Imagine and perhaps aren't good enough. We need facts on this thread
What did they have as entertainment back then though? They had to play charades or play the piano and sing - oooh what fun! The upper class didn't even have to look after their own kids as they had servants to do that.
What did they have as entertainment back then though? They had to play charades or play the piano and sing - oooh what fun! The upper class didn't even have to look after their own kids as they had servants to do that.
Yesterday I'd convinced myself that it was a good idea for Elizabeth to be played by an older actress - it ought to have given her the gravitas that a real Mrs Darcy of Pemberley would have.
But today I've reverted, because, as pointed out by another FM, Jane has been cast as younger and far (not just slightly) prettier. And I agree with the 'bedraggled, anaemic and moany' comments.
And the actor playing Darcy is not really doing it for me either. Not sure what I want from a Mr Darcy, but this one doesn't fit the bill.
Elliot Cowan from Lost in Austen is still my all-time favourite Darcy. :kitty:
Exactly. Its as if 6 years married to Darcy has sucked all the life and spirit out of her, not to mention her wit. She has the appearance of an abused wife scared of shadows rather than a woman at her peak with a loving husband and wonderful home.
This is my main problem with Lizzie in this adaptation. She should be vivacious, contented and happy. She should be wearing fine clothes and have the look of a woman enjoying her life. This should shine through despite the on going murder investigation. Anna MM is good at displaying Lizzie's intelligence and her kindness but the lively spirited woman has gone both in appearance and mannerisms.
I agree with you so much here!
I share many posters' misgiving about the Elizabeth Benett's casting. I personally was taken aback by how dowdy, drawn, old, weary, dull looking Elizabeth was when I first saw her pictures in the promos. I waited to see how all this would translate on screen, and I have to admit I did not like AMM's whole body language. At first, I was one of those people who felt that Elizabeth was far to plain. She wasn't a conventional beauty like Jane but I never imagined her, as I read the book, to be this plain looking. And yes, to those who say otherwise, I find her looks plain. And yes, it DID grate and jar with me during the first episode; it DID put me off somewhat. I shall make NO apologises to anyone for feeling this whatever, no matter what interpretation they came away with from the book (i.e. Pride and Prejudice (P&P)) or feelings they had over the Ehle/Firth adapation and casting (which incidentalyy I rather liked).
However, I did take into account all the other contrary views vis-a-vis AMM's casting and re-watched the first episode again. I also thought it was only fair to at least let two epsiodes pass before commenting. If I had posted after the first episode, it would have been full of a lot of deep disappointment and dislike for it.
For me, it did take some time to get used this particular Elizabeth and AMM's (and P.D. James's) take on the character. I can now over look the 'plain' looks (if I must call it that). In the end, I'm not entirely sure that physical looks is what made Lizzie the witty, insightful, intelligent, vivacious woman who at times rushes to haste judgements. Her physical appearence certainly played a part in MY own imagining of what the character looked like, but it was her personality, her person that made who she was for me, and no doubt what also attracted Darcy.
But unfortunately, as you say, Haphash, it is this very essence that has been lost and completely ignored in this adapted 'sequel'. Some posters have said that perhaps running Pemberley and having and raising a child will take its toil on Elizabeth. Yes, perhaps it will. But then you look to the Jane Bingley casting, she blows that theory out of the water. Even if running a huge household like Pemberley (which is far bigger and larger than Netherfield Park) and becoming a mother took its toil on Elizabeth's looks, I doubt it would not have taken such a toil on her spirits. Unless, of course, we are saying that being married to Darcy has been such hard work she has lost all her vitality?
Though I think it's a miscast (not so much about physical beauty, but I think - and I hate to write this because I feel it's rude and disrespectful to the actress - AMM is too "old" looking to play a 26/27 year old, even if life at Pemberley was taking its toil and it is the adaptation's objective to present this to the viewer), I now don't care how Elizabeth looks in this particular re-imagining of the P&P aftermath. What I do care, however, is that the very thing that attracted me as reader to Elizabeth - her lively-spirit - has essentially been done away with.
