I think Austen's Mr. Darcy is shy, too, but way more in the way of CF's than the new one... whereas with Austen and CF's Darcy it *is* his own fault. But that's the point of the story: Mr. Darcy has obvious flaws he must learn to fix and Lizzy must learn to forgive; where as the new P&P reduced Lizzy/Darcy's issues to just not ever getting to sit down and talk properly.
I guess, given this analysis, that the 2005 version really isn't about "Darcy's" Pride and Prejudice, or even Lizzie's. It was more Shy and Prejudice. What I gathered from Austen's and CF's Darcy was that he really didn't fix his proud flaws. He still didn't care for her parents, and even though he paid for Wickham's misdeeds, he did it all for Lizzie because he loved her. He also did it to right a wrong he thinks is his fault (which it wasn't), but I wonder if he would have done so if Lydia was anyone else's sister besides Lizzie's.
that's one I hated in particular. I don't know! There's just something wrong to me about Jane singing so prettily when she's telling herself how unattractive she is.
Whoah. We shall agree to disagree :-) I didn't find her singing pretty in that song. Well, her voice is very pretty, but the song is dreary, frantic, has some flats/sharps, etc. Mind you, I have absolutely no clue about anythign musical, but I know, compared to Secret Soul or even Brave Enough for Love, it's a depressing song.
I think so too, but I'm glad she didn't. I think it emphasizes that the songs are more internal. Maybe?
I'm glad she didn't get one either. Her use was simply to get Jane into that house, so once that was done, she kind of fell to the side.
He is very violent with her and it turns a *lot* of people off...In the other versions, in that leaving scene, Rochester is all sad and broody and begging, and I feel as a viewer as if I'm expected to feel sorry for him. Hello, he just tried to trick Jane into BIGAMY. He *knows* he's scum. Don't play the innocent victim who thinks he deserves love! I'd much rather him be angry.
Angry is one reaction, and I think people (like me) didn't care for it because it's not a positive reaction. He's hardly the innocent victim, but I always saw the "woe is me" reaction as, "my life sucks, I'm scum, and I hate myself" more than "It's not my fault." Even though what he did was wrong, it's kind of hard to blame him for wanting some happiness. Although it would have surfaced anyway, and it was best that it happened when it did. It's been ages since I read the book, but I wonder if it's more of Rochester getting a shitty deal in life and having to deal with it or if he's a bad man. Period. I've heard that the Timothy Dalton version is the best adaptation of the story by some Pemberleans, but to each their own.
BTW, did you get the 2006 version yet?
Ha, yeah. Plummer thought the Captain was a wussy part, too. It *would* have been just the puddle of sap CP kept saying it was, imo. But he really made it something different. You wouldn't think, though, that someone who stands up to the Nazis the way the Captain did would look on paper like a weak character!
He does add the needed weight to that story. In the musical, Georg is slightly tempted to comand a submarine again, where CP's Captain doesn't even consider it (at least on screen). The real Georg was tempted to be at sea again, but his disdain for the Nazis overpowered that. In the play, he really is more of a background figure. It's Maria who comes up with the idea of singing in the concert, and it's Maria who decides to go over the mountains. While I wish the movie Maria had a bit more to say more in those final decisions, I'm glad they changed it to have the Captain be more of a leader and would believably stand up to the Nazis (holding guns) with his family standing right there. And CP (despite his attitude toward the kids) was a loving father in his post-arguement scenes.
A while ago this girl wrote out a really short, funny tv interview of Mr. Rochester, Heathcliffe, and Mr. Darcy all together. It was hilarious and kinda sad
There's a crowd. It sounds like it would be sad. I read a ficlette with all of Austen's heroes at a table pining for their ladies. Very cool.
no subject
I guess, given this analysis, that the 2005 version really isn't about "Darcy's" Pride and Prejudice, or even Lizzie's. It was more Shy and Prejudice. What I gathered from Austen's and CF's Darcy was that he really didn't fix his proud flaws. He still didn't care for her parents, and even though he paid for Wickham's misdeeds, he did it all for Lizzie because he loved her. He also did it to right a wrong he thinks is his fault (which it wasn't), but I wonder if he would have done so if Lydia was anyone else's sister besides Lizzie's.
that's one I hated in particular. I don't know! There's just something wrong to me about Jane singing so prettily when she's telling herself how unattractive she is.
Whoah. We shall agree to disagree :-) I didn't find her singing pretty in that song. Well, her voice is very pretty, but the song is dreary, frantic, has some flats/sharps, etc. Mind you, I have absolutely no clue about anythign musical, but I know, compared to Secret Soul or even Brave Enough for Love, it's a depressing song.
I think so too, but I'm glad she didn't. I think it emphasizes that the songs are more internal. Maybe?
I'm glad she didn't get one either. Her use was simply to get Jane into that house, so once that was done, she kind of fell to the side.
He is very violent with her and it turns a *lot* of people off...In the other versions, in that leaving scene, Rochester is all sad and broody and begging, and I feel as a viewer as if I'm expected to feel sorry for him. Hello, he just tried to trick Jane into BIGAMY. He *knows* he's scum. Don't play the innocent victim who thinks he deserves love! I'd much rather him be angry.
Angry is one reaction, and I think people (like me) didn't care for it because it's not a positive reaction. He's hardly the innocent victim, but I always saw the "woe is me" reaction as, "my life sucks, I'm scum, and I hate myself" more than "It's not my fault." Even though what he did was wrong, it's kind of hard to blame him for wanting some happiness. Although it would have surfaced anyway, and it was best that it happened when it did. It's been ages since I read the book, but I wonder if it's more of Rochester getting a shitty deal in life and having to deal with it or if he's a bad man. Period. I've heard that the Timothy Dalton version is the best adaptation of the story by some Pemberleans, but to each their own.
BTW, did you get the 2006 version yet?
Ha, yeah. Plummer thought the Captain was a wussy part, too. It *would* have been just the puddle of sap CP kept saying it was, imo. But he really made it something different. You wouldn't think, though, that someone who stands up to the Nazis the way the Captain did would look on paper like a weak character!
He does add the needed weight to that story. In the musical, Georg is slightly tempted to comand a submarine again, where CP's Captain doesn't even consider it (at least on screen). The real Georg was tempted to be at sea again, but his disdain for the Nazis overpowered that. In the play, he really is more of a background figure. It's Maria who comes up with the idea of singing in the concert, and it's Maria who decides to go over the mountains. While I wish the movie Maria had a bit more to say more in those final decisions, I'm glad they changed it to have the Captain be more of a leader and would believably stand up to the Nazis (holding guns) with his family standing right there. And CP (despite his attitude toward the kids) was a loving father in his post-arguement scenes.
A while ago this girl wrote out a really short, funny tv interview of Mr. Rochester, Heathcliffe, and Mr. Darcy all together. It was hilarious and kinda sad
There's a crowd. It sounds like it would be sad. I read a ficlette with all of Austen's heroes at a table pining for their ladies. Very cool.