I think I will publish this text under two works at the same time.
First watched the original a few years ago, followed by the BBC version in 1995. I liked the 1995 version very much, so I watched it over and over for a few years, until I felt that I should watch something else, so I watched the 2005 movie version. Because there are so many versions, people like to compare, and so do I. So in a sentence, I cannot guarantee my absolute objectivity. After all, there are always feelings between people and works. If this is true, the evaluation will have a personal emotional color.
Pride and Prejudice is a perfect love concept/romance model for me. Because I like the peace and wisdom of relationships, and the charm of mutual understanding, I can't help but make this movie my love template. Since this is the love template in my mind, every point reflected by the hero and heroine will affect my feeling of the two works, so after the overall comparison, I will write the characters in the front. So let's get started.
Overall
I think the original intention of the BBC mini-series and the film directed by Joe Wright is not exactly the same. The former has always been known for its respect for the original work and its seriousness, while the latter, as another remake, must exist for its own subjectivity and difference, otherwise this remake will also lose its meaning. So, the BBC's version doesn't carry a lot of subjectivity, the narrative is more earthy and smooth, and it's meant to follow and polish the original. The 2005 version is more intense and more like a gift from the director to himself.
The BBC version's six episodes by 50 minutes give the film more narrative space, but the 2005 version can present the same plot for more than two hours, and I am very happy to see it. Of course, as for the pacing, I still prefer the BBC, and I think it's different for everyone, and there's no way to ignore the preconceptions.
male and female
I have always felt that Keira Knightley is suitable for a more tragic role. If you don't match the original work from the appearance and body (after all, as many people said, the actors in the 05 version cater to modern aesthetics), Knightley's facial expressions are actually not the best presentation of the original work as I thought, because the original version of Elizabeth I always feel in my eyes Laughter should always come out. Although Knightley is a beauty, her face is relatively clear and needs to be squeezed every time she smiles. This is more gentle and plump in the 95 version. When I first saw Jennifer Ehle, I immediately thought of Aunt May, and I thought it was all because of the combination of the prominent apple muscle and the slender nose. Later, when I watched Jennifer Ehle's interview, her eyes were really naturally smiling, because the lower eyes and face were concave. In this way, I personally think that Ehle is more in line with my imagination of the original book, because her overall breath is more inclusive and atmospheric, but at the same time she has a certain power. One more prejudice: I've always had a huge trust in BBC casting.
I saw someone say that the male protagonist of the 05 version, Matthew Macfadyen, looks like Lee Pace, which is probably due to the location of the facial features and the eyebrows of the eyes. Macfadyen is still quite docile, with a pair of upside-down gentle eyebrows, which also makes me think that he is not as rigid as the BBC version played by Colin Firth. What's more, M grinned earlier than C. Regardless, they all have heights that are eye-catching in the play. When interpreting the character, I feel that Colin Firth has more energy in his dantian than Macfadyen, which is a bit difficult to explain, but the general idea is that Colin's character seems to have more hidden explosiveness. I think it's not unreasonable that Colin Firth's acting career stuck in this role of Mr. Darcy for almost ten years (BJ's single diary as an example), and it's not unreasonable to be the yy husband of many literary girls, because he has a lot of love for the original That nobility and alienation of control is really handy.
Overall, which of the two is more suitable for Darcy in a person's mind is really a matter of opinion.
I found that in the 05 version, every time the male and female protagonists expressed their feelings for each other, the director arranged a relatively down-to-earth setting, which seemed to be used by the director to set off the deep love between them. Once it was two people drenched in the rain, and the other time when two people with insomnia came together in a field with disheveled clothes. These changes that made many fans of the original raise their eyebrows are probably the original intention of director Joe Wright to remake it - in order to present the perfection in his mind. And when Darcy proposed marriage for the last time, the 05 edition added an incomparably crisp confession to Darcy based on the original work. And the 95th edition, just like its overall line described before, is gentle and calm, and Elizabeth did not have the gnashing expression in the 05th edition when she first faced Darcy's proposal. The second marriage proposal BBC also respected the original book, embedded it in a walk, and the location was the same as the picture I had when I read it. It was a long road with trees on both sides.
