Howtidi’s Death Comes to Pemberley: PBS spoilt the BBC mini-series

Characteristicobserver
Elizabeth (Anna Maxwell Martin) in her characteristic thoughtful posture of the film, observing others

talkingofgeorgiana
Another talking at cross-purposes while dancing scene: here irritated by Mrs Bennet’s talk of Lydia not coming to the ball, and differing on Georgiana marrying Colonel Fitzwilliam

Dear friends and readers,

What was aired on PBS last night was a spoilt version of the three-part mini-series I saw in the BBC version this summer using a BBC region 2 DVD.

Segments and scenes have been rearranged so as to turn an almost 3 hour mini-series (180 minutes) into a two part drama each 80 minutes (160), where the most hectic and thriller type scenes had the place of climax. The US PBS first part does not end on the parallel set up in the original mini-series between the boy poacher, young Riley, being taken away in a cart from his mother to be tried and then hanged and now George Wickham (Matthew Goode) being taken away in a cart from a wailing Lydia (Jenna Coleman — who appears to have gained a little weight since her last frighteningly anorexic outing in a costume drama) as does the BBC first part of three. When the young boy, Riley was cared away the boy Darcy and the boy Wickham rushed after him; now at the close Darcy retreats to the house, and Elizabeth stands on the porch in her surveillance posture and the reason for Darcy’s brooding is lost.

The worst aspects of the take-over of mystery thrillers and cheap modern sensationalist costume dramas all this summer have been deliberately made to dominate this Jane Austen sequel film. I wrote about the gothicization of Victorian novels on PBS in August (Bloody Murders and Country Houses), and this mini-series is seeking to titillate the same taste. They think they are not making a mistake for they will still get the costume drama and Janeite viewership and the more complaints will just get more hits, and be dismissed and may make up for any loss with attracting the same viewership that watched Masterpiece Mystery this summer — for note the rubric for this two parter — a Masterpiece Mystery.

What they did was ignore the art, pace, and meaning Towhidi and Daniel Percival’s contemporary and filmically stylish 3 hour costume drama, which includes the use of lingering voice-over from interwoven juxtaposed shots from deep past, recent past and sometimes more than one present scene throughout the 3 hours, a kind of spillage of thoughts and sounds across remembered time, and spectacular visual dissolving landscapes. The colors of the film are often golden, brown, burnt oranges and reds.

Openingshot
Opening shot

Allured by the film’s beauty and the performances of a number of the actors, this summer I studied Juliette Towhidi’s screenplay against intermediary sequel novel (I’d call it) by P.D. James, Death comes to Pemberley and can vouch for a number of still silent moments being shortened or cut altogether in this PBS version. In the BBC film Elizabeth’s shots (second long) are not cut or undermined so we see her in various stages of memory (first somewhat happy and triumphant as she looks forward to another Lady Anne Ball, but also remembers some of her mortifications at the first one when she had just married Darcy and overheard sneers at her), puzzle, brooding, hurt, disillusion, anxiety over Darcy’s attitude towards her, and (not to cover the long sequence of emotional development) across an intermingling reaction to his reactions. It is painful for her to remember how Wickham took her in:

painfulmemory

This long tracing of an inner journey of Elizabeth’s ends not in (as is so common in women’s films, including the Austen canon) Elizabeth apologizing, humiliated in front of herself for her flaws, but at the close of Part 3 in Darcy apologizing, aware he has been mistreating Elizabeth, wrong to inflict on her his sensitive injured pride, and their making love successfully (in the middle of the movie, he comes to her in bed, sees her peacefully sleeping and decides to move away). He does this before she solves the mystery of who killed Denny. Towhidi’s conception of Darcy shows the inadequacy of the view Darcy is shy (the reading of Macfayden and Joe Wright in the 2005 P&P film) or needs to undergo an Oedipal transformation (Andrew Davies): he is a proud aristocrat whose self-esteem is rooted in his family history, public honor, home, lands and rank. He learns to moderate his adherence to these things in this film: by its end he has seen that Colonel Fitzwilliam is a flawed man, not to be fully trusted as an individual (Fitzwilliam’s rank is less important than Elizabeth’s integrity), and the worth of the lower status lawyer, Alveston (James Norton) as a person and Darcy supports Elizabeth’s encouragement of Georgiana’s engagement with Alveston.

Darcy
Matthew Rhys as Darcy taking his son to ride, smiling at the reverence with which Mr Bidwell treats the boy and his job as steward/butler

This trajectory, this underlying plot-design with Elizabeth as the key pivotal figure in most of the scenes, and Darcy the reactive one, which Towhidi drew out of James’s meandering novel has been lost completely from Part I. Its climax comes about 2/3s the way through the BBC Part 2 where Elizabeth goes to a temple on the Pemberley grounds to think and Jane (Alexandra Moen) joins her to comfort her.

ElizabethatTemple
Elizabeth’s nadir from Part 2

Where that will find a place in the next 80 minutes of the film PBS is airing I have no idea.

