![]() ![]() For Eligible features such dexterous twists as turning officious Catherine de Bourgh into a wise doyenne of second-wave feminism and thus repositioning the original’s attitude toward powerful women. Fielding did in Bridget Jones.” Again, I protest. Sittenfeld “also fails,” Kakutani writes, “to work the sort of entertaining improvisations on her material that Ms. A droning suitor morphs into an awkward tech bro. Darcy hold but neurosurgeon? Would modern-day Lydia be anything other than a gorgeous, foul-mouthed, Crossfit-obsessed party girl who sneers at Liz, a writer, “Do you ever pass up a chance to use a big word? Or do you find that circumlocution always magnifies life’s conviviality?” A subtly competitive ball becomes an overtly combative game night. Heckerling deftly used in Clueless.” Here I must disagree, as Sittenfeld’s analogies could not be more delightfully apt. ![]() ![]() Sittenfeld struggles to update the plot of Pride and Prejudice,” Kakutani says, “failing to find the effortless sorts of analogies Ms. What are the lady Eligible’s faults? “Ms. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |