PRIDE AND PREJUDICE 2005 U.K. premiere information
According to KeiraWeb.com, the U.K. premiere of P&P3 will be on September 5th at the Odeon cinema in Leicester Square, London.
KeiraWeb also had a link to part of an interview with Keira Knightley that will be in the September issue of Film Review magazine in which she discusses her upcoming film roles, including P&P3.
In Pride and Prejudice, the latest adaptation of Jane Austen’s classic tale of love in the Georgian English countryside, Knightley is once again reaffirming her position as the quintessential British romantic lead. It’s a character that the actress has no problem in portraying – despite the corsets, “With these it was like not wearing a corset at all. It was fantastic. So a very easy corset experience for me.” – even at the risk of being typecast.
“I think the thing is not to be typecast if you can possibly manage it,” Knightley admits. “And what excites me about acting is the idea of changing as much as possible from character to character, and piece to piece. You’re not going to read a script that has a fantastic story, a fantastic character and a fantastic director and decide not to do it because it was set 200 years ago. That would be a bit foolish. You can only go with what interests you, and Pride and Prejudice has been a book that I’ve been obsessed with since I was about seven, so the opportunity to play a part like Elizabeth Bennet was one that I couldn’t miss out on.”
There is also a new film still we haven’t seen yet. Stripes!
August 10th, 2005 at 10:35 am
I’m starting to worry about this production. The more I hear about Keira, the less inclined I am to like her. I know she’s beautiful, spunky etc. etc. But she doesn’t seem to have any depth; she’s a bit too straightforward. Movie producers don’t seem to understand that the character of Elizabeth is every bit as flawed as Mr. Darcy. If they make her too favorable, to likeable, she in fact loses a dimension of her character, and becomes yet another objectified piece of arm candy. Being “headstrong” becomes an attractive character trait, like being dark-haired and doe-eyed. I feel like I’m losing sight of the Elizabeth who wakes up one morning to find she has grossly erred, feels genuine remorse, and grows into a more even-headed individual. Elizabeth is turing into a paper doll…
August 10th, 2005 at 11:57 am
Sophia J/ KK is actually cooling my enthusiasm too, which might be a good thing considering it was running too high…but Elizabeth paperdoll with big signs on her forehead “headstrong” or “modern”?? It’s a dreadful picture…. *shudder* I sincerely wish that is not the case.
August 10th, 2005 at 12:06 pm
Where do you get this from?
There’s nothing at all about Elizabeth Bennet’s character in that bit of interview. How does that indicate that they’ve got the character wrong?
August 10th, 2005 at 2:28 pm
I think Sophia is speaking in generalities, not about anything specific from the article. I begin to suspect that I am not the only longtime Janeite who is becoming weary of the hype. It only gets more intense from here out! Some of us will want to vent our frustrations from time to time, and the rest of us should relax and let others blow off steam.
I attribute a lot of the media swooning over Keira!Lizzy to the studio publicity machine, so I would temper any worry in that direction until we get to see the actual film. If I teach you guys nothing else here, I am determined to make you all as cynical about the media as I am.
I work in marketing and I see how the media is constantly manipulated–and willing to be so. They’re getting spoonfed what the studio and Keira’s handlers want them to write, and it might not necessarily be as objective an opinion as we need to make a judgment in absence of seeing for ourselves. That’s why I said, let’s watch and see how many of them write about “gritty reality.” Not that gritty reality is in itself a bad thing, but it’s so obviously what the studio wants them to seize upon that it is an amusing exercise to see how many do seize upon it. It’s the frustrated sociologist in me, you see.
“I will not say, ‘Do not be uneasy,’ because I know that you are so, at this moment;” I, too, fear filmmakers taking the easy way of adaptation, skimming the surface of a work and missing all the subtleties–and P&P is full of them (the fine line between Lizzy seeing the value of Pemberley as a symbol of Darcy’s true worth as a man and a husband and being a golddigger, for instance). That’s why I don’t really agitate for a film of NA anymore. It’s one of those cases when I don’t know if I want what I wished for, know what I mean?
August 11th, 2005 at 9:36 am
Mock Tudor - Yes, you are correct; there was nothing in that article about Elizabeth character development, and I agree I should avoid making conclusions before seeing the flim, lest I prove myself prejudiced…
In explanation, the sources of my discomford are as follows:
1) In the long preview, as Elizabeth runs away from the house, her mother, and Mr. Collins’ proposal, there is a shot of Mr. Collins leaning against the doorframe saying something along the lines of “oh, she’s headstrong, is she?” This paired up with the voice-over describing Elizabeth as a “modern woman”, and “born ahead of her time” constructs Elizabeth to be attractive in those terms. Now this would be all well and good, if it weren’t for the following:
2) So many of the movie stills (Keira deep in thought on a swing, Keira deep in thought at her boudoir, Keira deep in thought in a room of marble sculptures) look like they’re missing something to me. She looks like a model at a photo shoot, not a person contemplating her faults.
She doesn’t strike me as very deep, it’s just a first impression, and I don’t think the marketing does much to help this. In fact, I think it works to objectify her even more. It’s a person vs. object debate. Perhaps this is the fault of the medium.
