?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Super Bowl 7 Jane Austen 0

Boring!  I sneaked off from the super bowl party at my house (again) to watch  a biography of Jane Austen on PBS yet.  Arg...awful, dull and just plain stupid.  Despite the whooping and hollowing down stairs,with the football saga, that show managed to put me to sleep.  Lets face,it. Austen's real life was nothing to base a film on..  Too unattractive and too inteligent to marry, she sat around, wrote books,, got sick and died. I mean, what else was an educated upper class women to do?  This was a fictionalized biography.    They knew her real life was too much of a dud to film, so they spiced it up, inventing potential Mr Darcys that did not pan out.  As much as I love Austen books and hate football, the super bowl won in this case as far as a plot goes.

Comments

( 8 comments — Leave a comment )
rosathome
Feb. 4th, 2008 04:00 am (UTC)
Should have watched Sense and Sensibility like I did. ;)
girlspell
Feb. 4th, 2008 04:15 am (UTC)
I agree. Poor Jane, her books really out did her real life. Even though, my one complaint with Austen is she really did write the same book over and over.
rosathome
Feb. 4th, 2008 04:20 am (UTC)
my one complaint with Austen is she really did write the same book over and over

I think that's a bit harsh. Though I adored this summary of the complete works of Jane Austen:

Female Lead

I secretly love Male Lead. He must never know.

Male Lead

I secretly love Female Lead. She must never know.

(They find out.)

The plots are certainly similar (though not identical), but the characters are unique and they are what make her books so endlessly readable.
girlspell
Feb. 4th, 2008 04:36 am (UTC)
Yes, I agree it was a little harsh. Her characters do redeem a plot that (you must admit, the city of Bath aside) is very similar. Her heriones from large, happy, yet-on-the-vergeof-the losing the mansion gets the guy and him money through love.

Hard to belive, but Jane lived through a very wild and violent period of history. Her cousin was guillotined in France, yet she wrote nothing of this. All she wrote was about was being rich and keeping from the poor house to save face in a society she so cleverly mocked.
kanedax
Feb. 4th, 2008 05:01 am (UTC)
You missed a hell of a game, though.
girlspell
Feb. 4th, 2008 12:04 pm (UTC)
I gave up on Jane in time to see Manning, the younger thow a tuchdown pass. (I ignored the smirk from my husband.) So all was not lost. Besides, not too many super bowls in which the the quarterbacks of both teams were kind of hot looking...:)
(Deleted comment)
girlspell
Feb. 4th, 2008 07:28 pm (UTC)
Ugh...it was such a contrived story. It was made by the same folks who are doing the umteenth redo of Jane Austen books. Some were pretty good (Northanger Abbey), some pretty bad (Persuasion) I understand after this, another try at Pride & Prejudice or Sense & Sensibility. The critics knocked Mansfield Park. I hated that book, but I thought the production was pretty good. They are doing this every Sunday night at PBS.

I love Jane, but really...look at the icon and you see the entire set of books done over and over
(Deleted comment)
girlspell
Feb. 4th, 2008 07:56 pm (UTC)
This craze for Jane was ignited (I think) by the P & P production with Colin Firth as Darcy back in 1996. If you were female, you just drooled. You didn't have to read the book,(or read period) when you could just look at him. The movie Clueless (based on Emma) heped too.

I think more people have heard her name now then ever in the hundreds of years since her books came out. The fact that they are being filmed over and over shows you the craze has not died out. So any craze that makes people read is fine by me. So JKR (yet another Austen fanatic) has nothing on Jane.
( 8 comments — Leave a comment )