Has anyone else noticed that this is the Simpson's version of Heavenly Creatures? I saw Heavenly Creatures in 1994 when it came out in limited release at my college, and it has remained a favorite film of mine. After directing this and Dead Alive, I was surprised to see that Peter Jackson would be the director for the Lord of the Rings films many years later. Lisa is Melanie Lynskey's character Pauline, Juliet is Kate Winslet's character (also named Juliet in the film). The girls are obsessed with Josh Groban, which mirrors the girls' in Heavenly Creatures' obsession with operatic singer Mario Lanza. Lisa and Juliet made up an alternate world called Equalia, counterpart to one called Borovnia in Heavenly Creatures. The Simpsons have made a million references to pop culture, both high and lowbrow, but this one was completely unexpected! I rather liked it, but I can see how someone who hasn't seen Heavenly Creatures would find this episode incredibly weird.
Reviews
2 Reviews
Pride & Prejudice
(2005)
austen society, please consider....
1 December 2005
Warning: Spoilers
i remember reading pride and prejudice in high school and finding it rather dry. i understood that rules of propriety during austen's time put restrictions on any overt gestures of passion, but my appreciation of this did not do much to assuage my feelings of disappointment that i was not moved as others by what had been described to me as one of the most romantic love story in all of English literature.
a friend recommend that i go see this new version of p&p, and much to my surprise, i loved every minute of it! my friend was absolutely correct when she described it as the most colorful, passionate, true to real life version of pride and prejudice ever made. the risks the director took with presenting characters with flaws, quirks and idiosyncrasies ultimately are what finally made me really understand, connect, and come to love these characters. i believe this heartfelt and touching film will bring this beautiful story to a whole new generation of people who might not have ever come to appreciate jane austen.
traditionalists who see the 2005 version as an aberration or bastardization of what is nearly a sacred text in the English canon should understand that this film is just that--a VERSION, a single interpretation. and what of it if this film includes a (very sweet and by today's standards, innocent) kiss at the end? compared to the very explicit films which are commonplace today, i found this work to be tender, refreshing, charming, touching, and very subtle. i believe the mark of a true classic is it's ability to endure--through generations of change in societal customs.
for example, the work of Shakespeare is continually adapted, some productions being very traditional, some extremely avant-garde. the avant-garde productions i have seen do much to show that the true nature of humanity prevails without regard to time period, place, or tradition. the lens through which we examine ourselves may change, but we as the subject remain the same. the rules of propriety during austen's time were the lens through which she examined everything--it perplexes me that there are those more concerned with the lens than the subject.
pride and prejudice, while a novel of manners, was ultimately a testament to the power of true love--and whether we be traditionalists or modernists, is the desire for this kind of love not a measure of our common passion? darcy and elizabeth overcome constraints and challenges to find their love for each other--why celebrate this and then cling to the rules and restrictions that kept our hero and heroine apart for so long?
long live mr. and MRS. darcy!
a friend recommend that i go see this new version of p&p, and much to my surprise, i loved every minute of it! my friend was absolutely correct when she described it as the most colorful, passionate, true to real life version of pride and prejudice ever made. the risks the director took with presenting characters with flaws, quirks and idiosyncrasies ultimately are what finally made me really understand, connect, and come to love these characters. i believe this heartfelt and touching film will bring this beautiful story to a whole new generation of people who might not have ever come to appreciate jane austen.
traditionalists who see the 2005 version as an aberration or bastardization of what is nearly a sacred text in the English canon should understand that this film is just that--a VERSION, a single interpretation. and what of it if this film includes a (very sweet and by today's standards, innocent) kiss at the end? compared to the very explicit films which are commonplace today, i found this work to be tender, refreshing, charming, touching, and very subtle. i believe the mark of a true classic is it's ability to endure--through generations of change in societal customs.
for example, the work of Shakespeare is continually adapted, some productions being very traditional, some extremely avant-garde. the avant-garde productions i have seen do much to show that the true nature of humanity prevails without regard to time period, place, or tradition. the lens through which we examine ourselves may change, but we as the subject remain the same. the rules of propriety during austen's time were the lens through which she examined everything--it perplexes me that there are those more concerned with the lens than the subject.
pride and prejudice, while a novel of manners, was ultimately a testament to the power of true love--and whether we be traditionalists or modernists, is the desire for this kind of love not a measure of our common passion? darcy and elizabeth overcome constraints and challenges to find their love for each other--why celebrate this and then cling to the rules and restrictions that kept our hero and heroine apart for so long?
long live mr. and MRS. darcy!
Tell Your Friends