It is a truth universally acknowledged that Hollywood ruins
every book they look at. The better the book, the worse the film adaptation
will be. This is particularly true for period drama in particular, because the
writers, producers, and costume designers don’t research the era enough to
understand what is proper or fashionable.
I read Pride and
Prejudice and Zombies earlier this month to prepare for the film adaptation
starring Lily James, Sam Riley, and, most importantly, Matt Smith. While I
questioned the casting of a tall, thin man to play Mr. Collins when he is
always described at short and plump, and raised an eyebrow over the numerous explosions
in the trailer that did not appear in the book, I still looked forward to the
film. But now that I have seen the film, I can say that I was genuinely
impressed that Hollywood could ruin a zombie movie.
First, let’s talk about how fantastic the book was. Seth
Grahame-Smith took a classic – potentially the most well-known piece of British
literature outside of Shakespeare – and created another classic. Zombies are a
fad right now. From movies, TV shows, and games to people who too seriously prepare for the zombie apocalypse, zombies are everywhere. Grahame-Smith created a pretty valid explanation to the
creation of zombies, added a bit of humor, and turned Elizabeth Bennet into a
bad-ass warrior. In fact, he created his own universe where Regency era prejudices
still existed, but expanded it to include Oriental
training and different priorities, such as staying alive.
Pride and Prejudice
and Zombies changed very little about the story which Jane Austen penned
two hundred years ago. Instead he changed the universe in which the Bennet
sisters lived. None of the events actually changed. Lizzy meets Darcy at the
ball, Jane is heartbroken when Bingley closes up Netherfield and returns to
London, Darcy proposes in Kent and Lizzy rejects him, they meet again in
Derbyshire and Lizzy’s opinion of him begins to change, and Lydia elopes with
Wickham and Darcy rectifies the situation. Now insert zombies to this mix.
Lizzy meets Darcy and then the sisters slaughter the zombies that attacks the
ball. Bingley returns to London to attend a conference on how to combat “unmentionables”
(zombies) at the encouragement of Darcy when he believes that Jane has been
infected. Charlotte Lucas accepts Mr. Collins because she has been infected and
she wants to live the rest of her life comfortably. Mr. Darcy proposes and
Lizzy rejects him by roundhouse kicking him into the fireplace mantle. Darcy
tells Lizzy of Wickham’s ruthlessness, but Lizzy withholds the truth from her
sisters. Lizzy meets Darcy again in Derbyshire and Darcy saves Lizzy when
zombies attack their party while walking at Pemberley. Lydia elopes with
Wickham, and Darcy forces Wickham to marry Lydia by beating him until he is a
cripple and the Wickham’s leave for Ireland. Lady Catherine approaches Lizzy
and they fight each other, but Lizzy spares Lady Catherine’s life.
What makes this tale even more enjoyable is the splendid
integration of Oriental fighting style and culture with Regency England. Darcy
and Lady Catherine look down on the Bennet family because they received their
training in China, where Japan was the fashionable
place to train. Lizzy constantly remembers her training, and that training
guides many of her actions. When Darcy informs her of Wickham’s character,
Lizzy punishes herself for being so blind to his true character. And, most
interestingly, Pemberley is styled in a Japanese style. At first, I questioned
the addition of ninjas and throwing stars, but after finishing the novel, I
realized that the Oriental influences introduced a unique and appropriate perspective
that no western culture could have added.
The story is the same, but with zombies and Oriental
architecture. And frankly, it’s brilliant. Elizabeth is just as clever as she
was, but now her sword is just as deadly as her words. Lady Catherine is
protected by a contingent of ninjas, and Lizzy disembowels them. Darcy insults
her, so she fights him. Lizzy has to make difficult choices, like killing her
friends, because they are undead. And those decisions makes her into the strong
woman that countless people have admired for centuries. All of Austen’s
characters are just as Austen intended them, and they come to an end which they
deserve, just like Austen sought to do. Jane is shy and Bingley is awkward.
Lydia is wild and Mr. Wickham is wicked. Mr. Collins is clumsy and Lady
Catherine is condescending. Mrs. Bennet is ridiculous and Mr. Bennet is aloof.
Mr. Darcy is proud and Lizzy is prejudiced. Seth Grahame-Smith put swords and
muskets in their hands, a different impetus for their actions, and tons of
zombies to be annihilated.
Jane Austen and Seth Grahame-Smith put a great deal of
thought into these two novels, as I hope I made clear. Austen understood the
world in which she lived, and Grahame-Smith understood Austen. Unfortunately,
Hollywood did not understand Austen, Grahame-Smith, or the Regency Era. At all.
They took a good book and decided that it wasn’t exciting enough. They had to
Hollywood-ize it. Make it more glamorous and sexy, when really it’s not a
glamorous or sexy novel. It’s a novel about ordinary people protecting
themselves and falling in love because two people were equals; Hollywood put
the zombie war on steroids and treated romance as a side-story. While it’s
going to be extremely difficult to limit myself to just eight things that
easily could have made this film adaptation better, here’s where the film
failed.
