Wonderful interview with Joe Wright in the online movie magazine Indiewire of 11/10/05

Enjoy!

Tackling A Classic: Joe Wright on "Pride and Prejudice" by Erica Abeel

So who is this Joe Wright, anyway? One thing's for sure: the director of the hot Brit film "Pride and Prejudice" doesn't come across as very Jane Austen: working class/Cockney accent, floppy hair shoved under a beret, punk good looks. He claims he was dyslexic as a child and has "a lot of catching up to do." When he was sent the script for "Pride," he'd never read the novel. He'd never made a feature film.

Wright, 33, hails from the world of British telly, where he directed several miniseries, including "Charles II" and the social realist "Bodily Harm" with Timothy Spall. Granted, Brit telly is pretty high-end, and "Charles II" snagged a BAFTA (cousin to our Academy Awards). Yet it's something of a surprise that Working Title gambled on a director lacking intellectual/lit cred or a track record in features for this big screen adaptation. (And equally surprising that none had been made since MGM's Greer Garson-Laurence Olivier starrer, though a memorable TV miniseries appeared in 1995 with Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle.)

To judge by reactions at this year's Toronto, though, Wright turned out to be an inspired choice. His take on this Regency tale of strong-willed women in a caste-bound society melds romantic sweep with period detail. With its sumptuous visuals, roistering ensembles, and a star-making turn from Keira Knightley as heroine Elizabeth Bennet, "Pride" exudes the youthful exuberance of an author who penned her novel at 21.

The Bennet family has five daughters to marry off. So when the Misters Darcy (Matthew MacFadyen) and Bingley (Simon Wood) settle in nearby, the chase is on it being "universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a wife." Mrs. B (a perpetually flushed Brenda Blethyn) grasps hysterically at any matrimonial prospect, since an arcane law deeding the family property to a male cousin (Tom Hollander in a priceless cameo) could land her brood in impoverished spinsterhood.

Uppity aristocrat Darcy is prejudiced against the Bennet's lesser social status (they have a kinsman in trade) while Lizzie's pride is nicked when at a ball she overhears Darcy dissing her looks (it's a credit to Knightley's assured turn that his judgment doesn't trigger guffaws). In this template for romcom, the hostile attraction of the high-spirited pair culminates, after many reversals, in a happy union. Lizzie, you could say, marries up. Paralleling the material on the screen, Wright reportedly became involved, after filming, with patrician-looking Rosamund Pike, who plays Lizzie's demure elder sister Jane. While the rough-diamond Wright never made it to university, Pike plays the piano and cello, speaks French and German and graduated with honors from Oxford. Life imitating art.

indieWIRE sat down with the director (who was fighting a cold) over breakfast at the trendy 60 Thompson Street hotel to discuss what shaped his updated version of Austen's classic.

indieWIRE: Isn't "Pride and Prejudice" compulsory reading for the English?
Joe Wright: I guess so. But since I'm dyslexic, I didn't read any books at all when I was growing up. And then when I did start reading, I was reading kind of uh [inaudible] lit, like Milan Kundera.

iW: That's called bottom literature?
JW: No modern. [Into my mike]: Modern, not bottom-dwelling literature like a carp. So, no, I'd never read any Austen and then I went and read the book. And I was stunned by it really -- it seemed to me the first piece of British realism. It felt so accurately observed, so carefully drawn. And very, very true as well. And actually to discover this thing that spoke so directly to human experience. So at that point I had some ideas on how to make the film. And once those ideas had put their claws in me, I found it very difficult to escape them and really just wanted to see them realized.

iW: Tell me about your education.
JW: I went to comprehensive school in North London and left without any qualifications [diploma]. And I was doing bits of acting and improv in a drama club in the evenings. Then I discovered you didn't need qualifications to go to art school, you just needed a body of work. I had my paintings and my Super 8 films, so I applied and was accepted to do fine art and film.

iW: How did you segue into directing?
JW: I got a scholarship the last year to make a short film for the BBC that gained some awards. Then a producer for the BBC said, How about doing TV? And gave me the script for "Nature Boy." Then they offered me "Charles II," very different from "Pride and Prejudice." It was quite violent, quite a lot of sex in it. Charles was renowned for being extremely promiscuous. It was all shot in the studio -- kind of "West Wing" circa 1600. I guess I was very lucky.

iW: You're saying your success is due to luck?
JW: Yeah, I worked hard, but I was lucky the right people happened to see my work.

iW: How did you get tapped to direct "Pride and Prejudice" with its big name cast?
JW: I dunno, really. I went in and did an interview and told them my ideas. And they gave me the job. And then I cast it. So the cast wasn't attached when I came on board.

iW: How were you able to snag the likes of Keira Knightley, Judi Dench, and the rest?
JW: It was just a good script. Like myself, actors are drawn to the quality of the script [by novelist and miniseries writer Deborah Moggach]. Initially I thought Keira was probably too beautiful for the role. And when I met her I discovered this scruffy kind of little tomboy character. And discovered she had incredible wit and intelligence and a very strong personality. Those qualities made me think that she doesn't fit into the kind of preconceived ideas of what a girl should be. And that made me think she'd be perfect for Elizabeth.

iW: Her Lara in the TV version of "Dr. Zhivago" felt a bit anemic. Especially after Julie Christie.
JW: I think Keira's great in the "Pirates" stuff when she's playing opposite Johnny Depp. She's been learning in public. She's very young -- 18 when we met her for the part. And she's been developing and learning in the public eye. And that's sometimes difficult.

iW: Why film this novel now?
JW: There hadn't been a film version of "Pride and Prejudice" for about 65 years. So it felt like it was time to be made again. Also, I don't really make work in the context of what's been made before. Certain ideas just get their hooks in me.

iW: What did you bring to the story that's new?
JW: In the 1940s film, Olivier was in his 40s, Garson in her 30s. To me that makes a mockery of the story. It's about very young people falling in love. And I thought casting people of the right ages [like Knightley and MacFadyen] was the key to it. It seems really obvious, but it hadn't occurred to anyone. In the book Elizabeth was 20 and Darcy 28.

iW: In those days their teeth would be falling out by age 30.
JW: Yes, Mr. Bennet would have had wooden pegs for teeth. If you think English people's teeth are bad now, you should have seen them then.

iW: One of the things I most admired was that the film didn't look like Masterpiece Theatre. You've said you wanted to avoid the "picturesque tradition."
JW: For a start, I like messiness. I think messy is beautiful. I think tidiness is ugly and so that's just my aesthetic. Through my research I also discovered that life was pretty dirty in those days. It wasn't all clean and pristine. The Bennets didn't really have the finances to keep a house like that in the order it should be kept. They would have only bathed once a week. Their clothes would be washed rarely.

iW: That really comes across. I had the feeling of sweat and smells and earthiness. When Lizzie is twirling on the swing in the courtyard, you can almost smell the manure. And when Mrs. Bennet was always flushing, it seemed almost menopausal. Was that in your mind?
JW: Uh, maybe. A little.

iW: Then you have this pig walk by and he has enormous balls.
JW: That's not something we thought of before we saw the pig. Then when we met the pig, we were incredibly impressed by him. I'm rather interested in the fact that a family like the Bennets would only own female pigs. They'd hire the male pig to come in and, as they call it, cover the sows, at a fee. I kind of liked the parallels between human and animal procreation. I wanted a sense of the elements, of mud and rain. It occurred to me that love is an elemental force, and I wanted to set it in the context of the other elements. And it seemed to me that if Elizabeth had a very earthbound existence, then her aspiration for romantic love would be all the more heroic. She's got her feet in the mud, and she's reaching for the stars. I think it's a heroic story.

iW: Why heroic?
JW: It's about two people who have the imagination to envisage a world in which they're able to love each other. You know, they are creating a new society in a way.

iW: Are there parallels with this story today?
JW: I think that people are still trying to understand each other and overcome prejudices. And people are still, most important, loving each other. And that is today as it was yesterday and will be for another 200 years. It's also about a young woman growing up. And young people are still having to grow up and learn about themselves.
JW: No, it's in Jane Austen. Each character has a different kind of snobbery and mind-set. Society at that time was changing. The French Revolution has just happened and the aristocracy are terrified that the lower classes are going to rise up in arms against them. So rather than segregate themselves, they assimilated. That's why Darcy and Bingley go to that first Assembly dance.

iW: They're slumming.
JW: Yah, Bingley thinks it's marvelous, embraces it with open arms. All the more girls to dance with, all the more fun to be had. He's not a snob at all really. Whereas Caroline Bingley is incredibly threatened by this whole development. She's probably kind of new money. Not old money like Darcy, who's more settled in his position.

iW: Obviously, an adaptation requires pruning. How did you shape Austen's novel?
JW: We tried to stay faithful to the narrative beats of the story, but also the atmosphere and tone of the book. That's why there are so many closeups. Jane Austen observes people very carefully and closely: so that was the cinematic equivalent of her prose. I like closeups very much indeed. I think studying the human face on that kind of scale is one of the enduring pleasures of film. Also the constant movement of the camera felt like an equivalent to the sense of energy and excitement about her talent that comes across to me when reading the book.

