Pride and Prejudice 2005

At first many thanks to Mia Store, who translated our reviews so perfectly!

Quite unexpectedly and on very short notice Kerstin and I got the opportunity to take part on 25th July 2005 in Hamburg, in a special screening of P&P 2005, which stars Keira Knightley and Matthew MacFadyen. Thus, you have the chance to read a review of the film here on our website already before the German premiere, which is in three months’ time.

As an extraspecial thing, Keira Knightley had arrived in Germany and Hamburg to be present at the, to my knowledge, first German screening of this film. During her live interview, which unfortunately only lasted half an hour, she confirmed my good opinion of her; she is a star who is down to earth. She confessed that she has been a Jane Austen fan since she was seven years old; her dollhouses were called Longbourne and Pemberley and her dolls Lizzy, Mr. Darcy and Co.

But now to the film itself. The first positive surprise was that the film was shown in the original language and with German subtitles. I, for my part, prefer this to dubbing in watching Jane Austen adaptations. Those who regularly visit our board, remember perhaps that I felt very sceptical towards this movie. From the outset towards Matthew MacFadyen as Mr. Darcy and after the first trailers towards the abridgements and simplifications in the dialogue. But to let the cat out of the bag: neither of my prejudices was affirmed. Matthew MacFadyen is a truly fantastic Mr. Darcy and the editing of the trailers was really somewhat unfortunate.

As for the details, the whole film is very well cast. I thought Keira Knightley and Matthew MacFadyen were outstanding, but Rosamund Pike as Jane was also convincing, more so even than Susannah Harker (P&P 1995). Donald Sutherland’s Mr. Bennet also deserves a special mention. The only exceptions are perhaps Colonel Fitzwilliam, who is really rather plain and uninteresting and Mr. Collins. To begin with Col. Fitzwilliam, I must say, however, that his role is very small. And I imagine Mr. Collins to be a big, fat and clumsy man who is always somewhat sweaty. The previous Mr. Collins fits this image perfectly, Tom Hollander, however, does not as he is small and rather thin. But, as I said, this is my personal image of Mr. Collins and it is most probably not shared by everyone.

It was also clear that the film would simplify and abridge, not least because of the movie theatre format. But the abridgements have been made with great care. Naturally, some things have also been made simpler to make the film more suitable for Hollywood, but this has also been done with a sense of proportion. Jane Austen purists may perhaps wish to wrinkle their noses at one or the other of the romantic scenes, but I think that the majority of the Janeites will be able to live with them. These procedures also make the film easier for that part of the audience who have not previously had any contact with Jane Austen.

I want to conclude by mentioning that once during the film the audience applauded and many laughed. There were also well-wishing applause at the end from an audience which was very mixed and whose members were certainly not all necessarily part of the Jane Austen fan community.

The worst for me is that I now have to wait three long months before I will see Lizzy, Darcy, Jane and co. again and most probably a further three or four months before I will have the DVD in my hands. And then it will not be the same as watching the original in English on the big screen.
(By Sonja on 26th July 2005)

Here, now, is the review of the second person who never dreamed of experiencing something like this. Exactly like Sonja, I was taken completely by surprise when the invitations from UIP arrived on Wednesday. This especially considering we had really only enquired when the film starts in Germany. We got then photos and the synopsis sent to us and thought that this already was very helpful. And now we got the chance to see the film that the Austen fans so desperately await, three months before the official premiere!
And I admit that as a big fan of the 1995 tv series and because of the disappointment I felt when watching Mansfield Park, I was very sceptical.
It took perhaps five minutes, and my scepticism had vanished. This is a really well made movie; the filmmakers have not copied the BBC adaptation, it’s not a strange abreviation in the manner of the 1940s version, and neither is it a deviating interpretation like Mansfield Park.

The story has been shortened, some characters have been left out and so the Hursts are not there, but one doesn’t miss them either. The story has been compressed, but not in such a way as to leave out important scenes. The dialogue is often straight from the novel, and the characters have also retained their original personalities.
The doses of kitsch and humor are well chosen and neither seem too sweet nor too silly. There are some “gags” built in, but they are in no way embarrassing.

