Reply
Sun 13 Apr, 2003 07:54 am
Okay, I just finished Bridget Jones years after all the hype. Enjoyed the book, can see it definitely started a trend (and I understand most of the female American knockoffs are in no where its caliber and believe it). Movie to me stands alongside reasonably well, as sort of a different entity via different medium, especially since author Helen Fielding is connected with the producers, the same group who did "Four Weddings and a Funeral" but I digress...
Anyway, suspected after seeing the film but now have heavy leanings since finishing the book, that it's really just a very, very modern, very very updated version of Pride and Predjudice--complete with a Mr. Darcy and "cheeky" references to the both the book and BBC film version of Pride and Prejudice.
Here's an outline of thoughts, just my opinion --
Both Bridget and Elizabeth have a lifelong struggle with not being accomplished (of course at different things, but again education and class here are both reoccurring issues) although Bridget is a lot more loose limbed about it v. general society she lives in, but again temporary setting, values, et al., is updated.
Both have a strong, inappropriate acting, if not horrifying mother to deal with, and ongoing humiliation issues, re: their families.
Elizabeth's correspondence (chiefly to her sister) in the book provided generous insight into her strong character. Bridget's "diary enteries" could be again, the substitution of that literary device.
The "Darcy" character in both situations, assists the main female character with a major family crisis.
Mr. Darcy helps with the general Lydia situation, getting her married and supporting her and her husband (after convincing him to marry her), and Mark Darcy goes to Portugal to find Bridget's mom, get charges reduced/dropped, retrieves some of the stolen money and is able to lure back her boyfriend and set a trap for him, helping the police.
What do you think? All thoughts and theories welcome.
: )
The major difference, to me, is the sexual climate of the two books. And the movie accentuated Bridget's sexual experimentation even further by having her engage in sodomy with the Hugh Grant character.
Hmmm - I think Elizabeth Bennett by far the more sure of herself and her values, and a stronger character - in a sense, Elizabeth's journey is to become less SURE of herself, and to know herself more - while Bridget's is to become more sure and to obsess about herself less.
The use of the actor who played Darcy in the TV series is a very funny touch - adding layers of irony to the film.
I am unable to recall enough about the plot of Bridget to really add any more - except that it is intresting that, despite what is really a very difficult social and economic situation that Elizabeth is in - in an era when women were very vulnerable in both these areas, and Bridget's economic self suffiency and sexual freedom, Bridget is by far the more vulnerable character, I believe.
Hi. I was comparing the books, spefically not the films although I think it carries over some as well.
dlowan -- I agree, Elizabeth is more sure of herself or at least presents that manner. After re-reading the book, I found at times she was putting on a brave front when embarassed about her family and some of the situations, i.e. being surprised by Darcy while touring the house and also when she learned of his help with Lydia's disgrace, and how her mother still carried on.
I think both women characters are set in their own contemporary societies, and there of course huge differences to account for -- Although I think Fielding does very clever updating of social behavior, etiquette, and/or including social behavior around dating, sexual situations, etc.--compared to Austen's interpretations of social manners, situations, etc.--which included proper romantic etiquette, and general etiquette of the day.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace