PRIDE AND PREJUDICE’s Redeeming Features
Christianity Today has published its list of The 10 Most Redeeming Films of 2005, and PRIDE AND PREJUDICE clocked in at number three:
This most recent adaptation of the Jane Austen classic is witty and romantic, as you might expect, but it’s also strikingly naturalistic and a gracefully compelling look at the social world of Austen’s book. And the ultimate message: Good guys do finish first! This film beautifully illustrates the value of a person of character; though not as evident and popular as good looks or a suave manner, integrity is more lasting, foundational, and truly attractive. Keira Knightley is a screen-stealer as Lizzie, who ultimately learns the lesson of 1 Samuel 16:7: “Man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart.”
Christianity Today’s review of PRIDE AND PREJUDICE is available here.
February 8th, 2006 at 1:35 am
The Church of Jane (all proclaim) -
Hallelujah… Amen!!!!
February 8th, 2006 at 8:51 am
Damned by faint praise?
February 8th, 2006 at 9:20 pm
I love that the Christianity Today article points out the symbolism of birds in this film. Throughout, there are bird images and bird calls interlaced in the soundtrack. Somewhere I saw a comment by Joe Wright that he feels falling in love is very primeval, very connected to nature, and he wanted to convey that. If anyone else has found comments about the use of bird images and sounds in the film, I would love to hear about it.
February 10th, 2006 at 7:16 pm
Lizzie is Anguished???? (Either I’m going crazy or something just doesn’t seem right about this)
February 12th, 2006 at 1:58 pm
JW made the blackbird Lizzy’s birdsong. It starts with the opening credits, heralding the overture, and presumably elsewhere in the film as well.
February 12th, 2006 at 7:47 pm
JW mentions the blackbirds in the commentary, which I listened to this afternon. We hear it again just before the 2nd proposal, and he reminds us that the blackbird is “Lizzy’s bird.”
BTW, the subtitling for the UK disc is pretty bad. It leaves out quite a lot of words, but there doesn’t seem to be any rhyme or reason as to which words are left out. I don’t know any of the other 10-15 languages that are available (such popular languages as Icelandic, Slovenian and Croatian are available, but not French or German), so I cannot vouch for the quality of the subtitles in those languages.
One thing that cracked me up about the commentary is that JW is *bleeped* twice. Both times are very early on — within the first 5 or 10 minutes.
One more thing — this is for everyone who complained that Emma Thompson should have written the whole script: JW informs us that ET wrote the scene when Charlotte tells Elizabeth about her engagement.
As for ET being “ashamed” of her involvement, I can’t think she’d have been so eager to present the film at the Golden Globes if she were ashamed of it.
February 17th, 2006 at 8:41 am
ET also wrote the letter at Lampton scene: together with the coming and going of Lizzy as she is trying to tell the Gardners and Darcy about Lydia.
If ET was invited in as a script doctor, then it would be unusual for her to receive any credit in the film at all. Generally it is the main script writers that are listed in the credits - no matter how many script doctors / consultants were used. I cannot remember, but is Lee Hall mentioned in the credits, as she wrote the revisions of DM’s script in Feb 2004?
ET has been willing to be acknowledged in various interviews / JW’s commentary as having had input into the script, as well as presenting the Golden Globes - doesn’t sound as though she is ashamed of her involvement!
March 3rd, 2006 at 6:54 pm
julie- it is interesting that JW is bleeped in your version because the American versian doesn’t