I have to agree, about Fancy. Keeley Hawes really made her a unique woman. She was supposed to be educated, yet have origins in the country. Keeley showed her qualities of both worlds, so she was more dignified, yet down-to-earth, too. She was a much stronger woman than the Fancy in the book, also. I liked that.
I really can't imagine James Murray's character being attracted to someone like the book Fancy!
(I think it's kind of interesting: James Murray's real life date, Sarah Parish, has the same birthdate, January 1, as Keeley Hawes. And Keeley and Sarah are similar-looking--they are both tall brunettes, with gorgeous cheekbones.)
reply
share
Dickensismyhomeboy
17 years ago
Yes, down to earth and dignified. I like my Fancy to have those qualities, and my females characters in general. I can see why Hardy portrayed her the way he did in the book, but I don't know... she annoyed me more than half the time. Perhaps that was the reaction Hardy was going for?
I agree about Parson Maybold never going for someone like book!Fancy. It would never happen! I can totally see why he would go for movie!Fancy...
reply
share
rowan_red
17 years ago
Yes, perhaps Hardy didn't intend Fancy to be as sympathetic a character. I have known girls who were like the Fancy in the book, so I think the character's realistic.
Actually, Parson Maybold was played by Ben Miles, and James Murray played Dick Dewy. I loved Murray's Dick Dewy, and so enjoyed seeing him attracted to an intelligent woman like Keeley Hawes' Fancy.
Now Ben Miles played Parson Maybold, and did a wonderful performance. However, his parson was too domineering for my taste. He might have appreciated a submissive Fancy like the one in the book!
reply
share
Dickensismyhomeboy
17 years ago
Ahh, yes. I realized my blunder after it was too late *hangs head in shame* I don't know the actors' names aside from Keeley because I know her from Wives & Daughters and that she's married to Mr. Darcy.
Still... I don't see how Maybold would have put up with book!Fancy's childishness for very long. He would have broken her. It may have been a relationship not unlike David Copperfield's mother and Mr. Murdstone's relationship (though, Clara Copperfield isn't nearly as annoying as book!Fancy). He may have killed her spirit through his trying to break her from her childish ways thinking he was doing what was best for her. Maybold probably wouldn't have made Fancy submit to the extent of inadvertantly making her die, but I believe she would have tunred out to be a shadow of a woman. (I know I'm speculating, but I love to speculate and develop characters in my mind as I think the authors would have developed them).
To be honest, I could see Dick falling for book!Fancy... Sorta like the way David Copperfield fell for Dora Spenlow (same sort of characteristics as book!Fancy). But after they were married his blind love for Fancy would dissipate and he would see the woman as she truly was: irritatingly immature. I know girls like that as well. The love of being loved is what Hardy believed women had a tendancy towards... I don't agree with generalizations, but I know SOME women tend to be like that.
I was just watching Under the Greenwood Tree (I taped it when it first aired). I hadn't seen it in a while and our discussion peaked my interest. I have to say that the book's intent and the movie's intent are quite different. The things they chose to add and the things they chose to omit for the movie gives the story a different feel from the book. As far as the movie is concernted I was totally rootin' for Fancy and Dick. A sort of "love knows no class system" story in its essence. (Cliche, yes... but this version is rather fresh and new, IMO.) Dick and Fancy are a great match but a lot of things are holding them back. With the book I couldn't help but think that Dick was making a terrible decision by marrying Fancy. Like, alright kid, you got what you wanted but how are you going to feel a few months/years into the marriage when you realize you're stuck with her? I think the latter feel is what Hardy was going for because of his cynicism towards marriage.
reply
share
rowan_red
17 years ago
Yes, I remember (in the book), how Dick looked at how unromantic his parents were, and was sure that the same thing would never happen to him and Fancy. There was a definite air of people being subject to the changing of seasons, just as the village was. The movie may have lacked a the ironic view of the romantic procedings, that was hinted at in the book.
I loved the movie as a beautiful, unashamed romantic romp, in love with the English countryside. And I discovered James Murray as Dick Dewy--who was irresistable in this performance.
Do you think Parson Maybold of the book is very different from the parson of the movie? It seemed to me he was more sympathetic in the book; however, I was concentrating more on Dick, and I'm not sure about this!
reply
share
Dickensismyhomeboy
17 years ago
Yeah, Hardy was all about marriage ruining relationships. Look at Jude and Sue in Jude The Obscure.
Anyways... Maybold's character wasn't really developed in the book, was it? Just that bit where he (seemingly) randomly asks Fancy to marry him. In the movie he's definately stiff and dominating. In the book his character evoked no emotion for me, save the part where Fancy agrees to marry him and then dumps hiim. I sorta felt bad for him, but I was more annoyed with Fancy. Ya know? So... he was more sympathetic in the book, but barely noticable IMO. In the movie I had little to no sympathy for him. The movie really sets up the rival between the three men (Shinar, Dewy and Maybld). In the book Maybold's "love" for Fancy comes outta nowhere. Interesting.
reply
share
StacyScrip
17 years ago
I read an interview with Ashley Pharoah (the writer/adaptor) on the old Masterpiece Theatre site where he acknowledged changing the focus of the book. He thought it best to bring in a plot device from "Far From the Madding Crowd" and make the three men revolve around Fancy instead of the book's focus on Dick Dewy. In the book there is always the feeling that Fancy and Dick will end up together. In the movie, there's a bit of doubt.
I read the book long ago, but I barely remembered Parson Maybold having contact with Fancy until the end where he up and asks her to marry him. I remembered thinking, huh??? At least in the film, it makes more sense as you see him fall for her. All in all though, I did love the movie for a pure, romantic confection.
reply
share
rowan_red
17 years ago
I guess that why I was so vague in my recollection of the book's Parson Maybold! I do enjoy Ben Miles' Maybold--he really is funny, when he reacts to the eruption in the choir loft, or to being invited to the Dewy's house!
The contrast between the stuffy party at Shinar's, and the vigorous country dancing emphasizes the choice Fancy makes, in choosing Dick. Poor Maybold will never fit in, and rides off stiffly, after watching the beauty he was infatuated with be embraced and kissed in a marriage he had to perform (poor schmuck)! But Farmer Shinar fits in well with the country proceedings, dancing and swinging his new love, in a way that was rather dashing!
Yes, it was a romantic confection. But James Murray (Dick Dewy) was more than just a pretty face. I loved his country speech, and the ardor with which he pursued Fancy. All the performances were fine, but it was Murray's performance that first caught my attention.
reply
share
bianca36
17 years ago
---------------------------
I loved his country speech, and the ardor with which he pursued Fancy. All the performances were fine, but it was Murray's performance that first caught my attention.
---------------------------
I agree 100%. I love the ardor with which he pursued and adored Fancy. In every scene, he couldn't take his eyes off her and he's bold in his pursue. And he is so fine! The chemistry between the two is what caught my attention and kept me going. I really enjoyed this charming story.
reply
share
17 years ago
[deleted]
rowan_red
17 years ago
I wish that the Fancy character had made a little more sense.
She came across a little Mary-sue-ish, in the attempt to make more likeable and more intelligent than in the book. However, her character seems confused, as to whether she is an independent young woman, or a weak, immature one. Why would such a spirited woman meekly go along with Mr. Shinar, nice as he is, when she so obviously finds him a bit repulsive physically?
I think she should have been allowed to spend a little more time on deciding how she actually felt about all these suitors. I ended up with the distinct feeling that, while Dick Dewey was an outstanding person, she chose him more for sexual reasons than anything else.
reply
share