Irritatingly to me, the PBS people especially eschewed moments where both Martin and Rhys are not beautiful people but Darcy and Elizabeth aging and under pressure, either (in this first part) still talking to one another, and (I expect in the next two) growing estranged. What I liked especially was this lack of glamor. Yes it’s not probable or realistic that Elizabeth would be so underdressed, her hair except when at a ball neglected altogether (she appears not to have a lady’s maid to do her hair), but it’s in line with recent heritage Austen films which dress the Austen heroines to be genteelly on the edge or at least not super-rich, which after Elizabeth marries Darcy she is. But it does fit the character of Elizabeth as enacted by Martin — not pompous, not involved with self, but with her boy (we see her reading to him) and her function as the mistress of Pemberley as a sort of going concern of people to be seen to, fed, gardens to be cared for, menus gotten up. Darcy is seen at the stable with his little son, about to go riding. Above all both are clever, but Elizabeth less prejudiced: she isthe person who puts together first who murdered Denny and why and her quick application of a signed statement by the murderer saves Wickham’s life. Sir Selwyn Hardcastle (our detective magistrate) played with a virtuoso flare by Trevor Eve never gets near the truth; has it all wrong from the end of the original Part 1 on (taking Wickham’s emotional self-blaming to be a confession). Nancy Drew could do no more.

*******************

contentedcookshowingoff
Mrs Reynolds showing off what has been prepared for the ball — historically accurate — P.D. James’s stories often have an upstairs/downstairs perspective

James’s novel is a weak sequel: she tries to tell a story of the next phase of the characters’ existence as left there by Austen at the close of P&P. In James’s book The mystery element only emerges about half-way through: we do not meet the Bidwells until the last third of the novel: in the film the gothic elements begin immediately and the Bidwells are visited before the end of 10 minutes and their life and presence at the cottage and the father’s as butler in the house are woven into the film early on and throughout. James is writing a romance, rehearsing some of Pride and Prejudice in case the reader doesn’t know the story (!) and her book meanders tepidly as a novel of manners. Hers is the idea (to give her credit where it’s due), that the Darcy and Elizabeth marriage is not going well because of the distance in rank between them, how people treat them, and thus the death threatens their marriage centrally because it threatens Darcy’s self-esteem and the reputation (as he sees it) of Pemberley. James is politically conservative and this fits her outlook: an egalitarian marriage will be rocky, strained at best. Some of her descriptions of the grounds of Pemberley show she has Ann Radcliffe in mind.

TrevorEve
Trevor Eve as Hardcastle

There are number of problems in James’s novel: She’s just not passionate enough about the detective murder bit — she’s doing that because it’s what she knows how to do (her life’s metier), and her treatment of the magistrate is apparently not anachronistic (though Trevor Eve in the film adaptation is made to act a Sherlock Holmes role — he does it rather well). She has read 18th century novels and historical novels and to some extent this sequel novel reminds me of Winston Graham and is like Jo Baker’s Longbourne. However, it’s not just not as good, not as thoroughly realized or researched because its franchise is not the 18th century or 18th century novel or modern fictional historal novel: it is Austen seen through a Radcliffean kind of descriptive glass. I did bond with Elizabeth as recreated by James: I am drawn to James’s use of theme of disillusion for Elizabeth, anxiety Darcy does not value her, Darcy’s own humiliation, and all this getting in the way of their marital relationship because it is so hard to escape other people’s views of you outside your relationship.

Juliette Howtidi has so re-structured the original novel and changed it — darkened, gothicized, swung the politics in another direction — the screenplay and then this film is almost another work. Some elements are the same. The basic story outline. The depiction of the relationship between the servants and the Darcys is even more reactionary than that found in Downton Abbey. The lead servants, Mrs Reynolds (Joanne Scanlon) and the Bidwell father (Philip Martin Brown) treat the lower servants with condescension and ruthless discipline, disrespect really, identifying wholly with the idea that they are living their long- hard working lives worthily by abasing themselves before the patrician luxury they provide. On the other hand, her scenes of the family together are filled with good feeling, the humane characters sympathized with, including when dancing …

ReadingBook
One of the family scenes from Part 1 — click on image to make larger

In Twohidi’s mini-series there is a certain amount of understandable mutiny, and Wickham and his sister’s angry and resentment is made palpable. Towhidi weaves the Bidwells in early to show us one family’s vulnerability and anger (Will murders Denny thinking Denny is Wickham, the man who seduced and abandoned his sister). Howtidi changes Elizabeth to make her identify with the Bidwells, protest against coerced marriage for money. In the book there is a deep sense that somehow Darcy was right to doubt whether he should go against all norms and relatives and that is taken up By Howtidi’s film but in the film Darcy is shown to be wrong: James undercut whatever questioning content there is in Austen’s and her book can be fitted into those readings which interpret Austen’s P&P as humiliating Elizabeth and teaching her a lesson (there’s a scholarly essay to called “The humiliation of Elizabeth … following on “The humiliation of Emma …”), but this is not how Howtidi and Percival’s film has it. The film questions this stance intensely at the same time as it presents Elizabeth’s hurt and pride. The film’s depiction of their struggling relationship is valuable and I hope influences further heritage films and appropriations of Pride and Prejudice.

