Extra Menu Links

When People say things...about Jane Austen, Keira Knightley, Matthew Macfadyen, and Pride & Prejudice movie! #OMGICantEven

When people say things... #OMGICantEven

Okay, I'm not trying to be a spelling or grammar detective here, but when I see/hear/read people (P&P/Austen fans or not...but most especially some...not all...P&P/Austen fans, who should know better. I can understand once and if you're not a fan, but to) say things about P&P/Austen adaptations without checking if they are right or often misspell either Jane Austen or Elizabeth Bennet's last names, it just irks me and I can't help but SMH (shakes my head) and say, OMG, I can't even know what to say (or #hashtag #OMGICANTEVEN! for short, lol). I thought I'd post and rant a bit here about the following things below that I've been noticing on social media recently (which doesn't really bother me and I mostly ignore them, but here I thought I'd mention them, just because I need to vent a little about these on my blog, get it out of the way...and then, let it go! *just like Elsa did in Frozen, haha!*))...

When people often misspelled Jane Austen's last name...
It's Jane Austen not "Austin" (a city in Texas, lol)...


It's Elizabeth BENNET (with one "T") not double "T" in  "Bennett"...

It's Matthew MACFADYEN (pronounced as its spelled Mac-fad-yen) not "MacFayden" or "Macfadden"

Darcy is not amused...

It's Keira KNIGHTLEY (her name is attached on all the movie's posters/OST CD cover/DVD and character posters and wallpapers for anyone to not know how to properly spell either her first or last name. I'm mostly talking about those bloggers, journalists/media who often misspelled either her first name and last name wrong). Also, her last name is spelled similar to Mr. Knightley from Emma) not "Knightly".

When people compare and can't tell the difference between a TV mini-series and film/movie adaptations of Pride and Prejudice (or Pride & Prejudice)...

Here's where P&P adaptations are categorized...

Feature Films (or Movies)
1940 Pride and Prejudice

2005 Pride & Prejudice

TV Mini-series
1980 Pride and Prejudice

1995 Pride and Prejudice

Other modern P&P inspired of (or loosely based) adaptations...

Feature Films (Movies)
2003 Pride and Prejudice: A Latter Day Comedy

2004 Bride & Prejudice

(Not really a P&P adaptation, but more like Colin Firth's Mark Darcy was based on his Mr. Darcy portrayal in P&P 1995 TV Mini-series...)

2001 Bridget Jones' Diary

2004 Bridget Jones' The Edge of Reason

TV Mini-series
2008 Lost In Austen

2013/2014 Death Comes To Pemberley

Other media...

YouTube VideoLog series
2012-2013 The Lizzie Bennet Diaries


When people say that they "hate movie," "the movie is horrible," or that the "2005 Pride & Prejudice movie is the worst P&P adaptation ever made".... I failed to understand why they'd say so. The 2005 movie was a box-office success (worldwide gross of $121 million, according to BOM) with mostly rave reviews (from both film critics and audiences worldwide) and received various awards and nominations (including 4 Oscars, 2 Golden Globes, and 6 BAFTAs). I know we all have different opinions and personal preferences, but did we see the same movie or what?!! I can understand if the movie was not to your liking or preference because you love a certain version of P&P (and can't seem to watch the 2005 movie without comparing it to other versions before it...or that you just thought it was okay or good. There's nothing right or wrong about it, but to call it "horrible," "worst adaptation ever," or hating it because of a dislike of a certain actor from the movie or the creative license and deviations it made from the book is just plainly unfair and prejudice), SMH and #OMGICantEven!

The most common dislike/hate on the 2005 movie is not really because it wasn't good...that's just hating on the movie for the sake of hating on it, but has nothing to do with the quality of it, because any movie-goers out there knows (fans of this movie or not....P&P fans or not) this movie is far from terrible or horrible or any negative words people come up with just to hate on it. This movie is actually the opposite, it's not the worst...it's one of the best...or rather the BEST, actually (or at least, in my viewing and opinion)...of all the P&P adaptations ever made then and now. And I'm not just saying that because of my bias and personal love for this movie (I know there are people and fans out there who agree with me), but even if I'm not a big fan of this movie. I definitely know a great (or not so good) movie when I see one and this movie is easily one of the best. If I have to rank which P&P adaptations (TV or Film) is the best...this 2005 P&P movie is way on top and wins every time based on film's production quality, storyline, and casting-wise (to name a few) alone.

