Pride & Prejudice: Book & Film Review

                I will start this review with a statement that will be unwelcome by all: Pride and Prejudice is not my favourite Austen novel.

               Falling in love with the 1996 film adaptation of Emma (Oh Gwyneth Paltrow!) at the age of 10 probably didn’t help, but I can’t blame all of my scepticism on sentimentality. Its frivolous plot development compared to what seemed like a more calculated flow of events in Emma always disappointed me slightly, although voicing that was a suicidal kind of controversy .

 For me, what this author does best is caricature with a delightful profanity and deep underpinning psychological complexity - what I found in Pride & Prejudice was mainly just caricature. While Elizabeth is indeed a compelling and quick-witted protagonist, there is nothing original about a strong female lead (even in her day!) and it is Emma’s complex flaws and pure ‘spunk’ that really convinces me of Austen’s label as literary genius was merited. 
Emma made me feel like Austen was firmly behind the wheel, not just lurking in the cockpit.

                To the rescue of Austen’s early and undeveloped work however, comes Deborah Moggach. As an advisory editor, she comes several hundred years too late - but as a screen writer she is right on time. I feel like she recognises just what endears these pantomime regency characters to the public and picks out their best and defining moments – lifting spirits, giving an illusion of complexity and most of all, saving us time! I absolutely love this 2005 version.

 I have a happy recognition of the besotted state everyone gets over the BBC adaptation of 1995, and while that is a worth and lovely adaptation (yes, I have sat through it all- twice!) with much more precision and authenticity, I think this film possesses a very vital position in the world of re-tellings and serves up a completely unique homage to characters that otherwise would, for those who aren’t ‘readers’, pail in to insignificance

The Cinematography is to die for – particularly in the penultimate misty-field scene in which love is finally confessed and literary wank-banks all over the country are gratified for both young and old.

 I don’t care that almost every scene is relocated somewhere more photographic – fab.
I don’t care that scenes are omitted and accents a little wobbly.
I don’t even care that social conventions of the time were completely ignored in casting such a skinny Elizabeth – Keira Knightly can stick her twos up to my historical research any day! Casting Jena Malone in one of the most under developed and annoying roles of the story was a stroke of inspiration – nothing is brittle or flat in her hands. The way she played Lydia will actually change the way I read her character (if I ever give it a re-read).

Carey Mulligan took the character of Kitty from pointless accessory to endearing and vital supporting role. And Donald Sutherland as Mr. Bennet? Be still my beating heart. If the Regency sarcasm flew over your head in a reading of the novel, Donald is here to show you how frikkin hilarious dear old Jane really is. Because she is – I actually laughed aloud a few times watching this film, especially at the age old familiar line about Mrs. Bennet’s nerves in the beginning sequence. A film to watch again, again and again.

My only regret is that Colin Firth was not there in a wet shirt.