Given the time and arrangement originally followed on the BBC the relationship of Darcy and Elizabeth as an development out of Darcy and Elizabeth some 6 to 7 years ago works. It does not come out firmly and clearly in this PBS foreshortened and rearranged version so the best part of the film is lost (or spoilt).

I am not claiming this is a great mini-series in the BBC version. I concede that Towhidi was not above herself mixing the subgenres of the Austen canon (familial romance, melodrama with recently some use of gothic features) with those of the mystery thriller, with its use of horror characteristics (thus we had Denny’s bloody head crushed by a piece of iron in both versions), and a group of secrets as linchpin: who killed Captain Denny (Tom Canton), why did Denny rush out of the carriage to the woods (where was he going). All that Austen avoided in her books like poison is shoved back in. Anthony Trollope mocked the kind of reading and readers’ experience where it mattered who was at a stile at 1:15 pm on a specific day (in the Victorian period Wilkie Collins was among the first to feed this game taste), but it seems when combined with violence (and sex) this kind of thing is seen by PBS as a winner for increasing popular readership (and sales of books and advertiser’s interests). But in the structuring of BBC three hour mini-series, the psychological development of the characters, the nearly thwarted or destroyed romance of Georgiana and Henry Alveston (she accepts Fitzwilliam in Part 2), are at least as dominant as the mystery thriller obsessive gothic elements.

Strained0
A good filmic moment: combines the film noirish gothic colors with a moment of strain for Elizabeth and Darcy

In addition, Towhidi (far more than James) tried to piggyback the formulaic mystery plot stuff (where the detective usually tidies up the world by the end) onto a new reading of Wickham (which has been becoming more widespread since the 2005 Joe Wright P&P and the 2009 Lost in Austen) as having offered in his original story some real truths (such as Darcy’s rivalry with him as a motive for strong antagonism) so that part of the story of the murder is the stigmatizing Wickham has endured, his bitterness and ruthless behavior in response. She has harked back to older readings of P&P where Lydia is seen as a spiteful shallowly vain creature: in this film adaptation we are asked to feel sorry for Wickham who was pressured into marrying Lydia: he would have had a happier life, perhaps been a better man could he have married the cottager, Louisa Bidwell (Nichola Burdell); at the same time he is clearly (as Denny is trying to point out in the scene Wickham obsessively remembers over and over) cruel in his behavior to Louisa. At the very close of the book, Mrs Younge (Mariah Gale) is discovered to be his sister, intensely devoted to him (for which he is grateful) to the point she wants to bring up his child as its mother; in the film we discover this early in the third part and it explains Mrs Younge’s presence in the first and second parts. Wickham is trying to buy his son from Louisa and using Denny as a proxy to give the baby to his sister: Wickham and Mrs Younge are also willing to snatch the baby, and Colonel Fitzwilliam to abet them.

In Towhidi’s version, Georgiana and Henry Alveston carry the film’s explicit mainstream liberal humane message: Henry is a lawyer who is sympathetic to the goals and ideals of the French revolution, and he and Georgiana are kindred spirits. They sit and look at picturesque views of Colonel Fitzwilliam’s Scottish castle over a river. Their romance is not used to make a contrast with Elizabeth and Darcy’s conventionally pro-establishment one in James’s book; it is in this film.

*****************************

A general outline and some features of Part I (nearly 60 minutes) of Death Comes to Pemberley as available on the Region 2 DVD version of the BBC version:

Gravestone
Gravestone of Darcy’s great-grandfather, a suicide, almost lost Pemberley, lived alone in his later years with a dog

The story of Part 1 begins with two housemaids’s terror in the woods: they have been tricked by some male servants to look for the ghost of Mrs Riley into the woods. They are (very like Austen sees the gothic in part in Northanger Abbey) over-excited and glad to be frightened by their own nervous over-reaction to signs of a ghost. We see a grave of another generation Darcy. The next sequence is about Elizabeth’s delight in her existence: her boy, Fitzwilliam, running about the house, preparations for a extravagant ball she with Mrs Reynolds’s help has shown she can cope with. Her pride and triumph are tempered by her knowledge of how others see her and her memories. She talks with Georgiana, who is staring out windows: longing for Alveston to turn up as escort to Mr and Mrs Bennet. Elizabeth visits the Bidwells: Will dying of a disease, Louisa home with her sister’s baby (so it’s said to be).

LouisandBaby
Louisa and baby George (we discover named after Wickham, the father)

BedriddenWill
The elusive bed-ridden reading Will

On her way home, Elizabeth encounters Mrs Younge, and tells Darcy about it when she returns to Pemberley. The Bennets arrive and the first vexations emerge with Mrs Bennet trying to persuade Darcy to allow Lydia and Wickham to come to the ball.

