Why Joe Wright’s work on Pride and Prejudice (2005) is so accomplished.
More than just a sumptuous adaptation.
“I got excited about new ways to film the story which I don’t believe have been done before. I wanted to make Pride & Prejudice real and gritty — and be as honest as possible.” — Joe Wright (Quoted in Focus Features, 2011)
While it might not be able to claim to be a favourite amongst die-hard Jane Austen enthusiasts in terms of its sheer faithfulness to the source material, particularly when placed against the beloved BBC adaptation, it’s hard to ignore director Joe Wright’s mastery when it comes to the technical, narrative and symbolic choices he made when filming his feature-length version of Pride and Prejudice (2005). As Stewart-Beer has observed, the film is ‘more notable for showcasing the qualities and intensities of the cinematic experience over fresh readings of Austen’s best-loved romance’ (2007: para 28). Despite the pitfalls inevitable with shortening a novel into a two-hour film, Wright was always looking for ways to capture the ‘cinematic equivalent of prose’ (Paquet-Deyris, 2007: para 2), and his wonderful interpretation is subsequently one that is arguably the most aesthetically accomplished of the several adaptations.
The famous story follows Elizabeth (Keira Knightly), the second eldest of the Bennet family’s daughters who are also comprised of her beautiful but shy elder sister Jane (Rosamund Pike), middle child Mary (Talulah Riley) and the silly youngest sisters Lydia (Jena Malone) and Kitty (Carey Mulligan). Their mother (played by Brenda Blethyn), perpetually distressed that they are not to inherit a penny if Mr Bennet (Donald Sutherland) passes away, is overjoyed to hear that wealthy, eligible bachelors Mr Bingley (Simon Woods) and his friend Mr Darcy (Matthew Macfadyen) are in town. While Jane and Bingley are immediately taken with one another, Elizabeth takes an instant disliking to the apparent proud and rude Mr Darcy.
While not being a word-for-word adaptation, Wright was still able to maintain, and in several cases emphasise the themes and spirit of the novel when directing his debut picture. His skill at visually translating it from book to screen in a concise and condensed manner was obviously necessary considering the time limits he was working with, and in so doing Pride and Prejudice is a stunning work that stands alone as a self contained film as well as an adaptation.
“There was no point in reinventing the story, as it is such a worldwide favourite. But we wanted to present the story as it was written. Joe is a true romantic, yet he also shoots the story in a modern way.” — Tim Bevan & Eric Fellner (2011: para 4)
The most striking and complex shot of the film that encapsulates Wright’s talent occurs during the dance at Netherfield Park. Here, he weaves together several narrative threads in nearly three minutes as we follow the different members of the Bennet family interacting with one another at the ball. The seamless transitions between subjects as the camera moves around the environment demonstrates the embarrassment that Elizabeth is subject to as a result of her family’s behaviour, as well as her beloved sister’s bourgeoning relationship with Mr Bingley (in addition to her friend Charlotte’s (Claudie Blakley) concern for Jane’s reserved nature).
The take starts and ends with Elizabeth as she witnesses her father trying to hush Mary as she makes an awkward performance on the piano. As the camera tracks back we see the bumbling and comic Mr Collins (Tom Hollander) enter from the left, his inconsequential nature emphasised by the small scale he occupies within the frame. As Jane (the only one of her siblings not seen as an embarrassment) and Bingley appear from the right and walk into the next room, Wright’s camera tilts down to capture him touching her dress, which sets up Darcy overhearing Mrs Bennet’s boasts about Jane’s expected marriage. Within the sequence we also see her mother and siblings drunkenly stumbling around the venue.
Gibbs and Pye write that long takes often ‘evoke the sense of an observing presence’ (2017: 11), and similar to the long introductory shot in Robert Altman’s The Player (1992) for example, which brings audiences immediately into a wonderfully satirised world of a Hollywood film studio, this scene feels similarly immersive as it invites us to peek into the window of a different era almost voyeuristically. Class distinctions are established immediately as the Bennet family’s excited behaviour makes it clear that they’re not used to such a grand gathering, while the rich characters such as Darcy and Caroline Bingley (Kelly Reilly) who are accustomed to such a setting simply blend into their surroundings. Showing all of this in real-time serves to highlight this sense that Lizzie’s shame has been never-ending throughout the night, with no edits to offer a respite from her family’s behaviour.