At the end, the 95 version ends with a kiss on the carriage after the wedding, and the 05 version ends with a romantic setting night, numb romance and multiple kisses. In the same way, I think the 05 version also continues to adhere to the main purpose of satisfying subjective enjoyment, providing viewers with a romantic (or nauseous) shot of Darcy Elizabeth that was not enjoyed in the 95 version or the original.
As for the off-screen romance between Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle, it seems to be an understatement. I can't remember which site I saw, when they broke up, Jennifer Ehle admitted that she thought she had fallen in love with Colin Firth's character, not him. Anyway, in the end, this has also become a story that literary boys and girls will more or less regret. It is also said that Colin Firth likes dark-haired women, such as the current Italian wife. Later, Colin and Jennifer appeared together in the King's speech, and I stayed there for a while when I saw it. Even if the last paragraph is to express my love for these two actors, Colin Firth will always be my favorite British man (so I said I was unfair to the hero and heroine of the 05 version!).
actor [incomplete]
Mrs. Bennet is actually quite similar in the voices of the two versions of the actors. The BBC version of the characters is more exaggerated than the 05 version, but perhaps because the 05 footage is not as much as the BBC version, haha. The same goes for Mr. Collins. The 2005 version is more normal. I remember when my mother watched the 95 version, every time I saw a feature of Collins, she would laugh and say that this character was disgusting.
Because I had seen An Education before, the 2005 version had Rosamund Pike and Carey Mulligan as Jane and Kitty, respectively, which made me feel good. Not to mention that Pike also played Gone Girl.
As for the character of Charlotte Lucas, what I think is more impressive is that the 2005 version gave the character a chance to explain why he married Collins.
As for Lady Catherine de Bourg, the 2005 version found another actor Judi Dench who made me play frequently (I really can't love the old plays), M in 007.
In general, maybe it's because of the time, the 05 version's portrayal of the supporting characters is not as emotional as the 95 version, but at the same time there are some people who argue that the stupid characters in the 95 version are more stupid than the 05 version, such as Mrs. Bennet and Mrs. Collins.
shoot
I think the 2005 film version can feel that the shots are more jumpy, the shots are more personal, and the overall colors are more intense and rich. In this way, the 2005 version feels more impactful as a whole. For example, it can be deeply felt that the entire life background in the 2005 version is not as peaceful, calm, and clean as the 95 version portrayed, and what is replaced in the 05 version is a more vibrant, stained, and noisy town. In the shots that depict characters, the 05 version has more pictures with a large depth of field, focusing on some details of the characters, and many shots are more shaky. Overall, the shooting methods are richer. It can be seen that the 2005 version is better than the BBC version. Added more personal thoughts from the director. In contrast to the BBC version, the footage is smoother, journalist, and more objectively stated, providing a stable, controllable, and safe environment for the story. So for viewers, the BBC's cut is very comfortable and calm, and the 2005 version will have more excitement.
Music
05 was composed by Dario Marianelli in Italy (Italy is a fertile land for film soundtrack composers), and Joe Wright seems to find him every time he shoots, like this one, Anna Karenina, and Atonement. All of these were nominated for the Grand Prix, and Atonement also won the award.
I really listened to the opening paragraph of the BBC version for several years, and every time I listened to it, it was full of immersion. Later I found out that the composer and conductor Carl Davis was the biggest contributor, a Brooklyn-born musician who settled down in the UK, and a lovely-looking person who has worked with the BBC many times.
I don't need to talk too much about their respective skill levels. First, I don't have enough skills. Second, music is too personal experience. All in all, they have improved the viewing quality of moviegoers. For my personal experience, I think the style of 05 is more diverse. Different pieces have different combinations of instruments, and the division of labor style is very obvious, which is especially credited for emotional rendering. The music in 95 is basically very refined, refined, and more inclined to classical symphony, which is more immersive to me for the age of the work itself.
some have some not [incomplete]
The end of the BBC version always felt a bit rushed, and the last episode felt a lot denser than the previous ones. But maybe the BBC has its own reasons, so there is no need to say more.
Because of the limited time and energy, I have not written a lot of things, and I may make up for it from time to time when I think of it in the future.
If this record is fortunate to be seen, it will be my great luck.
View more about Pride & Prejudice reviews