ElizabethMrBennet

James Fleet as Mr Bennet has lost his cool wit against the hysterics of his wife, and Towhidi is not above using despising of women to give us scenes where the wise doctor is told to give large drafts of sedatives to both Mrs Bennet and Lydia. But he does love his daughter, Lizzie, and in the BBC version near the opening of part 2 we see a moment of his peaceful satisfaction as he sits in the Pemberley library escaped to his books.

FitzwilliamEmlizabeth
Fitzwilliam first trying to persuade Elizabeth

In a threaded in talk with Fitzwilliam in a garden who then proceeds to try to court Georgiana to persuade her to marry him (despite his misgivings over her reputation, to him stained by her early near-elopement with Wickham), it emerges that Darcy is so fragile he cannot stand to have the Wickhams mentioned, much less in his house.

And of course Lydia arrives, selfishly hysterical in a flying coach, and the flashbacks begin. The still below is of Wickham’s memories of Denny’s protests against him, and Denny’s scorn of Wickham.

Despsinghim

We move back to the carriage drive, see Wickham and Denny’s coldness, and the silly Lydia’s complacency and Denny’s abrupt rush out of the carriage. There’s a confused time of running about in the wood which ends with Wickham coming upon Denny’s bleeding to death before Wickham can quite reach Denny, and
Wickham’s shooting his gun to attract help. This occurs at the 30 minute point in the original BBC version.

WalkingTalking

Now Darcy and Elizabeth’s marriage is to be tested. The formulation “death comes to” is found in a number of James’s novels and it is central to this film. In the second deepening half-hour, the intermingled talking and walking of Elizabeth and Darcy occurs, with scenes of them in their drawing room, as they try to cope with what’s happened and the behavior of everyone around them. Darcy must call a magistrate, Hardcastle, the son it emerges of the man who insisted on hanging the Riley boy. This Hardcastle is intensely aware of how he’s seen hostilely by those who remember his father’s harsh injustice. The use of landscape and voice-over and intermingled shots of past memories and present shots begins.

Threaded in are the scenes (brief but there) between Georgiana and Alveston, their joy in one another, their having to deal with Fitzwilliam’s scorn of him, and reactionary put-downs, how he would send Georgiana to stay with Lady Catherine de Bourgh lest she be somehow “besmirched” or hurt by nearness to this crisis. Repeatedly Elizabeth defends her right to stay, to help out, to follow her individual desires, which include loving the lawyer. Elizabeth’s scenes with Georgiana over the course of the whole film show their developed relationship and is another of the element which come out of Austen’s book.

ElizabethisteningtoGeorgiana
Elizabeth listening hard to Georgiana towards the end of the original Part 1

The neutral way Wickham’s envy and anger at his lack of status are presented constitutes a less usual way to present the source of revolutionary feeling: rage at injustice. Wickham has brought Lydia to a ball she is not welcome to come to. They were going to “crash” their way in by coming late at night and daring the Darcys to turn them away. Wickham does feel rage; how could others think he’d murder his best friend so brutally? He is the outsider. He is admired by Colonel Fitzwilliam for his violence against the Irish in the Irish uprising; he is himself no revolutionary, rather simply narrowly amoral on his own behalf. He extracted (in one of the film’s many flashback scenes) as much money as he could get from Darcy as payment to marry Lydia. But in Part 3 of the BBC version Wickham is almost executed because he is nobody, as the boy Riley was cruelly cut off. Mrs Younge’s fierce malignity towards Elizabeth is jealousy but it’s made understandable; at the opening of Part 1 the actress conveys something poignant in the wood.

MrsYounger
Mariah Gale as we first see her (through Elizabeth’s eyes)

The BBC hour ends with Wickham taken away because Hardcastle is convinced Wickham killed Denny nefarious reasons, like the 30£ Hardcastle finds in Wickham’s hat (actually we will discover the money Fitzwilliam gave Mrs Younge to buy the infant from Louisa Bidwell with), that the shots were fired by Denny to try to protect himself. Hardcastle never deviates from this conclusion and his gathering of clues after this (in Part 2) just serves this thesis.

As I am a reader who has never liked Lydia, I like Towhidi’s depiction of her as doing all she can to needle Darcy (saying in another room how Elizabeth wanted Wickham to marry her), and making her vanity at thinking all men are after her a hard version of Mrs Bennet, similarly silly. They both have a wholly inadequate idea of how they fit into society, of their own status as nullities. In the film gradually we see that Wickham and Lydia suit one another: the way they get through life is to live off others and pretend to be gay.

I’d call the novel a weak sequel, and its film adaptation in the 3 part version a strong one, even if under pressure to draw an audience, the genre of mystery thriller or a P.D.James novel (she is an English and BBC brand name) was resorted to.

****************************

PBS has only so much money (see Rebecca Eaton’s book reviewed by me, a sort of apology for what Masterpiece theater has become in the last couple of years). From their point of view it is more valuable to pay for the Newshour to send Margaret Warner to the Ukraine, to have foreign correspondents, to support good documentaries. There has ever been a contingent at the BBC which despises costume dramas a tea-time soap operas for women. This despising and the lack of money since Mobil left (Viking Cruise and Ralph Lauren are no substitutes) is what leads to not having beautifully-done and respectfully aired adaptations of great books and to trashing even of minor work.