iW: There's a magical, storybook feel to the film as well, especially with those glorious English settings and mansions.
JW: My parents founded a puppet theater. What I was playing with was the idea of bringing together the social realist aesthetic with fairytale imagery. I like the way the Bennet house has a moat around it. So you have five virgins living on an island, and stuff like that.

iW: What prompted you to open the film with that long Steadicam shot that follows Lizzie into the Bennet house?
JW: I wanted the audience to feel like they were living at this time, and involved deeply. I wanted a 360-degree world, where you could look around any corner, and it would still be period accurate.

iW: The opening Steadicam shot feels like music, like a dance.
JW: Exactly. Dario [Marianelli, composer of the film's soundtrack] wrote a piece of music before we filmed that scene. So I had the music playing in my headphones while we were shooting it, which was really nice. For atmosphere, just for me. It helped with that feeling of it being a dance.

iW: But the long shot of Lizzie standing on the cliff, hair and skirts blowing, isn't that more "Wuthering Heights" than Jane Austen?
JW: Austen set her scenes in parlors and people's front rooms. And I wanted to take it out of the parlors. It's not interesting to set everything inside.

iW: What was it like first day on the set?
JW: Terrifying. I had Judi Dench at the dinner table scene. On TV crews you have about 70 people maybe. With this, when I turned up there were over 300 people. That was a shock to start with. And then I was very nervous about directing Judi, because she's such a genius. And I quite quickly realized that Judi was probably as nervous as I was. She gets very nervous, Judi. So I saw my role as making sure that she was okay and looking after her, and then I stopped being quite so nervous.

iW: What's up next?
JW: I think I'm doing an adaptation of a book called "Atonement," an Ian McEwan novel. Do you know it?

iW: I've read it at least twice.
JW: Yah, it's wonderful, huh? I can't wait.

iW: What's the source of your confidence?
JW: Ignorance. And naivete. I just see it as a great story that I'd like to tell.

And a loooong article in the MSNBC of 11/10/2005

Here's the link: The Importance of Being Darcy by M.B. Ellis

USA Today 11/10/05

This 'Pride' does Austen proud
By Claudia Puig

Who would have guessed that the world needed another remake of Pride and Prejudice? Yet despite multiple previous incarnations and the cries of protest from diehard Colin Firth fans, this Pride & Prejudice is a stellar adaptation, bewitching the viewer completely and incandescently with an exquisite blend of emotion and wit.

Though some threads of Jane Austen's intricate 1813 novel had to be excised to winnow the story down to a two-hour movie, director Joe Wright and screenwriter Deborah Moggach extract the essence of Austen's clever dialogue, fashioning a supremely entertaining saga of amorous adventures.

What emerges on screen feels contemporary while preserving the nature of the character study. Pride & Prejudice's transcendent love story will captivate viewers — even diehard Austenites.

Wry, beguiling and lushly romantic, the film is gorgeously shot, with some of England's most dazzling estates doubling for the novel's Pemberley and Netherfield Park manses. The sumptuous musical score intensifies the film's vitality.

Keira Knightley's spirited Lizzie Bennet is a delight, but the movie belongs to dark-haired, blue-eyed Matthew Macfadyen, who plays Mr. Darcy, one of literature's great romantic heroes.

Taking on a role that was powerfully played by Laurence Olivier in 1940 and indelibly re-enacted by Firth a decade ago had to be daunting. But Macfadyen manages to make us swoon with his more boyish, vulnerable version of Darcy. Unlike Firth's supremely confident portrayal, Macfadyen seems endearingly awkward. And Knightley and Macfadyen have chemistry.

Donald Sutherland as the remote and sardonic Mr. Bennet and Brenda Blethyn as the nattering, marriage-obsessed Mrs. Bennet are both superb as the beleaguered parents of five daughters.

Knightley imbues Austen's beloved heroine with just the right blend of humor, intensity and intelligence. Rosamunde Pike, who plays her gentle sister Jane, is also winning. Elizabeth and Jane fall for wealthy, handsome men (Darcy and Mr. Bingley), but the path of true love is anything but smooth.

Judi Dench is aptly imperious as Lady Catherine de Bourg, the benefactress of the Bennets' cousin, Mr. Collins, and an impediment to Lizzie's liaison with Darcy. One of the movie's happiest surprises is Tom Hollander as Collins, a groveling sycophant to Lady Catherine and hilarious in his bungling attempts to woo Lizzie.

This production of Pride & Prejudice avoids any suggestion of pretension or stodginess. Rather, it's subtly sexy. The climactic scene in which a disheveled Macfadyen emerges from the misty dawn, desperately seeking Lizzie, is rich with sexual yearning.

A PG romance rarely feels this satisfying.

The New York Times

Marrying Off Those Bennet Sisters Again, but This Time Elizabeth Is a Looker

By STEPHEN HOLDEN
Published: November 11, 2005
The sumptuous new screen adaptation of Jane Austen's "Pride and Prejudice" has so much to recommend it that it seems almost churlish to point out that its plucky, clever heroine, Elizabeth Bennet, played by Keira Knightley, is not exactly the creature described in the 1813 novel.

The second of five well-brought-up but impecunious Bennet sisters, whose fluttery mother (Brenda Blethyn) desperately schemes to marry them off to men of means, Elizabeth prevails in the novel through her wit and honesty, not through stunning physical beauty. Among the five, the belle of the ball is Elizabeth's older sister, Jane (Rosamund Pike), who is as demure and private as Elizabeth is outspoken and opinionated.

But because Ms. Knightley is, in a word, a knockout, the balance has shifted. When this 20-year-old star is on the screen, which is much of the time, you can barely take your eyes off her. Her radiance so suffuses the film that it's foolish to imagine Elizabeth would be anyone's second choice.

Once you've accepted this critical adjustment made by Joe Wright, a British television director in his feature film debut, "Pride & Prejudice" gathers you up on its white horse and gallops off into the sunset. Along the way, it serves a continuing banquet of high-end comfort food perfectly cooked and seasoned to Anglophilic tastes. In its final minutes, it makes you believe in true love, the union of soul mates, happily-ever-after and all the other stuff a romantic comedy promises but so seldom delivers. For one misty-eyed moment, order reigns in the universe.

If the depth and complexity of the movie can't match those of the five-hour British mini-series with Jennifer Ehle and Colin Firth that was shown on A&E a decade ago, how could they, given the time constraints of a feature film (128 minutes, in this case)? But in a little more than two hours, Mr. Wright and the screenwriter, Deborah Moggach, have created as satisfyingly rich and robust a fusion of romance, historical detail and genial social satire as the time allows.

Matthew Macfadyen finds a human dimension in the taciturn landowner Fitzwilliam Darcy that was missing in earlier, more conventionally heroic portrayals. Mr. Firth might have been far more dashing, but Mr. Macfadyen's portrayal of the character as a shy, awkward suitor whose seeming arrogance camouflages insecurity and deep sensitivity is more realistic. Isolated by his wealth, ethical high-mindedness and fierce critical intelligence, Mr. Darcy is as stubborn in his idealism as Elizabeth is in hers. The disparity between his diffidence and her forthrightness makes the lovers' failure to connect more than a delaying tactic to keep the story churning forward; it's a touching tale of misread signals.

The movie unfolds as a sweeping ensemble piece in which many of the characters outside the lovers' orbit are seen through a Dickensian comic lens. Ms. Blethyn's mother is a dithery, squawking hysteric; Donald Sutherland's father a shaggy, long-suffering curmudgeon with a soft heart; and the Bennet sisters, except for Elizabeth and Jane, a gaggle of pretentious flibbertigibbets. Jena Malone, as the saucy, boy-crazy youngest daughter, Lydia, offers an amusing caricature of teenage idiocy and entitlement.

William Collins (Tom Hollander), the priggish, self-satisfied clergyman Elizabeth rejects, to her mother's horror, is mocked for his short stature as well as his puffed-up airs. Late in the movie, Dame Judi Dench storms onto the screen as Mr. Darcy's imperious aunt, Lady Catherine de Bourg, to offer a tutorial on British snobbery. Elocution curdled with contempt and kept on ice; upwardly tilted facial posturing with narrowing eyes; and the deployment of artful humiliation, as when Lady Catherine coerces Elizabeth into playing the piano (very badly): all are laid out to be studied by mean-spirited future grandes dames on both sides of the Atlantic.

In the film's most intoxicating scenes, the camera plunges into the thick of the crowded balls attended with delirious anticipation by the Bennet sisters and moves with the dancers as they carry on breathless, broken conversations while whirling past one another. That mood of voluptuous excitement, barely contained, is augmented by Dario Marianelli's score, which takes the sound and style of late 18th- and early 19th-century piano music in increasingly romantic directions.