Yet to its credit, I think yesterday's episode does provide me some answers why Elizabeth is so terribly down and drawn with a body that appears to have taken a beaten in the last 5-7 years since P&P. Yesterday gave me that feeling that for whatever reason, Elizabeth herself doesn't feel worthy of Darcy's love. Much of what I read in P&P was given from Elizabeth's POV, albeit from a 3rd person omniscient narration. Little was seen from Darcy's POV, which DCTP seems to address. (I haven't read Death Comes To Pemberley(DCTP)and given the reviews on here and on Amazon, I think I shall give it a miss - Life is way too short, haha!. So I'm basing my views on this TV adaptation alone and on P&P).
At least from DCTP, Darcy's story is fleshed out a lot more. From his POV, according to DCTP's re-imagining, the reserved, prejudicial feelings he initally had over Elizabeth and her family wasn't just based on her class, but also based on his duty to his class and family. He took a great risk marrying Elizabeth defying social convention. He took even a greater risk marrying Elizabeth knowing full well that Wickham will now be his brother and be a part of his family once again. And now all these risks are bearing their fruit. So for me, DCTP hasn't become some P&P sequel that looks into the lives of the characters after Darcy and Elizabeth got married; it is also about the past before P&P and how it comes to haunt all of them (even Lady Catherine hinted at this foreshadowing in P&P albeit in a self-centered, selfish way that was not well meaning): Pemberley, family, duty, social expectation, class and so on.
The past has taken its toil on everyone in one way or the other. I saw last night how Elizabeth following her marriage to Darcy felt the malicious gossip and mocking and slander and cold-shoulder from Darcy's friends and acqaintances, all of which Elizabeth feels first hand and begins to tell on her. And now the past takes on a physical manifestation in the form of 'death' and Darcy's great-grandfather's irresponsible living, and all the dark forbodings and deathly connotations re-visits itself on Pemberley and the Darcys. Whether it's Wickham's social or familial miscreants, or Georgiana's near-elopement at 15, or the Benetts' ill-manners and self-regard (notably Mrs Benett and Lydia), or Darcy's sense of doing his duty (which has been affected by what his great-grandfather failed to do), or the repercussions of not doing one's duty or what was expected of them, and so on.
For these reasons alone, I can see how Elizabeth might not now feel as care-free and spirited as she once was. Yes, she is the wife of the richest man in Derbyshire; she is a mother to the heir of that wealth, and for her the decision to marry Darcy is one she will never regret. But she is also a woman who married outside her class and bears the scars of that decision. It is interesting that she also fails to learn the lessons of the past: just as she has feels worn-down by her decision to marry for love (even though it was the right decision), she desires the same 'fate' for Georgiana and remains prejudical towards any other means to get married that it is the polar opposite. Elizabeth fails to recognise and see that a similiar 'fate' that "befalls" her might happen to Georginana if she married Alverston. Georginana and Dracy recognise and see this, and Darcy wants to protect his sister from the pain of doing what he did, perhaps because he feels she does not have Elizabeth's inner strength and fortitude to bear its consequences. But for his part, Darcy also fails to see that what is good for the goose may also be good for the gander, which is what Elizabeth points out to him.
The past and the effects it has on people can suck the life and spirit out of us if we feel trapped by it. It is something that still lingers with Elizabeth and Darcy (and remains almost unsaid between them), despite making the right and happy decision to risk class and social alienation and marry for love. When Darcy spoke those unintentionally, frustratingly cruel words to Elizabeth - 'made in a wave of sentimental haste'! - it spoke volumes about what toil their right and good and proper decision has taken on them for the last 6 years. While it was a shock for me to see how dowdy and old and life-less Elizabeth had become and how irritated and frustrated and disappointed I was to see the Elizabeth casting (and the fact she wore the same dress day-in, day-out. Like, really??!!), I think once I got over these initial feelings and allowed the adaptation the freedom to tell the story it wanted to tell, I found some aspects of DTCP's re-imagining clever and entertaining. It makes sense for instance that Darcy and Elizabeth's decision (for all its happy ending in P&P) will have some social and human repercussions later on, hence the use of the dark gothic tone was a useful narrative device.
