Colin
Firth vs. Matthew MacFayden
It is a truth universally acknowledged
that the question of which Darcy is the best is a strongly debated topic among
avid Janeites, and, in my experience, more often than not, Firth comes out on
top.
Firstly, I shall say that I am only
going to compare Colin Firth and Matthew MacFayden as I believe they are the
two performances which get talked of the most. And I will also put in my
opinion here – which is that I cannot choose between these amazing actors and I
do not favour one over the other. I am merely aiming to state my reasons why I
think that MacFayden should be given a fair trial with his performance as Mr
Darcy. I believe there are certain differences of situation that need to be
taken into consideration before announcing Firth to be the best.
I know that many people say that Firth
set the bar too high in the BBC’s production in 1995, meaning no one could even
compete with his performance – don’t get me wrong, it was a fantastic
performance – but I think that the people who watched the 2005 Pride and
Prejudice with this thought in their head would be starting in the wrong frame
of mind from the off. If you think that no one can better Firth, then you will
not let yourself find someone to better Firth. Another problem in this area is
that for many, 1995 Pride and Prejudice would have been their first viewing of
an adaptation, given it was made 10 years before the other, of the spectacular
novel – and your first experience is often the one that sticks! For me this
wasn’t an issue. My first experience with any Austen at all was the 2005
version. But, when I watched the 1995 version for the first time, given that I
heard a lot about Firth’s performance, I did not go into thinking that he would
not be as good as MacFayden. Hence why I cannot decide who I like the best –
and why I don’t plan to choose!
I have heard many people say to me,
when asked about MacFayden’s performance, ‘he didn’t do it like Colin
Firth!’But to this, I can only say - good! Would not it merely be copying if he
had tried to imitate Firth’s performance? Each actor, whatever the role and
however many times it has been played before, should make the character his own!
This is exactly what I think MacFayden did as there is no real similarity
between the way the parts were played. MacFayden himself said that he had not
read Pride and Prejudice and consequently based the character entirely on the
script he was given. I personally think I would have been bored to see another
actor try and perform the same role in the same style... it is nice to see how
different people interpret the character.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c292b/c292bf58d763372f6f6bf657a3bc0a6e431aab9c" alt=""
A side point here would be that many
love the ‘extra Darcy scenes’ in the 1995 version – who could forget the image
of a rather good looking man walking towards you soaked to the skin... Sorry –
daydreaming!! ;) As there are these ‘extra’ (also the fencing and the bath
scene) which are not in the novel, I think it is unfair to say people do not
like the different scenes in the 2005 one. The first proposal, for example, is
not like the book I grant you but it does mean he gets a wet shirt!!! Also
other deviations from the setting of events I think can be overlooked,
especially because of the added scenes in the 1995 one, and the ending may be
different from the novel but it was still wonderfully romantic I think, even if
not that Regency! I am from England meaning the ending was not the part outside
Pemberley after their marriage which I will admit goes a little too far – even
though it is still rather sweet! That ending is in the bonus features called
‘Alternate US Ending’, and for us the film finishes when Elizabeth runs out of
her father’s room once she has permission to marry, to tell Darcy the good
news! This leads to the ending of the 1995 – the double wedding – different to
the novel also!
Back to Firth vs. MacFayden. I think it is fair to
say that Firth went down the ‘proud’ route, whereas MacFayden went the ‘shy’
route. This brings me onto my other point of time scale. The 1995 SERIES was 5 hours
long and the 2005 FILM only 2 hours – that’s a big difference! Do you not think
that if MacFayden had gone the proud way that his transformation in such a
short time would be a lot less imaginable and realistic? (Yes, I know that
technically it is over the same time but I mean screen time scale!) Whereas,
MacFayden’s shy Darcy growing into a more confident man did work for that
length of time. Firth, however, had the time to develop the role from a very
proud man to a lovely gentleman. :) Some here might argue that Darcy is meant
to start proud as that it is how he is portrayed in the book – yes, it’s titled
PRIDE and Prejudice I know ;) – but there is also in the novel instances
showing him to be also a shy man. For example, he says himself “I certainly
have not the talent which some people possess of conversing easily with those I
have never seen before.” So, both pride and shyness are evident in the
character in the novel meaning the performances of both are acceptable in
regards to the novel.
These are just a few reasons why I think that MacFayden’s
performance should not be so quickly dismissed and why I think that the high
bar which was set by Firth was definitely reached by MacFayden and why I cannot
pick a favourite and why I love them both equally, however much this little
article makes me sound as if I am for MacFayden!
Your affectionate friend,
Excellent post! I loved the 'wet shirt' line. :)
ReplyDeleteThank you :) ;)
DeleteWell said! I totally agree with you and I appreciate your just comparison of the two portrayals! :) I liked them both.
ReplyDeleteThanks Nicole :D i thought he deserved a fair trial...
DeleteI liked them both, but I prefer Matthew MacFayden's interpretation of Mr. Darcy hands down because he put more passion into the part. Now remember this is only my opinion. The way Matthew spoke the proposal scene was so passionate and heartfelt that I wished it was me he was talking to. His facial expressions; especially in his eyes sometimes spoke louder than words. MacFayden's eyes are very expressive. His eyes were always so intense every time he looked at Elizabeth.
ReplyDeleteColin Firth wore the period clothes better than MacFayden did and his acting was good too, but I did not feel the passion and agony he was feeling regarding Elizabeth. You could see how Elizabeth was changing Mr. Darcy in Matthew MacFayden. You could see that Mr.Darcy really wanted to be better for Elizabeth. The 2005 version with Matthew Macfayden is worth it just for that proposal scene. I streamed it on amazon and HAD to buy the DVD afterwards so I could play it over and over as I please. I do enjoy the 1995 version with Colin Firth and I do own that DVD too, but I do not find myself going for that one when I need a Mr. Darcy fix...LOL
We are all welcome to our own opinions ;)
DeleteI'm glad you enjoyed this.:) and thanks for posting your opinion also :)
I can agree about the proposal scene - I LOVE that scene however untrue to the books and I know it *cough cough* word for word... ;D oh to have him with his voice speak it to me...
I think your right about the period clothes accept I love MacFaydens coat in the 2nd proposal scene (amount other places) but in that scene... <3 nice ;) flying around in the breeze.....
Your affectionate friend,
Mrs Darcy
I totes love your blog darling! :D gr8 job!
ReplyDeleteThanks Alice!!! <3 hope you enjoy my new ones and future ones :)
ReplyDeleteWonderful job Lizzie!
ReplyDeleteYour affectionate sister :)
Thank you dearest Jane ;) hope you enjoy my other posts and my future ones :)
Deletei agree with what you said, the 05 version only had two hours to portray everything and they did an amazing job!
ReplyDeleteI agree!! As you may have guessed from my post ;)
Delete