The movie skillfully uses visuals to comment on economic and class divisions. The humble Bennet estate, in which farm animals roam outside the house, is contrasted with some of the world's most gorgeous palaces and formal gardens, all filmed with a Realtor's drooling eye. Burghley House, a resplendent mid-16th-century palace in Lincolnshire, doubles as Lady Catherine's home, Rosings. At Chatsworth House in Derbyshire, the largest private country house in England, which substitutes for Mr. Darcy's home, Pemberley, the movie pauses to make a quick tour of a sculpture gallery.

For all its romantic gloss and finery, the film still reflects Austen's keen scrutiny of social mobility and the Darwinian struggle of the hungriest to advance by wielding whatever leverage is at hand. This is a world in which, for a woman, an advantageous marriage made at an early age is tantamount to safety from the jungle.

As the tide of feminism that crested two decades ago recedes and the old advance-and-retreat games of courtship return, "Pride & Prejudice" speaks wistfully to the moment. Elizabeth Bennet and Fitzwilliam Darcy are tantalizing early prototypes for a Katharine Hepburn-Spencer Tracy ideal of lovers as brainy, passionate sparring partners. That the world teems with fantasies of Mr. Darcy and his ilk there is no doubt. How many of his type are to be found outside the pages of a novel, however, is another matter.

Look what I've found in Local6.com...

When I interviewed Knightley, she told me she had never read the book and therefore had no pre-conceived notions going into the part.

I have actually heard her say in an interview that P&P used to be her favourite book and that she even had a dollhouse named 'Pemberley'...

Joe Wright hadn't read the book.

Review: 'Pride & Prejudice' Is Lush, Lovely
Director Brings Fresh Vision To Classic Story
Michelle Solomon, Staff Writer
POSTED: 12:36 pm EST November 11, 2005

Who needs another big screen telling Jane Austen's "Pride and Prejudice"?

The book is frequently on high-school recommended reading lists and the 1995 BBC series starring Colin Firth as Mr. Darcy still remains top on BBC's play list.

So why will audiences want to turn out for the latest incarnation? Four words: It is just good.

Kiera Knightley plays Elizabeth, and her portrayal of the role is one of girlish naiveté blended with a sure stubbornness. Knightley brings an originality and freshness to the role. When I interviewed Knightley, she told me she had never read the book and therefore had no pre-conceived notions going into the part.

Director Joe Wright bucks convention, which is what gives this old saw a new look. You'll immediately know this is not going to be your usual period piece by the substitution of the ampersand in his "Pride & Prejudice," rather than the conventional "and." He also does audiences a favor by not insisting that a period movie be an epic drama. His "Pride," while criticized by some for its brevity and therefore its deletion of some story elements, clocks in at a digestible movie length of a little over two hours. The swift pace and lush scenery Wright employs never lets the film let up for a minute. Frankly, I could have watched 30 minutes more.

Wright's research of the period pays off and with his taste for detail. The pigs in the Bennet household look exactly right and plump, the grassy hills look greener and in Mr. Bennet's library -- you can almost smell his pipe and dust settling on his book collection.

From the biggest names in the cast to the unknowns, there isn't an unbelievable character in the bunch. Dame Judi Dench is Darcy's aunt Lady Catherine de Bourg and while she is probably one of the characters least seen on the screen, her presence is constantly felt.

Brenda Blethyn is perfectly high strung as the exasperated Mrs. Bennet who wants nothing more than to marry her girls off and secure not only their futures, but hers. Donald Sutherland brings sensitivity to his role as doting father Mr. Bennet.

The rough and tumble Matthew Macfadyen creates Darcy in a different way than seen before. His Darcy isn't all dashing looks and strapping manners, but more of a soul-searching malcontent who is always deeply misunderstood.

The chemistry between Macfadyen and Knightley is sometimes not entirely believable, but a particularly gorgeous rain scene washes away any doubts of the two's relationship.

Devotees of Austen will find criticism with some of Wright's choices, but for anyone who just wants to enjoy a love story without computer-generated effects or other pretensions, "Pride & Prejudice" is just the ticket.

I can only hope that Wright may have a five-hour director's cut for the eventual DVD release. Meanwhile, I can't wait to immerse myself once again in the big-screen experience. Do join me.


I couldn't agree more! R~

source: The Davis Enterprise.com
"Pride and Prejudice"
By Derrick Bang/Enterprise entertainment editor
Published Nov 11, 2005 - 14:16:32 CST.

Four-and-a-half stars. Sumptuous handling of classic romantic novel a treat for the senses.

With fond memories of Colin Firth's performance as Mr. Darcy still fresh in my mind from the sumptuous five-hour 1995 miniseries adaptation of Jane Austen's “Pride and Prejudice,” my initial fear was that this new film version would be entirely superfluous.

Boy, was that a mistake.

Although the story has been (of necessity) compressed for this 128-minute adaptation, director Joe Wright's magnificent rendition of this timeless novel is as joyously fresh, clever and swooningly romantic as Austen's prose must have been, to its original readers. This is Wright's big-screen debut, after some television work, and it's an impressively accomplished job: a performance every bit as entertaining as that delivered by stars Keira Knightley and Matthew MacFadyen.

Truly, I haven't been this excited about the way a film was assembled since my first viewing of Baz Luhrmann's “Moulin Rouge.” Wright and cinematographer Roman Osin (another newcomer) make marvelous magic together, with elaborate, crowd-filled tracking shots that must've been difficult to conceive, let alone execute. The film opens with one such sequence, as Elizabeth Bennet (Knightley) returns home from one of her frequent countryside walks, and strolls from room to room in her family's somewhat cramped but lovingly happy country home, with various sisters, parents and servants moving hither and yon, conducting simultaneous conversations but never quite getting in each other's way.

The true showpiece, however, takes place during the evening ball thrown by Darcy's friend Mr. Bingley (Simon Woods), particularly when the various protagonists have ruffled each other's feathers and sent themselves to different rooms, to lick their respective wounds, as scores of capering partygoers continue their revels. It's a breathtaking, sumptuous sequence - a story all by itself - and genuinely intoxicating to watch.

Some of Wright's quieter tricks are equally inventive, as when the crowded room briefly, magically, empties while Elizabeth dances with Darcy (MacFadyen), reflecting the single-minded focus with which they stare at each other; or later in the story, when Elizabeth twists on a swing in her family barn, and time's passage is marked by changing seasons as the rope slowly unwinds; or when shadows behind Elizabeth shift as an entire day passes, while she stares at her reflection in a mirror.

On their own, of course, these are mere directorial bells and whistles: the sort of stuff used by lesser talents (Tony Scott comes to mind) trying to distract us from the absence of any substance in their films. But Wright employs such techniques in the service of Deborah Moggach's deliciously witty script, and also as a means of shading the strong performances from his talented ensemble cast; the result is sheer visual poetry from a filmmaker who clearly understands how to properly blend every possible element - image, performance, editing, music - to produce the desired result.

Austen's novels are luxuriously droll and entertaining to begin with; Wright's film echoes the author's own style and makes it even better.

I dunno where this filmmaker has been hiding, but he won't be an unknown for long. He's amazing.

“Pride and Prejudice” is the oft-told tale of Elizabeth and her four sisters, all of marrying age but still single, much to the chagrin of their eternally flustered and mildly social-climbing mother (Brenda Blethyn, hilariously self-centered). Their father (Donald Sutherland, in a remarkably warm performance) is less concerned with such frippery; whereas Mrs. Bennet would marry off any or all of her daughters for money and status, he's more concerned that each marries for love.

An opportunity arises when Mr. Bingley and his catty sister, Caroline (Kelly Reilly), set up housekeeping in a nearby manor; they arrive in the company of Darcy, Mr. Bingley's best friend. The latter is immediately attracted to Elizabeth's elder sister, the somewhat shy Jane (Rosamund Pike, acquitting herself far better than she did in “Die Another Day” .

Elizabeth's youngest sister, meanwhile - the brainless, coquettish Lydia (Jena Malone) - has become enchanted by the many liveried young soldiers who gallantly stroll through town and pop up at all the best social functions. One of these, Mr. Wickham (Rupert Friend), also catches Elizabeth's eye; at the same time, she derives considerable sport from sparring verbally with the stand-offish Darcy.

To further complicate matters, the Bennet household is invaded by a distant cousin, Mr. Collins (Tom Hollander), a simply ghastly little toad who - due to the intricacies of inheritance - controls the family fortune, and makes it known that he desires one of the Bennet daughters for a wife. Apparently any one would do, although he fixes his gaze on Elizabeth.

Elizabeth and Darcy profess mutual loathing so much that we know they're perfect for each other, but you must give Austen credit: She throws up a lot of emotional roadblocks. Every time we think True Love will win the day, another hitherto unglimpsed piece of Darcy's past pops out, irritating Elizabeth anew, and prompting yet another tart-tongued exchange of wonderfully frosty dialogue.

Although Moggach's adaptation focuses on Elizabeth, the role is Darcy is crucial: He must be lofty but not unpleasantly arrogant. Elizabeth's fascination with him must seem genuine, and not contrived. MacFadyen, probably recognized on these shores for his starring role in the British TV series “MI5,” almost overplays the haughtiness card in his early scenes - such a stiff, unpleasant boor! - but he quickly thaws just enough to make Darcy's subsequent behavior comprehensible, if at times needlessly bewildering.