Lizzy would not have done that. Ok, if you’re
going to make a film adaptation, you first have to understand the characters, particularly
the main character. Lizzy Bennet is a strong, witty woman who can take care of
herself. But she also understands propriety. She never would have compromised her values for anything, even a
zombie. Meeting Wickham alone in a creepy garden in the middle of the night
would have mortified her propriety. Traveling unescorted also would have
mortified her. Hollywood thought that they were covering their bases when
Charlotte Lucas asked Lizzy to accompany her to Rosings Park with her, but
really, either a male family member or a married woman needed to escort both of them. Lizzy certainly could have
protected her friend, but their traveling alone would have reconfirmed their
inferior birth and morals to Lady Catherine. Lizzy and Jane’s values is what
sets them apart from their younger sisters. Hollywood places Lizzy on the same
level as Lydia when Lizzy rides off alone with Mr. Wickham to St. Lazarus. The
reason why females were considered “damaged goods” after an elopement is that
their purity could have been tainted, hence no respectable man would want them
anymore. Lizzy would have been suspected of the same taint by accompanying
Wickham. Lizzy is no longer morally superior to her sisters, and therefore does
not deserve Darcy’s good opinion.
You had ONE JOB. If
you ask any Austen fan what their favorite scene in the book/film is, they will
probably say the scene where Lizzy and Darcy dance at Netherfield. There’s just
so much sexual tension that you can feel, but they continue to gently insult
each other. Or they will say when Lizzy and Darcy meet at Pemberley, because Lizzy’s
heart is softened to Darcy and Darcy is actually nice. Or when Lizzy discovers how generous Darcy truly is, which
leads her to discover that she loves him too but she fears that she will never
find true happiness because surely he will not renew his proposal again. But he
does and everyone lives happily ever after. These are the things that pretty
much anyone who has read Pride and Prejudice
will say. But Hollywood said “Oh you like those parts? Let’s not put them
in the movie then.” Well, obviously Lizzy and Darcy had to get together at the
end, but it wasn’t half as romantic as it could have been. The Netherfield
dance is iconic. Lizzy is disappointed because Wickham is not there, and she
has to dance with Darcy! What a disappointment! But in the film, Wickham shows
up then disappears later, and Darcy asks Lizzy to dance but they never actually
show the dance. For an industry that tries to sex-up everything, they eliminate
the sexiest scene of the book! The second major elimination, the Gardiner’s
trip to Derbyshire, segues into my next point…
People change, but no
need to show that. In the book, Darcy’s letter shows Lizzy where she had
misjudged him. But even though her heart softened toward him, Darcy changed
too. When they met at Pemberley, they could see that the other had changed.
Without the mutual changes that occurred, they never would have seen each other
in a way that allowed them to fall in love. By removing part of that
progression, Hollywood made the romance less believable. In the film, Elizabeth
smacks Darcy around after the proposal, and the next time they meet suddenly
all of their differences are gone even though they have no idea that the other
has changed. If Darcy did not realize that he was being irrational, Lizzy’s
change of heart would not have mattered, and if Lizzy did not realize that she
was being blind, Darcy’s change of heart would have been insignificant.
Instead, Lizzy looks fickle, as if the letter alone made her fall in love with
him, and Darcy seems as if he’s the same person he always was. By leaving out
half of the romance, they made the love story unrealistic. They needed the time
at Pemberley, or time in general other than half a conversation about Lydia
eloping, to get to know each other without their previous prejudices in order
to fall in love.
Good overcomes evil…
and not because of a woman. When Darcy finally discovers what Wickham is
really up to, they begin to fight and Wickham seems to be getting the upper
hand until Lizzy rides in on her white steed and chops Wickham’s arm off. Since
when does Darcy need a woman to save him? And to be fair, since when would
Lizzy need Darcy to save her? Darcy and Lizzy are both warriors, the best of
the best. But Darcy cannot overcome Wickham? This battle is the epitome of good
vs. evil in this film. Darcy is self-sacrificing and Wickham is conniving.
Darcy wants to save the human race and Wickham wants to destroy it. While Darcy
still saves Lydia, his inability to defeat Wickham implies that he is unworthy
of Lizzy. Now they are no longer equals who can defeat any foe who comes their
way, but instead the inappropriately feminist portrayal of Lizzy as the savior
places Darcy beneath her. The entire reason why Darcy is able to put aside his
reservations about Lizzy is because they are equals. And when Lizzy rides in and saves the day, she says that
Darcy is not worthy of her. Darcy has to defeat Wickham, or Wickham still wins.
