The Jane Austen Film & TV Club (P&P and More!)

[proserpina65]

Yeah, people may be like that but I don't read romance for the reality of it all! :)

I can definitely respect that.  I don't apply it to Jane Austen, but there are plenty of other novelists/genres where I feel the same.  :-)

[Crs97]

One of the local universities offered an evening community class on Jane Austen novels about twenty years ago, and I will always remember the professor's comment about Persuasion: if Anne had accepted him the first time when her family was so against it, she would be Lydia from P&P. An interesting perspective that might make her speech a little more palatable.

[editorgrrl]

One of the local universities offered an evening community class on Jane Austen novels about twenty years ago.

That is so cool!

[dusang]

One of the local universities offered an evening community class on Jane Austen novels about twenty years ago, and I will always remember the professor's comment about Persuasion: if Anne had accepted him the first time when her family was so against it, she would be Lydia from P&P. An interesting perspective that might make her speech a little more palatable.

 

Now that I disagree with -- Lydia didn't even ask permission, she ran away knowing she was doing something completely socially ruinous.  Also, I take great offence at the suggestion that either Anne or Wentworth bear any resemblance to Lydia or Wickham.  If anything, had Anne pursued her original engagement, she'd be closer to Fanny's mom from Mansfield Park.  Although, as Anne is more industrious, she'd probably have been happier than Mrs. Price, even if Wentworth didn't make all the money he did as a single man.

Edited April 20, 2015 by dusang

[Crs97]

The professor made many shocking statements that series (he compared Elinor to George Wickham!), but his analysis was something like this (if I remember correctly):  Anne's father would never have consented to their marriage.  In that time period family obligations were taken seriously.  If Anne had completely disregarded her family's disapproval and eloped (which she would have had to do, since her family was against the marriage) with Wentworth - a man who had nothing to recommend himself except his desire to better his situation through hard work, a sentiment which many say but don't necessarily mean - then she would have put her own happiness above her duty as the daughter of a baronet at the height of his prestige.  That is not in her character, but it is exactly what Lydia would do.  The fact that Wentworth did end up making money and becoming a well-admired person in society didn't make her original decision wrong, just sad.  The professor's main complaint about Persuasion was that Anne was too perfect for the time period.

 

That is so cool!

 

 

It really was!  I didn't agree with everything he said, but it was my first time to get a male perspective of her writing and he definitely made me think about her characters in different ways.  I don't know that I fully agree with this analysis of Anne, but it is thought-provoking.

Edited April 18, 2015 by Crs97

[dusang]

The professor made many shocking statements that series (he compared Elinor to George Wickham!), but his analysis was something like this (if I remember correctly):  Anne's father would never have consented to their marriage.  In that time period family obligations were taken seriously.  If Anne had completely disregarded her family's disapproval and eloped (which she would have had to do, since her family was against the marriage) with Wentworth - a man who had nothing to recommend himself except his desire to better his situation through hard work, a sentiment which many say but don't necessarily mean - then she would have put her own happiness above her duty as the daughter of a baronet at the height of his prestige.  That is not in her character, but it is exactly what Lydia would do.  The fact that Wentworth did end up making money and becoming a well-admired person in society didn't make her original decision wrong, just sad.  The professor's main complaint about Persuasion was that Anne was too perfect for the time period.

 

 

It really was!  I didn't agree with everything he said, but it was my first time to get a male perspective of her writing and he definitely made me think about her characters in different ways.  I don't know that I fully agree with this analysis of Anne, but it is thought-provoking.

 

Well, if you take Sir Walter's refusal as a given, then that is one interpretation.  However, the text states "Sir Walter, on being applied to, without actually withholding his consent, or saying it should never be, gave it all the negative of great astonishment, great coldness, great silence, and a professed resolution of doing nothing for his daughter. He thought it a very degrading alliance; and Lady Russell, though with more tempered and pardonable pride, received it as a most unfortunate one." and that the primary persuasion was that of Lady Russell rather than Sir Walter.  And since Sir Walter thought so little of Anne anyway, his threat of "doing nothing for his daughter" would be equally probable with any suitor -- except, perhaps, Mr. Elliot.

 

How on Earth did he make a connection between Elinor and Wickham?!  I can't see that at all.  I saw the Emma Thompson version of S&S long before I read the book, and although she was WAY too old to play Elinor, I will always see those characters as those actors.  I haven't watched the movie in a while so I don't exactly recall how they play Willoughby's confession to Elinor but in the book I hate that she has any sympathy for him.  In the entire Austen pantheon I think Willoughby is possibly the most villainous character and totally undeserving of any sympathy on any front.