(That is the nature of the beast, in all such romantic fiction: One must take for granted that the single frank conversation - the one that would solve all misunderstandings - ain't gonna happen quickly.)

Eventually, MacFadyen's Darcy becomes a classic tragic figure: trying to take well-intentioned actions for the best reasons, and forever blamed for outcomes beyond his control. The actor bears his suffering disappointment well, and we eventually can't help feeling sorry for the guy, forever at the mercy of Elizabeth's far sharper tongue.

Knightley is radiant in a role that truly suits her (and one that will, I hope, quickly snuff the unpleasant memory of “Domino” . Elizabeth is a classic Austen heroine: far too emancipated for the close of the 18th century, and bold to a degree that can't help but raise eyebrows among friends and family members. Knightley perfectly fits the period, and the part; she delivers her dialogue with well-timed irony ... and yet her sparkling, mischievous eyes and classic beauty make it obvious that, despite her strong will, she'd be the focus of every man with a heartbeat.

My only lament is that Austen's novel has been condensed so much, although Moggach assembles these “best bits” with finesse. Two of Elizabeth's sisters - Mary (Talulah Riley) and Kitty (Carey Mulligan) - are little more than afterthoughts, and a late entrance by the snobbish Lady Catherine de Bourg (Judi Dench) screams for additional backstory.

I can only hope that Wright may have a five-hour director's cut for the eventual DVD release. Meanwhile, I can't wait to immerse myself once again in the big-screen experience.

Do join me. [yes, yes a thousandfold yes! ]

Rated PG for no particular reason.

"I instantly found him sympathetic," says Macfadyen, played the rules-breaking spy on A&E's "MI-5." "There's an adolescent quality of trying to find out who you are. He's still grieving. He's guarded. I felt sorry for Darcy. He's not worried about how he's perceived. He's concerned that he does the right thing.

"I don't think his behavior changes that much," Macfadyen adds. "It's the way people perceive him that changes."

"It's really important that (Lizzy) doesn't change him," Wright says. "She helps him become more of himself."

Read the entire article here: Pride, prejudice and mud

Girls, I wouldn’t subscribe to The Monterey Herald, if I were you!! J))))

Austen power
Author Jane Austen's 'Pride and Prejudice' brought to the big screen with rich, powerful images
By ROBERT W. BUTLER

The world wasn't clamoring for another Jane Austen movie. And certainly not an adaptation of "Pride and Prejudice," which only a decade ago got first-class treatment in a five-hour British TV miniseries.
But like the Bard of Avon's plays, Austen's books are ever ripe for reinterpretation. And the new, compact "P&P" starring Keira Knightley is not only good Jane Austen, it's great moviemaking.

With his first feature film outing, Brit TV director Joe Wright, 33, slams one out of the park. With screenwriter Andrew Davies (Emma Thompson reportedly polished the script) he has jettisoned many scenes and plot threads to keep the running time to only two hours, but has compensated by making this the most cinematic Austen adaptation ever, surpassing even Ang Lee's "Sense and Sensibility."

By some alchemy he's made a film that moves swiftly yet seems attuned to the slower rhythms of life in rural 19th-century England. His richly detailed landscape has fascinating and amusing characters, and in Knightley he has found an ideal Austen heroine, a young woman whose combination of intelligence, beauty, stubbornness and high good humor is enchanting.

The film opens with an astounding visual passage as Roman Osin's camera drifts through the Barret household, introducing us not only to the members of the family but to the richly-detailed environment in which the story will unfold.
Presided over by the hyperactive, fussbudgety Mrs. Barret (a very funny Brenda Blethyn) while her scholarly husband (Donald Sutherland) keeps a low profile, the clan has four daughters of marrying age: Elizabeth (Knightley), Mary (Talulah Riley), Jane (Rosamund Pike) and Lydia (Jena Malone).

The Barret girls are poor but pretty, and it is their mother's mission in life to see them all married to well-to-do gentlemen. The arrival in their backwater of the rich bachelor Sir William Lucas (Sylvester Morand) sets Mama into matrimonial overdrive.

But being auctioned off to the highest bidder is not a fate that the plucky Elizabeth looks forward to. Armed with a vicious sense of humor, she's capable of popping the balloon of any egoistic male who falls into her orbit. Take the case of Sir William's friend Mr. Darcy (Matthew MacFadyen), a stuffy pill to whom our heroine takes an immediate dislike.

"Do you dance, Mr. Darcy?"
"Not if I can help it."

He is, she concludes, a "proud, indifferent fellow" whom "I'm bound to loathe for all eternity."
They are made for each other.

"Pride and Prejudice" is about inspiring the pompous Darcy to let down his hair and Lizzie to recognize there's a romantic guy inside. To a lesser extent the same drama is being played out with her sisters, who one by one find the man they've been looking for, whether he's a sterling fellow or an utter cad.

Wright tells this story (one might argue that all of Austen's books are essentially the same story) with much good humor, a genuine sense of burgeoning romance and a polished cinematic technique that verges on the flabbergasting.

The film's centerpiece is a long, unbroken shot following the Barret women as they arrive at Sir William's fancy dress ball. It must last five minutes, with the camera's attention being pulled this way and that, eavesdropping on conversations and spinning around the dance floor.
It's intoxicating, but not pretentious. The film is so focused on character and story that we're halfway through this amazingly complex shot before we realize that we're witnessing a tour de force of moviemaking. And in fact that's the approach Wright takes throughout the film, using brilliant visuals to illustrate his story while not calling attention to themselves.

As a comedy of manners, this "Pride" perfectly captures Austen's attitude, one of droll humor relieving a smoldering sense of outrage over a woman's lot in Georgian society. But it also works wonderfully as a romance about two people loathe to admit their mutual attraction.

Moment for moment I derived more pure pleasure from this "Pride and Prejudice" than any other movie I've seen this year. It is nearly perfect, with Keira Knightly cementing her stardom, MacFayden announcing his intention to become one, and Joe Wright delivering the "Citizen Kane" of Jane Austen movies.GO!

(Good lord! And what’s worse, the reporter writes in a tone as if he’s well informed on Austen and her era… R~* shakes her head in disbelief*)

This is a lovely, long interview with Keira and Matthew. Enjoy!

Source: Premiere; the movie magazine

Pride and Prejudice Revisited
Keira Knightley Meets her Match

By Karl Rozemeyer



“I think Pride and Prejudice you can set anywhere. It is about things that are as relevant today as they were two hundred years ago. It is about growing up. It is about making mistakes. It is about falling in love for the first time. It’s about a million different things. You can see that you can set this story anywhere because you have got Bride and Prejudice, the Bollywood version, you’ve got Bridget Jones, you’ve got so many different versions of this story. I think that it doesn’t matter where you are from, we all need a little bit of romance. So, why not.”
—Keira Knightley

The contrast in personality between Keira Knightley and Matthew MacFadyen is as marked in person as it is on screen in their roles as Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy in the latest adaptation of the Jane Austen novel Pride and Prejudice (Focus Features). The maturity of Knightley’s comments belie her age: the star of Bend it Like Beckham, King Arthur and Pirates of the Caribbean is just twenty years old. And yet she has an unmistakable youthful effervescence. Wide-eyed and upbeat, she gushes hyperboles (“Fantastic!” and expletives (“****!” in almost equal amounts. MacFadyen is eleven years her senior. Despite his closely cropped hair (“I am doing this film in Ireland and I wanted it to be shorter” he is every bit the tall, dark and somewhat brooding handsome gentleman that one associates with the infamous Mr. Darcy. Says Knightley of her co-star: “We go for this quite androgynous look in our leading men at the moment which is lovely. Johnny Depp, Orlando Bloom. Beautiful! (They’re) absolutely lovely but it is terribly romantic to have that big guy. He is a bit of a Richard Burton-type…And what is incredibly romantic is that you have got this big man but he is so vulnerable, as well. And it is so rare to see that in cinema.”

Dark kohl framing her eyes, Knightley is glamorously dressed in black with a jangle of arm bracelets that shake noisily every time she gesticulates. Gone is her preferred choice of grunge jeans-and-t-shirts and heavy boots. “That’s because I have had hair and make-up! Fantastic!” she exclaims. But her personal sense of dress and style is underscored when she reveals what items she took away from the late 18th-century set of the film: “I got my stripy stockings—which were my big thing. I wanted stripes for Elizabeth! I was really obsessed about stripes. And (director) Joe (Wright) was like: ‘Well, you can’t have every single one of your dresses striped but I will give you stripy stockings’. So all my stockings in the film where striped. So I got those. What else did I get? I got the boots. Lizzie always wears boots. Those green kind of boots.”

Dressed in a light pink shirt, MacFadyen is more hesitant in his speech than Knightley and has a distinct reserve, keeping his sentences short and to the point. Even his filmography is quieter than Knightley’s. He describes the highlights of his career thus far as: “Probably when I played Benedict in this Much Ado About Nothing play tour. And I did a TV film called Warriors which was kind of a first break on telly and that was a film about the soldiers in Bosnia and the war there. That was a highlight. I have had a lot of nice jobs. I have been very lucky…And I did a play at the National with Michael Gambon recently.”

