Fuck Yeah! Jane Austen Heroine

Sorry for the accidental hiatus.

Tue, 24 May 2011 11:12:04 -0600

My little brother graduated high school and my grandparents came to visit! I started a summer job! And I’m taking a spring semester class on Shakespeare that makes me weep, because the prof is ridiculous! Portal! The Pillars of the Earth!

…mostly it’s been a newfound obsession with Community, though. Basically, my dears, I am a busy bee and real life gets in the way of tumblr something horrid. So. SUBMIT.

Photo

Tue, 24 May 2011 11:02:53 -0600

Sir William Lucas? You around? Super-dorkish or not, I’m...

Thu, 28 Apr 2011 23:33:36 -0600

Sir William Lucas? You around?

Super-dorkish or not, I’m totally staying up tonight to watch. For the dress. And to bid adieu to my girlhood dreams of marrying Wills. I ain’t even that old, but goddamn he looks like Charles now and I can’t abide by such things.

“They had drawn back from many introductions, and still were perpetually having cards left by...

Tue, 26 Apr 2011 22:01:00 -0600

“They had drawn back from many introductions, and still were perpetually having cards left by people of whom they knew nothing” -Persuasion.

The original I-don’t-know-you-but-maybe-we-can-be-Facebook-friends-anyway. Jane Austen was so hip.

i enjoy this muchly, thank you for submitting! (and sorry for all the lower-case nonsense, guys, i still can’t type. it’s interfering with portal. and summer. but mostly portal.)

Sorry about the broken wrist, Lovely! I hope your gentleman friend is pleased to take care of you. Which wrist did you break?

Mon, 25 Apr 2011 19:49:22 -0600

awh, thank you! it’s my left wrist, which is just unfortunate because i’m left-handed and i’m supposed to write my last english final tomorrow, hah. and yes, everyone’s been perfectly lovely, including him.

so this happened today. i’ll be wearing a cast/not typing...

Mon, 25 Apr 2011 17:12:13 -0600

so this happened today. i’ll be wearing a cast/not typing properly for a month. my gentleman friend is all bingley-ish right now, though, and I am rather amused.

I’m non-religious and celebrate Easter as Mini Egg Day,...

Sun, 24 Apr 2011 12:35:23 -0600

I’m non-religious and celebrate Easter as Mini Egg Day, but for those of you who do…I hope it wasn’t like this.

Happy Easter!

I played the first Portal for the first time today and actually...

Fri, 22 Apr 2011 22:44:42 -0600

I played the first Portal for the first time today and actually liked it. Enough to be downloading it right now, even!

…couldn’t help thinking this, though.

I adore the 2005 version, it captures the humour that the 1995 mini-series didn't really get. I saw the 2005 first, and generally it seems that the version people have seen first, they like better. I suppose it's because we connect with how the actors pay their roles and when somebody else does it, we think 'no, they aren't doing it right'. The cinematography in the 2005 was so breathtaking and the amazing music also made the film so much more intense which is what a film really should do. I still love the 1995 version, but I'm with you in preferring the 2005 film :)
(yeah I hope that all made sense haha)

Fri, 22 Apr 2011 11:18:19 -0600

You know, I saw the 2005 one first too, and I think you’re right in saying that has something to do with it. Thanks!

My roommate and I have the same issue. She likes the 2005 version and I like the 1995 version (at this point, we just agree to disagree). I like them both, they're both good movies, but I'll always love the 1995 version more.
For me, I think the overall quality of acting is better (Judi Dench aside, she's freaking amazing as always). Colin Firth will always be the best Darcy in the world in my opinion, so is Jennifer Ehle. Matthew Macfadyen and Keira Knightely have their moments but it just didn't cut it for me.

Fri, 22 Apr 2011 01:51:06 -0600

Legit. Part of my issue is one that someone else had, which is that Ehle looks too old. IDK.

Also, it should surprise exactly none of you that I can quote along exactly to the 2005 version. Also unsurprisingly, no one wants to watch it with me anymore.

I absolutely adore MacFayden as Darcy. In fact, McFayden made me truly fall in love with Mr. Darcy as a character. He's just fucking perfect and intense and has just the right ratio of asshole to hero.

Thu, 21 Apr 2011 22:10:06 -0600

Yesss! I love the intensity, too. Also, Macfadyen is straight up hot. Have you see The Pillars of the Earth at all? He makes monks look hot, dude.

I like the 2005 version best, mostly because I think MacFadyen is perfect as mr. Darcy, while Firth has the same uninterested look in every shot.
However, I really don't like Keira Knightley, and I think the movie is way too cheesy in some parts. That's Hollywood, of course... But that confession scene in the rain was too weak for my taste. She's supposed to still despise him then, yet she acts like she's going to kiss him. And the words mr. Darcy uses are way too simple, and don't portray his character or emotions at all. I love his way of speaking in the book. "You must allow me to tell you how ardently I love and admire you" is so much better than: "I love you. Most ardently."
But I love the 2005 version mostly because of mr. Bingley and Jane. They are just perfect in it.

Thu, 21 Apr 2011 20:20:06 -0600

Hah, re: Firth and the cheesy factor. I actually love the rain scene because of all the sexual tension they’ve got going on. And same with the Netherfield ball.

And yes. Jane, especially Jane. Rosamund Pike is awesome in many ways.

