A movie review

I borrowed the new Pride and Predjudice film from a friend and watched it tonight. Although I am biased from liking the book and the A&E version of the film, I did not feel that the movie was very good. Granted, compressing the rather lengthly book down to two hours is an impressive feat, given the numerous essential elements of the plot that must be included in order to give any sense to the whole. But, really, if I had not have already read the book and seen the 6-hour movie, I am sure that I would have had no idea what the story was. First, watching this is like watching a slideshow, perhaps one showing someone's vacation. It jumps from one location, timeframe, or general tone rapidly, without actually explaining or showing anything. Viewing more like a selection of the best scenes from the book, the movie lacks the connecting tissue that brings the series of vingnettes into a collective whole. The characters, except for possibly Elizabeth, have no depth whatsoever. They are like little paper dolls, without substance. With half of them, I would hardly catch their names before their 30 seconds in the film was up and they were cast off stage. Even Elizabeth, the heroine, did not have much substance backing the image of the actress. The vibrant character in the book is displayed as a pensive, and inscrutable woman, with a much less understanding nature.
The whole story of Lydia's elopment with Wickham is told and resolved inside of five minutes. Elizabeth receives her letter from Jane, Suddenly she is home with her mother, when they receive a letter just as her father arrives home, which states that the two have been found. Cut to next scene - Lydia arriving in state. There is no portrayal of the despair of the family, of how deeply it has affected them. This is a time that helped to develop the characters in the book, but here it is glossed over.
Now, some of the above I could partially understand - they are extremely limited by time constraints. But, many scenes were changed from the book which would have had little change on the length of the telling.
Quotes from the book, quite recognisable and distinct, would be stated here and there, most of which seemed to be put in merely to try to maintain some form of adherence to the original, but, in my opinion, they could have chosen better. It seemed like the producers liked to try to force the audience to imagine the emotions going through Elizabeth's head at various points, as well as attempt to indicate the passing of time, by including of shots of Lizzy with a thoughtful look on her face just staring into a mirror, or the sunset, or the spinning walls of a barn - they could have saved some time on those and added some extra dialog that tells the story better.

My advice (for the little that it is worth) is to read the book, which is an excellent story, and then to set aside a long period of time to watch the 6-hour A&E version of the movie, which feels as if you are watching the book unfold before your eyes.

I would like to include an explanation for any spelling errors, incoherencies, or grammatical oddities that are found within this post, or, for that matter, in anything on this blog. When I write something that is not going to be graded or put to the test or otherwise important, I will generally not read what I have written. For example, I have not read what I have written above after I have written it. It saves on revision time, and besides, who reads and cares about it anyway?



What is left feels like a mere shell of the beautiful story that it is modeled over.