Anna Maxwell Martin, although seems like a good actor, does not fit the aesthetics of Elizabeth. She looks so much older than Darcy despite the actress being 4 years younger. The lack of makeup combined with her puffy eyes makes her look very tired. Her attitude is also very matronly in this adaptation and she has lost all characteristic Lizzie wit and charm. The pedestrian costumes do not help her portrayal either. So disappointed!
share[deleted]
She looks too plain and skinny, she dresses too plain, she doesn't have any sparkle about her character. I can't believe marriage and motherhood have done that to her. She just isn't the Elizabeth we love from the book and previous movies.
shareTotally agree - Anna Maxwell Martin is miscast, badly directed, badly costumed and badly made-up. Her costumes as the wealthy Mrs Darcy are plainer and poorer-looking than Jennifer Erhle's cash-strapped Miss Bennett's! As someone else said, she probably would not wear her "best" clothes for walking round the estate, but this Mrs Darcy would be mistaken for the governess! She looks tired, old and miserable - and that's BEFORE the troubles begin!
BriarRose
Growing old disgracefully
Mrs Darcy are plainer and poorer-looking than Jennifer Erhle's cash-strapped Miss Bennett's!
Yes! Lydia looks so much classier than Elizabeth in this adaptation. And the way they've cast Elizabeth with Darcy, it's as though Darcy married somebody waaay below his means.
shareClassier??? That garish riff on a military riding habit??? I thought that outfit (thought not strictly historical) was spot-on; exactly the sort of in-your-face ostentation that Lydia would adore and Lizzy wouldn't dream of. (Though oddly enough Lizzy almost certainly would have owned a genuine military riding habit - Darcy would certainly be colonel of the Pemberley Volunteers, and Mrs Darcy would certainly be expected to present its colours, attend reviews and so on wearing a habit based on the Pemberley Volunteers' uniform. She just wouldn't wear it on any other occasion.)
As for flights_of_fancy's question of how Lydia could afford anything so expensive - simple! She ordered it from the habit-maker and left town without paying the habit-maker's bill, of course. Standard operating procedure for both Wickhams.
She's definitely no Jennifer Ehle or Keira Knightley.
Although, Ms. Martin is a fine actress but I also agree casting should have chosen someone else. Daniela Denby-Ashe from North and South might have been a good choice.
"What we do in life echoes in eternity." GLADIATOR
[deleted]
How many threads are there going to be dedicated to the premise that Anna Maxwell Martin is not as good looking as Jennifer Ehle, or (shudder) Keira Knightley (at least Anna CAN act)? As I've said on another thread, AMM is not ugly. She does not, perhaps, have Elizabeth's "fine eyes" often referred to in P&P, and is also ten years older than Lizzie Darcy would be, but to denigrate her as ugly, or, as some other charmer said, "hideous", is quite disgusting, as well as totally wrong. I think she's excellent, even if to an extent miscast.
shareI agree that there's nothing wrong with the actress, she's doing an excellent job, with what she got.
I think it is certainly a problem of make up and clothing. She's too plainly dressed to be Mrs Darcy. Mr Darcy is supposedly a very rich man, yet his wife looks like she could be a chamber-maid.
Even her sister Lydia is better dressed than Lizzie. It almost looks as if those who dressed her, tried to make her look as uninteresting and bland as possible.
I have to admit I haven't read the book, (I tried, but it was so boring, that I gave up), so she could be as PD James meant her to be though. (Still not a real excuse though)
I agree with you 100%. I don't think the actress is ugly, but I think she looks ugly compared to how beautiful Georgiana, Jane, and Lydia are. They really should have put *some* makeup on Elizabeth to make her look better, and those clothes are absolutely horrible. She looks poor! The church scene in episode 2 says it all- seeing how Elizabeth is dressed compared to Lydia was such a contrast, it was painful to even see them side by side.
shareI don't think Anna Maxwell Martin is ugly at all, I think she is beautiful but her Elizabeth is so miserable! and Darcy is a real bore (I do know they aren't having the most jolly time but still....)
