傲慢与偏见（Pride&Prejudice）英文影评
发布时间：2019-08-21 22:47:27
Keira Knightley‘s Elizabeth must re-examine her prejudices against Matthew MacFadyen‘s proud Darcy in this adaptation of Jane Austen‘s classic
A collective groan of "not again!" went up throughout Britain‘s green and pleasant land when news got out that there was another adaptation of Jane Austen‘s ‘Pride and Prejudice‘ in the works. After all, the memory of Colin Firth‘s Darcy getting hot and bothered over Jennifer Ehle‘s Elizabeth Bennet in the BBC version of the book is still fresh in many minds, to say nothing of re-jigged versions of the story like Bridget Jones‘s Diary and the Bollywood-style Bride & Prejudice.
There were even more piercing shrieks of "Good God, no!" when the announcement came that comely but hitherto limited actress Keira Knightley - the poshie in the peignoir from Pirates Of The Caribbean: The Curse Of The Black Pearl - was to play Elizabeth Bennet. Sure, doubters said, she‘s got the accent, but would she be able to put across the sparkling intelligence of one of Britain‘s best-loved literary heroines?
What an enormous relief it is to find the 2005 version of Pride & Prejudice has turned out to be one of the best British films of the year. It‘s a smart, elegant but exuberant version that‘s in every way faithful to the spirit of a book that was first written by a 21-year-old woman. (The revised version familiar to us today was published when Austen was 38.)
It is a fact universally known by every sixth-former that the story centres on sparky heroine Elizabeth Bennet (Knightley), her three sisters Jane (Pike), Lydia (Malone) and Kitty (Mulligan) and their parents, wry Mr Bennet (Sutherland) and talkative Mrs Bennet (Blethyn), who live in 18th century rural England.
A respectable but not wealthy family, their fortunes depend very much on the daughters making good matches. At a dance, beautiful Jane soon catches the eye of local squire Bingley (Woods), but Elizabeth takes against his haughty friend Darcy (MacFadyen) when she hears him making a snooty comment about the local talent.
After several missteps and much banter, followed by a few kind deeds, Darcy overcomes his pride and Elizabeth her prejudices to fall in love - especially after she gets an eyeful of the seriously stately gaff Darcy has inherited. (Derbyshire‘s Chatsworth House, the real-life inspiration for Austen, provides the location.)
Novelist Deborah Moggach‘s skilful screenplay here by necessity both fillets the original and fills it out, but does the dialogue and sprightly ironic tone justice. Meanwhile, director Joe Wright, a former TV miniseries maker, subtly accentuates realism over costume-drama froth.
One of the film‘s strokes of genius is to set the story not in the Regency period when the book was published, but in the 1790s when Austen first wrote it, which brings out the class subtext nicely. At this earlier time, the French Revolution was unfolding just a few miles over the Channel, which is why there are soldiers everywhere. Although the English upper classes were rattled, there was social reform in the air which means it doesn‘t seem so scandalous for rich Bingley to consider marrying poor Jane, or super-rich Darcy to consider Elizabeth.
The fresh approach to the period is just one of this new version‘s many strong points. Others include its roster of excellent character turns, from Blethyn and Sutherland (their Mr and Mrs Bennet are always bickering but clearly originally a love match), to Tom Hollander‘s definitively oleaginous Mr Collins, and Judi Dench‘s grand old bitch, Lady Catherine De Bourgh.
MacFadyen‘s Darcy seems younger and shier than Firth‘s, a man not quite used yet to his status. He‘s matched by Knightley‘s impetuous, appropriately 24-year-old Lizzie. For all the posh dialogue they speak (delivered impeccably by both leads), one never forgets they‘re still barely out of their teenage years. Their sparring, charged attraction for one another is built up beautifully throughout the movie, flowering particularly in a key ball scene, where the teeming room of people suddenly melts away, leaving just the two bickering lovers locked in a minuet. It‘s these imaginative, just-so touches which lift this well above the polite costume-drama norm.
There were even more piercing shrieks of "Good God, no!" when the announcement came that comely but hitherto limited actress Keira Knightley - the poshie in the peignoir from Pirates Of The Caribbean: The Curse Of The Black Pearl - was to play Elizabeth Bennet. Sure, doubters said, she‘s got the accent, but would she be able to put across the sparkling intelligence of one of Britain‘s best-loved literary heroines?
What an enormous relief it is to find the 2005 version of Pride & Prejudice has turned out to be one of the best British films of the year. It‘s a smart, elegant but exuberant version that‘s in every way faithful to the spirit of a book that was first written by a 21-year-old woman. (The revised version familiar to us today was published when Austen was 38.)
It is a fact universally known by every sixth-former that the story centres on sparky heroine Elizabeth Bennet (Knightley), her three sisters Jane (Pike), Lydia (Malone) and Kitty (Mulligan) and their parents, wry Mr Bennet (Sutherland) and talkative Mrs Bennet (Blethyn), who live in 18th century rural England.
A respectable but not wealthy family, their fortunes depend very much on the daughters making good matches. At a dance, beautiful Jane soon catches the eye of local squire Bingley (Woods), but Elizabeth takes against his haughty friend Darcy (MacFadyen) when she hears him making a snooty comment about the local talent.
After several missteps and much banter, followed by a few kind deeds, Darcy overcomes his pride and Elizabeth her prejudices to fall in love - especially after she gets an eyeful of the seriously stately gaff Darcy has inherited. (Derbyshire‘s Chatsworth House, the real-life inspiration for Austen, provides the location.)
Novelist Deborah Moggach‘s skilful screenplay here by necessity both fillets the original and fills it out, but does the dialogue and sprightly ironic tone justice. Meanwhile, director Joe Wright, a former TV miniseries maker, subtly accentuates realism over costume-drama froth.
One of the film‘s strokes of genius is to set the story not in the Regency period when the book was published, but in the 1790s when Austen first wrote it, which brings out the class subtext nicely. At this earlier time, the French Revolution was unfolding just a few miles over the Channel, which is why there are soldiers everywhere. Although the English upper classes were rattled, there was social reform in the air which means it doesn‘t seem so scandalous for rich Bingley to consider marrying poor Jane, or super-rich Darcy to consider Elizabeth.
The fresh approach to the period is just one of this new version‘s many strong points. Others include its roster of excellent character turns, from Blethyn and Sutherland (their Mr and Mrs Bennet are always bickering but clearly originally a love match), to Tom Hollander‘s definitively oleaginous Mr Collins, and Judi Dench‘s grand old bitch, Lady Catherine De Bourgh.
MacFadyen‘s Darcy seems younger and shier than Firth‘s, a man not quite used yet to his status. He‘s matched by Knightley‘s impetuous, appropriately 24-year-old Lizzie. For all the posh dialogue they speak (delivered impeccably by both leads), one never forgets they‘re still barely out of their teenage years. Their sparring, charged attraction for one another is built up beautifully throughout the movie, flowering particularly in a key ball scene, where the teeming room of people suddenly melts away, leaving just the two bickering lovers locked in a minuet. It‘s these imaginative, just-so touches which lift this well above the polite costume-drama norm.