Mr. Darcy, the hero of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice, has needed a good kick to the head for the past 203 years for his jerk-ish behavior.
And in “Pride and Prejudice and Zombies,” the heroine Elizabeth Bennet finally gives him one. This blow to the head, along with the rest of the movie, solidifies this version of Jane Austen’s 200-year-old novel as campy, ridiculous fun.
Based on Seth Grahame-Smith’s 2009 novel Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, the film throws viewers into a world where social propriety and dances held in glittering halls coexist with bloody zombie massacres and sword fighting. While Grahame-Smith’s book is more or less the plot of Jane Austen’s original work with ninjas and the apocalypse, this cinematic retelling takes a more liberal approach to both stories. Much is the same—Mr. Collins is still painfully and annoyingly awkward, Mrs. Bennet remains obsessed with marrying off her daughters and Mr. Wickham remains a sleaze-ball— but director Burr Steers changes enough in the latter half to surprise both readers of Austen and Grahame-Smith.
“Pride and Prejudice and Zombies” is at its best when it fully embraces the silliness inherent in its premise. Any film that constantly alludes to other Pride and Prejudice adaptations (fancy a dip in the pond, Colin Firth fans) and has Mr. Darcy clad in an all-leather Regency-era outfit obviously owns its campiness. However, it truly embodies that presence when it fully blurs the lines between zombie hunter and Jane Austen. Elizabeth Bennet shoving her boot into Darcy’s face during his rude proposal is one of the film’s high points, for instance.
But it’s not until the work radically departs from Austen’s plot and Grahame-Smith’s source material (sorry everyone, the ninjas from the 2009 novel didn’t make the cut) and works its own resolution of the zombie apocalypse that the plot and characters truly begin to shine.
The film does suffer from some pacing issues. The movie’s first three or so scenes feel disjointed, almost as if all three should somehow be the audience’s first introduction to this world. Additionally, bits and pieces audiences most remember from the original book or previous adaptations of the story, such as the letter where Darcy explains himself to Elizabeth are rushed, leaving the romance between the two lead feeling the same, although the acting makes up for most of the plot’s failings.
Also, given the fact the white characters train in Japan (if they’re wealthy) or China, the film missed a chance to bring some much needed diversity to screen. And on that more social criticism, the director could have definitely left out some of the linger shots of undergarments and legs as the women dress and arm themselves for the first ball.
Will “Pride and Prejudice and Zombies” go down as one of the best Jane Austen adaptations ever made? Given the hurdle of literature purists and the film’s technical difficulties, probably not. But if audiences can leave their literary snobbery at the door and let themselves enjoy the Bennet sisters punch, shoot and stab their way to a happy ending, they’re in for a bloody good time.
@Ehamnnky