Taking on the roles of two of the most beloved characters of the English novel tradition had to be daunting for Knightley and MacFadyen but both were aware that they were also taking on parts that had already been defined by actors before them. Mr. Darcy has been portrayed famously by Sir Laurence Olivier and more recently in the BBC TV series by Colin Firth. “I was a little bit daunted,“ concedes MacFadyen, “But like any part that is well known. I felt quite flattered. I am in very good company.’” However, he had neither read the book nor seen Firth’s performance before filming began: “A lot of people asked at the outset how it was going to be different from Colin Firth’s (portrayal). But I didn’t have any kind of frame of reference.” He does admit that this was a conscious decision. “Although I didn’t sit down and think to myself: ‘I am not going to do this (research).’ I just kind of didn’t bother. My wife was pregnant at the time. I just couldn’t sit and watch six hours. Because it is our screenplay we are shooting. It is different. And I had an experience with that. I did a Trollope (adaptation) on the telly, a thing called The Way We live Now. We had a brilliant script written by Andrew Davies and I started reading the book and it said the character I was playing was black-haired and green-eyed and whippet thin. I just thought this is not useful because you are not shooting the book.” And although he has never met Firth he claims to be a big fan of his work: “I saw Tumbledown, a film he did of the Falklands War. I had kind of seen a lot of him as I was growing up and before I went to drama school.”

Knightley’s affair with the role of Elizabeth Bennett, by contrast, had begun when she was just a child: “I read the book a lot. I’ve been obsessed by the book since I was about seven. I had all the Austen series on book tape and I used to listen to it on a loop. And I was obsessed by the BBC version when I was about eleven, maybe ten. And then I read the book finally when I was about fourteen and got obsessed again. Then when I was offered the role, I read it. I was terrified of doing it because I had been really obsessed with the BBC version I thought I was going to do an absolute copy of Jennifer Ehle’s performance and that would be awful. I mean, she was fantastic but it would be awful if I tried to copy her.” The prospect of taking the part weighed heavily on Knightley: she made notes and even was so terrified that before shooting had begun she had learned the entire script, her part and everybody else’s by heart.

Knightley feels Elizabeth Bennett is a universal character for all women: “It is partly because she is a character—I’m making a huge generalization here but I am assuming—that every woman would want to be. Which is sort of this incredibly passionate, clever, witty, intelligent, just amazing being but also somebody who seems so annoying. And you want to her kick up the ass and just say: ‘Oh, sort it out!’. So she is flawed, really flawed. You can imagine her going into a room and being slightly nervous about it, thinking: ‘I feel really stupid right now’…I think you see yourselves in all (Austen’s) characters, all her strong women.” And yet for Knightley Elizabeth Bennett embodies the unattainable—characteristics that she can only aspire to: “She is the sort of person (who) comes up with all the put downs that I always think: ‘I should have said that!’ She is the person who can come up with it really quickly. So I think she is still the person I want to be and I will never get there. I am just not clever enough.”

Both actors claim to recognize aspects of themselves in their characters but MacFadyen’s identification with Darcy borders on compassion. “There is a bit of Darcy in everyone. I found it very sympathetic. I found it kind of heartbreaking at times really. Nobody is just arrogant and cold without reason. I kind of thought he was a young man who was still trying to work out who he was, is, who to be with, still grieving the loss of his parents.“ MacFadyen recognizes that wounded pride can both humiliate and spark an attraction: “It is terribly attractive when your pomposity is noticed and then punctured in public. It is infuriating and embarrassing and you hate that person. When (Elizabeth) humiliates (Darcy) at the Merriton Ball, he finds it incredibly funny. I mean, he is mortified and hates her but goes home and locks all the doors and laughs hysterically into the pillow. That is why she is so attractive.”

MacFadyen describes his prepping for the role as “fairly straightforward. It is such a beautifully written part and it is such a lovely part to play (that) it makes an actor’s job easier rather than having to wade through and work out what it is all about.” Although, neither MacFadyen nor Knightley are strangers to period pieces, preparation for the roles began early with the two undergoing private rehearsals with director Joe Wright a week before filming commenced. “And we were really lucky because we had historians come in and give us lectures and we had etiquette lessons and all that kind of stuff,’ says Knightley. “It was good because I think doing a piece like this you have to learn the rules to be able know how to break them. So it was good to be clear about what the rules were.” Learning the rules and codes of behavior for men and women during the Regency period was imperative for the film’s authenticity. “There are different ways of walking and talking.,” says MacFadyden, “There are different ways of being in a room with women than there are now…The fact that they wouldn’t touch and they wouldn’t talk about (their emotions) pre-Freud: ‘So, this is how I am feeling Lizzie and how do you feel about this?’ So the slightest thing is charged. The slightest touch would be so immense. Whereas now we are all so tactile.” There is no lip-locking in the film at all “because they wouldn’t have, at least not until after they were married. It is all held in. You don’t need to do a big kind of snog.”



And about costume dramas in general, Knightley says she loves them: "I love going to see them. I can't wait for Memoirs of a Geisha . That just looks absolutely beautiful. And I love performing in them. Because in a funny kind of way, you feel more free. You know about the period. You can read the books. You can see the paintings. But you're never actually going to know what it was like. You are never going to have been there so there is always room: you can stretch those boundaries a bit."

The historical exactness that proved to be the most taxing on both actors were the highly complicated choreographed 18th Century dance steps. MacFadyen notes: "I had done a bit of stuff from vaguely that period before so I knew bits and bobs." But describes his dancing as "shaky" at best. Knightley is more self-deprecating: "I made myself look like an idiot! It was great because we actually started rehearsals off with the dancing and there is nothing that is going to break the ice more than everybody looking so stupid. So you don't know what to do with your limbs. You say: 'Oh, God this feels stupid.' I absolutely loved it. I really loved it. It was kind of difficult (especially) the scene with Darcy, where it is talking and dancing at the same time. And you do it once and it is difficult enough to remember the steps and then they take the music away so that you have got to say the lines. So you are trying to remember what the music is and trying to say the lines…and then Joe took everyone else that you were dancing with away as well. So suddenly we had to dance with absolutely no one there and no music. And it was suddenly like: 'Ok, I have no idea what we are doing now.' Yeah, it was quite difficult but I loved that." Agrees MacFadyen: "That was a hard day. That was a long day…Terrible, when you miss each other (in the dance)."

But the scene that both actors single out as memorable is the proposal scene, shot under rain machines. "That was a good scene,' says MacFadyen, "We called it the 'car crash scene'". He describes it as his favorite while Knightley says it was the most difficult. "Just because it was quite complex. You want to get that sexual tension between them. You want to get the fact that they really ******* fancy each other but that they hate each other at the same time. And sometimes you go too far and wonder and you have to pull it back. But that is what is great about the job: it's when it is difficult it is fantastic."

The cast of Pride and Prejudice includes some of the great living icons of modern British cinema and theatre, including Dame Judi Dench, Donald Sutherland and Brenda Blethyn. Working alongside them was for MacFadyen a great experience but he demurred from discussing acting with any of them or asking for thespian tips: "I am much too afraid of appearing earnest and gauche. So we just gossip and talk ****. But inevitably just by being with or Judi Dench or people like that…I mean, actors steal things from other actors all the time…you watch how they operate and how they work and it all sinks in." Knightley seems as much in awe of her older co-stars but has trouble identifying what it is that makes them masters of their craft: "Like Johnny (Depp), I have watched Johnny and I go: 'Right, you are a genius; you're a legend. I am going to understand how it works and I am going to be better than you, watching you.' I have no ******* idea how that happens. I don't know what you are doing. I don't know where it comes from. So I haven't been able to steal anything. I think what I have learned, actually from working with everyone, but mostly from this with Donald Sutherland and with Judi Dench, (is that) they were both really nervous when they started, really nervous and both so excited by it….As a twenty year-old actress, you go: 'They are still learning. Nothing is ever good enough. They are still hungry for it.' That is brilliant. And it is the same with Johnny Depp. You watch him playing Jack Sparrow and he is loving it. He's loving playing it. He's loving being in that world. He's excited by it. And sometimes he goes: 'Oh, was that alright? Was that okay?' And you think: 'You're Johnny Depp, man! You know that is okay!'"

But perhaps the most arresting memory that they take away from being on set with living legend Judi Dench is not her boundless fascination with acting but her penchant for subversive needlework. Her work certainly did not resemble the delicately stitched roses of a Mrs. Bennet. "She makes these like needlework embroideries on set in the tedium of filming", says MacFadyen, "but they are all: 'You Are a ******* And she gives them as presents. And it's Dame Judi Dench. And she is doing this beautifully, intricate, ornate (work). You kind of see the work materializing as the shoot goes on. Like: 'You Are a ******* ****.' Knightley never received her embroidered cushion from Dench but remarks: "I love that! She gives this fantastic air. She just sits there and she embroiders and you think: 'Oh, that's so nice! It's Judi Dench. It's so quaint; she's embroidering a cushion,' and you go: 'What are you embroidering?' And (it says): '****!' Apparently she's got hundreds of them just covered in swear words or rude sayings."