I don't know. For what it's worth, that's how I see this adaptation/re-imagining, and it's helped me enjoy it a lot more than I would have ordinarily - mainly because I did want to see it through, even though I was sorely tempted to jack it in after Boxing Day (it was that awful initially). I honestly share and feel some posters' disappointment (and the ratings reflect that), but I think it's one of those adaptations that subverts and challenges our P&P expections and calls for different interpretation than the kind we would normally expect or are used to expecting or are hoping to be given. There is still much pride and prejudice these characters have yet to deal with and overcome.
ETA: Apologises for the lenghty reply. It's the only thing I shall apologise for!:);-) But you did make a very good point about Elizabeth, so I blame you!:D
What did they have as entertainment back then though? They had to play charades or play the piano and sing - oooh what fun! The upper class didn't even have to look after their own kids as they had servants to do that.
Would you care for a dance?
If only life was about playing charades, card, playing the piano and singing! Would I care for a dance? Yes, please. I think we should do the waltz or the charleston or salsa. That should get Mrs Bennet's pulse racing, not to mention her smelling salts. A bit of twerking might not go amiss, methinks!:D
At the start of the opening episode she was happy and light hearted. But then the murder happened and her mood changed. She's an intelligent woman who realises the implications of this - unlike the air headed Lydia who continues to worry about her ball gowns, and flirt with other men, and carry on as if nothing has happened.
How she needed that slap from Darcy and I hurrah-ed! Slapped for all the wrong reasons, mind, which was the greatest disappointment>:(. And I don't condone violence, btw.
I agree with whoever said Colonel Fitzwilliam going to the dark-side was a bit . He wasn't ever thus in P&P.
For those with better memories than me, did I understand that Col. Fitzwilliam is now heir to the Earldom? If so, he would feel the pressure of duty for his father's estate, and marrying Georgiana would ensure security and all that sort of thing. Pemberley comes into the mix should Darcy's heir die and no more are forthcoming, the estate passes to (I assume) Georgiana's firstborn son?
If his brother is now dead, wouldn't Col. Fitzwilliam be expected to give up his army role? He's relied on to stay alive to carry on the succession, so surely the battlefield is the last place that his family would want him to be? I know it's a little thing in the grand scheme of things, but for some reason it's bugging me, what with Darcy's fears coming back to the fore again in the last night's episode.
Having similar issues with AMM. She is a fabulous actress, and I understand that six years of being married and having the responsibilities of an estate would effect Lizzy, but even in the flashbacks there's no...life in her as young woman.
Wickham's being played very well, I feel, and Lydia and her mother are just as annoying and slap-worthy as in Pride and Prejudice.
Yesterday when Jane told Lizzie to rest, and we saw Anna MM's tiny pale eyes as she lay her head down, it was clear evidence of hopeless miscasting. Lizzie had beautiful eyes, which Darcey talked about in P&P, she spoke clearly and was bright and lively. This Lizzie skulks around like a scullery maid, and looks like one in drab clothes. Who'd ever think she was the lady of a grand house? They don't even look like a couple. Darcey looks the part and has a grand air, you wonder what on earth he would've seen in Lizzie to pursue and marry her. When she travelled to the Court House with the Maid, really, who could tell the difference as to their station?
Anna MM looks like her age - 36, 10 years too old - and is far too hesitant and softly spoken. She's a good actress in other roles, but totally unsuitable for this. What a shame they've hindered what could've been a good production. I like Matthew Rhys's Darcey.
I enjoyed this from the beginning, and can't wait for the final episode.
I think the casting is just fine!
As an aside,to those who think Lizzie is too dowdy, take a look at the fashion of the period. It was in essence, 'classical' and relatively plain. I think the costumes have been excellent!
For those with better memories than me, did I understand that Col. Fitzwilliam is now heir to the Earldom? If so, he would feel the pressure of duty for his father's estate, and marrying Georgiana would ensure security and all that sort of thing. Pemberley comes into the mix should Darcy's heir die and no more are forthcoming, the estate passes to (I assume) Georgiana's firstborn son?