Next week I will write about Part 2 (the second hour) of the mini-series as aired in Britain.

DeathComestoPemberley

Ellen

See Part Two: Interwoven Threads

See Part Three: A Story of Self-Recognition

Author: ellenandjim

Ellen Moody holds a Ph.D in British Literature and taught in American senior colleges for more than 40 years. Since 2013 she has been teaching older retired people at two Oscher Institutes of Lifelong Learning, one attached to American University (Washington, DC) and other to George Mason University (in Fairfax, Va). She is also a literary scholar with specialties in 18th century literature, translation, early modern and women's studies, film, nineteenth and 20th century literature and of course Trollope. For Trollope she wrote a book on her experiences of reading Trollope on the Internet with others, some more academic style essays, two on film adaptations, the most recent on Trollope's depiction of settler colonialism: "On Inventing a New Country." Here is her website: http://www.jimandellen.org/ellen/ No part of this blog may be reproduced without express permission from the author/blog owner. Linking, on the other hand, is highly encouraged!

26 thoughts on “Howtidi’s Death Comes to Pemberley: PBS spoilt the BBC mini-series”

    1. To fit the 3 hours into 2 segments of 1 hour and 20 minutes. After the program is over, you immediately get what are in effect ads and by 10:30 another program (generating more revenue).

  1. Elissa:

    All,

    In critiquing the novel Death Comes to Pemberley by PD James when it came out last year, I was brusque and brutal: “simply awful,” I labeled it; worse, I called it an”absolute embarrassment” for a writer of PDJ’s stature to have penned and suggested that only because of past success did the author get a publisher to print this up at all. I’ll still hold with that harsh review: as a mystery it is dull, tedious, and simply
    dreadfully written in wooden, cliche-ridden prose; as a “sequel” to Austen’s P&P, it was simply ridiculous — and largely because both the writing was so awful and the dialogue rang so flat and untrue to the characters made so very alive for us by JA.

    This televised film, I felt might well be a different matter — it might well be a well-acted period melodrama pleasing to the viewing audience and even present a good mystery. Well, we’ve all seen the
    first half, and so far I appear to be half correct. Melodrama this certainly is using our well-known cast of Austen characters. Indeed, Pemberley itself plays a major role as character here, both visually and thematically as it is “the heritage of Pemberley” Mr. Darcy feels has been threatened by a murder on the estate grounds and seems impelled to defend.

    So there are both pleasures and shortcomings with this melodramatic rendition. First and foremost is Pemberley — the NY Times actually states Pemberley “is *played by* Castle Howard” — with its sweeping vistas, thick woods, and gorgeous “eye-candy” interiors that alone are worth viewing the film for. Doubtless, given the incredible success of Downton Abbey, many fans will simply swoon over Castle Howard the way Lydia swoons over Willoughby and consider the film a success for this alone. And curiously, the first half is really all about the main characters of P&P whom we all love so well with the actual murder mystery of seemingly little interest. And it is in the characters really that we have our delight, so let’s get down to it.

    Certainly in Darcy, played by a favorite of mine, Matthew Rhys, his cousin Col. Fitzwilliam, his rival for Georgiana, Henry, and Willoughby, we have both fine casting and acting, even if Darcy is a bit more like a
    needy immature Heathcliffe than Austen’s grand hero. Rhys, a Welchman, who performs classic British drama in both English and Welch, may be known to American television audiances as the totally miscast hen-pecked husband on an improbable spy caper, The Americans, and as a gay California attorney on the series Brothers and Sisters. But he is a fiercely powerful actor and seeing him play Dylan Thomas remains a high point in theater for me.

    Now, we must come to our best-loved of all Austen characters, our heroine, Lizzie. Alas, she is played here by the interesting Anna Maxwell Martin, who was so perfectly cast by the bbc as Esther Summerson in Bleak House and then in a role she handled exquisitely in the Bletchley Circle as a secret and brilliant decoder at Bletchley during WW II. Wonderful as she was in that role, an extremely plain-looking woman used to being dismissed as non-essential when really she serves as fulcrum of both her family and and her nation’s lives, she simply is not Elizabeth Bennet: with her wan sadness, we feel she can never be “light, bright, [or] sparkling”; she is a comforting presence, certainly, but not a lively force of animation and certainly never a joy to behold. Her relationship with Darcy seems all wrong as well: she attempts to comfort him as though he is an over-wrought child on the verge of a major temper tantrum. Sadly, a major, passionate love affair here simply does not exist. Her wardrobe, too, seems all wrong — perfect for creepmouse Esther Summerson, the same dress scene after scene and an ill-fitting jacket that looks ready for an Oxfam jumble sale not the grand rooms of Pemberley.