But wait, who is the
real bad guy here? There are two antagonists in the story: Wickham and Lady
Catherine. Wickham is Darcy’s nemesis because he fails to put him in his place
years before when Wickham seduces Georgiana. Darcy places his father’s wishes
for Wickham’s future above his own desires to smite Wickham. Lady Catherine is
Elizabeth’s nemesis because she dishonors and insults the Bennet family, which
Lizzy cannot allow. Elizabeth has to defend her honor, hence demonstrating that
she is indeed worthy of Mr. Darcy. Now in the film, Lizzy fights Lady Catherine’s
body guard before fighting Lady Catherine herself, and prevails over both her
foes. Then seconds later, after Lizzy has proven herself Lady Catherine’s
superior, Lady Catherine agrees to take the younger Bennet sisters and Mrs.
Bennet to Rosings? The only reason why Lady Catherine would do that is because
she feels something for Lizzy, such as respect, when in fact she hates Lizzy
because she is a threat. Why on earth did the Bennets need to go to Rosings
anyway? They are some of the best-trained warriors in all of England and they
run to safety instead of defending their home? Even selfish, immature Lydia had
more honor than that. Lady Catherine becomes the good guy, and Wickham becomes the
main antagonist. Wickham wants revenge on Darcy, but a plot twist from way out
in left field reveals Wickham as the leader of the zombies! Since when does
Wickham want more than money from Darcy? He is certainly a fortune-seeking
womanizer, but a traitor who wants the human race to die? Unlikely. Wickham
never sought power, he sought revenge and money; being the bringer of the apocalypse
really isn’t his style.
Enough with the
explosions already. Hollywood has
to make everything more exciting. Because Darcy making Wickham a cripple and
Lizzy kicking the snot out of Lady Catherine wasn’t good enough, they had to
add an entire subplot that didn’t exist in the book. Darcy was the commander of
the battle for London, in which the zombies continued to overtake the military
until their only option was the blow up the final bridge to London and trap all
the zombies inside. Apparently all the real military officers were turned into
zombies and they had to turn to a civilian for leadership. Lizzy and Darcy make
it back across the bridge just in time, leaving the audience sitting on the
edge of their seat. This entire subplot was added simply to make it more
appealing, because explosions are the only way to make an uninterested viewer
more interested. I would have preferred to see Lady Catherine and Lizzy
throwing punches and swinging samurai swords over a bridge blowing up.
Guys, this is really
confusing. The biggest issue that I had with this movie is that the writing
was crap. Half the dialogue made sense, and the other half was pointless. For
example, when the Bennet sisters and Mr. Collins are walking to Meryton to see
their Aunt Phillips, Lizzy stops to talk to Wickham and he tells her all about
why Mr. Darcy cannot be trusted. Apart from the fact that Lizzy was WAY too
familiar with a man that she’d met, literally, seconds before, Aunt Phillips
calls out for Lizzy to hurry so that they can discuss their trip to the Lake
District. Ignoring the fact that Mrs. Bennet’s brother, not sister, invited
Lizzy to travel with them, the entire trip to the Lake District was removed
from the film. Why was this even mentioned when it wasn’t happening in the film
to begin with? Another prime example was when Darcy took extreme curiosity in
Jane’s illness, suspecting that she was infected instead of having a simple
cold. When Darcy is explaining to Lizzy why he separated Jane and Bingley, he
fails to bring this up as a reason for his actions. This is Darcy’s main
impetus in the book, and frankly it’s a much better explanation than he gives
in the film. The movie script read like they were trying to keep certain things
from the book, while completely ignoring something that directly related, and
it made the plot infinitely more complicated. Oh, and another point: they never actually mentioned Mary and Kitty's names. They were just these two awkward sisters who were in half the movie but got completely ignored. Kinda rude, if you ask me.
Do you even know what
the Regency Era was? Time for my obligatory that’s-not-historically-accurate
section. Even though it’s a zombie movie, there are still certain things that
easily could have been addressed. First, Lily James may look fantastic in dark
blue, but unmarried ladies never wore dark colors. Light colors, particularly
white, was a symbol of purity. Likewise, married women rarely wore white.
Sorry, Mrs. Bennet. Second, aristocratic men wore primarily white cravats.
While military men wore black cravats, Darcy was not a military man, even
though they tried to make him into one. And if they really wanted to make him
into an Army Colonel, he should have been in uniform on the battlefield. Third,
unmarried ladies rarely rode astride. None of the women were shown riding side
saddle. And they certainly never would have ridden double ESPECIALLY with a
man. I could keep going, but I will refrain.
I am very particular when it comes to period drama, perhaps
even too picky. The casting was fantastic and the sets were lovely, but this
film could have been a great deal better if they could decide exactly what they
wanted to do in the story and stick with it. Unfortunately the writers failed
to make the story flow well, and I walked away doubting how Darcy and Lizzy had
enough time to really fall in love each other. And even if you change part of
the story to make it shorter, costumes and hairstyles do not depend on good
writing, for goodness sake.
Pride and Prejudice
and Zombies was a fantastic book. It was clever and well-written and
amusing. The film was “entertaining”, as my husband called it, and if I hadn't read the book I probably would have rather enjoyed the movie. But don’t expect
Hollywood to make a good period drama that follows a book, even when it’s a zombie movie. I’ll
await the BBC’s adaptation if I want a period drama I can truly enjoy.