Goodnight, good luck and may your God go with you
[deleted]
I agree with others on this thread that Anna Maxwell Martin wasn't an ideal Elizabeth for me. The character seemed careworn and not the bright, vivacious woman she was in P&P (especially in the Ehle version), but perhaps that's what several years of marriage to Darcy does to you. I thought it was interesting that the story highlighted how people had disapproved of the match and even Darcy and Elizabeth are shown to have doubts. I thoroughly enjoyed the murder mystery, but I would have liked to see a little more of Elizabeth's feisty fighting spirit - Maxwell Martin showed something of it, but just not quite enough.
PS: Someone on another thread summed it up for me - the problem was not so much in the casting of Maxwell Martin as in the writing of Elizabeth's character; it just seemed to lack her wit and humour.
I came here to see if anyone else was distracted by the casting of Elizabeth? and now I see yes, others feel that Elizabeth is simply not a woman who Darcy would have fought his aunt over marrying.
I think the producers must never have read Pride and Prejudice! Jane was beautiful effortlessly and sweet and hardly had to try. therefore she did not try to be anything but attractive. But Lizzie, as her father says, was his favorite.
Well why? She was also attractive tho not beautiful. But she had a personality and wit above any of the girls. She was striking in this way! I think of all the Lizzies I have seen Keira Knightly is wonderful altho TOO beautiful but soulful yes.
And Greer Garson was just right. Jennifer Ehle also got it right. The twinkle in her eyes did it.
Where is the twinkle now? Perhaps it would be there had it been written in. Something is awfully gloomy about Pemberly and I cannot imagine why anyone want to spend any time there.
Pemberley and Lizzy ARE gloomy. Because a murder was committed on the estate and the suspect/convicted murderer is Darcy’s brother-in-law.
That puts the Darcy family in social jeopardy. Their position is extremely precarious. So much is at stake. And because of the grandfather’s profligacy (partying, gambling) the estate had been in jeopardy before and had only recently become “safe.”
Darcy and Lizzy have enormous responsibility, not only to their son and Georgiana, but also all of their employees and their families, plus also to the families of all the shopkeepers and tradespeople who earn their livings because of the success of the estate.
Lizzy is overcome with worry because she feels responsible, because it’s her ridiculous sister and her terrible brother in law who bring all this misery and worry upon the estate. Lizzy feels it’s all her fault. So yes, she is gloomy.
Daniela Denby-Ashe is a inferior actress in comparison to Martin they needed someone who was better with a brain.
shareThe only thing I've ever seen Daniela Denby-Ashe in is North & South, and I think she did a great job. Lizzy Bennet is a bit more wittier and livelier than Margaret Hale, it'd be interesting to see Daniela's take on the character.
shareShe was in an episode of Torchwood as a blonde who seduces Tosh. I didn't recognize her at all.
http://currentscene.wordpress.com
She is definitely no Keira Knightley, who was atrocious as Elizabeth. The worst depiction of the character ever, actually.
shareI agree. I don't understand why Wickham and Lydia are so beautiful while Elizabeth and Darcy look so old and haggard next to them. They made a huge mistake there. The two main characters should never be less attractive than everyone else in the supporting cast, UNLESS they're supposed to be- and we all know that isn't the case, as Austen described both Darcy and Elizabeth as very handsome people.
shareNot just Wickham and Lydia but practically everyone else too, - Georgina and Alveston and Fitzwilliam, etc. It just seems like the supporting cast members are totally overshadowing Elizabeth & Darcy (who, although I haven't read the book but was told, are supposed to be the impressive core of the story). Matthew Rhys is alright (at some angles, he kind of looks a tiny bit like Colin Firth) but unfortunately A.M.M.'s Elizabeth (while I have nothing against the actress) just came off really tired, haggard, insecure and unhappy. Not the Elizabeth we've come to love in P&P. Also, I find the chemistry between Rhys & AMM totally lacking too....
shareI don't wish to be too rude personally to Ms Maxwell Martin, but she is actually 35. I cannot remember how old Elizabeth Bennett was when she married Darcy, but not much above 20, as I recall - so Maxwell Martin is actually 10 years too old for the part!