Of the final finished film, MacFadyen says: "I don't know what I was expecting really. I was really pleased when I saw it. I think Joe has done a really lovely job. There has been a lot of hype about it being very gritty and real. But I think…that it isn't chocolate boxy. Like when it is all sweet and saccharine and everyone has ringlets and everyone looks lovely. Like the Merchant Ivory glow. There is a period glow which is so beautiful but it is not real and I think Joe has taken that away. It still looks gorgeous. Like (you think) the Bennets are very successful because you really think they live there but then the house is all full of pigs and chickens and ****." Pressed to say if she felt parts of the book's plot line had been sacrificed in the final edit, says Knightley: "Oh, of course. I think it is a difficult thing when you try and make a film of book you really love because you only ever have about two hours to tell the story and it is never going to be enough.'" Perhaps the most anticipated quote from the novel is the line: "It is a truth universally acknowledged (that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife)". "(But) we don't do that line! Which is quite extraordinary and actually I didn't realize that until I saw the film the first time and sort of went: 'Wait a minute. We don't say the most famous line in the entire book!'—which is, I think, quite good actually because you expect that one. There is a lot more of the Wickham stuff in the book that I love. I love all that Lydia/Wickham stuff that we never shot. It was never written into the script again because you had to cut it. You have only got two hours and you have got to focus in on this aspect. (But) what is lovely about it is that you go: 'You know what, there is quite a wealth of stuff that we had to leave out because it didn't go with our story so therefore the next film of Pride and Prejudice can focus on that and that will be fantastic. That will be nice.'"

Source: The Flick Filosopher of 11/14/05. Review written by Mary Ann Johanson...

Regency Rave: Pride and Prejudice

R~

“In your heart you love it—you know there are things wrong with it, but you love it and you can’t help it.”

Indeed! a critical review but enthusiastic all the same...

Source: Chicago Maroon, online edition

New Pride & Prejudice just a little Austen-tatious
By Azure Gilman
November 15, 2005 in Voices

Let me preface this article by admitting the awful truth: I am a Pride & Prejudice-loving, Colin Firth-worshipping, total Jane Austen geek. If you’re one of those people who hate Jane Austen, and ridicule the silly girls who love Pride & Prejudice, stop reading now. This article is not for you.

It’s impossible to talk about this new movie without first at least mentioning what has come before—notably, the six-part BBC miniseries. Even the most pop culture–inept person would have found it hard to miss the Colin Firth fever that almost swept both sides of the Atlantic from Bridget Jones’s Diary. It may not be right, but it’s inevitable that moviegoers compare the two versions, and I’m no exception.

For the record, I was not particularly thrilled that a new version was coming out in the first place. I’m loyal to the BBC’s version, and anyone else playing Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy just seemed wrong. In short, this new version is treading on sacred ground. It would have been so easy for this movie to go terribly, terribly wrong. I’m happy to report, however, that it is definitely not a train wreck. Keira Knightly did a great job. She doesn’t pose to be admired but perfectly captures the vitality of Lizzy Bennet, bringing some unexpected and much appreciated humor to the character. Knightly’s otherwise unknown talent for comedy shines through. Our new Mr. Darcy is an entirely different matter. Mathew MacFadyen delivers his lines as if he’s struggling to remember the words, and rushes them out at the expense of emotion and believability. MacFayden improves over the course of the movie—Darcy’s failed marriage proposal is particularly good—but for the most part he seems concerned with looking moody. At a certain point it just becomes too much. We get it. You’re a brooding kind of guy—let’s move on.

It’s the supporting characters in Pride & Prejudice that truly bring it to life. Mrs. Bennet is perfect and, for my money, the best thing about the film. Bingley is transformed into a loveable geek, and Jane is perfect as the reserved and golden-hearted older sister, that is, without a doubt, better than her BBC counterpart. The audience at the theater where I saw the film especially loved Mr. Collins, who, just so you know, sports an entirely appropriate mullet.

If there was one glaringly ridiculous move on the film’s part, it was the choice of cheesy romantic scenery. There is extremely moody weather and, instead of actually heightening emotion, it just seems silly when important conversations only take place at dawn or dusk. The pacing is also a little off. The tension that should slowly build between Elizabeth and Darcy happens much too fast. They jump straight from arguing to intense looks that seem to say “I want to rip your clothes off.” Darcy, in particular, lacks a transition from “annoyed” to “enamored,” and, really, that’s what everyone is there to see. The audience wants to be convinced along with the protagonists themselves, and the movie chooses to work off assumptions rather than earn the ending.

The good news about the new Pride & Prejudice is that you forget about Colin Firth—it stands on its own. The bad news is that the film didn’t really bring anything new to the canon of prior Pride & Prejudice renditions. Things were generally good, but nothing was really different or spectacular. The director’s attempt to experiment with camera angles doesn’t amount to a new vision that absolutely must be shared with the world.

Of course, I really liked this movie. It’s a good, giddy time, and leaves you with that high, distinctly associated with happy love stories. But I’m not so sure how much of that is the movie’s doing and how much is just the nature of the story. You tell me. At the end of the day there’s no way that I can possibly judge this movie. As my friend Roshan said afterwards, “In your heart you love it—you know there are things wrong with it, but you love it and you can’t help it.” Exactly. If you really want to know the truth, ask that snobby movie kid in your dorm. I say, go.

A short review but a few original things are said... Things I like very much, actually. Particularly how the reviewer views Mr. Bennet.

Odd though that he/she saw the British version...

Source: The Daily Campus (Connecticut University)

'Pride and Prejudice' Transitions to Big Screen Effortlessly
By: MAGESH NANDAGOPAL
Issue date: 11/16/05 Section: Focus

Adapting one of the most beloved romantic novels of all-time is strewn with dangerous pitfalls. Any misstep guarantees creative abyss. This adaptation of "Pride and Prejudice" not only sidesteps all those pitfalls, but succeeds commendably in giving one of the best romantic comedies of the year.

The film launches the proceedings with great verve and energy, and zips by for the first 45 minutes. Traditional English society doesn't give itself to this type of energetic story-telling. Most of the actions, however passionately motivated that may be, is clothed in impeccable, stifling manners and seemingly innocuous utterances. Violence and action in such settings occurs not in the foreground. The movie breaks all these barriers and finds a way to unfold with breakneck pace and urgency. Watch the ballroom scene, where it zooms directly into the action conveying such immediacy and intimacy with the characters.

Another achievement is recreating the period settings. The film has an impeccable sense of space and time. The claustrophobic, over decorated interiors of the Bennet's, the expansive country locales and farm houses all aid the story-telling, without any intrusion.

Recreating legendary characters is a high-risk, high-payoff endeavor. Kiera Knightley ("Pirates of the Caribbean"), contrary to her previous uninspired work, pulls-off playing Elizabeth Bennet with great aplomb. She has enough range and charisma to support her role. The rub is Matthew McFadyen, who plays Mr. Darcy. Instead of portraying a character who personifies emotional and class conflict, he looks like a moody puppy with under-developed social skills.

The real pleasure is watching the supporting characters in action. Judy Dench, with a hairdo resembling a raging ball of fire, has mastered the art of stealing the movie even if she has minimal screen time. Brenda Blethyn, Rosamund Pike (the Bond girl from "Die Another Day") and Jena Malone all turn in worthy performances. The most interesting character in the film is Mr. Bennet. Donald Sutherland has the most fun playing this character. He is man who has learned to live with contradictions. He is not very pleased with his wife's actions, but still very much loves her. Watch him in the ballroom scene, in the background, where when his wife stands close to him, he slyly turns toward her, and ruffles his nose in the feathers in her hat. This action says volumes. The old man is practical enough to play along with the societal requirements, but has preserved enough of the child in him, to give in to such romantic impulses.

Unlike other romantic comedies, this film doesn't end with the lovers proclaiming their love for each other. It follows the emotional arc of the story to its completion by placing at the end the scene where Bennet gives his consent to his daughter's wedding. This scene glows with such understanding, warmth and tenderness it results in one of the most endearing father-daughter conversations in film.

Source: The Santa Monica Mirror online / 16/11/05
AT THE MOVIES: Lovesick
Sasha Stone, Mirror film critic Pride and Prejudice (***1/2)

In Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice, Fitzwilliam Darcy, or just plain Darcy, has it all, particularly when brought to life by the likes of men like Colin Firth, and now, Matthew MacFadyen in the latest adaptation of Austen’s masterwork. With his unrecognized charm, his sudden and uncontrollable passion, his moral core, his manners, to say nothing of his unimaginable riches, there is no better catch on the page. Leave it to a woman to write such a man. Nature couldn’t do it, so we had to.

That may be reason enough to bring Pride and Prejudice back to the big screen, even after the Jennifer Ehle/Colin Firth version on PBS. And it’s also why the first Bridget Jones was so good – you can’t screw up Darcy. Put him, or any permutation of him in a film and we women will fall all over ourselves to get a taste of his charm.

