1995
PG
5 hours and 27 minutes
BBC
Directed by Simon Langton
Screenplay by Andrew Davies
Starring Colin Firth, Jennifer Ehle, Susannah Harker, Julia Sawalha, Alison Steadman, Benjamin Whitrow
vs.
2005
PG
2 hours and 9 minutes
Focus Features
Directed by Joe Wright
Screenplay by Deborah Moggach and Emma Thompson
Starring Matthew Macfadyen, Keira Knightley, Brenda Blethyn, Donald Sutherland, Judi Dench, Rosamund Pike, Tom Hollander
Sparks fly when spirited Elizabeth Bennet meets single, rich, and proud Mr. Darcy. But Mr. Darcy reluctantly finds himself falling in love with a woman beneath his class. Can each overcome their own pride and prejudice? [IMDB]
On this issue, I am not torn -- though I'm certain I am in the minority of opinion. OK, here goes: Jumping without a net. *deep breath* The Darcy I love best of all Darcys is Matthew Macfadyen's Darcy...not Colin Firth's. (Don't get your petticoats in a twist just yet, I have some compelling reasons to plead my case.)
While 1995's Pride & Prejudice miniseries comes complete with six lengthy episodes to tell the beloved tale, the 2005 full-length feature film adaptation has just over two hours. Naturally, it goes without saying, this affords the miniseries a much greater opportunity to tell the story in detail. This doesn’t automatically make the miniseries better than the film; it does, however, make for an unbalanced comparison. So, for the purposes of this post, I’ll be sticking to each of the Darcy performances without running off on too many tangents, which--if you knew me--is no small feat.
When the 1995 miniseries premiered, it had many a Janeite reaching for her smelling salts. Literary ladies far and wide were positively swooning over Colin Firth’s portrayal of Fitzwilliam Darcy. The series launched his career into the stratosphere, inspired a bombardment of fanfic (obscure and noteworthy alike), a resurgence of the Jane Austen fandom, and saw Firth resume his role of sorts in the inspired-by-P&P book-to-film Bridget Jones’ Diary (and its subsequent sequels). No matter what Firth does for the rest of his life, his name will always be mentioned in conjunction with that now iconic dip he took in Pemberley’s pond.
 |
| Mr. Darcy post dip in Permberley's pond. Photo: BBC. |
Humor me, while I veer a little off course to discuss that famous scene. Austen devotees, of course, know Darcy’s venture into skinny dipping wasn’t in the original work. For those of you who are fans of the miniseries, but haven’t yet read the book, that scene was completely invented by screenwriter Andrew Davies who has gone on to inject many unnecessary and overt sexed-up scenes into his adaptations of Jane Austen’s works. For reference, I point you to his imagining of the sexual encounter between Willoughby and Col. Brandon’s ward in the 2008 miniseries adaptation of Sense & Sensibility; and the rather scandalous depictions of sexual activity in the multi-series Sanditon, which is loosely based on Austen’s unfinished novel. I say loosely because only 12 chapters of Sanditon were written before her untimely death in 1817. I still have not been able to get through Davies' series out of respect for Dear Jane. (I shudder to think what will happen if he gets his hands on The Watsons.)
Davies seems rather determined to sex up most of his costume dramas wherein only passing allusions were made in the source material from which he bases his screenplays. Like Jane, I’m not opposed to depictions of sexual activity. On the contrary, the 2023 adaptation of Lady Chatterley’s Lover, for instance, was extremely explicit; it was also a beautiful work of art. As for Austen, well, she was no prude to be sure; she enjoyed Clarissa and Tom Jones as much as the next gal. I do, however, take umbrage when sex is thrown in where it doesn’t belong to suit the tastes of modern audiences. I believe loyalty should favor the author’s original vision and not present-day preferences.
Now whose petticoat is in a twist? Getting back on track… It wouldn’t be out of left field to describe Firth’s Darcy as a stiff, staid, and stoic portrayal almost entirely throughout. He plays this role with a rather firm hand over the six episodes. It’s not until the scene in which Elizabeth receives news about her youngest sister Lydia’s impending elopement that we see Firth relax his vice-like grip on stoicism and display overt regard for the object of his affection. At times, he seems entirely devoid of human emotion, almost robotic. I suspect that was a purposeful interpretation, a means to justly convey what would today be termed as social anxiety. It’s not to say there isn’t fodder for this interpretation in the source material–Darcy is all of those things, but there’s more to him if we look a bit deeper.
