Hey folks, Harry here with a look from the Sonic Death Monkey at the latest from Jane Austen. And the word is... Very good. Now, if you're not familiar with the source material, there could be spoiler material here. If you are familiar, then there's nothing here that would suprise you other than the fact that a fellow calling himself, Sonic Death Monkey - likes a Jane Austen film based on PRIDE AND PREJUDICE, but it is so. And here it be...
Hey Harry it's me, sonic death monkey with another movie review for you. This time of Jane Austen's PRIDE AND PREJUDICE.
But first let me make a correction, as it turns out, Kruger did not write Dark Water as I had earlier said, that was my mistake. And the Cronenberg film The Ring 2 repeatedly references is Videodrome (or Zonekiller) not Videodrone and I repeatedly stated.
Now that that's out of the way lets get on with the show, now featuring editing and a non stream of consciousness conceit! Pride and Prejudice is a chick flick, and based on a Jane Austen novel, so going in it had 2 strikes already. Once the film started, it was from a video not film projector so the whole thing looked like and old episode of Dark Shadows. That was three strikes…luckily for me though, I still gave it a chance and was rewarded with one of the most fulfilling and enjoyable theater going experienced I've had since I saw Sideways last November.
I don't think I need to summarize the story, as it is a classic, and I wouldn't know how to really because there's so much going on but, IMDB says this about it…"The story is based on Jane Austen's novel about five sisters - Jane, Elizabeth, Mary, Kitty and Lydia Bennet - in Georgian England. Their lives are turned upside down when a wealthy young man (Mr. Bingley) and his best friend (Mr. Darcy) arrive in their neighborhood."
Pride stars the lovely Keira Knightly. I've had a thing for her since Bend it like Beckham but until now wasn't sure about her acting chops. Here, she proves she's going to be around for quite a while. She holds her own in scenes from Dame Judi Dench, Donald Sutherland and Jena Malone, just to name a few of the members of this superb ensemble, all of whom give top of the line performances.
Seriously, give this movie a chance. You wont regret it, it probably wont win any Oscars (except maybe for in technical areas like set and costume design), but it's still a masterfully made and very classy film that is in that class. Plus, it does the impossible, it makes Jane Austen not only not seem dry, but also made me want to go and read her books! That idea passed after a day or two of drowning in Elmore Leonard and Palahniuk or course, but, the movie will still definitely win many new fans for Austen.
The direction, by relative unknown Joe Wright is excellent; always taking the high road away from campiness and towards the feel of Howard's End and high end historical dramas of the type. Many scenes of elaborate and complex dialogue take place in one shot. I believe there was even scene were a single shot pans back and forth while the characters hit some 2 dozen different marks and recite old English witticisms. Very Fincher or Kubrick-esque Several scenes take place during balls where we are taken right up into the middle of the dances with some very elegant steady cam use, you can barely tell isn't a camera on tracks.
The film seemed to use mostly dialogue directly from the book, and the additions there are (there must be some) seem very in pace. The movie is, above all romantic, and secondly, very, very funny. Donald Sutherland has some of his best lines ever here, and Dame Judi Dench gets to have some fun too with her role as the male romantic leads overbearing mother. As I already mentioned, Knightly is captivating here. She reminded me a lot of Paltrow in Shakespeare in love. In fact, that entire movie and Kubrick's underrated Barry Lyndon with its use of wide angle lenses to flatten out the picture like a piece of classical art is similar to this one in style, though as a story this one wins out over those two.
Also, the male lead, Mr. Darcy, Matthew MacFadyen is excellent and this film should be a break through for him. He plays tall, dark and handsome, but he does it with such intensity and pathos that he reminded me of early Johnny Depp work, especially Edward Scissorhands (ok, that wasn't early, but still…) and even Carrey Grant comes to mind at some moments. He does more with a stare into the camera than some actors could do with a Tarrantino or Kaufman piece. He should be around for a long time and I wouldn't be surprised to see him as an A-lister someday soon.
I've never read the book and if you are in the same boat as me I can tell you, you will be surprised by some of the plot turns. Character arcs are perfect here, and the reveals had some audience members gasping aloud. I usually figure things out very early on, but here I was caught off guard by where the plot went. Sure, you know the main plots ending going in, but, several sub plots go in extremely surprising directions.
Still, the movie not perfect by any means. It is far too long clocking in at near 2 ? hours. I didn't mind so much because the movie had long since won me over and to be frank, I could stare at Knightly for 3 minutes short of infinity. But, the dramatic irony does wear thin once you've been told what was to happen and you have to wait for it to play out over the next 30 minutes so I can image it might bother most audiences.
Also, Knightly is far too gorgeous to play the part of the second fiddle sister. The eldest sister whom everyone is supposed to be gawking over is simply…not that good looking; she's a 6, and Knightlys' character is a 9. also, though I know it is carried over from the book, Malones' playing the youngest sister is simply very annoying and one dimensional. Granted, the character is written as such and you can only fit in so much during the span of a film, but I would have liked to have seen depth given to her. All the same, Malone does admirable work with the thin brat characterization she is given.
I can't speak for the films look of course because it was shown on video which drained it of all its sharpness. However, from what I could tell, the movie does look a little dreary, but then again, rainy period England usually does.
Finally, I must also complain about the movies final frame. The whole time the film had been nothing but class, and then it almost spoils it all with a god damned pan up to the stars when 2 characters kiss. I hate the damn pan up, it feels very Disney, in a bad sense, and just undercuts the real emotional payoff of the scene. The one shot annoyed me so much I took off one full point on my final grade because of how terribly cliché it is.
So, over all, the movie really worked for me and everyone that I saw it with. My friends father, a man near 50 liked it most, saying it was one of the best films he seen in a very long time, a 9.2 of 10 by my estimate, my mother also liked it giving it an 7.5-of 10, the 2 girls I saw it with liked it more than my mother, each giving it an 8.
As for me, I am a sucker for a real romance films, they don't get made nearly often enough. My second favorite film ever is Casablanca, and while this film couldn't dream of playing on that level, it is the best pure romance film (Eternal Sunshine doesn't count) released since perhaps my names sake High fidelity, if not even longer.
8/10, 9/10 if they remove the damn pan up
-sonic death monkey.