 

I wish more of these films were on (Canadian) Netflix.  I'll have to go old school and hit up the local video store!!

[Crs97]

How on Earth did he make a connection between Elinor and Wickham?!  I can't see that at all.

 

 

Taxing my memory, but I think his argument was along these lines: By being so stoic that no one, including her own family, knew the depth of her affection for Edward, she essentially wore a mask.  In a closed society like they lived in, someone who could insinuate himself into their community by disguising his true nature could be downright dangerous - see Wickham.  He said he knew Elinor was a good literary role model, but he wondered if she really should have been celebrated for being able to hide her true self so successfully.  

 

Again, a different take that makes it fun, even if we don't agree with him.

[treeofdreams]

I just finished watching Sense and Sensibility.  Dan Stevens (Downton Abbey) as Edward Ferrars, definitely my favorite.  In fact I think I liked all the casting in this version the best.

[methodwriter85]

I'm really kind of surprised that the Pemberly Digital people didn't do an adaption of Sense and Sensibility. Their Little Women adaption is failing miserably.

 

Also, the less said about From Prada to Nada, the better. Although damn Nicholas D'Agosto is cute as hell.

 

Austenland is becoming a favorite little guilty pleasure of mine. JJ Feild was absolutely perfect as a Darcy-like character.

Edited June 28, 2015 by methodwriter85

[AstaCharles]

Watching the 1995 version again, I just love the actress who plays Lady Catherine. She can make me laugh and yet I also feel a bit sorry for her too.

ETA: I also love shot of Darcy looking miserable as he watches the dancing couples and there is a painting of a soldier with his horse in the background but with a prominent view of the Horse's ass right next to Darcy. Nice suggestive angle, directors.

Edited September 2, 2015 by AstaCharles

[kassa]

Have to speak up for my favorite version -- 1980!  David Rintoul will always be Darcy to me, and I think Elizabeth Garvie had fine eyes. She definitely had more of the kind of beauty that would grow on you, as Elizabeth's is supposed to.  Ehle really nails the charm and humor of Lizzie, but she's so sparkly the whole time it's hard to see any group of men at any time not thinking she was the most attractive girl at the ball.  

 

And Judy Parfitt as Lady Catherine de Burgh!

 

I enjoy the Ehle/Firth version, but Firth seemed too common to me.  I enjoy it in rewatching, because he's very charming, but not really imperious enough.  And the river scene annoyed me (though, similarly, I can enjoy it in rewatching because he's hot)   

 

Sadly the 1980 is more of a theater piece, lower production values, etc.  But it definitely cemented all the characters in my mind and I would love to see it shown occasionally.

[Luckylyn]

Whit Stillman is adapting Lady Susan into a film titled Love and Friendship. 

[AstaCharles]

Have to speak up for my favorite version -- 1980!

I'd like to check out that version, I watched a clip of the marriage proposal scene from the Laurence Olivier version and had to turn it off. It had a feeling of "screwball comedy ".

Edited September 3, 2015 by AstaCharles

[kassa]

Was it the Olivier version that had the women in hoop skirts?! 

 

That was my first introduction to P+P.  I remember coming into the livingroom at the scene where Lady Catherine is trying to squash any ideas Lizzie has of marrying into the family, and laughing and sitting and watching the rest of it.  Must have been 11 or 12.  A few years later read the book in school and they showed us the 1980 version.  

[coppersin]

IIRC, it's the Olivier version that's the only Austen film I haven't seen from beginning to end. I realized that TCM was showing a version I hadn't seen before so I turned it on even though it was almost done. Lady Catherine was saying something to Darcy along the lines of, "You were such a spoiled child - I'm glad you've grown out of it" and my enthusiasm immediately flatlined; I finished it but never bothered watching it again from the start.

 

Most of Austen's novels haven't been filmed enough for me to be picky, but luckily there are plenty of decent P&P choices. The Olivier version may have plenty of charm or humor, or maybe the first hour is nothing like the ending and I'm missing out, but I know myself well enough to know I'd spend the entire 90 minutes rolling my eyes at the inaccuracies.

[Crs97]

My personal opinion is that if you can make it through Keira Knightly's version, you can get through Olivier's take of it. They are equally offending IMO.

[WendyCR72]

My personal opinion is that if you can make it through Keira Knightly's version, you can get through Olivier's take of it. They are equally offending IMO.

 

Oh, you had to mention the Knightley atrocity. Pigs in the Bennet household? Seriously?! Maybe the aesthetics were nice, but pretty scenery - to me - didn't make up for the hatchet job of the story.

