<p>P & P is on my short list of movies to try and see. Saw Walk the Line last night and enjoyed it very much. I found it quite moving, despite several reviewers’ comments that it lack emotional connection.</p>
<p>
Just saw it last night… My review: I can think of a lot less pleasant things to do with two hours than watching Keira Knightley as Elizabeth Bennett.</p>
<p>It’s interesting that our local mega-mega-plex relegated P&P to one of their smaller theaters, giving most of their capacity to real classics like Yours, Mine, and Ours. The result: every performance sold out and the theater transformed into a sardine can.</p>
<p>one of my mothers complaints about living in suburbs- many theatre complexes to choose from- but it seems that they all play the same 10 or 12 inane movies ( Starring Dennis Quaid-Cameron Diaz or/& Carrot top)
I have a decent neighborhood theater, with 3 screens but only one is large- so guess which one Rent is playing in while Harry Potter gets the big screen?
P & P is playing in only one Seattle theatre right now- albeit in one that only has two screens- ( the other is showing Goodnight and Good Luck- I think I will try and get my H to see that today since he is skipping work)</p>
<p>We saw P&P the day after Thanksgiving and it was in a small theater and we had to sit on the 2nd row! We still enjoyed it, but went out and rented the BBC version. Colin Firth - top hat, ruffled shirt, white horse; can’t get enough of that guy!</p>
<p>Saw the Gwenyth Paltrow “Emma” tonight. Yuck. I see why it’s TheMom’s least favorite Austen…and am totally mystified as to why it’s her best friend’s favorite. I’d retitle it “Four Ninnies and Others,” the ninnies being Emma, Miss Smith, Miss Bates, and Mr. Elton. And virtually all the plot depends on people misunderstanding each other. Gack. Ptui. Need both tea <em>and</em> port to wash the taste of that one out.</p>
<p>It occurs to me that I could very well have a bumper sticker that says, “Dated Marianne…Married Elinor.”</p>
<p>Hey, for all you folks running out to rent the Collin Firth P&P, the 1980 version can’t be <em>that</em> hard to find, is it? It, too, is a BBC version…he said rather pointedly.</p>
<p>I’m going to get the 1980 version because I cannot remember it that well. Colin Firth in a wet shirt preempted all other PnP programming. Soon Knightely will be a distant memory. I haven’t even bothered to call my library/video store…I assume everyone had the same idea and it will be weeks until it is available?</p>
<p>Hoping to go see this new version of P&P next weekend. I have both the 1980 version and the Jennifer Ehle/Colin Firth version. If memory serves I thought 1995 seemed more ‘real or natural’ somehow & anyway, I felt it had the best Elizabeth who to me is the most imp. character. </p>
<p>The 1980 one seemed very “stagey” to me. But I’ll have to view it again to make up my mind, preferably after seeing the 2005 movie!</p>
<p>D’s take on the new P&P. Darcy–stringy hair, bulbous nose, and blue eyes–all wrong. Also, cannot do the “haughty look” Colin Firth was so good at. Keira Knightley–way too skinny. Every dress looked like a nightgown on her. Didn’t help that the last preview before the movie was the new Colin Firth/Emma Thompson film. D did sigh and say sadly, “Colin’s getting old, mum.” So, we tried to recast Darcy and Elizabeth and couldn’t come up with anyone close to Firth and Ehle. Any ideas out there?</p>
<p>LOL at sjmom’s D’s take on Darcy! She was right on.</p>
<p>I actually liked skinny Keira, the simple dresses, and the fact that she doesn’t feel the need to become voluptuous via surgery…</p>
<p>I agree with the take on Darcy. He was more surly than haughty, a rather unkempt looking Heathcliff rather than Darcy. It was actually not that easy imagining him as the master of Pemberley, never mind the canoodling scene at the end. Easier to imagine him roaming the moors in search of his Cathy (I’m not the first one to think Austen has been Brontefied here).</p>
<p>i saw the new P&P in London back in September minus the extra canoodling added for America’s pleasure. Although the UK version is slightly shorter, it leaves a less submachine gun inspiring taste in your mouth. I’m sure once its out on DVD it will be available here and I recommend taking a second look. I reread the book a few days before I saw it and didn’t have too many complaints. In honesty, I only read it because it was the only book besides the Bible I could find in the hospital in cornwall. so if you plan on being hospitalized on your trip to england, bring your own reading material.</p>
<p>Having been unwell, H brought home the six episode BBC version as well as Bride and Prejudice. Saw the UK version of the Working Title production a month ago.</p>
<p>Here is my choice for ideal cast, setting and script:</p>
<p>Script: BBC–by a Austenian mile.
Elizabeth: BBC The sharpness of her intellect makes her attractive.
Jane: None of the above showed the Austen portrait of The Ideal Woman:a great beauty with a heart of gold. Bend It had a greatest beauty but the heart wasn’t on display. The BBC Jane was not photogenic, sadly.
Darcy: BBC. The misplaced arrogance only Firth could get away with. Loved it. Agree with others about the Bronte-esque quality of MacFayden.
Mrs Bennet. Split vote–Written character award goes to BBC (for showing the ugly, crass side of Mrs Bennet). Actress award goes to: Brenda Blethyn. I lowered the volume every time Allison Steadman’s falsetto sounded in the BBC version. Horrible!
Bingley: Bend It. Naveen Andrews. Yummy. Of course, he completely eclipsed Henderson, the Kiwi playing a particularily flat American.
Mr Bennet: None. The BBC was FAR too leisurely to be believed. Prince Charles isn’t that carefree. Southerland was too North American and modern.<br>
Setting: Working Title–despite the farm animals in the passageways. The country dance scenes were fairly dripping with sweat. The scenes of Pemberly made me drool too. Mr Bennet was a more believeable gentleman farmer in that setting.</p>
<p>What movie to see tomorrow night? Pride and Prejudice or Syriana? Next weekend will bring better choices.</p>
<p>I think the best version ever was the original BBC one with Elizabeth Garvie and David Rintoul. They were absolutley perfect and so was everone else in the cast. We actually bought the 2 video tape version.</p>
<p>Just got back from Pride and Prejudice. I found it earthy and unexpected – a good movie! I hope it gets some recognition when Oscars roll around . . . costumes, perhaps. Of course Brenda Blethyn is always a stitch!</p>
<p>Laura, we loaned our VHS version of the Garvie/Rintoul to D’s former ballet teacher, who’s had it for months but said last night that she’d watch it over Christmas break. I admit that many of the production values are better for the later BBC version but the casting for the first is so exquisite up and down the line.</p>
<p>P&P report - I liked it better than I thought I would - so did DD. Agree with the summation of Darcy, would have made a great Heathcliff, or in a few years Mr. Rochester.
The BIG glaring anachronism that I saw was the lack of headgear - Keira must have had it in her contract that nothing was to obscure her face - no lady would have been seen in public without a hat. It suffered from being so short - just like Goblet of Fire, those who had not read the book could get easily lost. If you didn’t know enough about Regency England to know that the whole family would be ruined by Lydia, then it didn’t quite make sense.</p>
<p>One addition that I thought worked well, or at least DD and I loved it, was the brief, almost wordless scene between Darcy and Bingley, in between final trips to Longbourne to propose. Calling the prior trip “a disaster” was another glaring anachronism, but it fit perfectly, and I think the distraught young man summoning the courage to propose, and being bucked up by his friend, probably transcends time and culture - we loved that scene.</p>