PROVING MY LOVE FOR PRIDE & PREJUDICE, AGAIN!

Pride and Prejudice (1940)
Director: Robert Z. Leonard
Initial release: July 26, 1940

    In the early 19th century in the English village of Meryton, the arrival of wealthy bachelors, most notably Mr. Darcy (Laurence Olivier), stirs up the families with single daughters. Among those is the Bennet family, with five eligible daughters, including the spirited Elizabeth (Greer Garson) and her pretty older sister, Jane (Maureen O'Sullivan). As Mrs. Bennet (Mary Boland) aggressively tries to pair off her girls, Elizabeth crosses swords with the imperious Darcy.

I've read Pride and Prejudice, I've listened to the audiobook, I watched the TV adaptation with Colin Firth TWICE, and I've watched Joe Wright's adaptation an unhealthy amount of times. I'm not saying I'm an expert or a super-fan, but... I am a little obsessed with the story, the writing, and the characters. 

This is what I expect in every adaptation: Elizabeth's wit, the sisterhood between Jane and Elizabeth, both covert and overt dissatisfaction from Caroline Bingley (she gotta be mean in a passive-aggressive way), PINING from Mr. Darcy, awkward Mr. Darcy, the progressive change of Mr. Darcy, the rapid-fire marriage rejection, the awkward encounter at Pemberly, and a mild degree of historical accuracy. These are staples!

I got maybe, say, 50% of my demands. 

I did not see or hear Elizabeth's playful wit; I'm very disheartened they didn't showcase this quintessential aspect of her characters, especially so because it resonated with so many readers. While on the topic of characterization, I forgot what part of the movie compelled me to write this, but it's of note: "I hate what they've done to Jane; she's a moronic imbecile. Why did they add another Lydia?!" Yes, she's the prettiest Bennet sister, but she's not brainless! If this is the writers' way to showcase her shyness, it fails in so many ways. The movie continues to showcase their camaraderie, but it's not impactful. 

Caroline will always be an insufferable character, and I look forward to what each actress brings to the table. I was not a fan of Freida Inescort. She had an incredibly snooty accent and an air about her that screamed over-acting. Her overt dislike for Elizabeth and their rude encounters were not appropriate for the time (Regency era). Where are the subtle jabs?! They're not even smart jabs like the ones Niles and C.C. have.

Last but not least, on the topic of characterization. I love Laurence Olivier; so pleasing to the eyes. I always think of Miriam Margolyes when I see him and laugh.

I enjoyed Darcy's cuteness in this adaptation, but he's not the Darcy I know and love. Olivier is not aloof and mysterious. Matthew Macfadyen and Colin Firth set the bar too high; their understated yet effective interpretation showed Darcy's awkwardness so well. They showed pining and longing that was so swoon-worthy. The way they slowly open up. 

Olivier's Darcy lacks the awkwardness I know and love. He's outgoing and seems a bit like a dick. He wears his heart on his sleeve. I think Darcy's metamorphosis is a central part of the story. 

I have a love/hate relationship with the pacing and storytelling. I applaud it because it's fast and explosive, which makes for a great viewing experience. I also condemn it because it does not follow the book to the t. Wickham is introduced much earlier, Lizzie doesn't go to Pemberly/vacation with her aunt and uncle, and the collusion with Lady Catherine de Bourgh (I liked this little twist because it's cute). I'm also a bit disappointed with Lizzie's rejection of Darcy's proposal because she stutters through it. It's a purist's nightmare!

In short, this movie lacks subtlety. It's a disgrace to Regency era fashion and decorum, but it's great! I really enjoyed watching it... There were some dramatic, gag-worthy aspects to this movie, like rejecting Darcy at the dance. The drama of it all! It's not entirely canon, and there is little to be desired with the music score... where am I going with this? Anyway. The fashion, albeit non-historical, is flouncy and fun; it shows how MGM likes to flex its budget and excess. The movie is indulgent.