The continuous take also gives a sense of immediacy to the film, in a society where women had to marry to ensure security since they were unable to inherit money, the uninterrupted shot establishes a tone that time is fleeting and it’s appropriate that such a shot is used at a ball — as Kica writes, ‘most of the girls of the eighteenth century attended balls to find husbands’ (2017: 4). While this scene was initially conceived as a montage, the dynamic, kinetic energy from the constantly mobile camera was Joe Wright’s way of converting the liveliness of Jane Austen’s prose into a visual form:
“The constant movement of the camera felt like an equivalent to the sense of energy and excitement about her [Jane Austen’s] talent that comes across to me when reading the book.” — Joe Wright (Quoted in IndieWire, 2005: para 44)
It’s fitting that the take ends with Lizzy standing in a desolate room as a isolated, solitary figure. As a free-spirited, slightly rebellious woman characterised by her individuality, Wright often separates her from others in the story. In so doing, he utilises and contrasts the indoor and outdoor environments of the picture to establish several important characteristics of both her and Darcy. Altomari argues that in Jane Austen’s fiction, the outdoors represents ‘an escape from the claustrophobic rage and suffocation of domesticity’ (1990: 51). Indeed, it’s clear that Lizzy finds solace in nature from one of the very first shots of the film, which is that of her alone, walking in the fields and then amongst the white sheets of washing surrounding her house at dawn. These early moments not only serve to instantly mark her independent spirit by having her differentiated from the rest of the family (even when indoors, Wright parts her at Netherfield Hall by placing her on a different sofa to three of her other sisters), but to also establish her reliance on nature as a form of respite and escape from the confinement of the different situations she finds herself in (she often wears earthy colours such as greens and browns too).
‘In Jane Austen’s works, location and setting are just as critical as dialogue and character to overall plot. Pride and Prejudice demonstrates the relevance of location to the personalities, compatibility and courtships.’ (Andre, 2010: 1)
Similarly, Darcy is often “enclosed” within his environments whenever placed in an interior setting within the film. For instance, the way Wright cleverly blocks his actors in the below shot instantly underscores the social values and expectations of the time period, in addition to Darcy’s conflicted and repressed desires. While on the one hand Caroline Bingley on the left represents a class of woman who Darcy should be marrying, Elizabeth on the right is who Darcy has actually fallen for, despite her status and financial inferiority. Roger Ebert described the picture as one where the character’s ‘minds are at war with their hearts’ (2006: 549) and Wright’s decision to capture the three of them all in the same frame as the two women almost drift in the back of Darcy’s mind demonstrates how torn he feels with his emotions without even needing any dialogue.
‘The first section of Joe Wright’s Pride & Prejudice establishes Elizabeth and Darcy as Romantic figures through their individual isolation in an uncongenial social world.’ (Ailwood 2007: para 16)
In addition to employing the environments to establish the confinements of the time period, Wright also uses them to indicate to us that Darcy and Elizabeth actually have more in common than they realise, certainly more than they are prepared to admit in the early stages of their relationship. Fraiman states that Lizzie’s aforementioned love of the outdoors, and the way Wright often distinguishes her from the rest of her family, marks her ‘as a kind of outsider’ (2010: para 7). Given Darcy’s lack of talent in social situations and his reluctance to participate in “normal” activities (the first dance at Meryton for example), he similarly can be classed as an outsider, particularly when considering that many people view his behaviour as proud and unpleasant.
The setting of Darcy’s first disastrous proposal is key to the idea that the two characters harbour similar personalities without realising it - occurring after Lizzy has learnt about Darcy’s sabotage of Jane and Bingley’s relationship. After hearing the distressing news she withdraws not to the sanctity of a private room but to the gardens of Rosings. It is here where she is interrupted by Darcy who has also retreated to the comfort of the outdoors, ‘suggesting that the natural world similarly provides him with escape and freedom’ (Ailwood, 2007: para 23). Despite the proposal itself being a “car crash” in Joe Wright’s words (hence the speed of the dialogue), the setting — an environment Elizabeth derives so much joy from — is a far cry from that of Mr Collins’ loveless proposal at the breakfast table… in front of a leg of ham.(Coincidently she flees to the apparent security of the pond by Longbourn after this encounter).
Changing the location of this moment to that of the book (where it occurs indoors) was one of many ways that Joe Wright sought to make his adaptation more cinematic: “Austen set her scenes in parlours and people’s front rooms. And I wanted to take it out of the parlours. It’s not interesting to set everything inside” (Wright, Quoted in Abeel, 2005: para 53). The exterior setting also heightens the emotional power of the scene as Wright is also able to employ the added effect of the stormy weather. As McKim argues, rain in films serve to ‘manifest otherwise latent desire, accelerate the pacing and intensify the sensation of a scene’ (2013: 92). The significance of Darcy’s hurtful words to Lizzy during this scene are stressed by the prominent sounds of weather in the background during their conversation. For example, a loud and noticeable thunderclap is heard just after he delivers his stinging monologue regarding the ill behaviour of Elizabeth’s other family members to her.
