Interesting though not flawless effort

Rating: 8/10 (6 October 2006)

The latest version of P&P delights one with its cinematography and beautiful cast but is not without its inherent flaws. I have loved the book for many years now and so I cannot wholeheartedly consent that this is the vision Jane Austen (JA) had, especially since many people will try to take a shortcut to learning what the book is about through the visual medium . It is therefore imperative to give warning that this is not what she or her book is about in totality. I do not doubt the casting, for JA does not give minutest portrayal of looks beyond tall or short ,pretty or simple, fat or thin etc. SO one may take liberties for want of better information (with the exception of Mr. Collins who is much too short to suit the book and perhaps his clumsiness on the floor has been downplayed because of it. Being short he is easily ignored but because he is in reality/fiction a tall man he is very obviously absurdhence the director loses the physical advantage at the very outset) Mr. Darcy and Mrs. Bennet are much too apologetic of and euphemise their character flaws when they are quite the essence of the storya Mr. Darcy who is just reserved and taciturn would not suit the title at all. In all other ways he is quite apt though. There is no need to explain her mercenary attitude towards her daughters, the idea is both amusing and practical and an intelligent audience would be able to appreciate both angles. But she is seen explaining her rationale and her methods and thinking which is unnecessary and goes against her character and takes away from her absurdity which is a pity. I liked the openly vivacious portrayal of Lizzy but sans the blatant rudeness towards her mother. It is not only not a part of Elizabeth's sweet temperament and her respect for her mother at least as a parent but also quite a useless weapon in the face of her mother's total disregard of anything sensible and subtle. Also Lizzy would not have been so affected by Mr. Darcy's criticism of her looks. She would have sooner laughed at his absurd directness and superior scorn in such a sensitive matter. Here she looks hurt and takes revengenot a trait in Elizabeth. But the scenes delight all the same. Just know that is not what the book says. What is most preposterous, presumptuous, outrageous and basically unacceptable is the total lack of respect for the sort of language that would have been prevalent in that period. There is simply no excuse for this liberty since it does not find its place in the movie even. A totally miscalculated attempt at some very crass humour. I can't imagine anyone finding it funny even if they are not familiar with the lines of the book. It is too anachronistic to evoke anything but disgust. Also unnecessary was the interchange of dialogues between characters. A good writer has ample reason for choosing her characters to say certain dialogues. It is mostly in keeping with the character. Using the same for keeping everyone in the scene in conversation is hardly good direction. On the plus side the confrontations between the leads are interesting and passionate though like everyone else I am disappointed with the way it ends. It all seem to fizzle out as it reaches the climaxlike all other elements in life? It was heartwarming to see the portrayal of Mary's relative insignificance in the household affairs, Lydia's frank and uncensored manners and conversations, Kitty's impressionable and sensitive airs. But of all the sisters, perhaps even better than Keira Knightley's Lizzy, Jane is best and most honestly portrayed. She is pretty, sweet, gentle, unassuming, friendly but reserved and sedate at all times and yet never dull. She expressed much through her eyes and is in all senses very satisfying. I could not find anything wanting in her character depiction. Of course the same cannot be said of Mr. Bingley who seems to attempt to equal Mr. Collins in silliness. It is amusing to start with but Mr. Bingley is not absurd or silly he is simply modest and easily persuaded. That is not a crime or a flaw that repulses. One is not repulsed by Bingley here but you know better than to think a Jane, as we have here, would be interested in such a Bingley.
So all in all it is far from a masterpiece but it is a good collective effort without his base completely in the book. It would have been better for someone with years of reflection on the book to have directed than someone who read it superficially. The book has stood the test of time for 200 plus years it is not to be unraveled over one reading!!
An ardent admirer of Pride and Prejudice