_Bennet_sisters_screenshot.jpg)
NOTE: We will watch the film on Friday as well, and then discuss it on Monday. The Exam will be on Wednesday. Obviously we're way behind schedule, but I'm in the process of revising it and will hand this schedule out in class on Friday.
Answer ONE of the questions as a COMMENT below:
1. In many ways, this version of Pride and
Prejudice can be see as a young, hip 21st century take on the
novel. Indeed, most of the actors are much younger than those in the 1995
version, and there is a tendency to make everything seem a bit flashier, bolder,
grittier, and yet lighter at the same time. How do you think this works with the story and characters we find
in the book? Is this kind of modernization
acceptable, or do we lose too much of what Austen intended? Discuss a specific scene that can help you
explain this.
2. Obviously, a 2 hour film (as opposed to a much
longer mini-series) can only cover so much of the novel; certain passages—and
even characters—have to be cut in the interest of time and an audience’s
patience. Do you feel there were any
objectionable cuts or changes to the story as seen in the film? Is there anything that bothered you or
changed some aspect of the characters/story?
Amory Morgan
ReplyDelete3.) I liked Kierra Knightleys appearence, I felt like it matched Elizabeths perfectly for me. Jane was a lot older looking in the movie than I imagined. But Janes attitude and personality matched perfectly to the Jane in the book. Elizabeth's personality in the movie shocked me, I didn't expect her to be so giddy and laughing so much. I thought she would be a little bit more serious and observant, where as in the movie she seemed very carefree. Lily Collins could have played a good Elizabeth. She is the main actress in the movie "The Mortal Instruments" she can be very serious, but with a little twist of playful. Not giddy like a young child. Mr. Bingley was another actor that I thought didn't match his character description in the book. He was supposed to be decent looking, like a 7 on a 1-10 scale. In the movie the guy was about a 4, but that is all matter of opionion.
Well, even though they are younger in this one, it's still the same. I think since they are younger, it is easier to see how silly they can be. I also believe that watching this one is easier to watch because the vocabulary seems easier to follow. For instance, the dancing scene. When Elizabeth verbally assaulted Mr.Darcy , it was much easier to sense her anger, because her face seems stern, where as in the older movie, the faces all seemed so emotionless that it could be difficult to tell.
ReplyDeleteNikki Ennis
ReplyDelete1. I think this "modern" take on Pride & Prejudice works well with the characters, especially with Elizabeth. She is already, in a way, "modern" for her time. She is a woman who thinks for herself, knows what she wants, and won't settle for less despite social pressures. This is reflective of today's young woman, and so I think this transitions well with this version. One scene in particular, where Elizabeth "tells off" Lady Catherine, showcases this quite well. It was a more "modern scene when Austen wrote it, because Elizabeth completely disregards class and age when Lady Catherine insults her and her family in the book as well.
Kendall Dobbs:
ReplyDelete2. I do not have any huge objections to any of the cuts or changes that were made in the movie; I understand why they had to cut them. I loved the movie before reading the novel and I still love the movie after reading the book. However if I had been the director of this film, I would have put more of a focus on the buildup of Darcy and Elizabeth’s relationship at Rosing’s Park, went into more depth in the Wickham/Lydia scandal, and totally rewritten all of Georgiana’s scenes.
In the movie it appears that Darcy proposed to Elizabeth after about three days while they were both in the Rosing’s Park area. In the book, I believe it was more like weeks! I understand that showing weeks in a movie is not ideal, but I feel like the foreshadowing of Darcy’s love for Elizabeth was completely skipped over. He seems more rash and bold in the movie than he was in the novel.
The scandal of Wickham and Lydia is given much more of an emphasis in the novel. I think that the movie could have done a much better job of explaining the significance of the scandal and the effect it would have on the Bennet family. I believe the younger audience, who this film targeted, missed out on the entire meaning behind the scandal. Oh, and Mr. Bennet’s disapproval of Wickham (and even Lydia) is completely overlooked which I think was an important aspect of the novel.
Finally, I would have totally changed Georgiana’s character. She was much to bubbly, outgoing, and talkative in the movie. In the novel, she rarely speaks and is EXTREMEMLY shy! I have no idea why the writers and directors of this film created such an inaccurate portrayal of Georgiana. In my opinion, Georgiana’s silence in the novel adds to Mr. Darcy’s arrogance and mysteriousness.
Kay Shurtleff
ReplyDeleteQuestion 2
I watched the film and didn't think it took anything too drastic from the book. With all movies made from famous books, there is always something that has to be cut. I think this movie attracted more audience and Austin fans. I for one, did not have an interest in the mini series when it came out, just didn't have the time during that time in my life or patience. BUT, this one was great. A few things caught my attention though. If someone has not read the book they will not grasp the build up and the tenseness of Darcy and Elizabeth's relationship as it develops. It was very entertaining in the book but slighted in the movie, as well as the scandal with Mr. Wickham and Lydia, it just was never really explained what the big deal was. But all in all, I really enjoyed it, and love Kiera Knightly in the part. She is perfect:
Stefan Schodlbauer
ReplyDelete2) When I watched the film I really felt like I was reading the book. I think that the director made a great work because it is not easy to copy and make feel the audience the same feelings that when they read the book. It is obvious that you have to make the film shorter because if not passes to be a boring film and that is not an easy work. You have to try to put the most important ideas and what the public like. For example, the relationship between Elizabeth and Darcy. If I have to choose the most important part of the movie will be when Darcy and Elizabeth join together in that rainy day an he expresses all his feelings to her, making Elizabeth realize of what Mr Darcy really felt.