If his brother is now dead, wouldn't Col. Fitzwilliam be expected to give up his army role? He's relied on to stay alive to carry on the succession, so surely the battlefield is the last place that his family would want him to be? I know it's a little thing in the grand scheme of things, but for some reason it's bugging me, what with Darcy's fears coming back to the fore again in the last night's episode.
Having similar issues with AMM. She is a fabulous actress, and I understand that six years of being married and having the responsibilities of an estate would effect Lizzy, but even in the flashbacks there's no...life in her as young woman.
Wickham's being played very well, I feel, and Lydia and her mother are just as annoying and slap-worthy as in Pride and Prejudice.
Great point about the flashbacks, and you're absolutely right. Lizzie wasn't bothered by the sly remarks; she knew her own worth and she laughed about such behaviour.
You've also got me intrigued about the Colonel Fitzwilliam situation. I've clearly forgotten what the family relationships are, and will now go off and research them. I have to say that I missed some of the dialogue last night, partly through making drinks, and partly through being unable to tell whats being said some of the time. I'm finding this drama to be suffering from the 'mumbling' issues that beset so many dramas these days. I particularly couldn't hear more than the odd word spoken by Wickham when Col.Fitzwilliam visited him in his prison.
If only life was about playing charades, card, playing the piano and singing! Would I care for a dance? Yes, please. I think we should do the waltz or the charleston or salsa. That should get Mrs Bennet's pulse racing, not to mention her smelling salts. A bit of twerking might not go amiss, methinks!:D
Imagine if Lydia started twerking. It would be like a French and Saunders sketch. Mrs Bennett would be in convulsions.
Keira Knightley played the part in 2005, so in theory would be just the right age for this. I for one would not want KK in this production and prefer AMM.
Does anyone know how much the £30 that they found in the carriage would be worth in today's money?
According to the Bank of England calculator, goods and services that cost £30 in 1803 would cost £2611.63 in 2012. However this is an average - for a farmworker £30 would be most of a year's wages, for a rich person it would be a good night out.
For those with better memories than me, did I understand that Col. Fitzwilliam is now heir to the Earldom? If so, he would feel the pressure of duty for his father's estate, and marrying Georgiana would ensure security and all that sort of thing. Pemberley comes into the mix should Darcy's heir die and no more are forthcoming, the estate passes to (I assume) Georgiana's firstborn son?
If his brother is now dead, wouldn't Col. Fitzwilliam be expected to give up his army role? He's relied on to stay alive to carry on the succession, so surely the battlefield is the last place that his family would want him to be? I know it's a little thing in the grand scheme of things, but for some reason it's bugging me, what with Darcy's fears coming back to the fore again in the last night's episode.
I thought he should have given up his army role as well. But does Darcy wanting the Col to marry Georgiana have anything to do with securing Pemberley or rather to do with securing Georgiana's future if Darcy can't provide for her should the whole Wickham/Denny scandal engulf him and his family?
Bib: I'm not entirely sure that is how it would work. I could be wrong (someone will put me right if I am), but I think they tend to trace the inheritance through the paternal male line, not the female one - maternal or sisterly (unless all measures to trace a legitimate male heir through the paternal line has been exhausted, which is what happened when Queen Victoria took the throne). In other words, if Darcy and his son died, the inheritance will be traced back to Darcy's father line (i.e. if Darcy had an uncle who had a male child - Darcy's cousin or Darcy's father's nephew, then Pemberley will be pass to him, or even the male child of that said cousin). If not, then I think only then would the estate be passed to Georgiana's son. Either that or Darcy could leave a will specifically stating that he wants his nephew to be his heir. Like I said, I could be off my rocker here.
According to the Bank of England calculator, goods and services that cost £30 in 1803 would cost £2611.63 in 2012. However this is an average - for a farmworker £30 would be most of a year's wages, for a rich person it would be a good night out.
In 2013 I guess if you sat in the back of a mini cab with someone you were arguing with, who was drunk and taken drugs - they might kill you for £2611.63 cash?