But more than even the easy mark of Darcy, bringing back Pride and Prejudice, to many, seemed redundant and pointless. Perhaps that would be true were it not for Keira Knightley. When an actress comes along who is so suited to the role, so naturally vibrant, everything Lizzy Bennet should be, people should move mountains to get the film made.

Playing a fiery Austen heroine has done much good for other A-list actresses like Kate Winslet (Sense and Sensibility) and Gwyneth Paltrow (Emma). It is likely to be the role that puts Knightley firmly on the map as a leading lady and show what the very pretty girl can really do. It is Knightley who provides this adaptation with its uniqueness; has there ever really been an actress so perfect for this character? Many would say, Ehle was the quintessential Lizzie – and perhaps that’s true to the degree that she is a more accomplished actress. Yet it is Knightley’s rough edges and youthful abandon, however, that breathe new life into this story. Otherwise, why would we bother?

For those unfamiliar with the tale, Pride and Prejudice is the story of the Bennett family, a family burdened with no money and too many daughters to marry off. In order to survive financially (women can’t work, of course, and must be well-bred to be married well) the daughters must marry rich men. This puts a strain on the family because, naturally, the daughters want to marry for love, not wealth. Lizzie doesn’t find love until she realizes it’s been right there in front of her all along in the form of Darcy (MacFadyen). It is her pride and prejudice that prevents her from letting him in. Ultimately, he proves himself worthy of her affection and the rest is literary history.

Austen is marvelous in small doses but see enough film adaptations of her work back to back and the similarities between storylines begin to emerge, much as they do in other prolific writers’ work. Austen can always be counted on to feature good and bad men who woo, close sisterly relationships, hateful rich relatives on whom the good people’s fortune depends, fiery heroines, and shy, withdrawn ones. Austen writes people as opposites, extremes, and it takes an intelligent actor to bring the hidden complexities to life.

Even though we know the story backwards and forwards, Knightley keeps us guessing what emotions play across her face. She is, as Tracy is described in The Philadelphia Story “lit from within.” The camera loves her and it is impossible to take your eyes off her, both for her beauty as well for her unpredictability.

The story here really depends on the love story between Lizzie and Darcy. Even though everyone knows they will eventually fall madly in love, it is the getting there that is like indulging in fine chocolate. The rigid Darcy takes notice of, but then purposefully ignores Lizzie. But she melts his heart and finally he has no choice but to desperately proclaim that she has “bewitched” him “body and soul.” At which point, women everywhere simultaneously swoon.

MacFadyen’s Darcy is different than Firth’s (both Firth as the PBS Darcy and Firth as the Bridget Jones Darcy) in that he appears less intimidating, but equally priggish. There is something so undeniably attractive about him that there is no doubt Lizzie will be drawn in. And Austen makes it clear that Lizzie is the prize, too – not because she’s the fairest in the land, not because she has money (she has none) but because she believes in passion and decency. In Knightley, these qualities are so obvious they don’t have to be dug out from the text.

Joe Wright directed the adaptation with a naturalist’s eye, befitting the 19th century. It is raw rather than sumptuous, rugged and muddy rather than pristine. The film was adapted by Deborah Maggach in a way that might enrage Austen-ites but will make the story more accessible to today’s jaded generation.

As with all of Austen’s stories, there is always a weary elder who wears the burden of an annoying spouse or a tradition that traps people in roles they can hardly bear. Where Lizzie pierces right out of convention and finds her own way, her father (Donald Sutherland) sadly tolerates it. Sutherland hasn’t been this good in years.

Pride and Prejudice is a version of the Austen work no one will likely forget, even if purists still cling to the Ehle/Firth version. It brings a healthy dose of romance back into our tired, old lives and reminds us that prematurely judging others, whether judging them because they are rich or poor, will ultimately deny us the potential for untold pleasure and incandescent happiness.

The Strand: student newspaper of Victoria University

Even Colin Firth would like this movie
By: Aine O'Hare
Issue date: 11/17/05 Section: Film & Music

Keep the Uggs in the attic and save the anime for Tarantino: if Keira Knightley's latest performance is anything to go on, pop culture's current fixation with the Victorian era isn't about to fade away just yet. Pride and Prejudice, the Universal Pictures adaptation of the oh-so-famous Jane Austen novel, is as delightful as a ball at Hertfordshire, crumpets with the gentry, or a merry jaunt along the Thames - and not nearly as irritating as words like "gentry" and "merry".

Keira Knightley and Matthew MacFadyen star as Lizzie Bennet and Mr. Darcy, one of literature's most beloved pair of pigheaded Brits. The chemistry between the two is enough to shift the focus away from MacFadyen's unfortunate hairstyle, and the film offers a refined alternative to the usual tripe that tends to dominate the realm of the "chick flick". One can't help but get the feeling that this is the role that Knightley was born to play: the quick-witted, waifish English rose, blending equal parts prissy snob and tomboy. The film is marked by the complexity of its characters, and appears very much as Lizzie's story: one which is more played out in subtle facial gestures and superb intonation than headstrong actions and pronouncements. Knightley's Lizzie has moxie, but she doesn't necessarily wear it on her sleeve, nor does MacFadyen's Mr. Darcy expose his soft, mushy middle until the end, when all the external layers have been stripped away.

Perhaps one of the film's greatest strengths lies in its portrayal of Lizzie's relationship with her family, which allows actors like Donald Sutherland, Brenda Blethyn and Judi Dench to radiate as Mr. and Mrs. Bennet and Lady Catherine de Bourgh, respectively. Rosamund Pike is adorable as Jane, the Bennet family beauty, and Simon Woods' portrayal of Mr. Bingley mixes the awkwardness of courtship with the elitism of aristocracy into comic brilliance - comedy perhaps helped in part by his resemblance to Ron Weasley. Thankfully, the main parts in the movie are played almost exclusively by actors hailing from Mother England, saving the audience from the agony of American actors choking on phony British accents.

Many fans of the novel are likely already familiar with the A&E miniseries of the same name, starring Jennifer Ehle and Colin Firth. While purists will argue that the A&E production is more in tune with the finer details of Austen's novel, the beauty of this movie lies in how it manages to sum up in two hours what the miniseries showed in five. While we see the Bennet sisters buying ribbons for the ball and giggling over unmarried men, we don't hear every discussion pertaining to how "agreeable", "suitable" or "tolerable" each and every character is.

So just how agreeable is Pride and Prejudice? As lovely as a steaming cup of Earl Grey, as refreshing as a brisk stroll through the countryside, as jolly good as a- oh, forget it. Suffice to say that Ms. Austen would be proud.

Wanna know a bit more about Donald Sutherland? Read this interview...

Hero nor Villain

source: The Capital Times: Wisconsin's progessive newspaper
19 November 2005

The Artful Shopper: 'Pride' is awesome Austen

By Linda Brazill
November 19, 2005

The latest screen adaptation of Jane Austen's "Pride and Prejudice" is light years away from all earlier versions, all six of them.

The best contenders for faithfulness to Austen's matchless mating tale of Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy are the 1995 BBC version starring Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle (distributed by A&E Home Video, 300 minutes) and the 1979 BBC version with Elizabeth Garvie and David Rintoul (distributed by CBS/Fox Video, 226 minutes).

At a mere 128 minutes, the new P&P, which hit area movie screens last Friday starring Keira Knightley and Matthew Macfadyen, is too short to tell the tale in text. Instead the movie envelopes you in another world, one that is viscerally physical and completely absorbing.

For the first time, I found myself in a real world instead of the genteel world that usually makes it to the screen in Austen adaptations. And it is a world that fiber artists, gardeners, and homebodies, in particular, will applaud. You could watch this new P&P multiple times, each time concentrating on something different, and none of them the story line.

The movie opens with our girl Lizzie crossing the moat that surrounds the Bennet house only to be caught in a sea of billowing clothes drying outdoors in the laundry yard. She steps inside into a darker world of wood paneled walls rather than the pastels of most Austen movie interiors.

These rooms are human scale and they are filled with the stuff of daily life, especially the books and dolls and needlework and clothing that five young women would be likely to leave strewn about. As one of four sisters I recognized the truth of that interior.

Because Groombridge Place -- the building that stands in for the Bennet house -- exists in reality rather than on a movie back lot, there are all sorts of other associations one makes, especially if you know your English country houses (which folks in the theater clearly did as they could be heard naming names).

For my money, P&P's opening scene is a secret nod to Peter Greenaway, the director who used the self-same 17th century moated house in Kent as the setting for his very different movie, the 1982 cult favorite, "The Draughtsman's Contract."

In that esoteric and erotic film, a young artist is hired by the wealthy owner of an estate to do a series of drawings of the house and garden for her absent husband. The laundry yard is depicted in the film and in one of the drawings, drawings which ultimately seem to implicate the draughtsman in the mystery at the film's core.

According to the Groombridge Web site, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was so enamored of the tipsy yew topiary in the estate's Drunken Garden that he set a scene there in one of his Sherlock Holmes stories, "The Valley of Fear." These days the 200 acres also feature gardens by the avant-garde landscape designer Ivan Hicks.

