![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Movie monstrosities
Oct. 21st, 2006 12:35 pm(BTW, have just noticed that the last six posts in my journal have all got the same timestamp, which might explain some things. Rey, we really need to get this PC to a state where we can upgrade our browser...)
Rey recently bought the DVD for last year's version of Pride and Prejudice. I think it is very telling that one of the special features is a 'study guide'. As for the director's commentary, I think the kindest way I can describe it is 'vapid':
"Lizzie and Darcy fancy each other. That's really what this is all about." GOSH I'M GLAD YOU CLEARED THAT UP FOR US.
"I didn't want to put the women in bonnets because that's a cliche." Er, no. 'Brooding hero' is a cliche. 'Fiery heroine' is a cliche, especially when we tack on '...with anachronistic attitudes to attract the sympathy of modern-day viewers'. Bonnets, OTOH, that's called 'making a film set in the 19th century'. While we're at it, what about all those people getting around by horse instead of cars? That's so BBC.
(Although I still think Mr. Collins' proposal of marriage needs to be done as a PowerPoint presentation. Some things really are timeless.)
And then this morning I was reading IMDB trivia for Kind Hearts & Coronets and came across this nugget of horror:
"In 2000, Mike Nichols was planning a remake with Robin Williams in the Alec Guinness roles and Will Smith in the role played by Dennis Price. Thankfully, it never came to fruition."
I'm very glad I didn't hear about this until after it fell through, but even now... I cannot conceive of a crackpipe big enough to make that seem like a good idea. No no no no no. Nothing against Nichols, Williams, or Smith, but there is no conceivable way that could work.
Rey recently bought the DVD for last year's version of Pride and Prejudice. I think it is very telling that one of the special features is a 'study guide'. As for the director's commentary, I think the kindest way I can describe it is 'vapid':
"Lizzie and Darcy fancy each other. That's really what this is all about." GOSH I'M GLAD YOU CLEARED THAT UP FOR US.
"I didn't want to put the women in bonnets because that's a cliche." Er, no. 'Brooding hero' is a cliche. 'Fiery heroine' is a cliche, especially when we tack on '...with anachronistic attitudes to attract the sympathy of modern-day viewers'. Bonnets, OTOH, that's called 'making a film set in the 19th century'. While we're at it, what about all those people getting around by horse instead of cars? That's so BBC.
(Although I still think Mr. Collins' proposal of marriage needs to be done as a PowerPoint presentation. Some things really are timeless.)
And then this morning I was reading IMDB trivia for Kind Hearts & Coronets and came across this nugget of horror:
"In 2000, Mike Nichols was planning a remake with Robin Williams in the Alec Guinness roles and Will Smith in the role played by Dennis Price. Thankfully, it never came to fruition."
I'm very glad I didn't hear about this until after it fell through, but even now... I cannot conceive of a crackpipe big enough to make that seem like a good idea. No no no no no. Nothing against Nichols, Williams, or Smith, but there is no conceivable way that could work.
