gloria_b said:
Do we need another version so soon?
Why is it that when we finally come to a difinative movie version of a classic novel, somebody tries to replicate/better/condense it for the masses?? Example: Vanity fair....the BBC made an excellent version of this novel some years ago (well it's not like it was 20 years ago now is it?) and of course, the hollywood sharks are lurking in the wings. What do we get? An incredibly watered down version of thackeray's novel, that doesn't even include the character of Jos, which is a total outrage to devoted readers of this novel.
But back to pride and prejudice. Simon Langton has essentially captured the essence of jane austen's novel, by not attempting to squeeze it into two hours, but allowing the story to run its natural course. It is by far the most sucessful of previous adaptations, which certainly do not do justice to the story, eg Laurence Olivier's version which incidentally set the story in the Victorian era. But not only does the 1995 version do justice to Jane Austen's novel, it also has excellent actors to compliment the script. Colin Firth has captured the essence of Mr Darcy so perfectly that none other could better it. Certainly not this new Mr Darcy (last seen playing Felix Carbury in The Way We Live Now) by any stretch of the imagination. Jennifer Ehle plays an excellent Elizabeth in Langton's classic, portraying the playfulness and wit of the character. Keira Kightley (apologies for any incorrect spelling) is certainly not the right choice for the new Elizabeth Bennet. She does not have the experience, nor the soul to convince the audience that in fact she is doing more than reading lines. Jennifer Ehle WAS Elizabeth. Keira can only attempt to emulate...
Yes Langton's version was made 10 years ago....but we don't need another version. Leave what is great alone. Attempting to create a new and shorter version of Pride and Prejudice can only end in disaster a la Vanity Fair......or worse....