Old-aches-become-new-again - Lubberwort

we as a society we don’t talk enough about the scene where lizzie tells darcy he should practice small talk and the next day he bursts into her room looking like he’s about to shit himself while commenting on the architecture

4 happy brothers ! 

Pride & Prejudice (2005) dir. Joe Wright

one of my absolute favourite things about pride and prejudice (2005) is the way darcy is just so taken by elizabeth and only her. and how he has always been attentive towards her, from the beginning. from the first time that they catch each other's eye in the public ball and then mr. darcy averts his almost immediately to the holy scared shrine that is the hand flex when they just touch for seconds and he leaves immediately after to not let his emotions be seen to every time when darcy is seated and lizzie makes an appearance so he stands up, no matter the company (mr. bingley and ms. bingley or lizzie's uncle and aunt), no matter the number of times he has to do it (jane's letter about lydia running away) to running after lizzie when she is visiting pemberley believing him to not be there and making an utter fool of himself and then when he is feeling completely, perfectly and incandescently and calls her mrs. darcy. the guy was so floored from the begining until the end of time, how do you not with your heart, body, mind and soul, most ardently love him.

Pondering Pride and Prejudice: The Book vs The 2005 Movie

(ps: spoiler heavy)

It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a good book must be in want of a good film adaptation. Often times, there is an understanding required that when a book is adapted into another medium, the story edges may need to be resculpted so as to fit the narrative as provided by said medium so it can be more visually pleasing. For me personally, differences in adaptations are acceptable as long as they represent the characters' genuine self as close as possible to the originals.

Pride and prejudice somehow succeeds in both doing that and not doing that at the same time. It may be because I went in watching the 2005 movie first before reading the book, and really, that's just testament to how well the movie was made for me to be interested to pick up the book in the first place.

My mom first brought me the book when I was in my younger teens, I kind of brushed it off as "just another romance story" and that "it's not my thing". Then I stumbled upon the movie recently (two months ago) and was just mesmerised by a) the absolutely gorgeous set amd soundtrack, b) the intricacies of each character and their marriage prospects being viewed in a half-sociological, half-survival lens.

(Also Keira Knightley is just so beautiful and I keep falling in love with her smile every time she does i think im questioning my sexuality I- just, just look at her!!! I rest my case. )

Thus, after appreciating the more intricate and realistic approach to love, commitment and atonement in the movie, and the riveting conclusion that romance well-written is worth a lot of time, I decided "Hey, might as well give the book a try!" Which is how I found that certain parts of the dialogue wasn't exactly the same, and certain scenes were set in different areas (i.e. Mr Darcy actually went to Mr. Collin's estate to confess (rather crudely) his love for Elizabeth whereas in the movie, they did it in the garden).

Another thing I found was that book Mr Darcy was actually more pompous, and definitely more high-offish than movie Mr Darcy where he's more just, socially awkward and can't really... people.

As I was reading, it was more just fun to note the differences and very rarely did I think "oh, the movie should have followed the book in this" because, although the movie definitely altered more than a few pieces of dialogue, each representation just felt so right for the story pacing and its characters.

Well, except for one scene where Lizzie's friend Charlotte relays the message that she's marrying Mr Collins, though it's only this one scene that I'm not particularly on board with. I felt the interaction a little too explosive even before reading the book. When compared, the message was relayed comparatively calmly in the book, albeit there existing undercurrents of tension. For me, the quiet way the book handled that little interaction where the girls just swiftly changed the topic, though Elizabeth inwardly retracted her good will for this friend she used to be close with - that felt a little more true to life for me.

But really, it's only this one scene that wasn't handled to my very subjective tastes. Overall the movie still stands with a solid 90% as a comfort movie I could watch again and again and still experience the same whirlwind of emotions.

(this gesture alone is already making me feel things 🥺)

Which begs the question: why did this work? Why did this adaptation, in particular, work so well despite straying quite far from its original counterpart? Why did this supposed "romance novel" work so well for a person who rarely goes for solely romance plots?