Now about the individual characters:
I liked Keira Knightley even before this movie, now my respect has definitely grown. She is a very good Lizzy; lively, sporty and with a sharp tongue. Her Lizzy seems younger and more modern than Jennifer Ehle’s but does not deviate from the personality of the character in the novel. She shows her feelings well through her facial expressions and gestures and is believable in the role.

I must here officially apologise to Matthew MacFadyen; I was, as some of you perhaps remember, at first very doubtful about the choise of him as Darcy. He refuted my prejudices and is a very good Darcy, but at the same time completely different from Colin Firth. His portrayal of the proud Darcy who falls under the spell of "the fine eyes" and only grows as a consequense of the refusal, is convincing.

The already mentioned Jane is absolutely lovely. In my opinion, she is the one who most closely resembles the character in the novel. Her possible future companion Mr. Bingley really only seems somewhat "goofy" in the trailer, in the film he is simply a friendly young man, very shy and very quickly head over heels in love with Jane, which makes him even more unsure of himself.

Donald Sutherland and Brenda Blethyn’s portrayal of the Bennets is perfect. She is slightly vulgar, but also cares a great deal about the welfare of her daughters. When Lizzy refuses Mr. Collins’ proposal, Mrs Bennet gives clear reasons for why this is so unfortunate for the family. This is very good for those viewers who aren’t familiar with the novel or the period.
Mr. Bennet is not so sharply sarcastic, but rather a man who has learnt to deal with his wife’s quirks and only now and then, as a contrast, makes his sarcastic comments. Slightly eccentric but very charismatic. The audience particularly liked the scene where Lizzy has refused Mr. Collins’ proposal and he is to talk her unwilling daughter into accepting it after all. As you know, she will then have to decide which parent she will not be talking to from now on. This made the audience applaud...and only because the words were an exact quote from Jane Austen’s novel.

The roles of the other sisters are also well cast. Mary is actually really pretty this time and not such a caricature as her predecessor. She does, however, still read too much. Lydia and Kitty are true teens; giggling, silly, boisterous and always talking. And when men are even slightly concerned, they are out of control.

The actor who plays Wickham is very attractive. It is easy to understand why he, with his blue eyes and dimples makes the ladies’ heads turn. His role is rather small, though.

I thought Tom Hollander’s Mr. Collins was pretty good; he is pompous and something of a show-off.
Charlotte Lucas is certainly no beauty, but is charming and gives a clear explanation for why she finds a matrimony with Mr. Collins advantageous.

I couldn’t really find anyone among the actors who I would have thought unfitting for his/her part, even Colonel Fitzwilliam came across as rather pleasant.

The use of locations is very interesting. The differences between the buildings are extreme; the Bennets live in a very simple house, the rooms are small and slightly dilapidated. Lizzy and Jane share a bed.
Pemberley and Rosings emanate wealth from afar and are furnished with a great deal of works of art and have fine park landscapes.

The costumes vary between "English fashion" and the Regency style. At the first ball, it is clear that some of the clothes are old fashioned. The costumes are, all in all, rather plain, but this is not necessarily something negative. Costume fans may, however, find this adapatation rather uninteresting.

The mysterious part in the trailer, where Darcy so intimately embraces a girl and Lizzy observes him, is explained. The scenes and the quotations, which in the trailer caused indignation and irritation are resolved. It’s all as it should be.

The only scene that really reminded me of the 1995 version, was Lizzy and Darcy’s dance. The beginning could be a straight copy. The ending, however, is realized in a completely different way.

The music is well chosen, there is a great deal of piano and it is somewhat reminiscent of Emma Thompson’s S&S.

I could, truly, say a great deal more about the film, I can hardly find words for my enthusiasm. But, first of all, I naturally don’t want to take away your joy of seeing at last on the 20th October what we have already seen and, secondly, a too lengthy review is as tiring as a sermon by Mr. Collins.

We enjoyed the film to the last second and would have loved to watch it again immediately. It is certainly very hard to bear not to be able to see it again until the end of October.

The audience also definitely liked the film. There were applause during and after the film and I think that this version will again produce some more Jane Austen fans!

And now a word about Keira Knightley. As I said, I liked her already before this film. Her performance was wonderful, her manner is unaffected and it’s clear that she has a sense of humor. I hope that the movie world may keep her for a long time yet!

All in all, this was an experience that I will live on for a long time. A once in a lifetime thing and hardly to be beaten!
(By Kerstin on 26th July 2005)