Moves in Curves

Having just re-read the book and re-watched the 1995 film, I watched the 2008 miniseries version. And since I can’t tweet everything (or I’ll overflow my allowed updates per day), I recorded my thoughts in a notepad for sharing here. Enjoy.

• People have their hair down WAAAY more often than his proper (Lady Middleton? Hello!).
• Willoughby, while certainly a bigger bastard than as portrayed in the 1995 film version, is not handsome and dashing enough for the character. The ‘95 film Willoughby was hotter, but more sympathetically portrayed.
• Mrs. Dashwood is far too calm. Really. Way too calm.
• I prefer the Margaret in the 1995 film, though this one is certainly cute.
• Marianne, while quite pretty (I want her hair), is also too calm. She barely cried at all. Kate Winslet’s hysterics and wild emotions were much more accurate to the character. And if she’s going to be out and about in society as an adult, for God’s sake put her hair UP. She doesn’t say enough rude things to people either – in the books she’s always spouting off inappropriately.
• Edward Ferrars is SO HOT in this one. His eyes are gorgeous. I totally loved him. I don’t mind Hugh Grant in the role, he was all right – but I love this guy. Although this version of Edward is a bit too animated for the way the character was written in the original book.
• Colonel Brandon is like a poor man’s Liam Neeson, but I did like him.
• Barton Cottage is the cutest house ever. And right on the beach. I want to live there!
• Elinor was quite good – the right age – though it’s hard to top Emma Thompson in any role, she’s just so damn wonderful).
• The Dashwood daughters always seem far more poor in the movie versions than they did in the book.
• The “money/happiness” discussion was a bit odd, I thought. It made Elinor seem a little too focused on riches. Edward’s response, I don’t know, the way they did that seemed to have little to do with either character in the book?
• All the men seem to be too old for their parts – Sir John and Mr. Palmer are both supposed to be about 26, but Mark Williams (much as I love him) is far too old.
• Lady Middleton’s hairdo is bothering the hell out of me. Put your hair up, for crying out loud!
• Anne Steele looks like Lily Tomlin. And she’s just as annoying as she’s characterized in the book.
• Lucy Steele always seems to be made out so sweet and innocent onscreen, when she’s very blatantly sly and bitchy in the books, especially toward Elinor.
• I didn’t think Mrs. Jennings was boisterous enough in this version – the 1995 movie Mrs. Jennings is so perfect though, it’s hard to top her.
• Elinor’s voice is so lovely. Very rich and cultured, just perfect for her character I think.
• Kind of sad that they left out the Robert Ferrars toothpick case scene, since that so well characterizes him – but, it’s hard to screw up that character. He’s a weaselly little jerk. No redeeming qualities.
• Miss Grey’s feather headdress is friggin’ sweet.
• Brandon is far more romantic in this version than in the 95 (though obviously, who doesn’t love Alan Rickman? Still, this is better). When he catches Marianne in her ballroom faint, that’s kind of hot. She’s too young for him, though. He needs a more mature woman. The duel scene? Hot. Kick Willoughby’s ass.
• Marianne’s crying scene after being snubbed by Willoughby in London is close to the book but not as well done as Kate Winslet’s performance.
• Brandon revealing Willoughby’s seduction of Miss Williams is a little too overwrought. And too indelicately put.
• I know, I’m a purist about movie versions of books.
• Margaret Dashwood is a far more interesting character onscreen than she is in the book. She has very little to her in the book, and they make her a proto-feminist or adventurer onscreen. It does make her more interesting, but less accurate.
• Fanny and John Dashwood are assholes. So are the Steele sisters.
• Marianne giving Mrs. Ferrars a set-down was freakin’ hilarious.
• Edward’s “oh… shit” look when he sees Lucy Steele with Elinor cracks me up. He could not more obviously want nothing to do with her.
• The little boy playing Harry Dashwood (the little boy of John and Fanny) reminds me of young Lex Luthor on Smallville. Pre-Kryptonite loss of his hair, that is.
• The under-the-blanket conversation between Marianne and Elinor – WTF?
• Mr. Palmer wasn’t nearly so amusing in this version. Hugh Laurie was quite possibly the perfect person for that role, however, so whoever this guy was could hardly compare.
• Oooh. Brandon rescuing Marianne (um, why was she just laying down in the rain?) was pretty romantic. Him visiting her alone in her room, however – wildly inappropriate for the time period.
• I am very glad the Elinor-Willougby conversation was included, even though it was altered pretty hugely. That was a big part of him showing what a bastard he really is in the book. I do think they should have included the bit when he wishes his wife would die so he could marry Marianne (ass!). Though of course, Marianne overhearing was an unnecessary departure.
• Colonel Brandon’s carriage is pretty awesome. I want a carriage like that. Wouldn’t say no to his house, either.
• Marianne’s dress in the Delaford library scene is really pretty. Very nice cut. I love Regency fashion.
• Elinor’s happy tears when Edward doesn’t marry Lucy are much better in this version. And of course, actual kisses are very satisfying. Not to say that Emma Thompson isn’t a great actress, but her bursting into tears was pretty fake. This seemed quite real.
• Very sweet. Excellent version.

