Pajiba

well, i, for one, think MOST classics would benefit with a little undead retrofit. it's unfortunate that this reviewer (whom i wanted to same-sex marry) doesn't want me to be happy.
when radiation from a meteor turns your town into a zombie buffet, don't expect me and my ragtag band of survivors to risk jack-shit coming to save you, prisco.

consider this your 'dear john'.

...that makes all the period pieces pool pussyjuices

Oh my gross.

I am another who was hoping this would be a bit more awesome. Isn't there already a movie deal in place? I assume they'll ratchet up the zombie in that case.

Damn, I was hoping they could keep the steam going without it losing its appeal, but apparently that's not the case. I also had no idea they were trained sword masters...that's kind of disappointing. It would be much funnier if they were totally unprepared for the zombie hordes and had to adapt.

Oh well, I'm sure I'll read it anyway at some point, and probably enjoy it.

What I want to know is, how can you get away with ripping off a classic book (whether you like it or not), adding in some dumb-ass zombies, and have a best seller? Does Jane Austen's estate get some of those royalties? And what self-respecting publisher thought this was a good idea? Is the literary world going down the same toliet the movie industry has? Is this the state of America's collective brain?

It just pisses me off to no end to see something as innane as this book getting heaps of hype (and sequels) while true artists can't get their foot in the door.

Fair enough, Paddy, and I don't dispute you. My point is that it is easy to read Austen and miss the subtle humors -- especially if you've never had the benefit of also reading Oscar Wilde and getting the jokes -- and so there are a larger population of readers swooning and bobbing about the romantic entanglements. You can't tell me the filmic representations of P&P or Emma are clever social satires?

But the larger point I was making was that many empty headed gals embraced Sex and the City as rote truth, to the point they too demanded to be like the four women: dishing disgustingly details about sexual encounters, to wear Blahniks, to drink Cosmos. When in truth, it was written by mostly gay men, and so it's amazing to think that female culture was inspired by a coterie of homosexuals. They were being made fun of, and totally didn't get the joke.

And to everyone else -- P&P&Z is actually a decent book. I wrote this review in a fevered haste to complete the 5K, and so it might be a little spotty at best. It's funny, it's just not as awesome as I had hoped it would be. But I still want people to read it. I dream of the day when some wicked teacher assigns it and the Austen for comparative purposes.

Prisco:

You had me at "empty-headed gals embracing Sex and The City". Great point. I just have a very sore spot about people thinking Austen is a sweet pink little rom-com writer. It brings out the worst in me.

B-unit: I'm pretty sure that all copyright has expired on Austen's work, but even if it hadn't, if the author classified this as satire, he could still put in zombies, werewolves and Republicans as much as he wanted and get away with it.

I just have a very sore spot about people thinking Austen is a sweet pink little rom-com writer.

See, Paddy, this is why it's an excellent litmus test for friendship. You don't get it? *GET OUT*.

They were being made fun of, and totally didn't get the joke.

This right here made me giggle and giggle. It's so funny to watch the idiots who think these women are something to aspire to be.

I still haven't had a chance to pick this up, and I still can't wait to. Also, I'm excited by the prospect of Abe Lincoln, Vampire Slayer. It could be really fun!

"I dream of the day when some wicked teacher assigns it and the Austen for comparative purposes."

When I was an English teacher, this is exactly the kind of thing I would've done. Which is probably why I'm not a teacher anymore.

Nice work, Prisco. A friend of a friend is friends with the guy who wrote it, so I've been hearing nothing but gushing. It's nice to hear input from a grounded point of view before I shell out money for my own copy. (Which I still probably will.)

However, let's not write off all of the Austen adaptations! What about the BBC version of P&P? Their Mr. Collins, Lady Catherine, Lydia, Wickam, and Bingley Sisters were all pretty spot on and scathing. Which is nice because all the way up here in the 21st century, I still deal with people like that all. the. time.

Thanks for speaking up PaddyDog and AvB. You both took the words right out of my mouth. A friend of mine said it well: Anyone who thinks Jane Austen was sentimental or mushy has never read one of her books.

Also, I think the world would be a much better place if fewer girls worshipped Miley, LiLo and Paris, and more emulated Lizzy Bennet and Eleanor Dashwood.

