Pride and Prejudice: Mr Darcy’s First Proposal


Burn, Darcy. Burn!

So we finally covered Mr Darcy’s proposal in English Literature class and let’s just say that as the teacher read the passage, I was mouthing the words and hearing in my mind the swoon-worthy tone of Matthew Macfadyen. I am aware that there are other Mr Darcys out there, though I know the 2004 movie adaptation is far from being the most accurate to the novel, I still think Macfadyen wins as the ‘top Darcy’ simply because of his voice.

Oh, and the passion between their characters! It’s just so… ohmigoshsogreat, y’know?? It completely takes my breath away. And then I thought about my third* favourite Darcy, and how Colin Firth managed to make you feel sorry for him even though he insults Elizabeth so thoroughly. In the 1996 television version, I absolutely love the proposal scene because not only does it stay true to the novel, but Ehle’s coldness was how I imagined Elizabeth to react.

Though Keira Knightley was great and everything, I felt the scene was dramatised too much. I mean, c’mon! The prophetic fallacy? The raining? It get’s old, man. Besides, Ehle’s Elizabeth was strong, and she didn’t nearly kiss Darcy in the heat of passion… unlike Knightley. ^_^

Moving on to the other interpretations of Darcy’s proposal, I came across the 1940s film Continue reading

Let’s Talk Movies


Specifically, the last two movies I’ve seen in the cinema. What I’ve noticed about the two is that they’re both remakes of old films — and by old, I mean before my time and I do not wish to offend anyone by this. *wink*

I watched The Three Musketeers last week (or was it the week before?) in 3D, keeping with my unconscious habit of only watching cinematic films in three-dimensional. I swear I looked strange with my Harry Potter 3D glasses, but oh well. A fan is a fan, right? Nevertheless, I found this modern remake of the classic story enjoyable. My friend and I exchanged whispers about her new-found crush on Logan Lerman, while in my mind I noted how off-putting he looked with long hair.

By the end of the movie, a part of me felt like I’ve wasted my time watching it. I’ve never seen any of the old versions before, but I’m sure one if not all of them covered all the necessary plot points in the novel they were based from. So, apart from profit and the supposed creative bankruptcy, what was the point of this film remake?

My answer? To cater to the younger people.

Like I said before, I’ve never seen any of the old versions of The Three Musketeers, and I doubt the average teen wouldn’t have either. I’m not saying there aren’t teenagers out there who like the classics, because I like the classics well enough. However, modern technology has spoiled me and from a personal standpoint, I’d rather watch a modern version of a film first and then watch the older. Not only would the special effects be better (though that’s not saying much for 2011’s Musketeers), but modern films feature my celebrity crushes. It’s a shallow reason but hey, it’s the truth. I mean, one of the main reasons I watched The Three Musketeers was because of Matthew Macfadyen — Mr. Darcy, anyone??

As for Footloose, I’ve seen the older version before although my memory of it is very weak. I find this modern version easier to relate to in a way, with the upholding of morals and the sins ‘sexy dancing’ these days represent. However, the constant referral to the laws banning public dancing came off to me as thin-veiled innuendos for sex.

I think I prefer the old version, because the dialogue in this new one seemed forced and robotic to me. The dancing was good — inspiring, even. I particularly enjoyed the line dancing, though I couldn’t help but LOL at the warehouse scene. Sorry.

Oh, and I happen to think that Miles Teller completely stole the show.

He's hott in a dorky kind of way ^_^

Watching Footloose rekindled the fire — not in my heart — but beneath my feet. Why? Well, not only did it remind me how much I enjoyed the mandatory ballroom dancing lessons I took for PE two years ago, but it made me super hyper and I couldn’t stop pretending to be a line-dancer for hours. It was like I was walking on hot coals >_<

Pride and Prejudice


Elizabeth Bennet, Fitzwilliam Darcy, Charles Bingley, Caroline Bingley, Jane Bennet… oh, those characters we all know and love. (Yes, even Caroline.)

“It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a wife.”

It’s been ages since I’ve read the book — in 2007, to be precise, and even then I was so young I barely understood what was happening because of  the hard words and the relatively new (in an old way) sentence structure. I only read it because a classmate of mine recommended the story to me. She was talking about the movie, of course, but since I didn’t have a copy then, I went straight to the library to get the copy of the book.

I’ve seen the movie, of course. And by movie I mean the one with Keira Knightley as the witty Miss Eliza Bennet. It was only recently that I’ve come across a DVD copy of the television series… you know, the one with Colin Firth as Mr. Darcy?

(Oh, Mr. Darcy!)

Ahem.

Anyhow, having seen the two different interpretations of Jane Austen‘s wonderful work, I’ve come to the conclusion that one: Matthew Macfadyen’s version of the proposal was much better, what with his deep, swoon-able voice working for him; and two: Colin Firth’s lake scene was certainly blush worthy. Now I know what the fuss was all about! =P

Certainly both interpretations were wonderful in their own right. The television series had more time, so it was the most accurate with the book. Yet, the movie was comical and Mrs. Bennet was less annoying. Yes, yes, I know. Mrs. Bennet is supposed to be annoying. But she irks me, all right? I just couldn’t stand it.

Now, I’m off to watch Macfadyen read Pride and Prejudice. Wanna watch it with me? Just go here.