Things that make me go *stab stab stab*
Nov. 15th, 2005 11:00 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
serindeSo, this new version of Pride and Prejudice. I don't expect it's going to touch the miniseries, but I have been hoping for a bit of love out of it. Matthew MacFadyen is such an earnest boo, as Beth would put it, and I've liked what I've seen of Keira Knightley, and I can totally see Donald Sutherland as Mr Bennet.
They've switched the year to 1797, because the director doesn't like Empire gowns. ...Well, okay, I don't either (has there ever been a garment more calculated to display any possible figure to poor advantage?), and unlike Persuasion it's not so directly tied to specific exterior events, so I guess that's not too terrible.
They've fahddled with the dialogue, made it more "accessible". Um. I don't know. I found it pretty "accessible" when I read it at age 15. I seriously hope this doesn't equate to "dumbed-down"; but I'll give it the benefit of the doubt.
But now, spies report that the US release is going to be eight minutes longer. For more exposition? Deeper character development, perhaps?
No. For gratuitous lip-mashing. For breathy exclamations and sappy gropings. Because "American audiences like a sweeter ending." Because that's SO GODDAMN APPROPRIATE for the era.
Jane Austen is not thematically equivalent to Harlequin romances, you stupid twats.
for the Taltos fans: I kept wanting to type the actress' name as "Kiera". Sigh.
They've switched the year to 1797, because the director doesn't like Empire gowns. ...Well, okay, I don't either (has there ever been a garment more calculated to display any possible figure to poor advantage?), and unlike Persuasion it's not so directly tied to specific exterior events, so I guess that's not too terrible.
They've fahddled with the dialogue, made it more "accessible". Um. I don't know. I found it pretty "accessible" when I read it at age 15. I seriously hope this doesn't equate to "dumbed-down"; but I'll give it the benefit of the doubt.
But now, spies report that the US release is going to be eight minutes longer. For more exposition? Deeper character development, perhaps?
No. For gratuitous lip-mashing. For breathy exclamations and sappy gropings. Because "American audiences like a sweeter ending." Because that's SO GODDAMN APPROPRIATE for the era.
Jane Austen is not thematically equivalent to Harlequin romances, you stupid twats.
for the Taltos fans: I kept wanting to type the actress' name as "Kiera". Sigh.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-11-15 11:13 pm (UTC)How'd you feel about the books? I have this funny feeling you weren't as attached to them as you were, say, to P&P.
Everyone I've spoken to about it who was really thoroughly hooked on the books at an early age hated the movie. All the really good jokes taken out and replaced by lame ones, that sort of thing.
no subject
Date: 2005-11-15 11:21 pm (UTC)(Hello, I am the anomalous data point, nice to meet you.)