a playful, lively Elizabeth, but she's missing the sweetness. As the episodes go on, she is arch and fun, but then she turns cranky and it's jarring. I can quite easily imagine this Elizabeth affronting someone. Angry Lizzy is angry! Lizzy smash!
Girl can sing, though.
Colin Firth. What to say about him that won't get pitchfork-and-torch-bearing fans beating down my door? My main objection is that he's kind of hard to escape as Darcy nowadays - witness what you look at when you have Tea with Mr. Darcy at the Jane Austen Centre in Bath.
I think he's a terrific actor, but at the beginning he was meh for me. I may be a teeny-weeny bit spoiled by David Rintoul, but I think Firth's character is spoiled by the director's attempts to turn him into passionate Mr. Rochester and get him wet. A huge problem is that they cut most of the interaction at Netherfield for cheesecake shots. I think those conversations are really important for showing his true character, growing attraction, and especially, how he relates to Elizabeth before, as compared to after. The pivotal proposal scene has him too anxious instead of confident. I really like the Pemberley section, which I think they did better than the 1980 version. And yes, that mutual stare does induce a little heart-flutter. But where was the heart-felt pleasure when she finally accepts him? His face was more like "K."
Mrs. Bennet is so irritating, she's almost unwatchable. In fact, she reminds me a lot of Monty Python pepperpot.
There are a few lines where her voice seems normal, so it's a definite acting choice. I don't find myself laughing at her; I'm too busy cringing.
Th best word for Mr. Collins? Unctuous. His combo of humility and conceit comes across as creepy and oily -- so much so that even his hair seems greasy. He's supposed to be a comic character, and he does comic things, but as with Mrs. Bennet, I find myself cringing instead of laughing. However, his musical motif is also the bassoon, so that's well done.
I'm torn about Lady Catherine. She's pretty unpleasant, which is not the impression I get from the book, but this time the cringing is tinged with funny.
Jane is well done. She is really pretty (yes, prettier than Elizabeth), sweet, and mostly importantly, intelligent and not a push-over. Her relationship with Lizzy is great. I will say that the 1980, 1995, and 2005 versions all get her character right. And I like the fact that Harker's mother also played Jane Bennet, albeit in a version I will never get to see.
Lydia is good here, too. Beautifully, watchably obnoxious. I was really surprised to find out that Julia Sawalha is older than Jennifer Ehle, because she does seem to be a Hollywood 15, at least -- and looking that fact up led me down a YouTube rabbit hole of British teenage comedy-drama whereby teens are responsible for running a very professional newspaper. Because that's realistic. Nevermind. Lydia's good.
I also like Charlotte in this version. And the Gardiners. Mr. Bennet is fun, too. And Colonel Fitzwilliam is awesome.
Mr. Bingley is likeable, but a bit of a doofus. I'm not really sure why Jane is so attracted to him, and since we never get to see him hold his own with his sister at Netherfield, he just seems wishy-washy.
Bingley's sisters are not quite right; we never get to see how charming they can be. Instead they turn their super-snide powers on at the beginning and leave them at full power throughout.
Wickham is not as handsome as he should be, but is very charming. The scene after he marries Lydia and is trying to find out how much Elizabeth knows is well-acted. You can tell the wheels are turning in his mind. It's fun to watch.
As for the additional scenes... my first reaction to them, all those years ago, was: "What the...? Yeah, that's appropriate in a period film." This time, I just rolled my eyes. I get it; Davies wanted to sex up the story. I'm not completely opposed to them; in fact, I did like the bit with the bath -- no that bit*, but the part afterwards when he sees Elizabeth playing with the dog. I thought that was a nice touch. And other parts, where they are each remembering actions or things the other said, were also a good way of showing us that Elizabeth, for instance, is starting to think of Darcy differently. But I think the whole let's-get-Darcy-wet thing takes too much attention away from the story.
And unfortunately it leads to stuff like this.
What I do mind, and what fuels my ire when talking about this version, is giving away the surprise of Darcy finding Wickham and Lydia. That really, really bothered me, because at this point we should be with Elizabeth, wondering what is happening to Lydia and whether Darcy could ever love her after this. Leaving the audience in no suspense is not well done of the production. Davies did this in the recent version of Sense and Sensibility, too, by showing us that Willoughby was a baddie up front. It's bad story-telling. Grrr. PhysicsGirl smash!
Okay, more good things. The wedding, with the where-are-they-now recap, was nice (but the exposed cleavage made m think Lizzy would have been very cold). The invented dialogue that covers necessary exposition or conversations that Austen merely described is very natural. And it's very faithful to the book, except for the cutting of some kind of important dialogue.
So, eating my words a little bit. It's not as bad as I said. In fact, it has much to recommend it. Happy now?
*Okay, maybe a little that bit, too.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Now with less captcha! Speak pretty to me. I love comments, especially constructive criticism.