 

I think I'm glad to have missed the GWTW-styled Olivier version on principle alone. I have seen the 1980 version, which was very much play-like, and the 1995 version, which I adore. So if I ever need a P&P jones, I have that.

 

Speaking of "jones", I do/did like the modern imagining of P&P, a.k.a. Bridget Jones's Diary, complete with the genius of Colin Firth again playing Mr. (Mark) Darcy. We won't mention the hideous sequel - or the revived newspaper column (that the books were derived from) from a few years ago...

[Ruby25]

Blasphemy! I LOVE the Keira Knightley one- seen it a thousand times, could watch it any moment. One of my favorite movies of all time.

Edited September 10, 2015 by Ruby25

[methodwriter85]

Blasphemy! I LOVE the Keira Knightley one- seen it a thousand times, could watch it any moment. One of my favorite movies of all time.

And consider this- three of the five Bennett sisters have been nominated for Oscars in real life.

 

I love it, too. I liked they decided to take it into the 1790's so we could ignore the regency clothes and go with a more Earthy feel.

[AstaCharles]

Oh, you had to mention the Knightley atrocity. Pigs in the Bennet household? Seriously?! Maybe the aesthetics were nice, but pretty scenery - to me - didn't make up for the hatchet job of the story.

Just watched this version recently, and I like the leads and some of the cast. The rustic feel was hard to get to used to at first, but it didn't bother me too much.

There were two things that bugged me though:

Bingley. Why did they have to turn him into such a nincompoop?

Darcy's "she's tolerable.." scene. I didn't like how that was staged especially showing Elizabeth's hurt feelings. Felt a little " high school", like if you shot that scene in a modern setting it would be Elizabeth hiding under the bleachers peeking at star quarterback Darcy.

[methodwriter85]

We now have a Lizzie Bennett who fights zombies. This could be either really, really awesome, or really, really terrible.

 

 

I did love how they tried to ape the style of the usual Austen trailers at the beginning and then veered off into the crazy.

Edited October 22, 2015 by methodwriter85

[proserpina65]

Just watched this version recently, and I like the leads and some of the cast.

 

I find this version tolerable only by treating it like Joel/Mike and the 'bots would've done on MST3K.

Although, as Anne is more industrious, she'd probably have been happier than Mrs. Price, even if Wentworth didn't make all the money he did as a single man.

 

Given that Wentworth made his fortune through his share of the ships he captured during the war with the French, being married vs. being single wouldn't have come into the equation.  Anne did seem like she could've handled the lean years before the war made Wentworth's fortune, though.

[Cherpumple]

Copied from DianeDobbler in the Downton Abbey thread:

 

It reminds me a bit of a cultishly popular version of "Persuasion" starring Ciaran Hinds and Amanda Root. A year or so before, they'd co-starred in "The Man Who Cried", displaying no chemistry whatsoever, according to most fans whose comments I've read. Many fans of "Persuasion" think there's terrific chemistry, but if you actually watch, through 90% of the movie they're not even in the same shot. He enters, we see only him (not over her shoulder as is the usual). She reacts - it's tight on her, filmed separately, he could be in his trailer for all we know. The camera did all the work and then it was stitched together.

 

 

This is my favourite Jane Austen adaptation (and novel) but I never noticed this particular editing style, so as a result I think the two actors had amazing chemistry. But now I wonder if I was fooled by the camera trickery, or if I really do think they play off each other well. Time for a re-watch! I definitely prefer this one over the version with Sally Hawkins and Rupert Penry-Jones, mainly because Penry-Jones is too much of a pretty boy for me, and I prefer a more rugged Wentworth. And I love Ciaran Hinds in general. My only real quibble with that one is the damn parade that starts up on the streets of Bath just at the end when Anne and Wentworth finally declare their love. It's just so jarring- this has been building for ten years people, just give them a chance to enjoy the moment before starting in with that creepy carnival music! But otherwise, I love it. And I'm not ashamed to say it reduces me to tears every time I hear the letter he writes to her. So romantic!

 

[nodorothyparker]

I love finding this thread.  That is all  I have at the moment.

[Frost]

Although I loathe to say I hate any of Jane Austen's books, I must admit to a strong dislike of Mansfield Park. Fanny Price is to the most meek, insipid character! Are there any TV or movie adaptations that could change my mind and actually enjoy this story?

