With Pride or With Prejudice
March 31, 2009
By Haylee Landford
I feel the desire to compare with summarized effort, the two movies depicting the famous romance in Pride and Prejudice, by Jane Austen. I wonder how the newer 2005 version can stand next to the 1995 A&E production. I don't wish to show one in superiority to the other, or to deeply delve into minute details, but just to show a mere overview.
The comparison begins with the heroine and star, Elizabeth Bennett. I see beyond the curvacious features of one, versus the stickly figure of the other, and also beyond the composed maturity of one, versus the giggly smirks that often accompany the other. This new story line chose to give Elizabeth a complete desire for secrecy, while A&E more accurately depicts Lizzy quite confident in confiding most of the story with her sister, with a few exception. I feel that was lacking that Keira was not as open and friendly with her sister as the book directs.
Of course with all the characters and their interminglings, 300 minutes to develop them versus only 129 minutes can hardly promote comparison. I feel that of course the lengthier version shows us more feelings and connections of the characters. However, the shorter of the two also allows sufficient scenes to depict the most important and controversial developments of the characters. I was also surprised that 2005's movie had more accurate dialogue in many scenes, but only in the few scenes they actually followed the dialogue Jane Austen has given us.
To single out another of my favorite characters, we must discuss Mr. Collins. Six hours does allow the viewer to grasp more of the moronic awkwardness that is the clergyman. Since comedy is the essence of this character, I was a little disappointed that the newer version only made it comical in the sense that he is a very short man. No doubt to me, the longer A&E casting was more superbly done in giving us the eloquent nonsense and not the cumbersome stuttering of a "shorter" Mr. Collins.
The music stood out to me as quite a difference as well. Both being very uniquely and brilliantly composed, yet creating very different moods. The A&E version had many songs that were often paired with a particular character, and the main title itself being very fast and upbeat, as if you were on a hunting chase. Meanwhile the newer version provides a very elegant and moving piano melody that to me intensifies the romance quite substantially. The music portrays one as whimsical and joyful, and the other as romantic and full of feeling.
The novel pay particular attention to the scenery of the area, which is spanned quite well in both films. The setting of the story surrounds the most beautiful acreage of England, which is projected perfectly on screen. Pemberley itself lends distinction as the type of property that any man of fortune would be eager to purchase.
With Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle, the development and shifting of their relationship is much more apparent, although I was more satisfied with the affectionate tenderness of Keira Knightley and Matthew Macfayden. Especially in terms of the conversation that creates their engagement, the new misty scene captivates and delivers much more intimate satisfaction at their finally coming together, then the more tedious and unfeeling older version, despite it being more accurately dictated from the book. The chance encounter Lizzy has with Mr. Darcy at his estate, however, is far more enjoyable in the A&E version, showing much more of the change in Darcy's countenance, and Lizzy attentions to him, the 2005 film was somewhat rushed in this part and disappointing.
Joe Wright, in the 2005 film, earns the title of brilliance with his directing of the ball at Mr. Bingley's estate. It is my favorite scene, with the elegance of Bingley and Darcy being shown in such contrast to most of the Bennett family. He creates a legendary scene with Darcy and Elizabeth dancing in such an artistic way, and also with completely uncut camera movements constantly throughout the ball.
It is apparent the success of both films. The theater release of 2005 gained the attention of four Oscar nominations. It was rated on IMDb with 7.8 out of 10 stars. It gathered the attention of many other award venues. 1995 posed a very substantial version that won an Emmy, and outstars the other with 9.3 out of 10 on the same website. The bulk of the success thriving from A&E's classic is that is has quite masterly transpired the test of time as a favorite for every generation. Only time will allow us to see if the newer version has the same capacity.
I am quite excited that to fit our most delicate of schedules, a more economic version has been created for us to enjoy when we rarely have six hours to waste in the day. The book however, is the supreme telling of this most romantic of all tales. This is the only way that Elizabeth and Darcy become exactly who we want them to be.
The comparison begins with the heroine and star, Elizabeth Bennett. I see beyond the curvacious features of one, versus the stickly figure of the other, and also beyond the composed maturity of one, versus the giggly smirks that often accompany the other. This new story line chose to give Elizabeth a complete desire for secrecy, while A&E more accurately depicts Lizzy quite confident in confiding most of the story with her sister, with a few exception. I feel that was lacking that Keira was not as open and friendly with her sister as the book directs.
Of course with all the characters and their interminglings, 300 minutes to develop them versus only 129 minutes can hardly promote comparison. I feel that of course the lengthier version shows us more feelings and connections of the characters. However, the shorter of the two also allows sufficient scenes to depict the most important and controversial developments of the characters. I was also surprised that 2005's movie had more accurate dialogue in many scenes, but only in the few scenes they actually followed the dialogue Jane Austen has given us.
To single out another of my favorite characters, we must discuss Mr. Collins. Six hours does allow the viewer to grasp more of the moronic awkwardness that is the clergyman. Since comedy is the essence of this character, I was a little disappointed that the newer version only made it comical in the sense that he is a very short man. No doubt to me, the longer A&E casting was more superbly done in giving us the eloquent nonsense and not the cumbersome stuttering of a "shorter" Mr. Collins.
The music stood out to me as quite a difference as well. Both being very uniquely and brilliantly composed, yet creating very different moods. The A&E version had many songs that were often paired with a particular character, and the main title itself being very fast and upbeat, as if you were on a hunting chase. Meanwhile the newer version provides a very elegant and moving piano melody that to me intensifies the romance quite substantially. The music portrays one as whimsical and joyful, and the other as romantic and full of feeling.
The novel pay particular attention to the scenery of the area, which is spanned quite well in both films. The setting of the story surrounds the most beautiful acreage of England, which is projected perfectly on screen. Pemberley itself lends distinction as the type of property that any man of fortune would be eager to purchase.
With Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle, the development and shifting of their relationship is much more apparent, although I was more satisfied with the affectionate tenderness of Keira Knightley and Matthew Macfayden. Especially in terms of the conversation that creates their engagement, the new misty scene captivates and delivers much more intimate satisfaction at their finally coming together, then the more tedious and unfeeling older version, despite it being more accurately dictated from the book. The chance encounter Lizzy has with Mr. Darcy at his estate, however, is far more enjoyable in the A&E version, showing much more of the change in Darcy's countenance, and Lizzy attentions to him, the 2005 film was somewhat rushed in this part and disappointing.
Joe Wright, in the 2005 film, earns the title of brilliance with his directing of the ball at Mr. Bingley's estate. It is my favorite scene, with the elegance of Bingley and Darcy being shown in such contrast to most of the Bennett family. He creates a legendary scene with Darcy and Elizabeth dancing in such an artistic way, and also with completely uncut camera movements constantly throughout the ball.
It is apparent the success of both films. The theater release of 2005 gained the attention of four Oscar nominations. It was rated on IMDb with 7.8 out of 10 stars. It gathered the attention of many other award venues. 1995 posed a very substantial version that won an Emmy, and outstars the other with 9.3 out of 10 on the same website. The bulk of the success thriving from A&E's classic is that is has quite masterly transpired the test of time as a favorite for every generation. Only time will allow us to see if the newer version has the same capacity.
I am quite excited that to fit our most delicate of schedules, a more economic version has been created for us to enjoy when we rarely have six hours to waste in the day. The book however, is the supreme telling of this most romantic of all tales. This is the only way that Elizabeth and Darcy become exactly who we want them to be.
About the Author:
Haylee Landford has a degree of Literary Studies, with particular emphasis in Jane Austen's work. She also writes as a guest author for Land For Sale where you can find your Pemberley.
0 comments:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