I also love 2005 version of Pride and Prejudice better than 1995 one. the actors are better suited for the roles, I believe (in the book Elizabeth says that she's not one and twenty, and Jennifer Ehle looks like she's thirty-something), oh and Macfadyen is more Darcy-ish, I think, because he's so secretive and mysterious in his looks. and the whole film is just very very beautiful, I adore it. :)

Thu, 21 Apr 2011 18:28:06 -0600

Yeah, I love the massive sexy brooding think Macfadyen’s got going on, too. Thanks for your input!

Hiya, just wanted to let you know that this post was mine:
http://fyeahjaneaustenheroine.tumblr.com/post/4794695363/ill-be-honest-with-you-guys-i-am-that-friend-no

Was fiddling with the wording and my computer died, hence why I didn't submit it =[

Also, re. that - the 2005 P&P is less accurate in the way that they portray the Bennet family life. There is no mention in the book of farm animals, and they are not the lower class, so they would probably have had more servants. Plus I really dislike Keira Knightley as Elizabeth for some weird reason...

Thu, 21 Apr 2011 16:37:05 -0600

Oh yay! I’m glad you told me.

Anyways, I know it’s totally inaccurate in a lot of ways (man, the pig in the house gets me every. fucking. time), but I dig it anyways, obvs. And yeah, Knightley’s Elizabeth irritates loads of people, I know. Though I’m half convinced that at least some of that comes from the “Keira Knightley in another period piece?!” thing. IDK. Or acting with her eyebrows. Something.

I love both the 1995 and 2005 versions! I really wish we could experiment with both casts and have them act out both adaptations and see what happens. I mean, both versions are amazing in different ways O_____O I CAN'T DECIDE. BOTH MAKE ME HAPPY

Thu, 21 Apr 2011 13:43:06 -0600

Ooooh, I like this idea! LET’S MAKE IT HAPPEN.

Y'all are awesome when you've got opinions

Thu, 21 Apr 2011 11:43:58 -0600

They’re all queued right now so I don’t flood your dashes.

…you should also fill up my submissions box. Just sayin’.

I still love the 1995 version better, and I don't quite understand how the merits of the 2005 top the merits of the 1995 (I hope we can at least agree that the Laurence Olivier version was terrible and completely wrong), but I promise not to unfollow. It's childish to assume everyone has the same opinion, and therefore I applaud your "coming out" as a 2005-lover, lol.

Thu, 21 Apr 2011 11:41:49 -0600

Hah, I’ve never seen that particular travesty (though Laurence Olivier, my god, that man. is attractive) And I’ve definitely actually gained about 20 followers since last night, lol.

I reblogged this, but the only problem I have with the 1995 version is the scenes that they ADD to it. I know, it's kind of backwards, usually people complain about the scenes that are cut out. But the scenes that weren't in the book felt forced to me, like they didn't seem completely in character. Of course, it was so long, they kind of had to, even the book was not long enough XD.

2005 version ftw. MacFadyen is totally my Darcy (though I LOVE Firth's Darcy), and I honestly didn't notice the loss of Mrs. Hurst at first :P She just didn't make much of an impression on me. I even love the little deviations from the characters that they took (awkward!Bingley and cutesy!Georgiana <3). Plus, it was just such a beautiful movie. It wasn't exactly the book but it followed the spirit, which in my opinion, is exactly what a book to movie transition should do.

Thu, 21 Apr 2011 08:01:06 -0600

Adding scenes that aren’t in the original text are about as useful as taking ones that were away, in my opinion. At least if you’re cutting something, you’re recognising that it’s not necessary, hey? Adding things…no, no thank you.

Also, yeah, agreed about capturing the spirit as being one of the most important parts of adaptations. I know tons of people get really irritated when it isn’t JUST SO…but it can’t be. It’s impossible. You’ve got to separate the book from the film, view them as two separate texts, or you’ll just end up ridic pissed off.

Also: I forget about Mrs. Hurst even when I’m reading the damn book, and I’m pretty sure I saw Georgiana in Jane Eyre, being equally adorable.

I just forgot to mention: 1995 might have Firth, but 2005 has Judi Dench, bitches

Thu, 21 Apr 2011 00:52:38 -0600

And Judi Dench wins at everything ever. Any other arguments are automatically rendered invalid, though feel free to tell me why you disagree.

It can be pretty daunting sitting through the whole of the 1995 P&P but It's a miniseries, so you're not actually meant to watch the whole thing in one shot. You can watch it episode by episode and make it last a week. At the end of the day I'd much rather do that than sit through the the two hours of mind-numbing dullness that is the 2005 version. There should be more to a movie than prettiness and nice music (and anyway the bbc version has a glorious soundtrack and some very pretty scenes). I find the 1995 version horrible because it just doesn't capture Austen's sense of humour.

Thu, 21 Apr 2011 00:48:46 -0600

Oh, I know. I just get antsy in general, is part of my problem with it personally; it’s rare that I can actually sit for longer than an hour to watch anything. I think the last thing I watched was The King’s Speech, and I only managed that because I was in the theatre.

Anyways: disagree that 2005 is dull and flat, obviously. Though you’re definitely correct in saying that there needs to be more to films than prettiness and nice music. Like I said to someone else earlier, though, I’ve got a soft spot for Wright and Marianelli.

However. YAY DISSENT! Debates > people just agreeing with me.