    Where both casting and acting are exactly right, however, are in Mr. and Mrs. Bennet. In this pair, it would seem the directors knew their novel quite well. Foolish, whining, nerve-grating Mrs. Bennet is played
    perfectly by Rebecca Front (fans of late Morse episodes and Inspector Lewis and now Inspector Hathaway will recognize her as the classy Met police captain urging her men to hone in on those serial murderers lose
    in Oxford with great speed so she can announce their arrests to the brass at Scotland Yard at one of the cocktail parties she’s forever attending) much in the same vein as Brenda Blethen played her several
    years ago. And Mr. Bennet — who is shown to be perhaps as foolish as his wife in his retreat from reality when the “going gets tough” — played by James Fleet illuminates just how much of a coward Mr. Bennet
    has been in his reluctance to put his foot down with Lydia, which has all resulted in such on-going, awful consequences for the entire family. His pathologic desire to avoid any confrontation is beautifully conveyed by his retreat to Darcy’s library as he raises his arms to caress the so many, many volumes arrayed before him; but he has abandoned his duty as a father, and this director makes the pathos of his life very clear to us.

    Finally, we have yet to encounter Lady Catherine (although Col. Fitzwilliam does threaten to send Georgina off to Rosings to get her away from the scandal of a murder investigation; she refuses to leave, btw, and frankly shows more spunk and personality in this film than Lizzie, who is more of a “den mother” arranging rooms and meals with the housekeeper). When we do, I hear she will be played by the delightful Penelope Keith (remember To the Manor Born?). Finally, almost unrecognizable, Trevor Eve plays Sir Selwyn, the neighboring lord and magistrate who certainly bears a grudge against the Darcys and is not inclined to give Willoughby a break. But this is an Austen sequel, so it is doubtful that Willoughby will hang for the murder of his friend
    and fellow officer. And we can all sit back, relax, enjoy a romp with some of our favorite characters, all set in the splendid grandeur of Castle Howard.

    Elissa

    ps: How interesting that Mr. Collins does not make an appearance. I suppose, ultimately, he is most forgettable! Poor Mr. Collins.

    1. I hope Elissa has read my blog and suppose her thorough-going careful resume comes the spoilt cut and rearranged version.

      By the way the 3 short Austen films that aired on PBS in 2007 were all cut about 8-10 minutes. Scenes are so short in films that every 11 seconds counts (11 seconds is the length of a typical scene). If you buy any of these 3 in the PBS DVD version you are missing delightful scenes in the Northanger Abbey DVD Regions 2 version of the film. It hurts the Persuasion film somewhat less as the scenes left out are not as crucial; it makes worse hay of an already mismanaged Mansfield Park by Wadey.

  2. Mr Collins is not there because he would not fit into a mystery thriller genre. He is a character who belongs to a satiric novel of manners or comic costume drama (he is a kind of screwball type).

  3. Judy; “Thank you for this, Ellen. I’m not watching the PBS version bc, having just moved, my TV nor my sofa has achieved clearance. I will wait for the library DVD which are usually in orig BBC format.”

    Wise. When you watch the two parter on TV you are further interfered with by the continual presence of the WETA logo at the right hand side of the screen! and every once in a while a pop-up ad for a WETA mystery coming soon.

    They have no respect for their viewers’ experience at all.

  4. I’ve also read Ellen’s long and detailed blog on this — interspersed with truly lovely screen shots — and found it quite interesting. Essentially, I think we both — as did several other commenters — sense this episodic film version finds its center of gravity NOT in the murder mystery of who killed Lt Capt Denny but, rather, in the middle-of-the-marriage, somewhat troubled relationship of Darcy and Lizzie. Surely, they are no longer in exuberant honeymoon mode with a fairy-tale-like future of happiness at Pemberley twinkling before them.
    In fact, the weight of Pemberley, its very size, its troubled history both with Wickham’s family and with other neighboring landed families, its traditions and hauntings of the past that include the stains of horrific child-hanging for poaching witnessed by both Darcy and Wickham as small children, the blood-feuds and uneasy relationship that must ensue from lords of the manor punishing essentially enserfed farmer-poachers of even small rodents and game (rabbits, fish) for food, and its “sense of honor” that Darcy insists must be upheld — all these and more seem to have pressed down on Lizzie and dampened her with troubles so that now, seven years into her marriage, why she resembles no one more than her capable, yet resigned and somewhat sad friend Charlotte. Lizzie seems very much alone in this marriage to me. It is as though the very stones of Pemberley’s walls are pressing down on her.

    And for such a role, well, I suppose I must say that Anna Maxwell Martin is perfect: her sad, lined face and sloping shoulders are the very essence of woe. But this is far, far from the Lizzie given us by Austen: there is no lightness or brightness or sparkling here. This Lizzie is world weary, and it makes me most unhappy.

  5. Effie Gray is another one of these modern biopic.

    Can you name one adaptation in the line-up of PBS that is an adaptation of a great book?

    Not one is.

    The only reason we might get it on PBS is it stars Emma Thompson who is box office draw. That’s the wrong reason for airing a film.

    We’ve talked about Effie Breist on WWTTA: a profound film was adapted under Fassbinder’s direction from this powerful 19th century novel:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effi_Briest_(1974_film)

    I wish you’d avoid referring to costume drama as a thing. I respect the form myself even if I see it being debased by some of the worst aspects of the genre of mystery thriller. Next time we’ll get a woman’s head all bloodied over and maybe the someone can turn that into a game.