I enjoyed this from the beginning, and can't wait for the final episode.
I think the casting is just fine!
As an aside,to those who think Lizzie is too dowdy, take a look at the fashion of the period. It was in essence, 'classical' and relatively plain. I think the costumes have been excellent!
I was originally thinking that Hayley Atwell could have played Elizabeth in an adaptation of Pride and Prejudice, which she is now too old for. But now you point out that she is younger than AMM, I have changed my mind, she would have made a great Lizzie in Death Comes to Pemberley instead.
I know that Elizabeth is more mature in this, after having children and running the house for 6 years. So I can accept a certain amount of change to her character. But even in the flashback scenes, she is played in exactly the same way. The snippet of the proposal scene showed that Anna Maxwell Martin's Lizzie is indead lacking liveliness.
Edit: Just noticed that Rednell has already pointed this out, oh well.
I was originally thinking that Hayley Atwell could have played Elizabeth in an adaptation of Pride and Prejudice, which she is now too old for. But now you point out that she is younger than AMM, I have changed my mind, she would have made a great Lizzie in Death Comes to Pemberley instead.
I know that Elizabeth is more mature in this, after having children and running the house for 6 years. So I can accept a certain amount of change to her character. But even in the flashback scenes, she is played in exactly the same way. The snippet of the proposal scene showed that Anna Maxwell Martin's Lizzie is indead lacking liveliness.
Edit: Just noticed that Rednell has already pointed this out, oh well.
It's fine. I was fairly sure others would have noticed. ;-)
That said, for all it's niggles, I'm thoroughly enjoying it and am trying to not to overthink it as I watch.
I thought he should have given up his army role as well. But does Darcy wanting the Col to marry Georgiana have anything to do with securing Pemberley or rather to do with securing Georgiana's future if Darcy can't provide for her should the whole Wickham/Denny scandal engulf him and his family?
Bib: I'm not entirely sure that is how it would work. I could be wrong (someone will put me right if I am), but I think they tend to trace the inheritance through the paternal male line, not the female one - maternal or sisterly (unless all measures to trace a legitimate male heir through the paternal line has been exhausted, which is what happened when Queen Victoria took the throne). In other words, if Darcy and his son died, the inheritance will be traced back to Darcy's father line (i.e. if Darcy had an uncle who had a male child - Darcy's cousin or Darcy's father's nephew, then Pemberley will be pass to him, or even the male child of that said cousin). If not, then I think only then would the estate be passed to Georgiana's son. Either that or Darcy could leave a will specifically stating that he wants his nephew to be his heir. Like I said, I could be off my rocker here.
A couple of questions, please:-
- I aren't understanding why Pemberley should be at all affected by this murder??
- Is Col. Fitzwilliam's elder brother dead now, then? Is his father, the Earl, still alive? Has the Earl got plenty of money and an estate?
- why does Georgiana feel she has a duty to marry Col. Fitz? Why does Darcy want her to?
How old was Jennifer Ehle when she played the role, bearing in mind that Elizabeth was supposed to be six years younger than in this book?
JE (according to the gospel of Wiki) was born in December 1969 and "her" P&P aired in 1995. So she was 25/26-ish and playing a 20 year old (20?) Elizabeth.
Comments
What did they have as entertainment back then though? They had to play charades or play the piano and sing - oooh what fun! The upper class didn't even have to look after their own kids as they had servants to do that.
Would you care for a dance?
Elliot Cowan from Lost in Austen is still my all-time favourite Darcy. :kitty:
I agree with you so much here!
I share many posters' misgiving about the Elizabeth Benett's casting. I personally was taken aback by how dowdy, drawn, old, weary, dull looking Elizabeth was when I first saw her pictures in the promos. I waited to see how all this would translate on screen, and I have to admit I did not like AMM's whole body language. At first, I was one of those people who felt that Elizabeth was far to plain. She wasn't a conventional beauty like Jane but I never imagined her, as I read the book, to be this plain looking. And yes, to those who say otherwise, I find her looks plain. And yes, it DID grate and jar with me during the first episode; it DID put me off somewhat. I shall make NO apologises to anyone for feeling this whatever, no matter what interpretation they came away with from the book (i.e. Pride and Prejudice (P&P)) or feelings they had over the Ehle/Firth adapation and casting (which incidentalyy I rather liked).