So I did some soul-searching, watched videos, read through some article reviews, thought about it in the back of my head, and my answers are this:

The more modernistic values and approach which we adhere to in the 21st century was more prevalent in the movie than the book. Obviously, considering they're literal centuries apart, but shifting Mr Darcy from the "arrogant wealthy man but kind at heart and honourably in love" to "emo boy questioning himself and everyone around him but still honourably in love" possibly made him dearer to the modern audience. Like, I'm no expert in historical societies, but I'm sure Mr Darcy as a character in 1847 must have been making ladies swoon for him as much as he is now. (Because honestly can you ever find a man who will right his wrongs to you despite you being kinda mean to him, only because he loves you, yet does not expect anything back? Both movie Darcy and book Darcy have the quality of integral atonement in them and it's just 👌👌)

(the walk symbolizing Mr Darcy doing what Elizabeth loves is a very nice touch from the movie)

Mentioned before, the dazzling actors, the set, the score, the witty script - everything that makes a movie a good movie, this movie's got it all. They took the original dialogue, enhanced it in their own words, a different voice but the same mind. I think that's what makes it pop off so well, that they can be different but still stay true to the core heart of each interaction. And even if certain interactions did not take place in their original locations, the movie still took care to craft every single crucial setting in the story. So although they might have missed a couple of Liz and Darcy's garden walks, I honestly don't mind, since I still got to see the garden anyway and the interaction we got there was a very solid A plus.

(cries in boy tried his best to express feelings but was still a prick about it)

The friendship between Mr Darcy and Mr Bingley being more, humourously portrayed in that one scene where wingman bro Mr Darcy acts as Jane is an absolutely brilliant addition. Their entire thing in the books was already a pretty fun juxtaposition of one another, like, Bingley as an uwu boy of the 19th century and Darcy the emo boy. This dynamic was enhanced further which alone gives the movie considerable brownie points because I love watching friends be friends :))

Maybe, maybe, just maybe, I may be influenced because I watched the movie first before the book, but this is like a very minor factor because I'm sure had I read the book earlier, I would still be able to appreciate how well-made the entire piece was.

So yeah, that was that. My very lengthy thought process on this piece of work that though having several valid criticisms posed against it in terms of its social stance, as a story in itself, it flourishes elegantly with iconic characters, mic-drop lines and wonderfully crafted settings. The depictions of various types of marriage in that time period, and the considerations one must take as a woman examining her prospects for herself and her family makes it less "another swoony love story" and more "realistic portrayal of romance and its circumstance." I'm still reading up on how Austen uses different settings to enhance her narrative (eg the location of Longbourn having certain implications by being fictional in an actual location Hertfordshire etc) and if I ever finish that reading, I might just come back here to rant again lmaooo

Also!!! What do you think? What made Pride and Prejudice, movie or book or both, pop off for you? I wanna find kindred souls so bad, leave a comment, anything!!! XD I'm very very open to discussion, and it would make me, ahem:

completely, perfectly, and incandescently happy

Leo, about Donnie: Oh, yeah he’s my brother. My twin brother, from the same sewer. Thank you so much for hiring Donatello. It means so much to me. Even though, honestly, he’s 🎶The wo-o-orst.🎶 He is the worst person in the world. Huge skank. Terrible. But thank you. It means a lot. 

HE’S SO REAL (yes I paid him to say a meme joke)

I love just how blatant and embarrassingly obvious Darcy’s affection for Elizabeth is on your second watch through of p&p 2005. I love him describing an accomplished woman as someone who “must improve her mind by extensive reading” and immediately eyeing Elizabeth with her book. I love him asking Elizabeth to dance at the Netherfield ball when, at the previous ball, Elizabeth had told him that dancing was the best way to encourage affection. I love piecing together the shots and realizing that Darcy is almost always looking in her direction. I love realizing the reason Darcy is walking through the crowd at the Netherfield Ball is because he’s searching for Elizabeth. I love him coming over to hear Elizabeth play piano and I love him telling her that he has trouble conversing easily with people he’s just met and knowing he’s attempting to be open and vulnerable with her.

His first proposal is so jarring and unexpected for Elizabeth but damn girl this idiot has been openly pining after you this whole time