(no subject)

[gabbydwg]

Somebody on Austenblog asked why anyone who's read the book would defend P&P3. So here goes.

For my part, I'm inclined to defend the movie because I think the level of vitriol leveled at it at certain sites is disproportionate to the "crimes" it has committed.

I've seen all the JA adaptations (I think) except NA and P1, and to my knowledge, this is the only one aside from MP2 that has met with this much anger. MP2 is also the only one I dislike on the grounds of being unfaithful---any others I dislike, it's because they were boring, or ugly, or both. Now, I don't think this movie comes anywhere close to the level of travesty that MP2 attained, so I find the rabidity of its detractors to be somewhat bewildering. I mean, at least the makers of P&P3 actually respect Jane Austen and P&P --- at least, they don't go around openly insulting it in interviews. It seems to me like they really tried to be "faithful," in their own way. There are some unpopular interpretations of characters, but nothing too outrageous. I mean, nobody would actually (I hope) interpret Fanny Price as a spirited, horseback-riding hoyden, but who honestly hasn't heard the argument before that Mrs. Bennet is actually really very sensible in trying to get her girls married? Who hasn't witnessed a Shy War? Even if you don't agree with it, it's out there.

Plenty of other adaptations -- Emmas 2 and 3, P2, and even S&S2, which I love -- make serious changes to the text, but they don't have gaggles of people bashing them. (Though of course every adaptation is disliked by *somebody.*) So I don't understand why this one meets with such frothing-at-the-mouth responses. Though I have my suspicions.

EDIT: Got a reply which was more of the same, insisting on the horrible inaccuracy of the movie, and here's my response to her:

MP2 was widely disparaged by Austendom when it came out. My intention was not to ask why MP2 wasn't *more* despised, but why P&P3 seems to have been labelled as the same sort of travesty as MP2.

So is it just that the publicity campaign shot itself in the foot? I can understand wanting to rebel against publicity. Personally, I realized I didn't like the publicity for the movie, so I stopped paying attention to it. I still liked the movie itself, however.

The thing is, if you're going to hate one adaptation for changing details, you have to hate all of them, in order to have consistency. But many people love the Gwyneth Paltrow and Kate Beckinsale Emmas, or P2, or S&S2, even though they changed and added lots of things. A lot of the complaints against P&P3 -- like simplifying the class structure, for example -- could also be levied against S&S2.

I enjoy most adaptations, even though every one of them has something in it that I don't like. I see a lot of complaints about the lack of gloves and the messy house in P&P3, and so on. Honestly. Yes, there were some things about P&P3 that I didn't like. But that doesn't mean I think it's a terrible movie. I don't like the parade at the end of P2 and I think Ciaran Hinds is ugly, but I don't condemn the movie because of it.

To me the makers of this movie have no understanding of the book.

This is what I hear a lot of people say, but at the same time, I think most of it comes down to "The makers of this movie don't have the same vision of the book as I do."

And what if, as you say, they have "no understanding" of the book? They're still trying to be faithful to it as they do understand it. They wouldn't be touting all this faithfulness nonsense if they weren't. And that is still much more than Rozema did.

I do think the hatred shown to this movie stems from an over-familiarity with P&P2. People are used to that version, they expect to see the same level of detail in every subsequent version of P&P. Which isn't to say anything against P&P2 or its fans, but I think if P&P2 hadn't existed, people would be more receptive of this new version.

Of course, if P&P2 hadn't existed, a lot of us wouldn't be here at all. ;)

That's also why I think adaptations of the other novels (barring an MP2-like departure from the novel) are generally more tolerated: adaptations of them are fewer and further in between, and so fans are glad just to have any version.

In any case, we'll probably get another adaptation of P&P in 10 years. Maybe that one will benefit from this one in no longer being compared to P&P2.

Comments

[carthia.livejournal.com]

So I don't understand why this one meets with such frothing-at-the-mouth responses. Though I have my suspicions.

So do I. They can deny it all they want, but it's been obvious since the first "It will never be better than P&P2, so why bother trying" post.

[fiorelina.livejournal.com]

They're just plain fundamentalists. Simple as that. At the moment I am reading "The Bronte Myth" which is not only a fascinating read on how the Brontes have been used by different generation and people to idealise their own views, but also how fanatic fans have a way of interpreting an author's work, supposedly sheltering the author and the work, and similarly stripping it of so much off its value - namely the ambiguity and openness to different interpretations. This is what Janeites are doing. They reject critique of Austen per se. They reject an adaptation of Austen which puts her in a different context. So what? While Austen lived Romanticism existed and was widely spread. All they see is "misrepresentation". All this proves to me is that they don't have one spec of imagination in their brains. It all has to be as JA wrote it (or P&P2 showed) or it's wrong. What they don't get is that Austen wrote fiction. No, for them it's all serious and earth-shattering. Really, those fanatics would make me doubt my love for Austen if I actually listened to them.