However, I did take into account all the other contrary views vis-a-vis AMM's casting and re-watched the first episode again. I also thought it was only fair to at least let two epsiodes pass before commenting. If I had posted after the first episode, it would have been full of a lot of deep disappointment and dislike for it.
For me, it did take some time to get used this particular Elizabeth and AMM's (and P.D. James's) take on the character. I can now over look the 'plain' looks (if I must call it that). In the end, I'm not entirely sure that physical looks is what made Lizzie the witty, insightful, intelligent, vivacious woman who at times rushes to haste judgements. Her physical appearence certainly played a part in MY own imagining of what the character looked like, but it was her personality, her person that made who she was for me, and no doubt what also attracted Darcy.
But unfortunately, as you say, Haphash, it is this very essence that has been lost and completely ignored in this adapted 'sequel'. Some posters have said that perhaps running Pemberley and having and raising a child will take its toil on Elizabeth. Yes, perhaps it will. But then you look to the Jane Bingley casting, she blows that theory out of the water. Even if running a huge household like Pemberley (which is far bigger and larger than Netherfield Park) and becoming a mother took its toil on Elizabeth's looks, I doubt it would not have taken such a toil on her spirits. Unless, of course, we are saying that being married to Darcy has been such hard work she has lost all her vitality?
Though I think it's a miscast (not so much about physical beauty, but I think - and I hate to write this because I feel it's rude and disrespectful to the actress - AMM is too "old" looking to play a 26/27 year old, even if life at Pemberley was taking its toil and it is the adaptation's objective to present this to the viewer), I now don't care how Elizabeth looks in this particular re-imagining of the P&P aftermath. What I do care, however, is that the very thing that attracted me as reader to Elizabeth - her lively-spirit - has essentially been done away with.
Yet to its credit, I think yesterday's episode does provide me some answers why Elizabeth is so terribly down and drawn with a body that appears to have taken a beaten in the last 5-7 years since P&P. Yesterday gave me that feeling that for whatever reason, Elizabeth herself doesn't feel worthy of Darcy's love. Much of what I read in P&P was given from Elizabeth's POV, albeit from a 3rd person omniscient narration. Little was seen from Darcy's POV, which DCTP seems to address. (I haven't read Death Comes To Pemberley(DCTP)and given the reviews on here and on Amazon, I think I shall give it a miss - Life is way too short, haha!. So I'm basing my views on this TV adaptation alone and on P&P).
At least from DCTP, Darcy's story is fleshed out a lot more. From his POV, according to DCTP's re-imagining, the reserved, prejudicial feelings he initally had over Elizabeth and her family wasn't just based on her class, but also based on his duty to his class and family. He took a great risk marrying Elizabeth defying social convention. He took even a greater risk marrying Elizabeth knowing full well that Wickham will now be his brother and be a part of his family once again. And now all these risks are bearing their fruit. So for me, DCTP hasn't become some P&P sequel that looks into the lives of the characters after Darcy and Elizabeth got married; it is also about the past before P&P and how it comes to haunt all of them (even Lady Catherine hinted at this foreshadowing in P&P albeit in a self-centered, selfish way that was not well meaning): Pemberley, family, duty, social expectation, class and so on.
The past has taken its toil on everyone in one way or the other. I saw last night how Elizabeth following her marriage to Darcy felt the malicious gossip and mocking and slander and cold-shoulder from Darcy's friends and acqaintances, all of which Elizabeth feels first hand and begins to tell on her. And now the past takes on a physical manifestation in the form of 'death' and Darcy's great-grandfather's irresponsible living, and all the dark forbodings and deathly connotations re-visits itself on Pemberley and the Darcys. Whether it's Wickham's social or familial miscreants, or Georgiana's near-elopement at 15, or the Benetts' ill-manners and self-regard (notably Mrs Benett and Lydia), or Darcy's sense of doing his duty (which has been affected by what his great-grandfather failed to do), or the repercussions of not doing one's duty or what was expected of them, and so on.