BriarRose
Growing old disgracefully
Anna Maxwell Martin is an amazing actress. I'm loving her in the scene with Lady Catherine.
Anna's often played younger than her years - she played Lyra in the stage production of 'His Dark Materials' for example, and was excellent.
Lizzie wouldn't have thrown money about unnecessarily. Lydia and Wickham would have lived well beyond their means and hang the consequences. I suspect the contrast between Lizzie's modest, matronly dresses and Lydia's flashy ones was deliberate.
I've been enjoying the adaptation far more than the book.
She may be an 'amazing actress,' but that doesn't mean the make-up department didn't need to do anything for her. Why is Jennifer Ehle so beloved? She did an amazing job as Elizabeth, but she was also beautiful! In Pride and Prejudice 1995, Ehle wore make-up but she didn't look made-up; the make-up artist highlighted her best features and made her look amazing. I don't see the argument that Anna Maxwell Martin is such a great actress that she didn't need a drop of make-up, especially when the other actresses look so glowing and pretty here. It would only be fair to make each actress look their best in the show. Then the viewers wouldn't be distracted by OBVIOUS contrasts in beauty between one character and the next...
shareJennifer Ehle had sparkle. But she was playing the young, single Lizzie. The Lizzie of 'Death Comes to Pemberley' is a mother, the mistress of a great estate with the responsibility that entails (and she feels very personally responsible for her tenants) and enduring a very difficult situation and a potential crisis in her marriage.
ETA, the most detailed description of Elizabeth Bennet's appearance comes from Caroline Bingley. Of course, she is jealous of Lizzie so far from objective, but fwiw this is what she says: "Her face is too thin; her complexion has no brilliancy; and her features are not at all handsome. Her nose wants character; there is nothing marked in its lines. Her teeth are tolerable, but not out of the common way; and as for her eyes, which have sometimes been called so fine, I never could perceive any thing extraordinary in them. They have a sharp, shrewish look, which I do not like at all; and in her air altogether, there is a self-sufficiency without fashion which is intolerable."
The Lizzie from the P&P we love would not have turned into the plain, almost spiritless woman we see in DCTP. She may be concerned about the affairs and welfare of the estate, and with being a mother, but I don't agree that that would have taken away her fight and sparkle. It's not the actress's fault - it's the way the character was written/directed.
shareWhile I see your point of view, lougarry, I don't think Caroline Bingley's view of Elizabeth is any justification for making Elizabeth any less than the beauty she's supposed to be. Is she supposed to be stunning? No. However, she IS supposed to be very pretty. The producers of this show could have, and frankly should have, tried to make her look as pretty as possible. That's my opinion anyway.
share[deleted]
[She is plain, old and extremely ugly]
I can't help wondering what you look like, jjparish. I can take a rough guess at your age.
What an ungracious lot you are!
Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain.
What does her looks have to do with the content of her heart (Wickham) was fortunate to have her in his corner the ungratful rake.
share[deleted]
My point is that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and what made Lizzie truly attractive was her personality and not so much her appearance. Lizzie's sparkle diminishes when she fears she is losing Darcy. Do people really think she had no sparkle in the final scenes of DCTP?
shareElizabeth - "I am not yet one and twenty"
However this is set 10 years later (hence the young son) so really Elizabeth Bennett- 31/32 Anna MM -35. Not that big a leap.
However this is set 10 years later
Forgive me. I read somewhere it was Tennis years but since I have checked and it is indeed set in 1803 six years after the wedding of lizzy and darcy. I knew the boy was between 5-6 but after reading Tennis years I just figured it took them a while.
If that is indeed the case then you are all rught she looks older than she shoukd. I thought while watching that she was poorly dressed and that the costume department should have done a better job.
