While this is an earlier rendition then the two discussed above, I saw no reason to cover it before the others. I didn’t see it first, and that should count for something. Besides, as it is dry and slow, much of the pleasure in watching comes from comparing it to the others.
It is another miniseries, and may be more complete than its cousins, but that depends on how you define complete. Certainly there is dialog which can only be found here and in the book. But there are also major scenes missing and lines relocated to unlikely locations. I suppose I should leave discussion of the “purity” of the material to the Janeites.
This version is almost wholly a comedy, although that doesn’t mean it is funny, only that it attempts to be. I did laugh (when Mr. Collins shows off his dancing skills), but generally it failed to coax even a smile out of me. The absurdity of the characters is highlighted, but it often goes too far, making them unpleasant to watch. Mrs. Bennet and the three younger sisters are always hard to take, but this time their obnoxious behavior (repeated again and again and again) will make you long for the subtlety of a Jim Carey movie. Mr. Bennet is played as a harder man, showing no love for most of his family. He is even occasionally cruel to them, but it is quite understandable, and I sympathized with his hiding in the library more than ever. Even Jane’s sunny disposition is tedious. This is Pride and Prejudice with people you don’t like and will never want to meet. The few that aren’t horrible by their own traits are so by association. Each time Elizabeth shows respect or fondness for her family, friends, and Darcy, my estimation of her decreases.
While the acting is often attacked as stilted, I can’t see that as a fair criticism. As with most comedies, realism is nudged to the side (if not thrown out all together). There is no reason why anyone should sound like an actual person. Also as a comedy, it can be excused for the lack of chemistry between its stars. If I was informed that Elizabeth Garvie and David Rintoul hated each other, and that there were several attempts by each to pluck out the other’s liver, perhaps with a more than normally dull spoon, then I’d be able to fathom their performances. Garvie is a bright-eyed and appealing Lizzie, more of an “every woman” then the exceptional one I’m used to seeing. But “every woman” or not, she holds Darcy in contempt from beginning to end, no matter what lines she is reciting. Rintoul brings the real humor to the show, although it is almost certainly accidental. I had thought of Darcy as a jerk before, but never had I taken him to be a psycho-killer. This Darcy, with his inability to move his neck, constantly slit mouth, obsessed stare, and artificial gait, is just weird. I could plop him down in a horror movie as either an escaped mental patient that keeps eyeballs in a jar, or as an undead mummy, only recently unwrapped, without any alteration. He’s a sick, unpleasant freak, and Lizzie even spitting out the words that she’s fond of him (no matter how much we don’t believe her) shows she’s under a demonic spell.
This sounds negative (and I haven’t even mentioned the uninspired sets and fake military uniforms), but it is still Austen. If you are a fan of the story, Garvie and company are worth one viewing.
I may not seem to be a good choice to review anything connected to The Phantom of the Opera. Not only do I not understand why someone would undertake re-editing it, I don’t understand why anyone would watch it. Or for that matter, why anyone wouldn’t take out a contract on Andrew Lloyd Webber for the pain he has caused.
Wui-Ming Gan will require watching. This guy (girl? Group? Fan editors tend to be a secretive lot) has imagination to spare. He corrects what could not be corrected. He fixes the singing.