‘It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife.’

As every high school student of the book – be they bewitched, bewildered or even bored by Jane Austen’s masterpiece – can tell you, the sentence is dripping in warm, aromatic irony.  Here is a sample of the homages and parodies that have been produced in its honor. We’re hoping to  build a nice collection so please add more via your comments below. Movies, TV shows and published sources only, please! We will have a reader competition with our own variations later.

This little gem comes from Bridget Jones Diary (2001):

It is a truth universally acknowledged that when one part of your life starts going okay, another falls spectacularly to pieces.

The TV series Lost in Austen (2008) started with the slightly hammy but nevertheless accurate:

It is a truth universally acknowledged that we are all longing to escape.

Bride and Prejudice (2004), reviewed in this post, did without the graceful language and gave it to us straight with:

All mothers think that any single guy with big bucks must be shopping for a wife.

Pride and Prejudice; A Latter-Comedy (2003) goes for a parody which is both more long-winded and more vague (preferring to transfer the irony to its use of the word ‘comedy’ in the movie’s title.) It opted for:

It is a truth universally acknowledged that a girl of a certain age, and in a certain situation in life, must be in want of a husband.

The 2009 novel Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, which is reviewed here, starts with a little more bite, offering us the following pearl of wisdom:

It is a truth universally acknowledged that a zombie in possession of brains must be in want of more brains.

Finally, Belinda Roberts begins her 2009 novel Prawn and Prejudice with the enticing:

It is a truth, universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a yacht must be in want of a female crew.

Which, dear Reader, is the most deserving of your good opinion? Which is the most insufferable? Please also let us know about any others you come across. Of course, you can never beat the original – unless of course the original is Star Trek – but there are sure to be a few more worthy of a mention.

Yours in anticipation

Lizzy

In explanations of infinity, it’s often said that 100 monkeys randomly clacking away on typewriters would eventually produce the works of Shakespeare. I somehow doubt, however, that they’d need infinity to produce the script for Pride and Prejudice; A Latter Day Comedy. This movie lifts 100% of the title, 60% of the storyline and about 4% of the charm from Jane Austen’s novel. It also strips down its themes to cover in detail only the dangers of making hasty first impressions. The film starts slowly but does pick up and there are some funny moments, yet it contains nothing to elevate it above the DVD bargain bins in which it currently resides.

Set in modern-day Utah (hence the “Latter Day” tagline), this movie follows Elizabeth Bennet, a hardworking student and aspiring novelist. Her romance with Fitzwilliam Darcy, a British publishing executive, provides the backbone to the story, and there is a large role for the dastardly Jack Wickham. Jane is Elizabeth’s best friend and Bingley (a kind of young Chris o’ Donnell in a plastic wig, worn backwards) is an entrepreneur specializing in music for dogs. There is no Mr. or Mrs. Bennet and no Lady Catherine, and some other characters have been amalgamated. Collins does make an appearance and does have most of the best comic moments.

Darcy, played well by Orlando Seale, affronts Elizabeth while the latter is working in a bookstore. Their relationship further sours when he criticizes a book she had submitted to his publishing firm. She begins to warm to Darcy when Elizabeth essentially breaks into his log cabin to escape from a storm. Darcy invites her in to dry off and here she meets Darcy’s younger sister. This could have been a nice scene, but Georgiana’s habit of stringing random vowels together in a kind of low-pitch whale-speak makes it frequently impossible to understand her. (I appreciate that this sounds rather singular, but you’ll have to watch it to understand what I mean.)

In general, the lead actors aren’t bad but they occasionally look embarrassed by the material. Perhaps it’s the effect of standing in neon and pastel sets that look like they’ve been recycled from Clueless. For the men, perhaps their embarrassment stems from the fact that they look like they’re attending a “First Season of Friends” – themed fancy dress party. It might look delightful to pre-teens, who are probably this movie’s target audience, and also perhaps to moths, but for most adult humans – including it seems the actors in this movie – it’s all a little too much.

Passages from the book are intermittently flashed on the screen, deprived of their context and purpose, and the relevance of some quotations rather tenuous. Since most of the enjoyable parts of the movie (e.g. Collins’ angry speech in church) are original additions it might have made more sense to just “borrow” a few plot details, change the title and give up on this being an adaptation. Nevertheless, it might encourage a few younger viewers to pick up Jane Austen’s novel, which can only be a good thing.

To conclude this review, Pride and Prejudice; A Latter Day Comedy isn’t really Pride and Prejudice, isn’t much of a comedy and, given its mid-90s styling doesn’t appear particularly “latter day” either. It veers from being good, to being so bad it’s good, to being so bad that it’s actually bad again. If you can find it cheaply and need another DVD case to level out your table legs then by all means, give it a try. Otherwise, there is not much here for Austen fans, I’m afraid. Anyone looking for a fresh update of Pride and Prejudice would do better to read our DVD review of Bride and Prejudice, and consider that instead.

Yours

Fitzwilliam Darcy