No, it's set 6 years after Elizabeth and Darcy's marriage - so if she was 20/21 then, she would only be 26/27 - and sorry, but she looked a lot older, worn out and worried!
BriarRose
Growing old disgracefully
Of course she's worried. A murder was committed on her property. Why wouldn't she be worried?
http://currentscene.wordpress.com
She looked worried BEFORE the murder occurred - and old! Darcy had an income of £10k a year - roughly equivalent to £322k today - a huge house, masses of servants, and Elizabeth looked as if she had too many children and not enough money! This was NOT Elizabeth Bennett!
BriarRose
Growing old disgracefully
No sparkling wit at all, Julie. But that's not casting. That's PD James.
shareI know. I said in my review of the book that Lizzy and Darcy were both very boring people in this story.
http://currentscene.wordpress.com
Elizabeth - "I am not yet one and twenty"
However this is set 10 years later (hence the young son) so really Elizabeth Bennett- 31/32 Anna MM -35. Not that big a leap.
No, Lizzie would be 26 now. Look at Jane and Lydia and Georgiana. They don't look old. and Jane is older than Lizzie. And AMM looks much older than 35 in this story. It's as though they deliberately made her look old and plain. It was just bad casting, and I think the men looked far too similar. The casting director did a bad job.
I guess it's like looking at clouds. You see one thing and I see another. Peace.
I thought Matthew Rhys was great ( although his hairstyle unfortunate), But AMM is HOMELY and not an accurate representation of Elizabeth
shareI completely agree with you! I'm so disappointed in this casting.
shareOne aspect of Elizabeth's appearance that comes across in P & P, and one of the features that attracted Darcy, was her "pair of fine eyes". Anna Maxwell Martin's appearance, at least in this, is on the plain side and her eyes are not what I should call "fine".
shareIncidentally, if you read the review comments on The Telegraph, (at the bottom) it turns out that a lot of people had a problem with AMM as Lizzie, so it's not just us...
Episode 1 review http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/tv-and-radio-reviews/10537039/Death-Comes-to-Pemberley-episode-1-BBC-One-review.html
Episode 2 review http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/tv-and-radio-reviews/10537136/Death-Comes-to-Pemberley-episode-2-BBC-One-review.html
Episode 3 review http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/tv-and-radio-reviews/10537122/Death-Comes-to-Pemberley-episode-3-BBC-One-review.html
I find this discussion so depressing - the majority of the comments complaining about the casting of AMM are around her appearance rather than her acting skills, which is what we should be judging her on. And if you can't see beyond an actor's looks you still can't claim she isn't right for the part and obviously don't know p&p that well as lizzie was never the beautiful sister (that was Jane). I think AMM is a great actress who showed Elizabeth's kindness and intelligence well in this adaptation.
shareWell said, Philippa.
shareActually it is frequently mentioned throughout the novel how pretty and bright Lizzie is. I worry how difficult her life must have been to turn her from Jennifer Ehle in beautiful dresses and with sparkling smiles to this rather dour woman!
'To you, Baldrick, the Renaissance was just something that happened to other people, wasn't it?'
I worry how difficult her life must have been to turn her from Jennifer Ehle in beautiful dresses and with sparkling smiles to this rather dour woman!
It's not a continuation of the 1995 P&P. In fact, Death Comes to Pemberley is actually set a few years earlier than the 95 P&P. (PP95 is set 1811-1812; DCtP is set in October 1803.)
Ehle's Lizzy Bennet dresses were muslin stamped in floral patterns. The costume designer of PP95 states in multiple interviews that the Bennet girls had less money than the Bingleys and Darcys, so they wore muslin while the wealthier ladies wore silk.
AMM's Elizabeth Darcy wears silk.
Oh it is hard to express tone online is it not? I was being sarcastic!