[Miss Dee]

Aw, I have a soft spot for poor Fanny, just trying to be dutiful and do what's right. It's easy to be a rootable heroine when you're spunky and disobedient to the conventions and mores around you. I thought Jane Austen was trying to do something very different in Fanny (and Anne too, really). Maybe she got interested when her audience liked Emma far more than she thought they would, and wanted the challenge of writing a female heroine who didn't seem very heroic on the surface.

And Fanny is heroic, in her own way. She endures a lot and faces considerable pressures that she resists. She's not your typical protagonist, and I appreciate her differences even while acknowledging her brand of heroine doesn't end up in the wacky adventures of your standard Anne Shirleys, Pippi Longstockings and Lizzie Bennets. They're easy to like and root for because we all aim to be like them in some way or another. Not a lot of us want to be like Fanny; quite the opposite: we're often afraid we are like Fanny and we hate that about ourselves. A book about a person like Fanny, where being like Fanny is maybe not such a bad thing and shows how even the non-spunky nevertheless have colour and adventures and romance, is refreshing.

To link this to another fandom: I think you see this with Arya and Sansa of Game of Thrones too. Hardly anyone dislikes Arya, the unconventional young girl who hates dresses, enjoys swordfighting and wants a life where she doesn't have to marry and settle down. Sansa, who dreams about the conventional life and tries to be obedient and has courtly romance swooning through her head is far more divisive. If there's a heaven and Jane Austen is there, then I'd love to get her take on these two characters. The woman who wrote Lizzie and Emma and Marianne, but also wrote Elinor and Fanny and Anne, would have something interesting to say on how a reader sees these two types.

Edited December 7, 2015 by Miss Dee

[sacrebleu]

 

the version with Sally Hawkins and Rupert Penry-Jones

Or, as I like to call it, "the one with the Bath 10K at the end" It never fails to crack me up to see Hawkins sprinting around the city in that version.

 

I want to share my love for "Austenland" which is really a charming film. And I love that JJ was in the BBC version of Northanger Abbey. That's the one Austen I have yet to read-- so I don't know how true it is to the book.

[feverfew]

Austenland is becoming a favorite little guilty pleasure of mine. JJ Feild was absolutely perfect as a Darcy-like character.

Then you should definitely see the 2007 Northanger Abbey; JJ Feild as Henry Tilney is just wonderful. And it's got Felicity Jones as Catherine and Carey Mulligan as Isabella - both Oscar nominated for later roles too. Austen seem a good way to go for aspiring young actresses :) As for how close the movie is to the book, I would say fairly - it definitely captures the intent of the novel (to make a pastiche of Austen's contemporary female writers - the gothic romance writers).

 

Now for my UO: I love Mansfield park from 1999. Yes, I know it's completely off compared to the book, but Fanny Price was such a dull heroine. Also; I read this lovely piece of fanfic where the writer imagined what would have happened if Henry Crawford didn't go see Maria. It's called Everingham and it's quite well written.

[methodwriter85]

Full-length trailer for Pride and Prejudice and Zombies:

 

 

I'm digging Sam Riley as a zombie-huntin' Mr. Darcy.

Edited January 9, 2016 by methodwriter85

[Amtosbm]

Is it heretical to love both this one and the Keira Knightley/Matthew Macfadyen one? Because I do. They each scratch a different itch!

 

I never care too much about liberties taken in adaptations, because to me a movie really has to work on its own level, and the Joe Wright one is just SO cinematic and gorgeous, and the music is swoony, and I love all the acting, etc.

 

 

I have come to agree with both of you. At first I was less than happy with the Kiera Knightley version but I have rewatched it many times now and I am surprised how much I have come to love it changes and all.  Her Elizabeth is different than I pictured but I think she has brought something playful to the role I know I find really appealing. I also appreciate Matthew's portrayal the more I see it - he really shows the longing Darcy has for her even if I find him more aloof than arrogant.

Yes some of the scenes are vexing as a book reader but as I have gotten older I have been less uptight about the filmed versions following the books exactly.  I treat them as an adaptation not canon and it makes it so much more enjoyable to watch.  I also love Rosamund Pike as Jane - I think she was perfect. I do think they made Bingley a little too silly but I think each version can be nitpik'd to death. I still love the BBC version but I think I have come to prefer the 2005 if only for the fact that I can enjoy it in two hours rather than six.  Its so much easier to watch that way and I am lazy.  If I want a movie to pick me up when I am in a bad mood its the first one I turn on.

 

Now for my UO: I love Mansfield park from 1999. Yes, I know it's completely off compared to the book, but Fanny Price was such a dull heroine. Also; I read this lovely piece of fanfic where the writer imagined what would have happened if Henry Crawford didn't go see Maria.

