If you are a fellow Janeite and bought your tickets weeks ahead of the 20th anniversary theatrical rerelease of director Joe Wright’s “Pride & Prejudice” (2005), then it is highly probable we shared the same ardent rush seeing Tom Hollander’s Mr. Collins compliment the excellence of the Bennets’ boiled potatoes on the silver screen.
The eternal debate questioning the superiority of Colin Firth’s or Matthew Macfadyen’s performances as the coveted Mr. Darcy rang once again in the ears of Jane Austen enthusiasts nationwide. For a limited time beginning April 20, Focus Features rereleased Wright’s depiction of Austen’s canonical novel in American cinemas, reminding audiences of the “supremely featured” narrative elements that cement it, in my book, as a film for the ages.
Whether you are an unyielding supporter of the 1995 BBC miniseries starring Firth and Jennifer Ehle as the heroine Elizabeth Bennet, the two-hour film featuring Mcfadyen and Keira Knightley as Lizzie or find yourself in an unpopular position where you can appreciate both productions, the unending discourse surrounding the adaptations’ merits is a testament to the story’s enduring charm.
Although it is practically universally acknowledged that the six-part miniseries with leads Ehle and Firth is more historically accurate and faithful to Austen’s work, the artistry and appeal of Wright’s film is nothing to sneeze at. His directorial debut, Wright envisioned Austen’s novel through a lens of “realism, a sense of mess.” It is clear that his hope of portraying the romance as raw and impassioned translated well on-screen, as the palpable chemistry between Macfadyen’s and Knightley’s characters revolutionized the very art of pining.
20 years later, Wright still feels that the authentic relatability of Austen’s 1813 novel is the catalyst behind the film’s continued resonance with viewers. “Her stories are psychologically true … She was honest about her experience, and she managed to articulate her inner life with clarity.”
As a devotee of the 1995 and 2005 adaptations, I am not above admitting that the unparalleled experience of watching the latter is shaped by its visual and musical nuances. On a cinematography level, the film is glorious. Viewing spectacularly shot scenes such as Darcy’s iconic hand flex, Lizzie atop a cliff longingly gazing at the scenery and Darcy’s failed proposal already makes for a screening beyond compare. Yet, being able to see Macfadyen and Knightley fervently bring Austen’s story to life while being surrounded by a community of other Austen fans can only be described as a surreal experience — one that has “bewitched me, body and soul.”
To boot, the most defining, alluring, gut-wrenching ingredient of Wright’s recipe is the film’s score. Stunningly composed by Dario Marianelli, it’s difficult not to fall in love with the beauty of Wright’s vision for the story; stirring tracks such as “Your Hands Are Cold” and “A Postcard to Henry Purcell” provoke the most profound of emotions in their listeners. The former, which accompanies Darcy’s early-morning walk towards Elizabeth after she receives a cold visit from Dame Judi Dench’s Lady Catherine, substantially amplifies the scene’s endearing nature. Although Wright’s execution of Darcy’s second proposal is a change from that of Austen’s novel, it is a welcome one. The urgency in his stride to determine whether his unrequited love may be reciprocated, coupled with the intensity of the score, expertly builds up the anticipation surrounding their intimate engagement.
While Knightley’s lively rendition of Lizzie has long been the subject of criticism when pitted against Ehle’s level-headed portrayal, the film, in more ways than one, diverts from what some may call the “stuffiness” of the 1995 miniseries. Aligning with Wright’s creative direction that put a modern twist on the classic, Knightley exudes levels of desire and introspection that sharply juxtapose the film’s 18th-century backdrop. It is the blend between the classical formality of the Regency era and the emotionally charged displays of Darcy and Elizabeth’s affection that make for a provocative interpretation of the social commentary Austen explored in her novel. At its heart, the film — while less historically accurate — subtly reminds viewers of the value and desirability of Austenian romance while putting a spin on the societal constructs of marriage, social class and gendered norms that the narrative interrogates.
If you missed a movie date with “Pride & Prejudice” this past week, I highly recommend commemorating the film’s anniversary by making a pot of English tea, preparing potatoes Bennet-style and curling up in cozy clothes for a viewing. To quote Austen’s “Emma,” “There is nothing like staying at home for real comfort.”