However on a serious note Ehle's Lizzie was well turned out in pretty frocks. Maxwell's is scruffy, has god awful posture (I just REALLY wanted her to stand up straight) and had messy hair. She also went out visiting without a hat on her head - a cardinal sin for a lady in those times. She looked dreadful and dowdy when stood next to Jane, Georgiana and even Lydia! The sparkly, bright girl was gone and replaced with a dour woman who is about a decade older than necessary.
I like Maxwell, superb actress but dreadfully miscast here!
'To you, Baldrick, the Renaissance was just something that happened to other people, wasn't it?'
Some of the comments here have been so ungracious that I sincerely hope Miss Maxwell Martin doesn't drop by to read them.
A few have unfairly compared her to Jennifer Ehle and Keira Knightley instead of, more properly, to the Elizabeth of the book. Austen tells us little of Elizabeth's appearance. She is pretty, undoubtedly, but not so pretty that she attracts Darcy's immediate admiration. Of course, he eventually comes to appreciate the intelligent expression in her eyes. Ehle and Knightley are both stunning, but they shouldn't be the yardstick. Maxwell Martin cannot compete, for example, with Ehle's immaculately styled wig and ample décolletage!
Some have said that she is overshadowed by Lydia and Georgiana. We know, of course, that Lydia is vain and superficial. Guess who will be spending the longer time on her appearance? Georgiana, too, is in the first throes of love. She will be making herself pretty for her young lawyer. On the other hand, Elizabeth has been married for six years and has a child and responsibilities!
To those who maintain that Maxwell Martin lacks sparkle, I say watch episode one again. She is radiant in the scenes leading up to the murder, and rightfully anxious and subdued after.
Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain.
Ehle's immaculately styled wig
Eeek. I've always hated her wigs in PP95. I thought them hideous, fake-looking, and poorly styled. (Why couldn't they get the hair to fall correctly from the part? It looked so gross.)
Here's an example of the bad wig! (look how the hair parts. Gross!)
http://images4.fanpop.com/image/photos/16100000/Jennifer-Ehle-Pride-And-Prejudice-jennifer-ehle-16177720-2016-1900.jpg
Jane Austen makes a brief reference that the five sisters having descending grades of beauty from the eldest Jane, who was the most beautiful girl in the area down to the youngest, so Lizzie would be very pretty. I always assumed that Lydia was probably appealing because of youth and high spirits rather than actual physical features.
shareYou started the comparisons...
AMM's hair is ten times lovelier in this than JE's hideous wigs in PP95. Yikes, the part in her wigs was so ugly and fake looking. JE scowled too much and rolled her eyes too much, and her decolletage was on display during the afternoon, which was ten times worse than not wearing a bonnet.
PP95 is far from perfect. I wouldn't hold it up as a yardstick of perfection to compare all Elizabeths.
Dowdy? If that's what you went into this looking for, no wonder you found it. Gosh, I'm not saying this program is perfection, but I am amused by the tone and severity of the criticisms against it, especially toward AMM.
Hi RM!
Good for you. The thing is, I like JE and I like P&P95, but it's so ridiculous to make comparisons between adaptations. Adaptations should always be measured against the books.
I haven't read Death Comes to Pemberley. Have you? Julie didn't like it much.
Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain.
I like JE and PP95 too. (I'm not the one who started the comparisons.) But when something is being compared unfavorably to something else, as much as I might like it, I feel compelled to point out its imperfections.
I haven't read it either. Don't intend to.
I know what you mean. Righteous indignation sets in. Lol!
To be honest, and at the risk of sounding a hypocrite, I do know what people mean when they say that AMM is on the plain side. But she is such a good actress, and I've got a sufficiently developed imagination, that I can see past an actor's looks to the nitty-gritty of the portrayal.
On the other hand, Matthew Rhys is rather gorgeous....
Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain.
To be honest, and at the risk of sounding a hypocrite, I do know what people mean when they say that AMM is on the plain side. But she is such a good actress, and I've got a sufficiently developed imagination, that I can see past an actor's looks to the nitty-gritty of the portrayal.