 

 

I will have to check that out.  I also have to admit I liked the 1999 version of Mansfield Park even though it strays far from the text. I think Alessandro Nivola is a gorgeous Henry and if I was Fanny I would have had a hard time saying no to him.  I always found Edmund so dull and I don't find JLM attractive in general.  I can see the turn off though especially with the sex scene Fanny walks in on.  I almost felt bad for Henry with the aftermath- what does that make me?

 

How would you rate your Austen heroes?

 

I  love Persuasion the book and Captain Wentworth grew on me. Anne is my favourite Austin herione after Elizabeth even though she is different from Lizzie in temperment. I have to be honest and so far have loved none of the versions produced. I hope it gets another go and this time I warm more to it.  I am not sure who I think would do justice to the two lead characters.

 

Finally I have never been a fan of Emma the character or the movie. I have never watched any version of the novel to the end. Am I missing something or does anyone else feel the same?

 

 

[Cherpumple]

the version with Sally Hawkins and Rupert Penry-Jones

 

Or, as I like to call it, "the one with the Bath 10K at the end" It never fails to crack me up to see Hawkins sprinting around the city in that version.

I want to share my love for "Austenland" which is really a charming film. And I love that JJ was in the BBC version of Northanger Abbey. That's the one Austen I have yet to read-- so I don't know how true it is to the book.

 

 

 

So true about Hawkins sprinting around Bath! It's a bit ridiculous.

 

I think I've grown to appreciate "Austenland", but it struck me as a bit annoying at first. I saw the film, then read the book, and was annoyed that, especially in the book version, Jane was so resistant to the whole cos-playing vibe of her holiday destination. Just go with it, woman! This was also my biggest complaint with "Lost in Austen" in which the main character spends half the time getting all worked up that people aren't doing what they are supposed to be doing, rather than simply luxuriating in the fact that she's actually been transported into her favorite novel, no matter how absurd that may be. The main characters of both these works are basically serving to indulge the fantasies of the readers/viewers, and I wanted to see them enjoy their surroundings more, rather than fretting over the details or the logic of everything.

[methodwriter85]

The American remake of Lost in Austen seems dead, which is probably for the best. It does seem like it would be hard to do as a feature-length movie.

[attica]

This is great on several levels: Mr. Darcy's wet shirt is coming to America!  This is in DC, so anybody local should report back!

[sacrebleu]

 

 

Yest. 1:54 pm

This is great on several levels: Mr. Darcy's wet shirt is coming to America!  This is in DC, so anybody local should report back!

I'm in DC, and was planning to attend the Will & Jane exhibits when they arrive-- some time this summer. I'll be sure to report back.

[JudyObscure]

If there's a heaven and Jane Austen is there, then I'd love to get her take on these two characters.

I can't guess on those, but I have read that Jane Austen said Fanny was her favorite character. I'm always surprised at the number of people who don't like her, I wonder what they expected of her? If she had "stuck up for herself," in that household she would just have been sent home to live in poverty and be a burden on the parents who really didn't want her. I think Fanny's a wonderful example of grace under bad circumstances. She was never bitter and always kind -- kindness being a bit lacking in most Austen novels.

I was lucky enough to read P&P in a "continuing education" class at Oxford and the teacher, who was something of a world class expert on Austen, agreed that there was a curious lack of family feeling there. Not only was the parental favoritism bad, Mrs B. and Lydia, Mr. B and Lizzie, but Jane and Elizabeth, as the older, much wiser sisters might have made a small effort with the younger ones. The treatment of Mary by everyone in the family was downright cruel.

If P&P had been all I read I really wouldn't be an Austen fan, but things picked up a little with Persuasion although Austen ridiculing a mother who lost her son for speaking too favorably of him afterwards, was a little shocking. Only in Emma did I see a character who at least tried to be kind, if in a controlling manner. Knightly's "badly done," speech was wonderful and the change in Emma afterward was one of the best things in all of Austen. Fanny, though, and her moral contrast with the Crawfords was brilliant, so, for me, Mansfield Park," will always be her masterpiece..

What a loss that Miss Austen died so young and we didn't get to see her writing evolve even further.

[Winter Rose]

I'm used to how it feels when a movie cuts or changes things from a book, even if I don't always agree with the particular choices. What I'm less used to is going from watching something that covers virtually the whole book (like the miniseries) to something that has about 4 less hours to work with (the KK movie). BUT I saw the movie first, and I'm one of those people who usually winds up liking the thing they see first better, so I have to admit the movie is my preference for my P&P fix. Plus I can get through the whole story in one sitting.

