Sappy nothing

Rating: 1/10 (23 April 2010)

I first saw the movie soon agter the release in a cinema, was utterly disappointed as any Austen fan or simply anyone in the least know of history and literature must be, and just tried to erase the memory of it. After a while, having read a lot of raving reviews I decided to give it another chance as non-adaptation. Well, I really tried. Didn't work either. Setting aside numerous inaccuracies and liberties taken with a masterpiece, I simply don't understand what the appeal of the movie is to so many? It lacks logic, consistency, character development and humour. The story is abrupt and hard to follow if you don't keep recollecting the book's plot. For instance, why Mrs Bennet tells Mr Benner what happened at the assembly if he was present there? Who is Mrs Forster? how did Lady Catherine come to know that Lizzy is going to be engaged to her nephew and how in this world could he possibly know her opinion if he was in Longbourn that very day, sorry, NIGHT? And so on. The scenery and locations are fabulous, I admit, but God created Discovery channel for a reason, so why bother filming this?
All in all, this movie is a mere boy-meets-girl story, the boy is depressed and shy (and we get no explanation why, no change either), the girl is obstinate (the same comment here). The sidelines (Charlotte's, Lydia's) are negligible, bring no sense and serve only as minor difficulties on the lovers' path to "understanding" (BTW did they actually understand each other? I don't think so, they seem quite as immature and absurd in the end as at the beginning). Given no reasonable development, no insight into the characters it is just boring to watch.
Acting is average provided there is nothing particular to act. Knightley gives quite convincing image of a not too bright teenager "in luv - in denial". McFadyen as Mr Darcy acts only if he can't avoid it. Sutherland is a treasure in this boring film - it is very refreshing to watch him and try to guess what part from what piece he is acting this moment and what accent he is now faking :) Other characters are so disposable that their acting doesn't count really. The actress who played Jane is very pretty, though.
"Romantic" picturesque doesn't help much. It works when one sees inner reasons of a character which this movie fails to show. I am not even saying how far this kind of picturesque is from Austen's vision and style...
To summarize, the film is 100% fan fiction of a lower stamp using beloved names and some random details but totally free of any meaning except hormone-driven replay. The infamous US ending shows that perfectly.
I don't advise to see this shallow production to anyone who has any eye-brain connections at all.