Another review of PRIDE AND PREJUDICE test screening
Ain’t It Cool News has a review of the P&P3 test screening by an individual rejoicing in the handle Sonic Death Monkey. (Unladylike/Ungentlemanlike Language Warning at link–in the comments, not the review itself)
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.
Praise indeed!
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!
Mmmkay.
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.
See PERSUASION, Mr. Death Monkey, immediately. Pay particular attention to: the scene where Mr. Elliot makes his first appearance; the concert scene; the card party scene at the end.
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.
Gee, Jane Austen was a good writer! Whodathunkit?
(via KeiraWeb.com)
February 13th, 2005 at 9:42 am
I’m not so sure about that Oscar for costume design.
This is sounding very good. I was especially encouraged by the report of Miss Knightley’s acting. I’m getting more excited about the movie by the day. Perhaps Mr. Firth will get a break from the Darcy Mania after all….
February 13th, 2005 at 11:40 am
Yeah, it sure sounds like it’s gonna be a good one after all our angsting.
February 13th, 2005 at 1:16 pm
I take it he means “dry” as in “dry wit” as opposed to “dry” meaning nothing of interest?
I look forward to this film. I’ve only recently got into Austen but already P+P is a favourite
February 14th, 2005 at 1:25 am
Hello, Matthew.
He must have meant “dry wit.” I certainly hope so.
I still am having a hard time imagining it in two hours–some of my favorite scenes in the 1995 mini series are so wonderfully paced. The Elizabeth-Darcy dance at Netherfield, for example, benefits so much from their long pauses interpersed with their conversation.
February 14th, 2005 at 6:11 am
I’m still having a hard time imagining Matthew MacFadyen as Mr Darcy - I’ve only ever seen him as an MI5 counter-terrorism operative in Spooks… (http://www.bbc.co.uk/drama/spooks/personnel_tq.shtml)
February 14th, 2005 at 7:24 am
Exactly the same review surfaced a couple of days earlier on the message boards at imdb.com (Wed Feb 9 2005), before being posted at AICN :
http://imdb.com/title/tt0414387/board/nest/15668114
What bothered me when reading the imdb review (or the AICN one), were these two sentences:
“The film seemed to use mostly dialogue directly from the book”
and
“I’ve never read the book”
This has been noticed, too, by some individual in the comments at AICN.
Someting smells fishy here…
February 14th, 2005 at 7:32 am
He’s just guessing that the dialogue is mostly from the book. If he knew for sure there would be no reason to write “seemed to use” - he could just have stated that it was so.
February 14th, 2005 at 9:16 am
There really was a test screening, I’ve confirmed that with the distributor, and let’s face it, the average AICN fanboy is not a big Austen reader.
He makes another comment that I quoted above about “old English witticisms.” As the Anonny Mouse above said, he assumed it was from the book because it sounded like “old English” to him. This is not an informed review, and in some ways I find it more trustworthy because of that, you know?
If someone like that had submitted such a review HERE, I’d find it fishy. But at AICN? Nah.
February 14th, 2005 at 9:28 am
I really enjoy MI-5/Spooks. MacFadyen in MI-5 has an ability to convey great emotion without histrionics. He plays a tortured soul quite effectively.
February 14th, 2005 at 9:30 am
Where’s that photo where he’s holding Keira/Lizzy’s head in his hands and obviously saying something intensely passionate?!? It’s quite smouldery. (And appropriate for Valentine’s Day! ;-))
February 14th, 2005 at 12:22 pm
Is it this one?
http://www.kkwavefront.org/media/albums/candids/prideset/PUKKAPIX-BB-KNIGHTLEY-12.jpg
February 14th, 2005 at 12:50 pm
I think that might be it, though I seem to remember another one from a different angle. I’ll look when I get home tonight.
February 14th, 2005 at 1:14 pm
Thanks for confirming the test screening, Mags. I’ll blame it on my tendency for paranoid thinking, but I really considered the possibility that the production company was engaging in a little session of astroturfing, due to the sometimes harsh and hostile criticism the movie has been receiving on internet message boards from die-hard fans of the 1995 BBC version.
I’m a huge fan of said version. Nevertheless, I’m really looking forward to see the new one on the big screen. If the reviews really turn out to be accurate, which I hope they are, we might be in for a treat. I recently saw Matthew MacFadyen in the BBC’s “The Way We Live Now” and I think he’s an excellent actor.
Whatever way you put it, a review from a test screening of P&P to show up on AICN, of all places!? Oh, the irony!
February 14th, 2005 at 1:33 pm
Julie B. can tell you that I was initially suspicious as well, but once I confirmed the testing I felt better about it. If they’re gonna astroturf against the criticism of fans of P&P2, I don’t see them sending it to AICN; unless of course they’re trying to torque up La Knightley’s fanboys as an opposing force… *adjusts tinfoil hat*
(There’s really no need to torque up the fanboys anyway, they’re already there from what I’ve seen. Check out the IMDb forum for P&P3!)
February 14th, 2005 at 2:44 pm
Well, obviously Working Title needs to mail off a DVD with their first cut of the movie on it to Mags (or me!) to put this raging Internet rumor to rest….
February 14th, 2005 at 9:57 pm
I finally read the whole review.
_ My friends father, a man near 50 liked it most, _
Holey moley! a man near 50, and he could still drag his sorry, senile butt away from his fireside & bowl of gruel??
February 14th, 2005 at 10:16 pm
THIS is the photo I was thinking of!
Hee hee. I better send Dorothy over to Julie B.’s with the vinaigrette again.
February 15th, 2005 at 9:27 am
[Thank you, Dorothy.]
If they do a better job of the second proposal scene than Davies did, I shall be content. Maybe.