 

I like the miniseries though, and it obviously fleshes out the story better than the movie. I just wonder, if I had seen the miniseries first, if I'd have the same appreciation for the movie or think it could never compare. In a way that makes me glad I saw the movie first because I enjoyed the story then saw a fuller version of it. I think it would've been tougher on me the other way around.

[whatsatool]

Love and Friendship is great. Funny and beautiful furniture. Go see it.

[DkNNy79]

17 hours ago, whatsatool said:

Love and Friendship is great. Funny and beautiful furniture. Go see it.

I definitely want to see this, but its only a limited release, so might have to wait for DVD.

[Julia]

I didn't even know this was here - so much to unpack...

On 2/17/2015 at 3:51 PM, DkNNy79 said:

I felt bad for Mr. Bennett.  If I was married to that annoying woman, I would hide out in the library all day as well.

The thing is, though, he knew who and what she was when he married her. If he was going to indulge himself by marrying a silly woman he couldn't love or connect to on an intellectual level, it was his responsibility to make sure that he safeguarded their children. Even if they had a son to hold on to the estate, it wasn't his son's job to provide fortunes for his sisters or to make sure they were educated and accomplished enough to be the wives of anyone who wasn't slumming. I don't think he had a right to indulge his cynicism and leave his family to face the consequences of what were essentially all his bad decisions.

On 2/25/2015 at 8:00 PM, Crs97 said:

Okay, here is my secret:  Go to abebooks.com and type the title in there.  Be sure and read the book's condition, but I have only been disappointed once in my dealings on that site and it was because I hadn't taken that particular book's warnings as seriously as they wanted me to.  I am finding first editions of the book at around $20 and good to very good paperbacks at around $3-4 with free shipping!

All of Austen's books are in the public domain and on Project Gutenberg in multiple formats, for anyone who doesn't need paper (I know some people prefer it).

On 4/16/2015 at 11:25 AM, dusang said:

Indeed, I think Captain Wentworth is my favourite Austen hero but his dramatic romanticism is wasted on stupid, malleable Anne.  Honestly, I could deal with her if she didn't actually say "I'm glad I rejected you because I would have felt bad for not agreeing with Lady Russell."  Bitch, please!!

Would it help to know that's Austen's story? She had a female friend and mentor who was the aunt of the love of her life, and who broke them up because she thought her nephew could do better financially. I think Ann was Austen's attempt to reconcile herself with what a truly crappy thing someone she loved had done to her.

On 11/25/2015 at 10:57 AM, Frost said:

Although I loathe to say I hate any of Jane Austen's books, I must admit to a strong dislike of Mansfield Park. Fanny Price is to the most meek, insipid character! Are there any TV or movie adaptations that could change my mind and actually enjoy this story?

I sort of like Fanny, because I think she's a poke in the eye to Austen's critics. She was beat up a bit for the coarse, unfeminine way her female characters had personalities and opinions. I think Fannie was her writing exactly the character everyone kept telling her to write, and everybody predictably couldn't stand her, so go Jane. Just another reason why I loathed that wretched movie of AU Austen fanfic they made under that title (not because it was fanfic, because it was terrible).

On 3/16/2016 at 9:10 AM, JudyObscure said:

I can't guess on those, but I have read that Jane Austen said Fanny was her favorite character. I'm always surprised at the number of people who don't like her, I wonder what they expected of her? If she had "stuck up for herself," in that household she would just have been sent home to live in poverty and be a burden on the parents who really didn't want her. I think Fanny's a wonderful example of grace under bad circumstances. She was never bitter and always kind -- kindness being a bit lacking in most Austen novels.

I always thought Austen had a weakness for Emma Woodhouse ("I am going to take a heroine whom no one but myself will much like."). And I like that book fine, although it kind of trips my humiliation squick, but I'd have to go with Elinor Dashwood.

Edited June 21, 2016 by Julia
spelling

[Crs97]

Quote

  

Quote

 

ON FEBRUARY 25, 2015 AT 8:00 PM,  CRS97 SAID: 

Okay, here is my secret:  Go to abebooks.com and type the title in there.  Be sure and read the book's condition, but I have only been disappointed once in my dealings on that site and it was because I hadn't taken that particular book's warnings as seriously as they wanted me to.  I am finding first editions of the book at around $20 and good to very good paperbacks at around $3-4 with free shipping!

 

All of Austen's books are in the public domain and on Project Gutenberg in multiple formats, for anyone who doesn't need paper (I know some people prefer it).