Gary Lack
ReplyDeleteQuestion 2
I watched the film and I believe the changes that were made between the film and the book had similar viewpoints. I believe the film cut out to much of the build up of the relationship between Darcy and Elizabeth. However Elizabeth, does compare to some of the modern day 21st century women, in the way she carries herself. I Believe in the film Darcy in the beginning acted harsh and bold and it seem he was in love within days and in the book the relationship took its time to develop.
Destiny Coley
ReplyDelete2. When it comes to a book that has a movie also, I always prefer to read the book first. It helps me to understand the actual concept of what is going on in the movie. Books are generally better than the movie and I always expect that. I get the best details from the book but that usually leaves me disappointed when it comes to the movie. I think that this version is actually a decent work. There was not too much that was left out that made it drastically different to me. If you have read the book before watching the movie then you will most likely be disappointed in the lack of build up between Elizabeth and Darcy's relationship. All in all, I was pleased with the connection between the book and the movie.
Weston Haynes
ReplyDelete2.) The movie and the book are pretty similar, but of course it would take a longer cut to actually get everything that goes on in the book into the movie. Though the movie did not focus on everything, it did focus on the main points of the story such as the sophisticated/stubborn side of Jane, such as her ability to read and misread people, and Mr. Darcy's boorish attitude around Jane when in the midst of higher social classes. In my opinion, the book is a surefire way to get all the information that was left out in the movie, which is why it is better to read the book before watching the movie.(That's just my opinion). It was smart to put a high power actress such as Kiera Knightley in the movie to appear to a wider audience. I think you would enjoy the movie more if you have not read the book, otherwise, you are more likely to point out the flaws, and maybe not enjoy it as much. Though the director took out various parts, in a way it is necessary, because I don't think many people would be interested in watching a 3 to 4 hour movie. It is put together well, but in my opinion the book is the clear cut choice as the better story. At least we get a visual aspect of the novel, and what maybe Jane Austen had in mind when t comes to the movie.
Stephanie Callen
ReplyDeleteThe movie was an excellent depiction of the book. Obviously, some of the book had to be left out but I think the movie hit the high most important parts of the book. I liked the visual aspect of the movie because it was easier to understand than some of the wording of the book. The modern characters added to the book in my opinion. However, I do think that Mr. Bingley's character was a poor choice. Maybe Bingley's character, who appeared sly, should have been switched with that of Wickham, who was more charming. Also, the relationship between Elizabeth and Darcy was in fast forward in the movie while in the book it took time to develop.
I don't necessarily feel like there were any objectionable cuts or changes to the film. The film is much better to me because you can actually see what's going on instead of trying to visualize everything in your head. The film to me showed a much softer side to Darcy than what I got from the book. In the book they hide his feelings very well as to in the film you can kind of see his love for Elizabeth. Also Jane was less annoying in the book than she was in the movie. I feel like they elaborated on her character a lot.
ReplyDeleteNesha Pickens
DeleteShannon Southwell
ReplyDelete1) I feel like they put to much of a modern twist to the movie. Like for instance in the movie during the medow scene, you see Darcy with his shirt unbuttoned and not dressed as nice as he should been for the time period. Now if the story was set in this modern time period his dressing would be acceptable, but in the time that it was set, a man of his class would not dare to walk out like that. The modern twist in the movies, take away from the point of the book. It shows a women being bold and being her self in during a time where it was frowned upon.
Aimee Elmore
ReplyDelete3.) I would recast Mr. Bingley. To me he was boring and dull. I didn't see jane marrying him. I thought the book made him more exciting. I liked the actor but i think he could have done it a little differently. I love the actress that played Mrs. Bennett, I thought she did a great job. I dislike her character because to me Mrs. Bennett is very annoying. Also i like Lydia she played her character very well. She was dizzy and cute at the same time. I think they did a great job picking there characters.
Walter Braxton Reeves
ReplyDelete2) The only thing that really bothered me, was the fact that the movie from 2004 was ALOT more dramatic. Like some of the scenes weren't even in the book. Example: when Darcy was walking across that dawn field with steam and his jacket open, with the sun rising behind him. I understand that they probably did it for entertainment, but that did indeed bother me.
Janis F.
ReplyDelete1.) I still think that they still kept some of the element of the book in the newer version (movie). Obviously they can't fit all of the original elements in. Why? because it is a movie, and two i'm not too sure that many people would want to watch a movie with all of the elements. Except for those who read the book. And yes to some degree, I think that this version is still acceptable even though it was shorter, it still got close to some or most of the main elements of the book. They still got the characters attitudes close just like the other movie, one example of the would be the scene where they went to the 2nd ball/dance and it displayed the girls acting silly except Jane and Elizabeth who acted normal compared to them.
Cristian C. Nazario Cruz
ReplyDelete2. The movie was a little bit more dramatic, but I still liked because, the book and the movie are very similar.I like when the movie focus on the main points of the story, the attitude of Mr. Darcy's. I preferred read the book because the movie left out some information of the story.