“I wanted a sense of the elements, of mud and rain. It occurred to me that love is an elemental force.” — Joe Wright (Quoted in Abeel, 2005: para 33)
This idea comes full circle during Darcy’s second, successful proposal at dawn where, echoing Lizzy’s own on-foot trek to Netherfield Hall, he is seen crossing a field on foot, having made the journey to her house not on horseback but by walking, something she told him she was fond of (Wright even ends this scene with a sunrise, just as he had started the picture). Once again the outdoors provides a haven for the two characters who both reveal that they were unable to sleep due to the events of the day before. Paquet-Deyris writes that ‘just as the line of sheets obstructs vision in the prologue, so is the heroine’s full perception hampered for the longest time in the film’ (2007: para 17). This hampered and negative initial perception that Lizzy holds for Darcy is gradually undone by Wright through his utilisation of setting and location — establishing that the two characters both have independent (and therefore similar) personalities with a love and reliance of nature’s refuge.
What sets Pride and Prejudice apart from the many adaptations is this emphasis on nature, which ‘becomes an unnamed but essential character to the audience’s understanding of the story… acting as a narrator by mirroring Elizabeth’s inner thoughts’ (Gilligan, 2011: 2).
“They [Elizabeth and Darcy] both belong in a landscape teeming with life and expressive weather… a reflection, ultimately, of their personal, moral and social compatibility.” (Anderson 2007: para 9)
This second proposal scene is notable for its similarity to the film’s aforementioned opening, also set amongst the morning fog of the countryside. Use of repetition in Pride and Prejudice also extends to Dario Marianelli’s beautiful score for the film, specifically with the track entitled ‘Dawn’ which is the first song that is played, heard later on when Elizabeth visits Pemberley. In this scene, Lizzy explores the grounds of Darcy’s estate, believing him to be out of town. As she surveys the luxury of the interiors, faint music can be heard in the distance; which turns out to be Darcy’s sister, who is extremely accomplished on the piano. Having Georgiana (Tamzin Merchant) play the same track that is used in the opening when Lizzy is roaming the countryside surrounding her house was Wright’s way of indicating and foreshadowing the idea that our heroine was always “at home” in Darcy’s company. Despite the opulence of Pemberley being a different world entirely to someone of her class, it will turn out to be as much of a home to her as Longbourn, where we first heard that song being played. The conversation between the two that follows after Darcy chases Lizzy outside is also notable for the way that the personalities of the two main characters are reversed almost — with the usually confident and head-strong Elizabeth now the painfully shy one, unable to make eye contact and stumbling over her words in the presence of Darcy now that her perception of him has changed for the better.
Another form of repetition in Pride and Prejudice that Wright employed was this time visual, with his perhaps unusual emphasis on hands within the picture. There are several moments where the frame lingers here, such as when Darcy helps Elizabeth into the carriage when she leaves Netherfield (i.e The Hand Flex™ as the internet has coined it) or after their embarrassing aforementioned encounter at Pemberley, where the camera follows Elizabeth down a set of stairs before a rack focus shifts the attention to Darcy’s hand. As Wright explains it: “Austen’s prose gave me many visual references for the people in the story, so I used a lot of close-ups of them, too” (2011: para 18). Indeed these moments work together to act as the perfect encapsulation of the novel’s famous opening words: It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife — since it’s a constant reminder that Darcy is seeking to win Elizabeth’s hand in marriage after falling in love with her.
Wright’s more modern take on the beloved story allowed him to take certain liberties that a more faithful adaptation wouldn’t have allowed (Wright actually decided to set the film at a slightly different time period to that of the book). An obvious example of this is with the film’s costumes, which in the case of Darcy are an ever-evolving and dynamic inclusion in the film that again allows for Wright’s version of the story to remain unique amongst those that came before. Landis writes that successful costumes in film must ‘evolve within the context of the story and the arc of the character within it’ (2012: 8) and in Pride and Prejudice, Darcy’s gradual warmth towards others as he falls for Elizabeth is expressed visually though such a costume transformation. His grouchy and uptight nature at the first when he is initially introduced to the Bennet family is emphasised by his attire, which in this scene is a rigid-looking, buttoned up outfit. This is in stark contrast to how he is dressed by the end of the picture:
“His costume had a series of stages. The first time we see him he’s at Meriton, where he has a very stiffly tailored jacket on, and he’s quite contained and rigid. By the time we get to the proposal that goes wrong in the rain, we move to a similar cut, but a much softer fabric. The nth degree is him walking through the mist in the morning, completely undressed by 18th-century standards.” — Jacqueline Durran (Quoted in The Telegraph, 2006: para 6)
Ragus writes that many commentators feel that Joe Wright’s adaptation, while ‘beautiful, is not Austen’ (2007: 350), which unfairly undermines his work by suggesting that it offers style rather than substance. On the contrary, Pride and Prejudice is a deeply rewarding watch that more than justifies its own existence as a shorter version of the story despite the “definitive” BBC series already existing 10 years earlier. His skill as a visual storyteller results in a picture that makes more use of the benefits and language of film than perhaps any other version. It’s a heart-warming adaptation teeming with love and life that absolutely stands on its own right — and all of this with his feature film debut!