[greenislove.livejournal.com]

No reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater, as the saying goes.

[jimmyhk.livejournal.com]

Wow, a level-headed answer. I'm planning to see it this weekend and will go into it open-minded. Will review it as:

1. just your plain ol' film
2. adaptation of JA (level of affinity, faithfulness, etc)

But I still adore Bride and Prejudice so this P&P3 has got a serious contender in my eyes.

[greenislove.livejournal.com]

Wow, a level-headed answer.

Thanks, Jimmy. That's what I was going for. :)

[shemmelle.livejournal.com]

I try to do that too Jimmy ;) (the splitting of looking at a JA film, or indeed any adaption of something I love)

My main problem with P&P3 is that I enjoyed it until the moment I got out of the cinema and then I went "wah? What was with the XXXX"

and XXXX = JA nitpicks and film nitpicks.

So it angered me because I hate films that sucker me in and then afterwards I go 'wait a moment' because I feel horribly horribly cheated ;)

No actually my main problem is that P&P2, P&P0, B&P are fun movies and to an extent MP2 is fun, but the only fun I really got in P&P3 was the ability to snark at it ;) (but you guys get fic out of that so ;) ....so maybe it *is* fun then? Oh I don't know. Though I accept it is their interpretation of the film but I happen to think they didn't do it very well (even if the original intepretation they went for was valid I don't think they ddi it well at all).

And yes very level headed and sensible comments!

I wish I could be so sensible. I want not to be a rapid GRRR GRRR ARRGH ARRGH person, but everytime I open my mouth out comes snark!

[lise-lise.livejournal.com]

I wish I could be so sensible. I want not to be a rapid GRRR GRRR ARRGH ARRGH person, but everytime I open my mouth out comes snark!

A cute little baby snark :-p

[greenislove.livejournal.com]

I had fun with P&P3, but I think that's mostly because of who I was with --- my sisters are very fun to watch movies with.

[shemmelle.livejournal.com]

Yeah the second time with all my Sydney Dwiggies was fun, but the movie itself wasn't a great deal of fun.

By fun I mean having a certain lightness and charm that magics away any problems even when you reflect on it afterwards.

[lockergirl.livejournal.com]

Thank goodness I don't read that blog.

I didn't like P&P3 at all, but I don't want to be put in the same group as those fundamentalists ;) I'm not a JA purist. I actually liked MP2 though it's definitely not Austen. I simply see MP2 as an enjoyable film which took a few ideas from Austen. It should have been given a different title though. So my problem with P&P3 is not that it's not close enough to the book, but that it isn't fun (like Shemelle said). I always try to convince people that JA's stories aren't pure romance, that if they were, I wouldn't like them. I'm not into costume dramas in general, I only like JA. To me P&P3 is too romantic and no fun. It's a JA adaptation without all the reasons why I love JA. Others may love JA for other reasons and will probably like this adaptation more than others. Nothing wrong with that.

My favourite adaptation is still Emma Thompsons's SS. And she took a lot of liberties as well.

[greenislove.livejournal.com]

See, that makes sense.

S&S2 is still my favorite, too. :)

You're right

[oz-deb.livejournal.com]

There isn't an adaption that people would agree is 100% accurate/perfect because they are a combination of various people's interpretations (scriptwriter, producer, director) and there's no way that absolutely everybody has the same view. You never know how surprised we might be if there was a way to make a movie/mini-series exactly the same as JA imagined any of her novels.

I'm a bit torn about what to think of P&P3. It's the kind of movie you can enjoy whilst at the same time wanting to bang your head on the wall. I mean there were parts that were amusing, but at the same time your inner voice was telling you it wasn't right.

Since you mentioned Emma, the first time I saw Andrew Davies' version (E2 or E3?) I really didn't like it because it seemed too dark. Perhaps some people would argue that the other is too light? But I like watching them both now.

Maybe P&P3 is similar - something that grows on you if you give it a chance. So I would like to see it again, but I'm held back by the expense of going to the cinema (because GOF opens on Thursday and I don't think I can see both).

Re: You're right

[greenislove.livejournal.com]

I can dislike some aspects of an adaptation and like others, and still come away with an overall positive impression. The first time I saw Davies' Emma I mostly really liked it, because of the more in-depth Frank/Jane story, as well as an Emma who was actually kind of mean, like in the book. Now I don't like it as much, though I do still appreciate the Frank/Jane story.

So some do grow on you, but others might, er, grow off you, I guess. (*giggle* That sounds really wrong.) Lose their appeal, that's what I mean.

Re: You're right

[few.livejournal.com]

Interesting--to me, Emma has always seemed the darkest of the books, somehow. Not that I've given it a lot of thought, since I don't actually like the book. :)

Er, replying a bit late, but...

[bijoux.livejournal.com]

I think I love you :)

Re: Er, replying a bit late, but...

[greenislove.livejournal.com]

We all wanna be loved. :D