DARCY VS. DARCY

In the case of Darcy vs. Darcy, 1995 Mr. Darcy beats 2005 Mr. Darcy hands down.  This decision is made with neither Pride nor Prejudice; there's actually a science to it all.

Oh, I'll confess that Matthew Macfadyen does an okay job, probably even stellar if Mr. Darcy were to wear his heart on his sleeve.  But, he plays Darcy as if he were too obvious, too readable, too ... too ... metro.  Macfadyen's Darcy is an overly emotional metrosexual.

Colin Firth's Darcy is an enigma.  He is the puzzle that must be solved, and he rarely falters or shows chinks in his armor.  Unlike Macfadyen's Darcy, emotions are not things Firth's Darcy is willing to express.  If Firth played Darcy with any more restraint, he'd be in a strait jacket.

Perhaps it isn't fair to compare Darcy vs. Darcy.  After all, the 1995 mini-series has hours and hours upon end in which to flesh out characters, whereas the 2005 film has merely two hours.  The 2005 version favors panoramic characterization as opposed to the minutiae studied and added to make the 1995 version the go-to adaptation.

The deciding factor in Darcy vs. Darcy, though, results from the main actresses -- those playing Elizabeth.  Keira Knightley is a beautiful, talented actress, as is Jennifer Ehle.  However, Ehle's facial expressions rank her as the winner if this were a true battle.  Ehle can play an entire scene with her eyes alone, no dialogue needed.  Ehle's left eyebrow could win its own Emmy, for shit's sake.  In order to have an actor worthy of an eyebrow as a costar, one must have its foil stoically thwarting that eyebrow's every move.

So, apologies to my friend who put out the challenge today.  Even more so, I am amazed by the serendipitious coincidence that the 2005 film version just happens to be on Cable at 6:30 this same evening, the exact day my pal throws down the gauntlet.  You may have your Macfadyen Mr. Darcy, but I'm still rooting for Darcy the Firth.

Therefore, may the Firth be with you!  Which reminds me of another movie...