The top 3 (lame) reasons some people (not all) say that make them dislike (even hate) the P&P 2005 movie are:

1. Keira Knightley - poor girl, what did she do to those people to hate her (Hmm, I'm guessing they're just mostly jealous that she's beautiful and a famous Oscar nominated actress and they're not...) and judged the movie based on their hatred of her and not the quality of the film nor her performance? KK is not the only actor in this movie and to hate the movie solely because of her is just plain wrong and a lame excuse. I can understand not liking her as an actress (and judging her acting-wise), but to hate her and not even know her personally nor have meet her in person is just plain stupid and too much. If these people couldn't put aside their prejudice against Miss Knightley and didn't watch her beautiful P&P movie just because they didn't like her, that's their loss 'cause they missed out on watching a great movie with a great cast including her in the lead.
2. The controversial "kiss" between newlyweds Elizabeth & Darcy in the "Mrs. Darcy" American ending scene - I failed to see why this was considered controversial. It's not like they were seen in public kissing inappropriately...they were inside the grounds of their estate in Pemberley. And they're married (can't we see a married couple be romantic and kiss?), for P&P's sake! LOL. So that scene wasn't in the book. Big freakin' Deal! So was the double wedding (while two weddings on the same day with EB/Darcy and JB/Bingley was mentioned in the novel...it didn't say they had a double wedding going on at the same time...) with the newlyweds Elizabeth & Darcy kissing outside in a carriage and the infamous Colin Firth/Darcy bathtub and wet T-shirt/jumping in the dirty lake scenes (in P&P 1995 TV mini-series) weren't in the book either. I don't hear people crying out heresy or calling them controversial or that version was horrible because of the changes that the filmmakers (or any other P&P adaptations) did for that version, yet the 2005 movie gets criticized just for minor changes, labeled for being unfaithful, and its creative additions to make their interpretation not the typical standard P&P adaptation, but something fun, entertaining, fresh, unique, and different. Who said an adaptation has to be an exact replica of the novel? Isn't that why it was called an adaptation? No one would read Jane Austen's classic P&P novel if everything from the book was translated for the small and big screen. No TV or film adaptation is perfect and not everything from the pages of the book can be translated to the big screen either. Just sayin'...
3. The constant comparison of the 2005 P&P movie vs the 1995 P&P TV miniseries - Some people (not all) based their dislike of the 2005 movie on comparing it to the version (P&P 1995, for example) they love or prefer watching more (just because they love the other version more as it had more time, doesn't mean it's the best or the 2005 movie is the worst or horrible adaptation for being shorter in time...).  It's like comparing apples to oranges. One is a lil' over 2-hours long, big screen version (2005 film) seen in theaters for cinema-going experience and the other is a 5-6 hours long, TV version (1995 TV mini-series seen in the small screen) for home-viewing experience. That alone shouldn't be compared. I can understand comparing the P&P characters, locations, key scenes such as the first and second proposal scenes, dialogues/quotes, costumes, and actors' performances because they were adapted and taken from Austen's original novel of the same name. Otherwise, they shouldn't be compared as far as their length and overall adaptation to screen. What or which versions should be compared are: P&P 1940 and P&P 2005 as they are both film versions and P&P 1980 and P&P 1995 because they are both TV mini-series versions.

And lastly...

When people say that the 2005 Pride & Prejudice movie is an American (FYI: the only American in this movie is Jena Malone, who played Lydia Bennet) or Hollywood production (without fact checking or at least google searching here on this blog)...I can't even know what to say...

FYI: Working Title Productions is a UK based production company as well as Focus Features (P&P 05's film distributor) affiliated with Universal Pictures (another P&P 05's film distributor).



Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Popular posts from this blog

TV News: Marrying Mr. Darcy, a sequel to Unleashing Mr. Darcy to premiere on Hallmark Channel in June!

First Look: Keira Knightley in title role Colette

First Look: Keira Knightley as Sugar Plum Fairy in The Nutcracker and the Four Realms!