  6. I just read your blog. I enjoyed the first half on PBS the other night. Was disappointed that I have to wait now for the second part actually. I never would have noticed that pieces were rearranged or that 20 minutes were cut. I can understand a station cutting for time, but not rearranging – that seems unusual to me. What a shame. I think all the actors are good. The actress playing Elizabeth played Jane’s sister in Becoming Jane Austen and also Esther Summerson in the Bleak House miniseries so it’s interesting to see her in such a different role. I thought Darcy was very good too. It made me want to reread some Jane Austen (though I was rather hoping Mrs. Bennet would be the one who ended up dead).

    Tyler

    1. I would not have noticed the rearrangement except for the way the hour and twenty minutes ended on a climax but that I spent the summer taking down the screenplay. What was rearranged allowed for ending on newly set up climax. It’s also not just a matter of cutting 20 minutes from the 180 to fit 160, you have to make sure what is cut is not missed, and different things are juxtaposed. I remember reading Raven’s comment about how difficult it was to cut any character from Trollope’s Palliser novels for it seemed to him somewhere along the line the character was central to some plot point, so he had to subsitute another character or omit more characters. He also wrote of how he was told his original 55 minute hour was too long and he had to cut a few minutes from each episode. That was challenge too .This kind of thing was done to Death comes to Pemberley? why? so they could have ads in the 10 minutes and have more programs for more revenue.

      Also I captured stills and it seems to me some of those of Elizabeth thinking or brooding mostly, a moment with Darcy too. These are not needed for pragmatics of plot. But we are not watching (I hope) for pragmatics of plot, to see (to echo Trollope) what happened night in the wood — I felt some of Denny’s lurching was omitted.

  7. Separately I also felt that Rhys and Martin added depths to the characters that come out of Austen’s own characters. Elizabeth is not so “light bright and sparkling” as people suppose (to me that is to see her superficially — she is, remember, humiliated, she has to fight with Lady Catherine, many moods in the novel); Elizabeth Garvie in the 1979 P&P brought out her thoughtful and hurt vein; Rhys made a happy medium between the cold stiffness of David Rintoul (all the aristocrat) and the vulnerability of Colin Firth (especially at the films’ end).

    Anna Maxwell Martin was also in Philomena (Judy Dench’s daughter), South Riding (Sarah Burton, the lead role and the closest of all these to Elizabeth Bennet) and with Steve Coogan in Alan Partridge.

  8. Wasn’t disrespecting the costume drama genre, Ellen, which I enjoy as much as I enjoy anything. Was disrespecting the book, which is as far as I care to go with that project. I know (who better?) that good movies can be made from bad books, but don’t feel obliged to follow up on one I disliked as much as I did Death Comes to Pemberley. Forty years reading novels in a movie studio story department should give me some right to avert my eyes.

    And I don’t play games either.

    Diana

    Me: In reply to Diana,

    I agree a poor book, but I also agree that her work in general is highly flawed: it reverts us back to an earlier era, shows reactionary obsessions, and this one is just a weaker version. Even the autobiography, intelligent, candid, moving and revealing (especially about film-making from her books) is far too much sheer name-dropping.

    Agree on games: perhaps one reason I find the taste for mysteries a mystery is I am not one who likes to play games. The author is playing a game with you; can you work out who did it? It’s even competitive. P.D. James’s autobiography signal this when she calls it “A time to be in earnest.”

    In these cases of the recent slasher mystery thrillers I was thinking especially of the violent pornographic games that are so popular on the Net (controversy called Gamergate). Hideous violence inflicted on women, sounds of them suffering are part of what we are to enjoy.

    There I disagree: I’ve begun to think after much study that a good and strong book is far more likely to produce a good and strong film than a poor or weak one.

    Diana, you often dislike costume dramas. You’ve said so.

    Ellen

  9. Nancy:

    You write beautiful reviews of films, Ellen. I just can’t look at many as separate pieces of art. I do not like sequels where the couple is having marital problems. I want my Happy ever after ending of the original story to still being place. Minor disagreements are one thing, Putting the future in doubt is another. I basically don’t like sequels at all.

    According to P &P, Wickham remained in the army. Having Denny shot in mistake for him would be more plausible if Wickham was also wearing a uniform.

    However, my biggest complaint– aside from the distance betwee Darcy and Elizabeth– is how Col. Fitzwilliam is presented. In P &P he is Georgiana’s cousin and co-guardian. Georgiana would most likely have visited her grandfather and uncle at least a couple of time in the past. Though a cousin, Fitzwlliam is presented more n the light of another brother or uncle in P &P so to have him want to marry Georgiana raises the ick factor for me. Marriage of cousins isn’t a problem for me , though I know it is for many, but Fitzwilliam’s relationship with Georgiana and the age difference does bother me. I know Knightley is 14 years older than Emma– he was never Emma’s guardian–he was never a substitute parent to Emma.