For these reasons alone, I can see how Elizabeth might not now feel as care-free and spirited as she once was. Yes, she is the wife of the richest man in Derbyshire; she is a mother to the heir of that wealth, and for her the decision to marry Darcy is one she will never regret. But she is also a woman who married outside her class and bears the scars of that decision. It is interesting that she also fails to learn the lessons of the past: just as she has feels worn-down by her decision to marry for love (even though it was the right decision), she desires the same 'fate' for Georgiana and remains prejudical towards any other means to get married that it is the polar opposite. Elizabeth fails to recognise and see that a similiar 'fate' that "befalls" her might happen to Georginana if she married Alverston. Georginana and Dracy recognise and see this, and Darcy wants to protect his sister from the pain of doing what he did, perhaps because he feels she does not have Elizabeth's inner strength and fortitude to bear its consequences. But for his part, Darcy also fails to see that what is good for the goose may also be good for the gander, which is what Elizabeth points out to him.
The past and the effects it has on people can suck the life and spirit out of us if we feel trapped by it. It is something that still lingers with Elizabeth and Darcy (and remains almost unsaid between them), despite making the right and happy decision to risk class and social alienation and marry for love. When Darcy spoke those unintentionally, frustratingly cruel words to Elizabeth - 'made in a wave of sentimental haste'! - it spoke volumes about what toil their right and good and proper decision has taken on them for the last 6 years. While it was a shock for me to see how dowdy and old and life-less Elizabeth had become and how irritated and frustrated and disappointed I was to see the Elizabeth casting (and the fact she wore the same dress day-in, day-out. Like, really??!!), I think once I got over these initial feelings and allowed the adaptation the freedom to tell the story it wanted to tell, I found some aspects of DTCP's re-imagining clever and entertaining. It makes sense for instance that Darcy and Elizabeth's decision (for all its happy ending in P&P) will have some social and human repercussions later on, hence the use of the dark gothic tone was a useful narrative device.
I don't know. For what it's worth, that's how I see this adaptation/re-imagining, and it's helped me enjoy it a lot more than I would have ordinarily - mainly because I did want to see it through, even though I was sorely tempted to jack it in after Boxing Day (it was that awful initially). I honestly share and feel some posters' disappointment (and the ratings reflect that), but I think it's one of those adaptations that subverts and challenges our P&P expections and calls for different interpretation than the kind we would normally expect or are used to expecting or are hoping to be given. There is still much pride and prejudice these characters have yet to deal with and overcome.
ETA: Apologises for the lenghty reply. It's the only thing I shall apologise for!:);-) But you did make a very good point about Elizabeth, so I blame you!:D
Haha!:D:D So true!
If only life was about playing charades, card, playing the piano and singing! Would I care for a dance? Yes, please. I think we should do the waltz or the charleston or salsa. That should get Mrs Bennet's pulse racing, not to mention her smelling salts. A bit of twerking might not go amiss, methinks!:D
How she needed that slap from Darcy and I hurrah-ed! Slapped for all the wrong reasons, mind, which was the greatest disappointment>:(. And I don't condone violence, btw.
I agree with whoever said Colonel Fitzwilliam going to the dark-side was a bit
I had to Google the suggested Lizzie nominations, but having done so, Felicity Jones looks as though she'd have been ok.
http://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/celebrity/540744/downton-abbey-s-dan-stevens-to-play-mr-darcy-in-new-bbc-adaptation.html#index=1
If his brother is now dead, wouldn't Col. Fitzwilliam be expected to give up his army role? He's relied on to stay alive to carry on the succession, so surely the battlefield is the last place that his family would want him to be? I know it's a little thing in the grand scheme of things, but for some reason it's bugging me, what with Darcy's fears coming back to the fore again in the last night's episode.
Having similar issues with AMM. She is a fabulous actress, and I understand that six years of being married and having the responsibilities of an estate would effect Lizzy, but even in the flashbacks there's no...life in her as young woman.