British photographer Rose Atkinson has shots of Groombridge taken earlier this year which show the house, the moat and a few of the gardens. You can see them on her Web site (see related article), where you can also see the "car park" adjacent to the house and tourists walking the paths. Atkinson also has photos of Beth Chatto's gardens, Penshurst Place and Stratford-Upon-Avon.

This new P&P is dripping with famous houses and locations. There's the Temple of Apollo at Stourhead, which appears as though it's part of the grounds of Burghley House, the Elizabethan masterpiece standing in for Rosings, the home of Mr. Darcy's aunt.

The exterior and a bit of the interior of Darcy's home are portrayed by Chatsworth, the largest private country house in England, home of Deborah, Duchess of Devonshire. The duchess, as well as many scholars, believe Austen based Darcy's literary home on Chatsworth as it looked at the time she was writing. It's known she visited in the area but whether she actually saw Chatsworth is not clear.

However, Austen's description of the building in the novel is very like a painting of the house done at the same time. (The Chatsworth library boasts a first edition of "Pride and Prejudice").

The movie is filled with glorious views of the English countryside, including the most dramatic tree I've ever seen. This tree is so big and old that its roots look like writhing snakes. Lizzie and her aunt and uncle are pictured sitting among the roots and they are dwarfed by them, to say nothing of the trunk. I would not have minded a bit if the movie took a break to circle that tree and let us gaze up into its branches.

Juxtaposed against all these luxurious estates and wealthy folk is an array of clothes and domestic linens that speak of everyday life. Of particular note is the use of subtle colors as well as the many browns and creams of natural materials like linen fabric. I reveled in the workers' traditional English smocks as well as Mrs. Bennet's bed pillows and Lizzie's embroidered robe and walking coat. Daily life in this film is so sensual and tactile that modern amenities pale by comparison.

Are Knightley and Macfadyen the perfect Elizabeth and Darcy? Of course not. That couple only exists in the mind of Janeites everywhere. But the production itself is pure perfection.

Very ADAPTABLE

The latest version of 'Pride & Prejudice' follows a long line of literary favorites made - and remade - into movies. Here's how Hollywood's take on these popular books stack up.

Read the rest of the article in The Buffalo News here, and enjoy the pictures:

Very adaptable

Sourse: Whittier Daily News LA - 11/27/05

AUSTEN powers
Why Keira Knightley's earning raves in the new 'Pride & Prejudice'
By Bob Strauss, Staff Writer

At the tender age of 20, Keira Knightley already has experienced the ups and downs of the acting game several times over. So far, it's been a blast.

"I'm very aware that this is a profession that, you know, comes and goes in a second," says the sharp-witted English lass. "That's what makes it beautiful. But you have to enjoy your moment, because it's only a moment, and then it's gone. And that's fine."

Right now she's on the high end of another rise-and-fall cycle. Knightley is receiving raves for her portrayal of Elizabeth Bennet in the latest film adaptation of Jane Austen's "Pride and Prejudice," which has already made a small fortune in Europe, and opened here earlier this month to unexpectedly rave reviews. Many are already dubbing Knightley as one of the front-runners in the Oscar best actress category.

This after the instant crash and burn in October of "Domino," Tony Scott's psychotropic "interpretation" of doomed bounty hunter Domino Harvey's bizarre life. Though Knightley threw everything she had into the picture, most critics couldn't take it (though this particular one had a great time), and the film died a quick box-office death.

No apologies from Knightley, though, who's seen her star rise with "Bend It Like Beckham" and "Pirates of the Caribbean," fall with "King Arthur" and "The Jacket," and now rocket again, all within little more than two years.

"You've got to keep your mind active," reckons the actress, who famously developed her chops as a dyslexic child by memorizing books on tape. "That's why I did 'Domino' straight after 'Pride & Prejudice.' It was terrifying. But in life, I think, I play things very, very safe. I'm not a risk-taker in any way. But in my professional life, I take risks. I think that's the only way to do it. Sometimes I'm going to make huge mistakes. But at least I'll have given it a try."

"Pride" succeeds by taking a few liberties with the sacred Austen text itself (there's even a kiss at the end of the American cut, though not the European one). Set in 1796, when it was written, rather than the more conventional 1813 when the book was published, it's a subtly grungier, more politically/economically savvy and realistic take on the material than we've seen before.

In fact, director Joe Wright, a veteran of contemporary British television drama, initially felt that the lithe, picture-pretty Knightley was too perfect an English rose for the strong-willed second of the five unmarried Bennet sisters.

"Originally, I thought that Keira might be too beautiful to play Elizabeth Bennet," Wright confirms. "I thought that Elizabeth should probably be a little bit plainer. But I was excited to meet her nevertheless, and I did so in a dark, basement bar of a Montreal hotel late one night.

"She was an extraordinary, tomboyish, scruffy kid who speaks her own mind and doesn't say what she thinks you want to hear. She has an incredible wit and independence of spirit. All of those qualities suggested to me that she was a perfect Elizabeth Bennet, regardless of the fact that she was probably a little bit too pretty."

"I've heard that Aishwarya Rai is the most beautiful woman in the world," Knightley says of the Indian actress who starred in the recent Brit/Bollywood update of the Austen novel, "Bride & Prejudice." "I think it's a bit rich that people say that I'm too pretty to play Elizabeth Bennet. If she's played it ... !"

Knightley's mock indignation belies the great deal of effort that she put into bringing one of her favorite literary characters to life. (Yes, she devoured a "P and P" book on tape, and the print version several times after she trained herself to read). The character's spunky individualism does correlate with Knightley's own nature. But getting the 18th-century particulars of it right required a lot of study.

"She is both modern and completely of her time," the actress notes. "What you have to do when you're playing a character like Lizzie, who is to some degree quietly a rebel, you have to know exactly what the rules are. So we had etiquette classes when we were doing the film, we had a historian come in and lecture us. You have to know your period in order to break the rules.

"There are simple things that maybe an audience would never pick up, but for me, playing the character,

are very important. Like in the ball scene, Elizabeth Bennet doesn't wear gloves. That's incredibly rebellious because everybody would've worn gloves. And there are things - like she slumps, she puts her elbows on the table, she laughs out loud, and she doesn't cover her mouth. Those things were terribly important for me, and it's fun to know for yourself when you're actually breaking the rules and when you're not."

Helping to get in character, of course, are all of those lovely period frocks and the extravagant grooming of the time.

Yeah, right.

"It gets quite annoying, actually," Knightley says of hair and makeup and all the rest. "You normally find that, the first couple of days of filming, you have about two hours to get ready, which means that your call is at some ridiculous hour in the morning, like about 4:30. So you just really resent the costumes.

"But what's great is, as the movie goes on, you learn tricks about how to get into them really quickly and tricks about how to do the hair and makeup so it's only going to take 20 minutes. And it's quite nice because it brings a realistic quality to the costumes. You get quite messy about it. I'm always very precise for the first couple of days; it's got to be a certain way. By halfway through the film, you just live in them."

Whatever aids such things provide, it's understanding the character that's the key to a successful performance. As Wright intuited, possessing some of Lizzie's personality qualities was also a big help.

But how stubborn is Knightley, really?

"Can be," she chirps. "I've had my moments. But I can't be bothered to be stubborn all the time. Professionally, I'm not hugely stubborn. I like to be told what to do, I like directors with a vision."

What about personally? Does Keira put guys through the wringer the way Lizzie does Mr. Darcy?

"No, it's the same thing," she says. "I am somebody who'll just go, 'Oh, whatever.' "

At the moment, Knightley is alternating working hard and trying to kill time at the remote Bahamas location of the next two "Pirates of the Caribbean" movies, which have been shooting simultaneously since February and are scheduled to continue through next March.

"I'm not sorry I got involved in these things; it really is great," she says. "It's just that it's a long time. I can't even see the end of it.

"But what's nice is that it's like piecing together a jigsaw, and you feel like you've accomplished something at the end of the day. And all of the guys - the cast is fantastic, and it's all the same people again. But you slightly get island fever because there's not a lot to do. I've gotten through more books than I've ever read in my entire life. I definitely prefer working down there. Those islands are great for holiday, i.e. a week or two weeks. But not for months."

That said, it more than beats trying to eke out a living on the London stage and in the British TV industry, as Keira's actor dad, Will Knightley, and playwright mom, Sharman Macdonald, did for many years.

"Are you kidding? Absolutely," Keira affirms. "I come from a family of actors, I know what this profession is. I know the highs, and I know the lows. I know how lucky I am. And it is lucky.

"I'd love to say yes, I've worked really hard and I completely deserve it," she says of the current accolades. "I don't deserve it. I've worked hard because I've been allowed to work hard. Acting isn't like being a musician or an artist. If you don't get paid work as an artist, you can still paint. If you don't get paid work as a musician, you can still make music. If you don't get work as an actor, you can't really act. You need the work to be given to you. So, yeah, I'm very aware of how fortunate I am."