‘[Joe Wright’s] Pride & Prejudice offers one of the most inspired visual representations of the dialogic nature of film adaptation… it stands out in its visual enjoyableness and stylistic originality, qualities that perfectly chime with Austen’s writing, whose main purpose was that of entertaining her readers.’ (Antinucci 2012: para 1 & 25)
References:
Abeel, E. 2005. ‘Tackling A Classic: Joe Wright on Pride and Prejudice’. Indiewire. [Online] Available here: https://www.indiewire.com/2005/11/tackling-a-classic-joe-wright-on-pride-and-prejudice-77678/
Altomari, L. 1990. ‘Jane Austen and Her Outdoors’. Jane Austen Society of North America.12. [Online] Available here: https://jasna.org/persuasions/printed/number12/altomari.htm
Anderson, K. 2007. ‘The Offending Pig: Determinism in the Focus Features Pride & Prejudice’. Jane Austen Society of North America. 27 (2). [Online] Available here: https://jasna.org/persuasions/on-line/vol27no2/anderson.htm
Andre, J. 2010. ‘From the Garret to the Garden: Courtship, Personality, and Location in Jane Austen’. Undergraduate Research Journal at UCCS. 3 (1). pp. 1–9.
Antinucci, R. 201. ‘Variations on a Theme: Openings, Closings, and Returns in Pride & Prejudice’. Jane Austen Society of North America. 33 (1). [Online] Available here: https://jasna.org/persuasions/on-line/vol33no1/antinucci.html?
Cartmell, C. 2010. Screen Adaptations: Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice: A Close Study of the Relationship Between Text and Film. London: Methuen Drama.
Ebert. R. 2006. Roger Ebert’s Movie Yearbook 2007. Missouri: Andrew McMeel Publishing.
Focus Features. 2011. ‘Pride and Prejudice: The Production’. Focus Features. [Online] Available here: https://www.focusfeatures.com/article/pride___prejudice__the_production
Fraiman, S. 2010. ‘The Liberation of Elizabeth Bennet in Joe Wright’s Pride & Prejudice’. Jane Austen Society of North America. 31 (1). [Online] Available here: http://www.jasna.org/persuasions/on-line/vol31no1/fraiman.html
Gibbs, J. & Pye, D. 2017. The Long Take: Critical Approaches. London: Macmillan Publishers.
Gilligan, K. 2011. ‘Jane Austen’s Unnamed Character: Exploring Nature in Pride and Prejudice’. Inquires Journal. 3(12). [Online] Available here: http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/articles/599/jane-austens-unnamed-character-exploring-nature-in-pride-and-prejudice-2005
Kica, E. 2017. ‘Unmarried and Married in Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice’. International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature. 5 (11) pp. 4–13.
Landis, D. 2012. FilmCraft: Costume Design. London: Ilex Press.
McKim, K. 2013. Cinema as Weather: Stylistic Screens and Atmospheric Change. New York: Routledge.
Paquet-Deyris, A. 2007. ‘Staging Intimacy and Interiority in Joe Wright’s Pride & Prejudice (2005)’. Jane Austen Society of North America. 27 (2) [Online] Available here: http://www.jasna.org/persuasions/on-line/vol27no2/paquet-deyris.htm
Perez, C. 2013. ‘Creating a Romantic Landscape: Costume Design and the Modern Romanticization of Pride and Prejudice’. College of Fine Arts, University of Florida. 14 (2) [Online] Available here: https://ufdcimages.uflib.ufl.edu/UF/00/09/15/23/00658/Perez_final.pdf
Raguz, Anđelka. 2007. ‘Till This Moment I Never Knew Myself: Adapting Pride and Prejudice’. University of Mostar. [Online] Available here: https://hrcak.srce.hr/192759
Robey, T. 2006. ‘How I Undressed Mr Darcy’. The Guardian. [Online] Available here: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/3649828/How-I-undressed-Mr-Darcy.html
Stewart-Beer, C. 2007. ‘Style over Substance? Pride & Prejudice (2005) Proves Itself a Film for Our Time’. Jane Austen Society of North America. 27 (2). [Online] Available here: http://www.jasna.org/persuasions/on-line/vol27no2/stewart-beer.htm
