Mrs. Fitzpatrick’s Stopped-Clock Movie Reviews

Mrs. Fitzpatrick, , , , , , , , , ,

This week, only 13 years late: BBC’s Pride and Prejudice, starring Jennifer Ehle and Colin Firth!

As many of you know, I first saw this a few weeks ago. There’s nothing like some good MST3K time with my beloved sisters. But, I have to admit, I came out of it pretty meh. I am not the adoring fan that I know so many of you are. 🙂 I can see why you love it! I can see it as a good intro to Austen. And I didn’t hate it. But it wasn’t enough to sway my persnickety self from the 1980 version, and, so much better than both, the book itself. Deep thoughts:

  • It’s pretty close to the book, lots of word for word, even if they did leave out some of my favorite lines. Though the post-Lydia-eloping part gets really compacted in this version. Seems like all the characters do is get in and out of carriages.
  • I actually liked the scene-setting parts that aren’t in the book—showing the countryside and town and all. You get a better sense of their world.
  • Plus I liked Jennifer Ehle better than I thought I would! I thought she would be too sappy; she was not too sappy. Check.
  • You want to talk Colin Firth? OK, let’s talk Colin Firth. Sure, he’s tall and cute, but he’s wooden. (Ha ha, get your minds out of the ha-ha, kids!) By which I mean he stares at Lizzie in a frankly creepy way for 3/4 of the movie. I’m spoiled by already having seen him in A Single Man and The King’s Speech, and I say he could tear the part up now 10 times better than he did it then. (Apart from being too old, and what do we think of Helena Bonham-Carter as Lizzie? . . . OK, back to 1995.)
  • Let’s talk more Colin Firth! Why do we call it “the Colin Firth version?” Is fans’ love of this version simply based on the Firthy Goodness (thank you, Miss Osborne)? Is it because we’re not sure how to say “Ehle”? (AY-lee, I think.) I’m curious. Because she is after all the star, though this version does try to bring him closer to stardom than Jane put him, by showing us his Inner Feelings, and his butt, and his famous wet shirt. Thoughts?
  • Jane Bennet is all wrong. No one thinks she’s prettier than Lizzie. (And she has a thick neck.)
  • It was kind of amusing at first, but it grated on me more and more that all the supporting characters were seriously exaggerated from the book. Any complexity in them was left out, and they were all completely one-dimensional. It makes them more fun to laugh at and all, but it does hurt the story. I mean, who would really believe Miss Bingley was their friend? She’s totally scary! And Mrs. Bennet always shrieking flattens the drama and believability of her crazy mood swings. Etc.

So, as I said, some mixed feelings. However, at least I now know what all you crazy kids mean when you say “No one wants your concertos here!” and “Lord, I’m so fat!” And that is a comfort.

Mrs. Fitzpatrick’s Stopped-Clock Movie Reviews

12 thoughts on “Mrs. Fitzpatrick’s Stopped-Clock Movie Reviews”

  1. Emily Michelle says:

    Some thoughts.

    1. I prefer to think of it as “intrigued and then later adoring” rather than “creepy.” But he’s lucky he’s hot and rich and respectable, because I will admit, if I was at the mall and some random dude was looking at me like he does sometimes, I’d call security.

    2. Why do we call it “the Colin Firth version?”
    I think because of both of the reasons you point out, but also there’s also possibly more to it. I thought through all the movies I love that have multiple versions of them, and for sometimes I refer to them by year, but often I refer to by the person in it who I know the best: the Ciaran Hinds Jane Eyre, the Keira Knightley Pride and Prejudice, the Kate Beckinsale Emma. (And if I didn’t know who any of the people in it were before I saw it, it goes by year, as in the 2007 Sense and Sensibility.) So maybe Colin Firth is just more famous and recognizable than Jennifer Ehle?

    3. Maybe I’ve been brainwashed by the movie telling me over and over how pretty Jane is, but I do feel she’s prettier than Lizzie. She’s pretty in a sort of classical way, and she has nicer hair—smooth and shiny where Lizzie tends toward the frizziness. But it’s a very near thing. And I do always think, when they say she’s the prettiest girl in the county or whatever, that it must be a rather average county.

