The P&P3 News Roundup and the Goblet of Fire
Since they are no longer in competition, the title seemed appropriate! 
In The Book Standard, Jessa Crispin of the excellent Bookslut complains about yet another adaptation of Pride and Prejudice and about how she doesn’t get this Jane Austen thing anyway. To say we are disappointed and dismayed is an understatement, particularly in the light of this part:
That worries me. Isn’t the point of Elizabeth Bennett that she’s completely mediocre? Not a great mind, not a great wit, not a great beauty—something every adaptation except for Bridget Jones seems skip over. Can’t someone adapt a book like Jane Eyre, where the title character actually makes a decision and does something?
Elizabeth Bennet (one t, s’il vous plait) is not mediocre, and she is actually rather clever and witty, and by the end of the book Mr. Darcy says she is “the handsomest woman of his acquaintance.” Once cannot read Jane Austen and place trust in the words of characters like the Bingley sisters. And to come away from even 108 pages of Pride and Prejudice thinking that Elizabeth Bennet lacks brains, wit or looks means that one did precisely that.
We think Ms. Crispin might like the film. Sounds like she’s the type of person for whom Gritty Realism™ was made.
Neil Norman grouses in the Times about P&P and the new adaptation of OLIVER TWIST directed by Roman Polanski. They’re too Victorian, he complains.
To remove Austen’s critique of her society as well as leave out the more offensive elements such as Wickham’s mercenary manipulation of women through irresistible sexuality (not to mention reducing Elizabeth Bennet from a fiercely intelligent witty woman to a slightly bewildered girl) is a travesty.
Yikes! (And what were we just saying about smart and witty?)
October 11th, 2005 at 6:32 am
Ms. Crispin will be quite dissapointed, the first thing you see in this movie is Elizabeth “not so witty” Bennet with a book. And she’s not holding it upside down, so I think, she’s able to read!
Not witty… oh my… what book was Ms. Crispin reading anyway?
Would our dear Elizabeth run away head over heels leaving her money in the carriage and stumbeling around in the country and FAINT? NO WAY…
And I think, Jane Eyre was adapted more often than P&P.. wasn’t it?
October 11th, 2005 at 9:36 am
I knew there was a reason why I never read Bookslut. 108 pages? She should return her library card!
October 11th, 2005 at 3:39 pm
I can’t believe these revewers and so called journalists. In the immortal words of Napoleon Dynamite, “Idiots, Gosh!”
Did anyone else happen to catch Keira Knightley on “The Tonight Show” last night? This little tidbit brought a smile to my face. Ms. Knightley said that she practiced for her fighting scenes (including learning how to use knumchucks) for her film “Domino” while she was making “Pride and Prejudice!” Can you just imagine Elizabeth Bennet with knumchucks? Mr. Darcy better not refuse to stand up with her again or he might just get a painful surprise.
October 11th, 2005 at 4:48 pm
Do you like pain, Mr. Darcy?
October 11th, 2005 at 5:31 pm
Hard to believe comments like these from someone who has “read” the book.
Even if you’re not a great reader, Jane Austen and her characters deserve far better than this so called journalist has provided. Obviously a ploy to get some attention.
October 12th, 2005 at 12:36 am
108 pages are not sufficient to form a judgment of the book. In fact, “Pride and Prejudice” requires more than several readings. Seems to me this reviewer asks to be ignored as inconsequential
October 12th, 2005 at 1:55 pm
To be honest, I don’t think a person who identifies herself as a “bookslut” is allowed to pass judgement on Jane Austen anyway…
October 12th, 2005 at 5:01 pm
WOW! “Not a great mind, not a great wit”?? I don’t think she’s read the book completely! The “not a great beauty” was correct though. Lizzy isn’t the beauty of the family.
October 12th, 2005 at 8:08 pm
One would think that people would have figured out by now that Bennet only has one ‘t’. I’m reading Will in the World right now and the reference to Pride & Prejudice has it as ‘Elizabeth Bennett.’ Very annoying (along with the review)!
October 12th, 2005 at 9:18 pm
I almost snorted when I read that about Elizabeth Bennet being “mediocre.” Really, my problem with Bridget Jones was that B.J. has absolutely no resemblence to the very witty, clever, and (while not a striking beauty) pretty herione of Pride and Prejudice. How can one even flip through the pages briefly and come off with that impression? Heck, even looking at summary sparknotes paragraph, you know these things. Anyone who can call Lizzy “mediocre” is unqualified to review anything to do with P&P.
October 13th, 2005 at 11:47 pm
Hmmm… not a great mind, not a great wit… hmmm…
We´ve to understand that this so-called-journalist hasn´t read this book…
Poor little girl… she´ve got all confused…
tsk, tsk!
October 13th, 2005 at 11:49 pm
I almost forgot!!
I completely agree with Maria Faustina!!
Every single word!!
October 17th, 2005 at 4:29 am
Perhaps somebody should explain to Ms. Crispin the book ?!?!? Perhaps it’s not her fault, she simply might lack the power of understanding Jane Austen….And I am deeply sorry to say that, but in my opinion the producers of the new movie seemed to suffer of the same malady ( lack of understanding Jane Austen, I mean… )