    I do not like dark sets as I find it hard to see the action– I have an old fashion large screen TV . I hate to think how it would look on a smaller screen. I couldn’t always follow the action.

    I agree with your description of Lydia.

    I just realized that Lydia and Wickham are shown wearimg expensive clothes. Lydia’s outfits are more glamorous and expensive looking than Elizabeth’s. Elizabeth is dressed as though she is an upperservant instead of the mistress of the house.

    Nancy

    1. In brief reply to a few points made by Elissa and Nancy.

      I don’t need the actress to be beautiful at all. I’m drawn to Martin’s thoughtful face. “Creepmouse” is badmouthing applied to anyone. I agree that Rhys is strong in the role as conceived in this mini-series and it is less anachronistic than has been seen since 1979. Rintoul was too cold and stiff, but Rhy is fully alive. I loved their love-making scene in Part 3. I doubt it’ll be part of what’s cut but little bits may be snipped.

      To Nancy, well if you keep saying you don’t want any change, then you leave yourself out of much art. Even the more faithful adaptations do a lot of changing, and for me another way to see these films and some of the sequels (they come in many different types now) is as enrichening commentary.

      Yes there is a lot of use of darkness — the attempt is made to imitate light at the time. And it can get hard to see — capturing stills is hopeless. I know many of Trevor Eve’s scenes are shot in semi-darkness as I could get few stills of him.

      I have to disagree on Fitzwilliam; they were within the norms of the era. It was accepted for much older men to marry younger women, particularly within family groups. It’s a new concept for pride in family is not in Austen’s character; rather it fits the thematics of this mini-series and reinforces Darcy’s and explains Darcy’s affection for Fitzwilliam until Darcy learns more about Fitzwilliam’s doings that night.

      These new heritage films equate super-luxurious clothes with arrogance and vanity — they do. So Lydia is superficial, shallow in feeling through the stigmatizing of her clothes. She cares more about her dress in the carriage than where Wickham is at the moment she asks.

      I did not recognize Castle Howard. I guess they were careful to film it so we would not remember Brideshead Revisited.

  10. Nancy: “Yes, it is within the norms of the era. However, marriage of a guardian and ward was frowned on because it was too much like incest. This was especially true when Godparents were the usual choice for guardian. At one time marriage between a god parent and a child was not allowed.

    Me: But note that in the film there is no mention that Fitzwilliam was her guardian. That has been cut. OTOH, Nancy notes that “at one time” marriage between godparent and child was not allowed. So later it was. I remember novels from the period where the guardian does marry his ward: it’s usually presented as coercive and for her money (not incest, not a too older person marrying a younger one). In the Renaissance it happened a lot. In the film we are supposed to feel that Fitzwilliam takes far too much advantage of the older aristocratic customs when it suits him; when it does not, he throws them overboard and will be treacherous and “unmanly” — as when he seems to be providing the money for Wickham’s sister to buy Louisa Bidwell’s baby for herself. We are to assume that Fitzwilliam has had an affair with Mrs Younge is what’s implied. At the close of the mini-series when Darcy apologizes to Elizabeth and seems to be about to try to alter some of his ways, he rejects Fitzwilliam. It’s not given enough time even in the 3 hour mini-series as it should have been. This by the way is not at all in the book. It’s one of the many ways Howtidi developed and improved upon James’s novel — found in the script.

  11. Elissa: “On the matter of an older male marrying his (often) wealthy young ward: There is definitely a tradition of this during the 19th century that dates from even before Victorian times. Remember (and this example is one of the most benign ones possible, with a kind elderly gentleman who does not lust after the young woman or her fortune) Bleak House — Mr. J. Jarndyce and his ward Esther Summerson, whom he wisely and kindly agrees to allow to marry her true love, a contemporary. It seems to me we have in the situation of the older, controlling male and his monied, innocent child ward the conflation of actual, sexual, and ultimately political power over women that was a “trifecta” come to its height during the high Victorian era and used, quite consciously, to
    dampen any possibility of the rights of women. Powerful — erotic as well — Mr. Rochester, even humbled a bit and blind, will always restrain, and *of course* protect Miss Eyre’s interests after he marries her. Despite being nominally ruled by an Empress Queen, men in Victorian England held the reins/reigns of power, and they often pulled on these reins with brutal force — sexuality, either in its denial to women or in its forced encounter — was a primary and socially accepted method of maintaining control.”

    1. Yes the point is to protect family property: Trollope’s Lady Glen is married off to a much older man to protect the vast Scots holdings of her family. It’s made explicit in film and book that Darcy’s desire to see Fitzwilliam marry Georgiana is a shoring up of Pemberley; it’s when he sees Fitzwilliam is not so upright and upstanding and that Alveston is the competent man of high integrity that he moves towards Alveston as a partner for Georgiana and her inheritance. Elizabeth (Anna Maxwell Martin) talks endlessly of love and in part 3 Darcy’s love-making with Elizabeth emphasizes how important love is, but as for Georgiana we don’t hear him talking about a love match, but rather watch his respect for Alveston as a lawyer grow.

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.