/rant :-)

Meet a tall and Hot woman on – Seekingtall.com. I’m sure your lover is there.

ShinyKate & AvB:

It is a truth universally acknowledged that a single girl in possession of a belief that Manolo Blahniks are her life's goal must be in want of a brain.

Paddydog, I officially love you.

zombies, werewolves and Republicans

ARRRRRRRWWWWWWWWWWWWWOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

AvB & ShinyKate:

BBC P&P was excellent, and let's not forget Clueless which managed to be a pretty good adaptation of Emma and made fun of the social manners of the day in the Los Angeles wealthy elite.

But don't get me started on Bridget Jones. I have never seen a more disgusting misinterpretation of P&P (and that includes the Mormon version which, while hilarious, seems to think that P&P should have been named "Virginity and Chastity are All that Matter in Life"

SinyKate:

It's called "Pride and Prejudice: A Latter-Day Comedy" and it is a real comedy although not in the way they intended I'm sure. It's from 2003 and occasionally you can find it on cable early on Saturday mornings when they have nothing else to air. Unfortunately, the version released for cable had some of the more overt LDS pieces removed from the theatrical version (which ran where???). One of my goals in life is to see the original.

Jane Austen is responsible for “Sex in the City,” all the romantic comedies that plague our cinemas, and basically all that is Katherine Heigl.

And that's where you lost me. Jane Austen was a feminist before there was such a thing, and wrote novels confronting the partiarchal nature of the society she was forced to live in.

Pride & Prejudice is as much about romance as it is about addressing how a man's wife and five daughters are rendered homeless if he dies because women weren't allowed to own property, and how the daughters needed to marry off to avoid such plight, or the plight of becoming an unmarryable "old maid" at 26. She is as responsible for Sex and the City as Edgar Allen Poe is for My Bloody Valentine 3D. I swear, you guys say the stupidest shit here sometimes.

I suppose if you just want to see a rom-com, the Mormon P&P is fine, but if you're the kind of person who doesn't think the choice between finishing college versus marriage is a moral dilemma (or even a valid choice) for a 20-year old in 2003, then it's a horrible adaptation.

Here's what this film (and Bridget Jones) just don't get: you can't throw in the names Longbourn, Bennet, Rosings, Darcy and decide you've made a P&P adaptation. You either do a version true to the book or a clever derivative that isn't afraid to walk a little bit away from the original while maintaining echoes of the wit.

What I mostly dislike about the LDS version is that Austen was highlighting what was confining and limiting about being an impecunious daughter of a gentleman in society at that time (so a rebellious approach albeit a very gentle one) while the LDS film uses her characters and some plot points to reinforce the mores of society and the need to comply with everything that confines and limits young women in that society.

And PaddyDog, from what I've read from you and others, the LDS version sounds like good campy fun (am I wrong?). Though I might need loads of alcohol (ironically) to keep from throwing things at the screen.

Hey! That's my ideal Saturday night!

Huh. This concept seemed oddly familiar to me, then I remembered that Red Dwarf did an episode called "Jane Austen World" way back when. No zombies, of course, just an angry Robot Kryten killing off the Austen characters because he wanted the Dwarf crew to sit down for a tasty meal he'd prepared.

Now THAT'S comedy!

Excellent. Every time I walk past an HMV I wonder whether or not to bother with this. The "zombie in possession of brains must be in want of more brains" cracked me up, but flipping through the book, it didn't look all that great. Thanks for saving me the time - I've got about 4 bookshelves worth to sift through.

PaddyDog, ShinyKate, and Mitch Clem , you are my heroes for defending my beloved Jane. I take issue with people (men in particular) who claim that Jane Austen was the original romance author, that her books are all about LOVE, and that her material is trite. Clearly, as has been said before, such people have never read Austen's novels.

Now, Brian Prisco, you're next. As I am reading PPZ myself, I can honestly say that Seth Grahame-Smith does more than just insert zombie scenes. There are entire scenes of character assassination that totally ruin the spirit of the original novel. Your comments seem to indicate that you have neither read nor care about Austen's body of work. I suggest you begin with Emma, if P&P is too nauseating. You might be surprised at the complex socioeconomic class- and gender-related issues that arise.