Just as Mags tends to see things through the lens of a media professional who is keenly aware of the manipulations and coercions behind the scenes, I cannot help but watch films / plays with an arsenal of feminist film / theatre criticism. The Keira/Elizabeth is definitely a red-button issue for me, so forgive me if a tend to rant, and by all means, ask me to justify and support my statements.
August 11th, 2005 at 9:55 am
Those are really interesting points, Sophia.
Another thing to keep in mind about trailers, etc. is that they are not meant for people who are already P&P fans (and Keira Knightley fans for that matter) who will go to see the film no matter what. I used this analogy before: we (the readers of this weblog) are like Julia Roberts in PRETTY WOMAN. Remember the scene where Richard Gere orders champagne and strawberries from room service, and she says to him (paraphrasing a bit), “You don’t have to seduce me. I’m a sure thing.” We don’t have to be seduced to see the movie–we’re going to see it no matter what. They are trying to seduce the clueless who THINK movies with women in long skirts must be boring and old-fashioned and don’t know Elizabeth Bennet, a delightful character at any time and in any era and from any perspective.
I personally am somewhat comforted by the fact that Keira knew the book well before she took the role and that she used it as a reference (that’s in the production notes). However, it’s entirely possible that her interpretation of Lizzy (which is further filtered through the director’s and editor’s interpretation) might not agree with ours. It’s hard to tell until we see the film.
That being said, I don’t have a problem with our readers criticizing the media we are offered to publicize the film. I’m just trying to offer a bit of comfort, like (as I quoted above) Henry Tilney to Catherine Morland when she was concerned about Captain Tilney and Isabella Thorpe. We all know how that turned out. It seemed bad, but in the big picture maybe not. Frederick basically rescued James Morland from marrying Isabella, which would NOT have been a good thing. Broke the poor boy’s heart in the process, but there you go.
August 11th, 2005 at 10:17 am
1. The term “headstrong” is straight from the novel, so I don’t understand how you can object to that. It is even used in exactly the same place. The trailer voice-over is terrible, of course, but I see that as pure marketing drivel. The British trailer contains nothing like it.
2. I don’t think it’s fair to judge if a facial expression is appropriate for a scene from a still picture absent of context and movement. But if you’ve got an innate dislike for Keira (that’s how I read your comment) then I can understand why you’re apprehensive. I’ve also got actors who rub me the wrong way and whose work I avoid. Lucklily none of them are in this movie.
August 11th, 2005 at 11:29 am
“I don’t think it’s fair to judge if a facial expression is appropriate for a scene from a still picture absent of context and movement.”
Actually, I think it is appropriate to find a person’s facial expression uninteresting in a photograph, as I have seen many photographs, paintings, sculptures etc. which convey the kind of depth I think the P&P stills are lacking.
“But if you’ve got an innate dislike for Keira (that’s how I read your comment)…”
Uh, no, I don’t dislike her innately. I thought she was pretty good in Love Actually, King Arthur and Pirates.
August 11th, 2005 at 11:36 am
Mmm… Just to claify. I don’t mean that ALL the P&P stills are lacking depth; I was referring to the three I mentioned of Keira in my earlier entry. Some of the stills are very touching (ie Jane, Kitty and Lydia presumably going home after the Netherfield ball)
August 11th, 2005 at 12:13 pm
You can certainly judge if you find an expression in a picture interesting or not and I didn’t mean to suggest otherwise. Only that going from that to drawing conclusions about the corresponding scene in the movie isn’t, imho, quite fair as you don’t know the context it will appear in.
August 11th, 2005 at 12:42 pm
Look, I haven’t drawn ANY conclusions about the film. I’m expressing concerns.
August 11th, 2005 at 1:14 pm
Sophia J/ At least you liked previous performances of Keira, but actually I HATED her in King Arthur - which really doesn’t count since I even hated Clive Owen in the flop…then again, I never liked Clive’s acting style, oh well.. - and I don’t remember her acting at all in the Pirates. She was just pretty as a picture. I haven’t seen her in any serious dramatic pieces, so I’m not fully informed. Many people say Bend it like Beckam is good, so I’m staking my hopes there. Naturally I was one of many who strongly resented the casting of Keira. Actually when the trailer came out, I was quite relieved. At least she seemed to spark off and against Matthew Macfadyen and their chemistry felt genuine. Her tomboy charm seemed to fit in. My enthusiasm really soared up from that point on.
But these days, following these oscar hypes about Keira’s acting chops, articles on her charms, all those pictures…I started to feel a bit apprehensive all over again. As Mags said, I must be just media-weary but the last thing I want is this production turning to a Keira’s paperdoll show, as you aptly described. (I’m not saying that it will, but I’m just being apprehensive) I perfectly understand what you’re saying about Keira’s pictures lacking depth and her modelling pause ringing a wrong bell… I’m not saying Keira’s wrong for the part. She has the right flavor, I guess. So I’m half expectation, half apprehension…Well, let us see…with our fingers crossed.