Wickham's being played very well, I feel, and Lydia and her mother are just as annoying and slap-worthy as in Pride and Prejudice.
Anna MM looks like her age - 36, 10 years too old - and is far too hesitant and softly spoken. She's a good actress in other roles, but totally unsuitable for this. What a shame they've hindered what could've been a good production. I like Matthew Rhys's Darcey.
Felicity Jones would've been very good. She was wonderful in Northanger Abbey.
I think the casting is just fine!
As an aside,to those who think Lizzie is too dowdy, take a look at the fashion of the period. It was in essence, 'classical' and relatively plain. I think the costumes have been excellent!
https://www.pinterest.com/chance1951/georgian-clothing-1800-to-1810/
Great point about the flashbacks, and you're absolutely right. Lizzie wasn't bothered by the sly remarks; she knew her own worth and she laughed about such behaviour.
You've also got me intrigued about the Colonel Fitzwilliam situation. I've clearly forgotten what the family relationships are, and will now go off and research them. I have to say that I missed some of the dialogue last night, partly through making drinks, and partly through being unable to tell whats being said some of the time. I'm finding this drama to be suffering from the 'mumbling' issues that beset so many dramas these days. I particularly couldn't hear more than the odd word spoken by Wickham when Col.Fitzwilliam visited him in his prison.
Seems very hard to compare (according to Google), but it seems to be about enough for a family of plebs to live on for a year.
According to the Bank of England calculator, goods and services that cost £30 in 1803 would cost £2611.63 in 2012. However this is an average - for a farmworker £30 would be most of a year's wages, for a rich person it would be a good night out.
I thought he should have given up his army role as well. But does Darcy wanting the Col to marry Georgiana have anything to do with securing Pemberley or rather to do with securing Georgiana's future if Darcy can't provide for her should the whole Wickham/Denny scandal engulf him and his family?
Bib: I'm not entirely sure that is how it would work. I could be wrong (someone will put me right if I am), but I think they tend to trace the inheritance through the paternal male line, not the female one - maternal or sisterly (unless all measures to trace a legitimate male heir through the paternal line has been exhausted, which is what happened when Queen Victoria took the throne). In other words, if Darcy and his son died, the inheritance will be traced back to Darcy's father line (i.e. if Darcy had an uncle who had a male child - Darcy's cousin or Darcy's father's nephew, then Pemberley will be pass to him, or even the male child of that said cousin). If not, then I think only then would the estate be passed to Georgiana's son. Either that or Darcy could leave a will specifically stating that he wants his nephew to be his heir. Like I said, I could be off my rocker here.
In 2013 I guess if you sat in the back of a mini cab with someone you were arguing with, who was drunk and taken drugs - they might kill you for £2611.63 cash?
Thanks for link Ennui i loved looking at those pictures really interesting.....
I was originally thinking that Hayley Atwell could have played Elizabeth in an adaptation of Pride and Prejudice, which she is now too old for. But now you point out that she is younger than AMM, I have changed my mind, she would have made a great Lizzie in Death Comes to Pemberley instead.
I know that Elizabeth is more mature in this, after having children and running the house for 6 years. So I can accept a certain amount of change to her character. But even in the flashback scenes, she is played in exactly the same way. The snippet of the proposal scene showed that Anna Maxwell Martin's Lizzie is indead lacking liveliness.
Edit: Just noticed that Rednell has already pointed this out, oh well.
It's fine. I was fairly sure others would have noticed. ;-)
That said, for all it's niggles, I'm thoroughly enjoying it and am trying to not to overthink it as I watch.
A couple of questions, please:-
- I aren't understanding why Pemberley should be at all affected by this murder??
- Is Col. Fitzwilliam's elder brother dead now, then? Is his father, the Earl, still alive? Has the Earl got plenty of money and an estate?
- why does Georgiana feel she has a duty to marry Col. Fitz? Why does Darcy want her to?
Sorry, I seem to be quite lost
I think she was 24/25 depending on filming. Born 1969.