Gah. I've just been through over 12 BugMeNot accounts and none of them work. Too many people try to provide BMN with either mailinator accounts (which NYPost.com sees right through, apparently) or with genuine free email accounts through which they haven't bothered to confirm their registration. And BMN doesn't do much on their site to discourage this. =/
I think in this case ppl might actually have to sign up for the nypost.com account. I can't imagine going through another 10-20 BMN accounts and having none of them work.
Worked for me:
Pride & Prejudice
Austen Powers.
Running time: 128 minutes. Rated PG (mild thematic elements). At the Lincoln Square, the Kips Bay, the Landmark Sunshine, others.
LISTEN up, guys, have I got a flick for you: It's all about money, sex and slammin' babes in saucy-wench get-ups, and it goes down in the same country that gave us Led Zeppelin and the Clash. This weekend, forget "Jarhead" - two hours of guys playing grab-ass in the shower and no chicks. If you're lucky, you can con your girlfriend into seeing "Pride & Prejudice."
The Bennets are a family of four raging hotties (one mope's thrown in for contrast) looking for action in the randy years of the Regency - before that whole Janet Jackson crackdown on sex. The two girls most worthy of knocking boots with are sarcastic Elizabeth and sweet Jane, played by Keira Knightley (No. 53 on Maxim's Hot 100 List this year, down from No. 18 last year - she's 20 years old, guys, catch her before she wrinkles up) and Rosamund Pike, respectively. Brunette or blonde, spicy or sweet, Radcliffie or Tri-Delt sister - one of these two will get your knickers in a twist, no matter what your type.
Their dad is played by Donald Sutherland, the stoned college prof from "Animal House." He's just as funny here, always ragging on the old lady (blithering Brenda Blethyn), and unlike the rest of the cast he doesn't fuss too much with the Brit accent. Oh, and batting cleanup there's a cameo from M herself, Dame Judi Dench, and does she ever go yard in the few minutes she gets to swing the bat.
Elizabeth and Jane are looking to get hooked up in the meat markets of the country-party scene, which is sort of like a rainier Hamptons only without the risk of getting sideswiped by Billy Joel. Two rich guys with crazy frat-brotha names have target-locked on them: goofy redhead Bingley (Simon Woods), who's kind of like a funny Carrot Top, and hard guy Darcy (Matthew Macfadyen), who's so tough that he won't smile or dance. Their game is gold, baby. They're like Wedding Crashers who don't have to do the hora.
Jane tumbles hard for Der Bingster while you-make-me-dizzy Miss Lizzie swaps putdowns with Darhead. The mercury is spiking so fast around these four that you and all the other dudes crammed into the theater will be screaming, "Get a room!"
But working from a book by 19th-century fox Jane Austen, director Joe Wright (how many helmers have manlier names than that?) has engineered a big, intricately designed, fast-moving Hummer of a plot - again unlike "Jarhead," which is all, "And then this happened! And then this happened!"
Before they can get on with the getting it on, the two top guns have to blast away at all things heinous. There's a preachy little nerd named Mr. Collins who's panting in Elizabeth's general direction, a cash crunch (even the girls' house is in play, like it's an off da hook round of Texas Hold 'Em), and a ponytailed metrosexual named Wickham who says things like, "I have very good taste in ribbons." But the director jukes and spins his way through it all as righteously as LaDainian Tomlinson vs. the Jets' linebackers.
Here's the beauty part: The ending is a weddingpalooza. You know what that means, hussy hounds. Everyone gets a lusty license to no-limit nooky, forever and ever.
Brilliant! Thanks, Nika!
Hey I think I just finished watching the ultimate guy movie. 220 minutes, not a single utterance from a female. That's more like it!
Wow. That is the worst description of Pride and Prejudice I have ever read.
I haven't seen the recent film (2 hours? It needs at least 6!), but have started rereading the book, and I'm being reminded with delight of how very sharp Austen's wit is. I thought maybe I had made it better in my mind, but no, it's actually even better than I remember, especially since I understand more of the snobbery and class issues than I did when I was younger (having read a great deal since about class relations in the period). Darcy is actually established in the book as quite complex from the very beginning (something the BBC miniseries hides, by staying in Elizabeth's point of view), but he still had better shape up by the end to be worthy of her.
Aha, but have you seen the wonder that is Bride and Prejudice?
or Clyde and his Orifice?
Wow, that NYTimes page is instant crashination for Firefox on my computer. Any one else???
I couldn't stand to read Pride and Prejudice, I can't imagine that the film is any more palatable...
err, new york post, i meant...
I saw it this afternoon, and it really wasn't that bad. Very watch-able performances, and nice locations. One moment was awful though, in which Elizabeth stands on a cliff and you are left with the feeling she might throw herself of the it. For some reason I was also reminded of Titanic's "top of the world"-scene and immediately the music of Celine Dion sprung up into my mind. No, it wasn't pretty. But fortunately the feeling went away quite fast. Haven't read the book, haven't seen the mini-series, just saw this film.
Aha, but have you seen the wonder that is Bride and Prejudice?
posted by tracicle at 07:36PM UTC on November 13, 2005
I haven't - I wanted to, since I loved Bend it like Beckham from the same director. I've since heard it wasn't quite as good.
I've read the book twice (working on a third time), and watched the miniseries three four times. I was thinking I wouldn't see this film, because I might be too disapointed, but a friend who has also read the book, etc, says it is worth seeing - it is new enough to add and be interesting.
threefour times. I was thinking I wouldn't see this film, because I might be too disapointed, but a friend who has also read the book, etc, says it is worth seeing - it is new enough to add and be interesting.