It occurs to me that last year's film of King Kong had more than a few similarities to Jane Austen's undying (undead?) Pride & Prejudice. I have to confess at this point, I've born a certain enmity towards Pride & Prejudice - or 'pap' as I've been known to call it.
This is not really the fault of the book, or even of Ms. Austen herself - it's more to do with an unfortunate experience of sitting an English exam only to discover that after two years spent studying Pride & Prejudice it wasn't actually on the course after all. So strictly speaking that's the fault of my English teacher.
Nonetheless, I feel that there's no point in being bad-tempered about something if you go and compound it with rationality, so a little part of me has long harboured a certain low-level acidity toward Austen's charming tale of an arrogant young woman with a chronic delusion that she is a good judge of character, and the way in which she falls in love with the dashing Pemberley. Oh, did I say Pemberley, I meant Darcy of course. I'm sure the fact that Lizzy starts to dig Darcy after seeing his enormous edifice is pure coincidence.
To be fair, I am, in general, on good terms with the story these days, but I don't regard this as a reason not to find fault with it. I'm all too happy to contemplate how famous stories can be improved, believe me. And, these days, I cannot help but feel that there is nothing really wrong with Pride & Prejudice that could not be improved by having Darcy engage in hand-to-hand combat with a crocodile or two in the wilds of Surrey.
I developed this theory basically while watching Peter Jackson's King Kong. Now I know, people find fault with that film all the time, and perhaps rightly so. Its first hour is grieviously in need of editing, I recognise this. But I honestly don't understand how anybody can hold this against the monster extravaganza that is the middle of the film - what about that lovely moment when Kong lets the Vastatosaurus bite him instead of Anne, and we get a close up of his stoical face contort as he tries to hold back the pain? There you have it - "Love Is… Letting A Dinosaur Savage You Rather Than Your Girlfriend". And are people really unmoved by the final hour..? I know a grown man who cried at the end. To be honest, he's not the slimmest or non-hairiest of people, so maybe it was just that King Kong reminded him of his mum. I don't know.
Personally however, I found that Kong was more than a little reminiscent of Colin Firth as Mr. Darcy. It's something to do with the furrowed brow, the stern silence, and occasional derisive snort. And really, when you contemplate the plots of these two stories, can anybody really tell the difference? Girl Meets Big Brooding Furrow-Browed Alpha Male. Alpha Male is monosyllabic and antisocial for a bit before she gets to see his pad, whereafter he suddenly demonstrates a total and sincere selflessness in defending said young lady from every threat, leading her to reconsider her judgement of him.
If you remain unconvinced, I'd suggest that the Wickham figure in King Kong would be one of the Tyrannosaurs - hold onto that thought, and then remind yourself of what happens in Bridget Jones' Diary between Darcy and the Wickham-figure, the lizardy Hugh Grant. Now really, I'd love to see a Director's Cut of Bridget Jones where Mark Darcy finishes the fight with Daniel Cleaver by breaking his jaw...
With this in mind, the possible improvements to both stories that suggest themselves are many. I'd really, really like to see a sequence in Pride & Prejudice where Mr. Darcy rampages through London in search of Lizzy, for example. He could end it by dragging Keira Knightley up Nelson's column and flailing angrily at the pigeons.
(Okay, any pedants wishing to point out that the Battle of Trafalgar took place in 1805, thus making it impossible for Darcy to climb Nelson's column, don't even think about it - I don't care.)
Actually, if anybody out there feels like trying this, I'll sponsor them, provided they leave Keira Knightley up there. "I am a binety hunter" indeed.
Rather unfair on poor ol' Firth, I think. But would your theory still hold for Matthew "the one who went nuts in Spooks" McFadyen's Pride and Prej? I think a sequel is in order.
Posted by: Tara of Doom | 03 November 2006 at 00:53