Looks like some good stuff will be coming out this year. Obviously, Deathly Hallows part 1 will be released, so that’s fabulous. I just saw the trailer for Russell Crowe’s “Robin Hood“, I’m all over that one. He’s a wee bit old for the part, but he’s Russell Crowe, who cares? And Cate Blanchett is Marian. Also Kevin Durand and Scott Grimes, minor actors who I always enjoy watching. Garb looks bad, but I’ll endure. (May 14)

“Clash of the Titans“: I’ve always loved Greek mythology. Don’t even care who’s in this one, I’ll be seeing it. (March 26)

“Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief“: Kevin McKidd and Sean Bean as Greek gods. Enough said. (February 12)

“Legion“: Okay, I’m not into apocalypse movies. I get wigged out by them. But Paul Bettany is playing the archangel Michael and Kevin Durand (is it me or is he having a break these days? He’s been in a lot lately. Love it.) as Gabriel, and I just might have to see that. Besides, this isn’t a natural-disaster apocalypse, it’s a real one. Maybe I can bear it. (January 22)

One I’ll be taking my kids to: “How to train your dragon” (March 26). Looks cute, and they’ll probably like it.

“Iron Man 2“: Obvious, yes, but I enjoyed the first one, and I never miss superhero movies. And hell, Robert Downey Jr’s looking hot these days. Amazing what laying off the sauce will do for you. (May 7)

“Prince of Persia“: Meh, I kind of want to see this. J.Gyl sure does a lot of backflips in the trailer, doesn’t he? I have to admit, this is the first time I’ve found him attractive (it’s amazing what seeing an actor with a sword will do for me). Costuming looks bad though. Will probably just rent this one or go to the dollar movies. (May 28)

“Jonah Hex”: I’m slightly tempted by this one, as it’s based on comic books and that generally makes for a good story, but the cast – blergh. When it hits Red Box, maybe. (June 18)

Hopefully more interesting fare will start being previewed soon. After all, it’s only January.

Is it odd that I can forgive historical inaccuracies in the plot more easily than I can in the clothes? Seriously, I’m totally willing to suspend my disbelief and pretend Henry VIII looked like Jonathan Rhys Meyers, for example, or that Lord Bothwell Duke of Orkney was a good guy, but damn, put the right shoes on them!

I love a good period film, I really do, and I love bitching about inaccuracies in the timeline or perceived characterizations of historical figures, and I even love giggling over who Hollywood casts to play those figures (that’s who you think Achilles looked like? Really?), but I really need them to wear the correct clothing to the time period. Inaccuracies in jewelry are a pet peeve of mine to a lesser degree, I don’t get nearly as worked up over using modern faceted gems in a time period hundreds of years before gems were faceted as I do about, for example, Richard III wearing a motorcycle jacket and pretending it’s a doublet.

This is why I love Rome right now. I got one look at their shoes and went into transports of archaeological delight. Yay HBO! Maybe you should show Showtime how to do garb research before they start filming the next season of the Tudors, eh? It gets progressively worse every year, despite plenty of archaeological evidence from the time period for the cut, construction, fabric, stitching, accessories, etc.

So I watched L’auberge espagnole tonight. And it was lovely. It was very French, and I love that about it. It had some very funny parts, but mostly it was just interesting. Extremely watchable. Really loved the main character, Xavier. Audrey Tautou was overbilled on the DVD cover, but the scenes she was in were excellent. Whole thing was excellent, honestly. I highly recommend watching it.

I put the subtitles on, figuring it had been so long since I watched a movie in French, I wouldn’t understand much of it. But I did. More than I thought I would. The longer the movie went, the easier I found it to understand and the less I glanced down at the subtitles (except for the parts in Spanish, which I do not speak). It was very encouraging. Je n’ai pas parlé français depuis plusieurs années, mais je me rapelle plus que j’ai craint. Je suis un peu rouillée, mais c’est pas mal. I knew my reading French was still fairly fluent, but my speaking and listening is not what it once was. I majored in French my first two years at BYU, then turned it into my minor when I switched to archaeology. I still read novels in French, for fun, but I don’t get much opportunity for conversational French these days.

And I have to say, it’s a relief to have a laptop with a number pad so I can do alt code accents again. Fabuleux.

Updated post on July 13 to reflect new version

Amazingly hilarious production up on YouTube called A Very Potter Musical. I watched the entire thing this afternoon, laughing my head off. It’s so hilarious. Adore the guy who plays Harry, he’s cute and has a great voice. Their Ginny was far more annoying than I see her, but it was funny. Ron was great with his snacks. Hermione was funny too, and had a nice voice. Voldemort was hilarious and – once he was off Quirrell’s back – sexy as well.

My personal highlights:

• Voldemort tap-dancing – and motorboating Bellatrix
• Drunk Voldemort
• The Death Eater chorus line
• Harry talking about how awesome he is
• Ron’s giant chocolate bar
• The Ron/Hermione kiss, if you can call it that
• Draco rolling around randomly on the floor
• Goyle’s voice, and the Indian Burn Hex
• Dumbledore’s twanging accent
• Voldy and Quirrell’s bromance
• Texan Cho Chang
• Cedric “find” Diggory
• Molly Weasley’s brief and extremely New Jersey appearance

The music was excellent. Sound quality’s not great, I had a hard time hearing some dialogue while music was painfully loud. I wish I had this on DVD, I would watch it far too often.

Here’s the playlist. If you have trouble with it in the embedded player, click here.