Jane Austen geeks, to arms!
This is why the blogosphere is so powerful. We can’t know it all, each of us, which is why we need information from others.
Lady T (a.k.a. living read girl) brought this to our attention recently, and it’s important enough–in these days of bloodless military coups and the falling price of gasoline and weird pieces breaking off the space shuttle mid-flight–that I wanted to highlight it for those of you who missed it.
Someone is doing a biopic about Jane Austen. Anne Hathaway stars as Jane. Fine. Love Anne, even though I disagree with her showing her boobies in Brokeback Mountain. (Anne, you don’t have to do that. You’re too good for that. Call me.) But whatever.
The problem, as Lady T pointed out, is that apparently Jane’s fascinating life as a single woman during a time of rampant marriage–not to mention a single successful writer chick at a time when men were so completely dominating the field–just isn’t fascinating enough for the filmmakers. They had to make up a suitor and give him a stupid name like “Lord Wisely.” Oh, buh-rother.
But of course I will go see the movie. How can I not? I’ve stood in Jane’s father’s old church. I’ve touched Jane’s writing desk. I’ve stopped by the gift shop in her house and debated with the attendant whether Colin Firth or Clint Eastwood is hotter. Jane and I are very, very close.
And just on a little fantasy side note: you know how Colin Firth, who played Mr. Darcy in the definitive version of Pride and Prejudice, also played Mark Darcy in Bridget Jones’ Diary, the story Helen Fielding based on P & P? Well, what do you think of Colin showing up as Lord Wisely in this biopic? Probably too late to change the casting, but wouldn’t that have been cool?
Instead they had to cast Clint Eastwood. Drat.
Technorati Tags: Jane Austen, Anne Hathaway, Brokeback Mountain, Pride and Prejudice, Bridget Jones’ Diary, Helen Fielding, Colin Firth, Clint Eastwood
September 20th, 2006 at 7:17 am
Somehow I don’t think there should be boobies and gay men in the same film.
Really, Robin. Now that you are a world traveller you need to adopt a more european attitude toward boobies. They need air from time to time. They need to be free to wander and explore.
Think about it this way, wouldn’t it have been a major let down if Lord Darcy had a bikini top under his wet white shirt thing?
September 20th, 2006 at 7:40 am
Patrick, I always appreciate the intellectualism you bring to every discussion.
September 20th, 2006 at 8:08 am
Jane Austen’s house is wonderful-I loved seeing a lock of her hair that was on display with the amber cross her brother gave her and looking at her writing table gave me chills(in a good way!). When my group went on their tour,our guide let us have a look at some of the music books that Jane had(she copied songs into that were popular for piano playing at the time-kind of a print version of Napster).
I might wind up seeing the movie,even tho my teeth will be gnashing and the urge to yell at the screen”That didn’t happen!” will be strong.
September 20th, 2006 at 8:10 am
Hmmm.. I’m guessing you didn’t see Havoc. Not only did Anne show boobies, but Busy Phillips had a menage…
September 20th, 2006 at 8:14 am
Sigh. Anne, Anne, Anne. Thanks for telling me, Lara. I’m calling her agent right now and talking some sense into him or her. Anne will always be the innocent girl from The Princess Diaries. We don’t want to see her bare chest any more than we wanted to see Julie Andrews’ in (I think it was) Victor, Victoria. Same problem with Meg Ryan deciding to go topless in whatever that movie was a few years ago. No, Meg. People don’t want to see that. Go back to sweet, innocent roles. There’s enough bare chestedness in the world without you needing to throw yours in.
September 20th, 2006 at 8:40 am
I’ve seen Robin Williams, Kevin Bacon and Harvey Keitel naked in movies. No one NEEDS to see that, but it is what it is - an offense to my puritanical spirit.
I need to go tell some people to stop dancing. brb.
September 20th, 2006 at 8:42 am
Emma Thompson, who I think we all can agree is an enormous Jane Austen fan, advocates nudity in film. I remember reading an article about kate Winslet where she was debating going nude in (can’t remember if it was Titanic or soemthing else?) anyway said she was all adrift about it and spoke to Emma, who said something along the lines of, ‘Oh, do it, darling. it’s a scream. you’ll love it!’ and she did, and loved it, and was all into going naked in film for a while.
Perhaps Julie, Anne’s mentor, suggested a similar thing. For the record, I had no problem with it.
Besides, everyone was naked in Brokeback. Michelle was naked, too (though that wasn’t a first for her. She’d also done it, to stunning effect, in If These Walls Could Talk 2.)
September 20th, 2006 at 9:03 am
Diana, I admit to a full-on prudish streak. I still wear a swimsuit in the shower. But that’s just me.
And Patrick, I didn’t mind seeing Harvey’s or Kevin’s bare behinds, but I DO NOT want to see any part of R. Williams without clothing. Can’t take that much back hair.
September 20th, 2006 at 9:27 am
I’m not talking about behinds…. I’m talking about afronts.
September 20th, 2006 at 8:46 pm
i say BRING ON THE FRONTS!!! there are A LOT of movies i’m renting this weekend–thanks blog.
September 21st, 2006 at 9:22 am
Annette - Does this mean that you are going to watch the Fisher King this weekend?
It’s a big step from DBA to RWA.
Careful now, keep all sharp objects away so as not to reflexivly(I’m pretty sure I just made up a new word) stab your own eyes out.
September 21st, 2006 at 3:58 pm
As usual, I’m sure I will regret asking, but I think I get “RWA”–does it start with Robin Williams? But what is DBA?
I reserve the right to delete this question and the answer if once again I am too naive to be allowed my own blog.
September 21st, 2006 at 5:29 pm
David Bowie’s Area
September 21st, 2006 at 6:03 pm
Oh. Right. Your memory for Annette’s weird obsessions is better than mine. Carry on.
September 21st, 2006 at 7:31 pm
p., it may be a big step but i believe i’m up to the challenge of exploring a “new” area–i just wish “it” had spawned a really good website like db’s. and robin, your knowledge of history is sorely lacking–dba was not and is not MY obsession, and even if it were, it is not weird. you may recall i was recommended to a certain movie, “labyrinth”, and specifically directed to note db’s a. which i in fact did. because i am a true student of pop culture i did my own independent research thus bringing to light (and to my fellow bloggie’s delight) DBA–the “area’s” official website–truly fine social science and satire.
September 22nd, 2006 at 1:16 am
Actually, you were specifically directed to note his ‘balls’ and if you saw the movie when you were 15-16 you would have thought the contact juggling of the crystal balls was super cool and spent weeks or at least minutes trying to juggle with a tennis ball that you had just taken from the slobbering mouth of a black lab.
And the double meaning was that his spandex were really disturbing.
September 22nd, 2006 at 12:14 pm
To get back to the SUBJECT–
“apparently Jane’s fascinating life as a single woman during a time of rampant marriage–not to mention a single successful writer chick at a time when men were so completely dominating the field–just isn’t fascinating enough for the filmmakers. They had to make up a suitor and give him a stupid name like “Lord Wisely.” Oh, buh-rother.”
It could have been worse. After all, gay is in. They could have made up another reason for a strong, single woman to be unattached . . .
*runs for the hills*
September 22nd, 2006 at 12:19 pm
Oh, buhrother. Hadn’t even thought of that.
September 23rd, 2006 at 11:53 am
omg–bj, i had no idea that jane austin was lesbian–hmmm, a lot of things are starting to make sense…