I haven't read the novel version, or call it the "original", so I only talk about movies.
Perhaps the two works have different meanings, and the screenwriter and director of the film have a different perspective; perhaps after so many years, in today's environment, the "personality" of a woman like Susan has been different from that of the day.
In short, I don't think Susan is ridiculous, pathetic, ridiculous, or ironic at all, and she is by no means ridiculous.
It is true that this beautiful and smart woman has been plotting something, but her methods and her determination of her behavior, through her conversations with American friends, through her conversations with her brother-in-law, have never let her His own schemes appear dirty and superficial.
We have all seen many characters who want to marry a wealthy family, and how different Susan is from them.
"I think it's interesting to change the minds of people who didn't like me in the first place."
"Marriage is certainly not all of my life."
"I won't indulge in the company of a child."
"Don't worry. I will make him believe me."
She doesn't care about marriage or children so much . She is full of confidence and ignores difficulties. Even if the ironclad facts are in front of her, the paper can no longer contain the fire, and she still stubbornly reverses other people's treatment of herself. the opinion of. Never ask anyone to stay, and don't care if the relationship is stable and reliable. She actively investigates and chooses, abandons the inappropriate, reverses when she thinks it is necessary, and does not abandon the good embryos she fancy.
What an interesting woman, what a twenty-first century!
What is rare is that she also has a good friend who agrees with her three views! In that era when women bound their feet, she actually had a good girlfriend who could borrow the world's men for her own use with her! He neither scolded her for stepping on two boats, nor did he despise her for being unclearly attached to the married man, and even risked being beaten by her husband into the cold palace to help her deal with it. Most importantly, I think from the bottom of my heart that "no man can truly be worthy of her"!
The existence of a man like Sir Martin is, for women like Susan, the best outcome other than "matching each other."
Think about it, if the man on the stall is a man like Anna Karenina's husband, or an American friend's husband in this film, who has the ability but is strong and not funny, Susan should live much more boring! The Barrett in Gone with the Wind is very good, but this is in the UK, and it is written by Miss Jane. Therefore, Sir Martin is already a gift.
Some people think she ended up dismal. Please, rich, good-tempered, and stupid, not to mention their era, even today, they are also the best choice for excellent husbands. Regardless of children's education-however, another standard of good men also contributes little in this regard-isn't it much better than embroidered pillows that cheat at every turn!
Besides, people still have love.
Having said that, the role of Manwolin, who is responsible for providing love, is not very satisfying.
As the love belonging to a woman like Susan, it's not so good! There are too few scenes, and the director is not interesting enough.
In short, I appreciate this kind of persona, but British literature and art are always simple.
For historical reasons, Susan in that era also lacked a career foil, which is a pity.
View more about Love & Friendship reviews