Darcy is oft-accused of being stuffy, snobby, and aloof; I give the sentiments he expresses in his first proposal of marriage as evidence to please the court. However, there’s more evidence to prove the opposite. Darcy is actually a painfully shy, caring, and principled man. These qualities are revealed in the passing details we get from reliable witnesses who observe Darcy’s behavior firsthand in settings where he's more comfortable to let down his guard. Take for example the protective care and concern for his sister, the generous and attentive regard he has for his tenants, his brotherly devotion to Bingley (however misguided and poorly managed his attempts to save him from a mismatch were), and, not least of all, the role he played in making sure Lydia’s reputation wouldn't be irreparably damaged by hers and Wickham's rash cohabitation.
Throughout the book, Austen drops numerous hints that Darcy is in love with Elizabeth long before she becomes aware of her own feelings. This is true of the film adaptations as well. However, I do think that these hints were emphasized with a bit more finesse in the 2005 screenplay, which is what may have induced Macfadyen to play Darcy a bit softer, somewhat forlorn, and certainly more sympathetic. Macfadyen’s portrayal gives us a suffering Darcy–not simply due to his unrequited love, but because he feels trapped by his inability to emote the way others do. This comes through on an emotional and physical level in the post-dinner scene at Rosings when he confesses to Elizabeth that “I do not have the talent of conversing easily with people I have never met before.”
 |
| Darcy confesses his insecurities to Elizabeth. Photo: Focus Features |
Now, as for invented scenes, the 2005 film is guilty as well. One of the earliest moments we see Darcy’s growing affection for Elizabeth is just after the Netherfield ball as he takes her hand to help her into the carriage. This is subtle, and respectfully done, albeit entirely absent from the source material. We must remember that this was a time period of strict social etiquette; men and women weren’t permitted to touch one another except on the dancefloor. (Why do you think Dear Jane was so keen to attend every ball she could?) As far as what Austen would have thought of this scene…well, I like to think she would have approved.
(Fun Fact: Macfadyen’s now famous and beloved “hand-flex” scene wasn’t actually in the script. It was improvised during production. Isn’t it lovely when movie magic happens?)
Small as it is, what this scene does is illustrate visually what Austen was implying about the internal conflict Darcy has regarding his shortcomings and the pressures on him to make a desirable match. He’s at odds with himself to fulfill his societal and familial duty while wanting to break free from his constraints (his own and those imposed upon him).
Before I sum up, let’s take a moment to compare the second proposal scenes in each adaptation. The 1995 version is a very literal representation of the book; ordinarily, I am in favor of remaining as true to the author's vision as possible. But, when changes are made for cinematic purposes and done so with great respect for the original work, diversions can be forgiven. In the miniseries, Darcy proposes to Elizabeth a second time with absolutely no fuss. Austen likely penned the second proposal as a quiet affair because the first one was so painfully dramatic and awkward. Furthermore, by this time in the narrative, Darcy and Elizabeth know way more about one another and their love is mutual. Not to mention, they’re the only two in possession of their happy secret. (That is except for Lady Catherine, who was very clearly on to something.) Firth and Ehle happen into engagement on their walk toward Mereton easily and effortlessly, as if nothing especially important happened that day.
 |
| Darcy and Elizabeth give love a second chance. Photo: BBC |
The 2005 version had other plans for moviegoers. Without the creative license taken by director Joe Wright and his team, we’d have been robbed of the crescendo that is Macfadyen’s Darcy striding through the field near Longbourn at dawn set to that absolutely glorious score by Dario Marianelli. When he reaches his destination and stands in front of Elizabeth in the chill morning air with the sun rising behind them, he delivers the lines with such gentle, besotted regard you can feel the love flowing like a wave within him. The scene is an absolute treasure; pause it and any frame is suitable for hanging in a gallery. It makes the ideal setting for a Darcy that is romance personified. For all these reasons, and more, this Darcy holds a special place in my nerdy bookish heart.
 |
| Darcy determinedly makes his way to declare his love to Elizabeth. Photo: Focus Features |
So, do you agree? Or, do you disagree vehemently and think I’ve lost the plot? Maybe you could go either way? Let me know in the comments section which Darcy you favor and why.
No comments:
Post a Comment