Just wanted to be clear that my post was regarding a book detailing the behind the scenes of the Pride and Prejudice miniseries.  You will not find first editions of Jane Austen's novels for $20! :-)

[marina to]

On 9/2/2015 at 3:22 PM, kassa said:

Have to speak up for my favorite version -- 1980!  David Rintoul will always be Darcy to me, and I think Elizabeth Garvie had fine eyes. She definitely had more of the kind of beauty that would grow on you, as Elizabeth's is supposed to.  Ehle really nails the charm and humor of Lizzie, but she's so sparkly the whole time it's hard to see any group of men at any time not thinking she was the most attractive girl at the ball.  

 

And Judy Parfitt as Lady Catherine de Burgh!

 

I enjoy the Ehle/Firth version, but Firth seemed too common to me.  I enjoy it in rewatching, because he's very charming, but not really imperious enough.  And the river scene annoyed me (though, similarly, I can enjoy it in rewatching because he's hot)   

 

Sadly the 1980 is more of a theater piece, lower production values, etc.  But it definitely cemented all the characters in my mind and I would love to see it shown occasionally.

Yay! Someone else who loves it as much as I do. It was my first version, so that may bias me a bit but it's long enough to truly capture the book and I think the casting is closest to the descriptions in the book.

I'm also a huge fan of the Ciaran Hinds/Amanda Root Persuasion. Again, great feel for the book and the characters.

[JustaPerson]

I have to admit that I have a soft spot for the 2005 P&P with Keira Knightley. I usually hate unfaithful adaptions, but this one is so well shot and acted. It might be because it was my first exposure to P&P and Austen in general (I read the P&P novel later), but KK and MM sparkled against each other and I think on a whole it captures the spirit of the story. I don't mind the scene in the field at the end, but I prefer the scene in the book and would rather have seen that acted out in the film. But overall I liked the little changes. I love the novel as well!

Edited December 18, 2017 by JustaPerson

[SusanSunflower]

Interestingly, the 1940 P&P (Oliver, Greer Garson and Maureen O'Sullivan) was made by MGM from a popular stage place that was sold as a comedy (of British Manners and likely snobbery).  I've never really understood the cult of Oliver (but it endures) but suspect part of his popularity was his broad-strokes and over-the-top actorly qualities.  In the 1940's Garson was the very bright, quick tongued heroine while Maureen O'Sullivan was the beauty. 

My only reservations wrt Ehrle was/is her ethereal beauty, while Susan Harker (much like Rosamund Pike) accurate-for-the-times was the "great beauty" of the family with her look of abiding serenity (Lizzy's intelligence and "sharpness" not considered universally pleasing). 

I think the wet shirt scene with Frith was supposed to remind us that he was a young man, although for me Firth was also so prematurely "responsible" I suspected -- as I've said -- that Elizabeth and Darcy would have been #1 insufferably happy young married couple for miles, both so upright and conscientious others would marvel at their "wisdom" ... Elizabeth would never regret marrying Darcy, but truly I hoped she softened him.  With more sisters to marry off, I hope both Elizabeth and Jane would be regularly consulted. 

I rather liked how P.D. James instead had D&E living in in a quiet riot at Pemberley with children and staff and dotty in-laws wandering about, suggesting that neither had the inclination or discipline for a "well run" household of military precision. (I confess I just remembered I only watched the movie). 

I'll stop. 

[JustaPerson]

1 hour ago, SusanSunflower said:

Elizabeth would never regret marrying Darcy, but truly I hoped she softened him. 

I believe she did, IIRC in the epilogue of the novel it's said that Elizabeth is very playful with Darcy.

Found it:

Quote

Pemberley was now Georgiana's home; and the attachment of the sisters was exactly what Darcy had hoped to see. They were able to love each other even as well as they intended. Georgiana had the highest opinion in the world of Elizabeth; though at first she often listened with an astonishment bordering on alarm at her lively, sportive, manner of talking to her brother. He, who had always inspired in herself a respect which almost overcame her affection, she now saw the object of open pleasantry. Her mind received knowledge which had never before fallen in her way. By Elizabeth's instructions, she began to comprehend that a woman may take liberties with her husband which a brother will not always allow in a sister more than ten years younger than himself.

[methodwriter85]

I want to see Sam Claflin play Mr. Darcy before he gets too old. He did a great job as Will Traynor in Me Before You and I think he'd rock the part, honestly. He'd also do a great Wickham, I think.

It was also really nice to see Colin Firth play Modern-Day Darcy one last time in Bridget Jone's Baby His looks to Bridget before they hook up at a wedding were just hot. The man still has it.