I quite agree, and I don't think it makes us hypocrites.
For all the complaints about historical accuracy in this thread, today's ideal of beauty would be inaccurate for Austen's period. AMM would be considered quite beautiful, except she isn't plump enough. But then again, neither was Lizzy, whose figure Darcy considered "light and pleasing."
[deleted]
I thought it was a dull, boring book. I liked the adaptation much better. I also liked how they found room for Lady Catherine (who is not in the book at all). Penelope Keith was so good. But then, she always is!
I had a friend over on New Year's Eve, and we watched all 3 episodes that night. We enjoyed it.
As an aside, I think I mentioned in another thread that my blog post on the book ended up garnering about 5,000 hits simply because of this series.
For those who haven't read my review of the book and are interested in doing so, here it is: http://currentscene.wordpress.com/2012/03/05/death-comes-to-pemberley- 5/
http://currentscene.wordpress.com
Totally agree. She acts & looks like Anne Elliot and not like Lizzie Bennet .
shareAfter Jennifer Ehle and Keira Kneighly as earlier "Elizabeths," I would have expected a more beautiful Lizzie. I appreciate Anna's acting talents and her looks, but they are more appropriate for other projects.
Elizabeth Garvie, who played Elizabeth in the 1980 version, is not as conventionally pretty as are JE or KK. But she's a terrific Elizabeth.
http://currentscene.wordpress.com
Just nearly fell off my chair realizing that someone else had seen P&P1980. :)
I agree that the actress wasn't a beauty-queen, but I remember her as someone who certainly got the attention and brought that certain-something to the screen. (which I feel was lacking in this version of Lizzie)
I don't think that Elizabeth should be 'pretty' in a glossy-magazine way, but I think she should certainly be more sparkling and less tired-looking as the Elizabeth in DCTP was.
On the other hand, who knows how tiresome it actually is to live with someone like Darcy. Perhaps it is indeed impossible to compare the two Lizzies because they are in completely different stages in their lives.
Elizabeth is very lively and bright in ep 1 of DCTP, but following the scandal, the stress shows. (And quite rightly, imo. It would be crass to be making jokes and laughing at the foibles of other people while all of that was going on! That sounds more like Lydia, not Elizabeth.)
shareThere are a lot of us who love P&P80. There is a whole board devoted to it. Come join us!
http://currentscene.wordpress.com
Speaking of P&P 1980, I couldn't help thinking that the portrayal (mostly the way the role is written) of Lydia in DCTP is very much in keeping with her portrayal in pp80.
shareI'm sorry, but Lizzie's physical appearance does matter. Acting ability is essential, of course, but it is more than possible to get the whole package when casting this role. Could you imagine all the actresses who were vying for this part?
I tried in every way to see her in the right context, the right light, to see some beauty in her, but Martin's looks are downright distracting. I'm not even saying the actress herself is ugly, but they could have made her look far more attractive than she was.
I'll even go so far as to say that her character was treated with contempt and without respect or regard. No makeup. No hairstyle. No adequate clothing. As if she truly didn't belong there.
Eye of the beholder and all that. People complained and complained that other "Lizzys" were far too beautiful.
shareI think the 1980 version is probably the best adaptation of P&P, the most faithful to Austen. And I love the casting, especially the mother and Mr. Collins, they were hilarious! And I've always thought Elizabeth Garvey and David Rintoul were a handsome Elizabeth and Darcy.
________________________________________
Get me a bromide - and put some gin in it!
I agree - the 1980 version was the best. The casting was spot on - it had the best Lady Catherine (Judy Parfitt was perfection) and I believe David Rintoul was the quintessential Darcy. I don't get the Jennifer Ehle love. Those wigs she wore were hideous and she looked like she was pushing 30 but I guess she was pretty next to those dowdy sisters.
Am watching DC to P now. Anna Maxwell Martin is not conventionally beautiful but she's a good actress and she actually looks prettier in close ups.