    4. Are you supposed to think Miss Bingley’s their friend? It’s been a while since I read the book, so I’ve just gotten accustomed to thinking that Jane’s just too nice to admit what a witch Caroline is. I need a re-read. I will say, on the topic of side characters, that the only thing I like better in the 1980 version than the 1995 version is Charlotte Lucas. I feel like that actress very nicely portrays that sense of her knowing exactly what her marriage is but trying to take it with good humor; the 1995 Charlotte is so bland that I have no idea what’s supposed to be going on in her head. So I can see where you’re coming from.

    There’s my two cents. Enjoy.

    Like

    1. Mrs. Fitzpatrick says:

      Emily Michelle: Thanks for all the thoughts! You are probably right re the Colin Firth version. Re #4, yes, Miss Bingley and Mrs. Hurst in the book aren’t the nicest people ever, but they are definitely friendly towards Jane, and even Lizzie doesn’t think too badly of them at first.

      Like

  2. Christy says:

    I agree that this is not my favorite Pride and Prejudice adaptation. I have not seen the 1980 or 1940 versions yet, though they both sound intriguing. My major beef with this Pride and Prejudice is its slow pacing. It seems to slow and studious to fit a work Ms. Austen herself called “light, bright, and sparkling.” Jane is pretty, but she does have a thick neck.

    Like

    1. Mrs. Fitzpatrick says:

      Christy: I agree that the pacing is slow – but then I saw it in 2 three-hour sittings, so couldn’t tell if it was me or the movie! I haven’t actually *watched* the 1980 one recently, so couldn’t compare, but I believe it’s 5 hours compared to 6 hours for this one. I do think it’s lighter and brighter, though. 🙂 As for the 1940 one, ugh! If the characters weren’t called the same things I don’t think you’d even recognize that it *is* P&P. I don’t know that any Austen fan has anything good to say about it. If you find something, let us know!

      Like

  3. leslie says:

    Jennifer Ehle is good, but seems a bit too old; not twenty!
    ALL of the Darcy’s have something to offer (Matthew McFadyen [sp?] is my personal favorite; you can’t beat the sight of him striding over the fields for a good *swoon*).
    1995 version: TOTALLY AGREE about Mrs. Bennet; she is HORRID & LOUD. I prefer the 1980 version; she’s a true scatterbrain. Brenda Blethen is good in the 2005 but she’s a little smarter the original character as written.
    TOTALLY AGREE about big sister Jane; she’s too cow-like, placid & dull. the 1980 Jane is much prettier.
    The dancing scenes in 1995 version go on FOREVER; the 2005 version made them fun! Those long takes following characters from room to room! Awesome!
    1980 version wins because Mr. & Mrs. Bennett are AS DESCRIBED IN THE BOOK. And we get to hear Lizzie’s internal monologues about how she sees her parents & their failings. Very insightful. The other versions make then “nicer” and more likeable–NOT as Jane wrote them!

    Like

    1. I also love me some McFadyen, mostly because I think he plays socially awkward so well. He’s not MAD; he’s just…mortified.

      You are also not wrong about his fields-striding abilities.

      Like

  4. I personally still feel that Miss Ehle was soppy :/ I much preferred Keira Knightley.

    This is sort of unrelated, but have any of you seen the Lizzie Bennet Diaries on Youtube? They’re super funny, and I would definitely reccomend them as a modern-day adaptation 😀

    Like

  5. I’ve never really understood the huge appeal for Firth – I mean the man’s obviously not repulsive but I’m a bit baffled by the universal adoration. (Macfadyen’s my favorite :P)

    You’re right about the fact that all they seem to do is get in and out of carriages – that’s the good thing about the 2005 version, it injects a bit life into the story (maybe a little TOO much at some points). The 1995’s one so DRY with everyone just sitting around delivering their lines as they appear in the book. But I do like it for the fact that it’s quite long and a long Austen adaptation’s sometimes preferable to a shorter one 😉

    Like

  6. I know I’m being super nit-picky and perhaps a little obsessive compulsive, but you talk about about us kids saying stuff like “Lord, I’m so fat” and I am irked, because the correct quotation is “Lord, I’m so FAGGED”. By which Lydia means she’s tired. Clearly I have spent too much time watching (and rewatching) and googling this adaptation. Other than that, great post!

    Like

    1. Mrs. Fitzpatrick says:

      Thanks, Elizabeth Ann! No problem, we are a little OCD about quotations too. And how interesting! That does make much more sense than Lydia saying she was fat. I think Miss Ball and Miss Osborne have been misquoting all this time – I’ll get them. 🙂

      Like

Comments are closed.