[Atlanta]

Couldn't get into the 1995 P&P since Charlotte was way prettier than Jane. She was supposed to be the beauty of the area and C forced to marry Collins. Eek!

[nodorothyparker]

On 12/18/2017 at 0:16 PM, SusanSunflower said:

I think the wet shirt scene with Frith was supposed to remind us that he was a young man, although for me Firth was also so prematurely "responsible"

I've been doing a rewatch because Christmas break and being cold as fuck outside and why not.  It never gets old. 

It's interesting to me that I get less hotness from that scene 20 years after I first saw it than it being a visual shorthand for how the character is only in his twenties and thus isn't completely staid for all the formality of the time and how very much responsibility he really does have on his shoulders.  It's also a bit of a reminder for everything that comes next how he's finally on his home turf and Elizabeth will be the one who's out of her element after all the commentary/complaining that's come earlier in the series about how he behaves among strangers and out of his comfort zone.  I'm enjoying all over again just how much restrained humor Colin Firth infused his version of the character with.  He has every bit as much appreciation for just how absurd so many of these characters may be as Elizabeth and Mr. Bennet do. (His eyerolling as Lady Catherine drones on and on never fails to make me snicker.)  For all of the things other characters fault him with, he's actually better at not being so overt about it.

[SusanSunflower]

I think Darcy very quickly realized that Elizabeth Bennett was the perfect role model for his sister, particularly in contrast to Caroline Bingley (highlighted during Elizabeth's visits to Netherfield  (and by extension even his dear friend Charles Bingley who he considers too amiable by half and a push-over, like his sister, for flattery and the appearances of "love").  Caroline's "presumption" of some claim on Darcy echoes that of Lady de Bourgh's wrt her runt of a daughter (as if!!!!). 

Charlotte Luca's problem was not her looks or even her lack of pedigree (her parents were Sir William Lucas and Lady Lucas, I think peers of the Bennetts) but her very real poverty -- she feared that her necessities would become a burden on her parents, quite as tight a budget as that facing Elizabeth after the death of her father and the loss of their home (to Mr. Collins).  Charlotte had never received a proposal and at 27 her prospects were nonexistent.  Mr. Collin's proposal to Charlotte was a very public snub to the Bennett's after he was refused by Elizabeth (which I think was fairly public knowledge) and after originally hoping for Jane (who Mrs. Bennett claimed was all but engaged to the very wealthy Charles).  The other younger daughters were either/and too young or too wild to be acceptable in the eyes of Lady De Bourgh.  Papa Bennett allowing Elizabeth to refuse Collins may have been the most fantasy element for contemporary readers of the book. 

Edited December 30, 2017 by SusanSunflower

[nodorothyparker]

I received an annotated copy of P&P for Christmas full of notes about the text and illustrations and it's been a fascinating companion in my considering some of this.  The notes point out that the Lucases have at least five and possibly as many as eight kids to provide for.  Sir William made what would have been considered a modest fortune in trade and as one of several examples of the rising and increasingly prosperous middle class throughout the book translated that first into a mayoralty that resulted in his knighting and then his transition to the idle landowning class with his purchase of what became nearby Lucas Lodge.  The bulk of his estate will go to Charlotte's brothers, who in the book are relieved when she accepts Mr. Collins' proposal because it means they won't be expected to provide for her beyond her own very small inheritance.  At 27, Charlotte is considered pretty much at the end of her shelf life as a marriage prospect.  She's had no serious offers up until now and has no other expectations of any when Mr. Collins figuratively falls into her lap.  She's certainly aware of all of this when she accepts his offer for the relative independence and security it brings.

I do like the observation of what a public snub to the Bennets that Mr. Collins proposing to Charlotte is.  Remember that Mrs. Bennet had spent much the Netherfield ball crowing to anyone who would listen about what was believed to be Jane's impending engagement to Mr. Bingley with a healthy dash of her expectation that Elizabeth's to Mr. Collins would soon follow.   His disastrous proposal to Elizabeth happens the next morning and his successful one to Charlotte two or three days after that.

The notes are clear about what a gamble Elizabeth was taking in refusing either of the proposals made to her and what the conventional reaction to those refusals would have been, given the state of her very small inheritance portion through her mother.  The word "indolent" is used repeatedly in characterizing Mr. Bennet and his handling of the whole thing.

[Atlanta]

Finally saw the P and P with Firth (who many consider sacred) in its entirety. I liked it, but Matthew Macfadyen brings a certain fragile vulnerability to Darcy where Firth was a steel wall.