My Thoughts on Pride & Prejudice (2005) | Movie Review

I hope you enjoy the review, whether you agree with me a little, a lot, or not at all. :)
Update: here's a list of my other Pride and Prejudice reviews:
the book.......... • Pride and Prejudice by...
the 1940 version.......... • Pride and Prejudice (1...
the Pride and Prejudice and Zombies movie......... • Pride and Prejudice an...
Christmas at Pemberley Manor movie.......... • Christmas at Pemberley...
the Lizzie Bennet Diaries......... • The Lizzie Bennet Diar...
the 1995 version......... • A Review (of Sorts!) o...
the 1980 version......... • Pride and Prejudice (1...

[@alicepavey974]

The thing that especially grates in me is the way this film mixes Austen's late 18th/early 19th century dialogue with modern expressions, sometimes all in the same sentence. Like Darcy referring to "our relationship" during the first proposal. Also, as you say, Elizabeth's verging into rudeness, whereas Austen emphasises that Lizzie has a "sweetness and archness" that make it almost impossible for her to offend anyone.

[@rosezingleman5007]

Kelly Reilly’s dress at the assembly dance is so unhistorical that it makes me nuts. Bare arms??

[@lauracochran6713]

I honestly do not understand how people prefer this adaption to the 1995 version. I'm convinced they are in it just for the actors or the most basic heartfluttering, love story. Loved your review and agree 100% with you.

[@henrywayne5724]

I’m not a native speaker of English(or rather I’m not very experienced in the language), and this movie was insanely accessible for me. I absolutely loved the directing, the cinematography, the acting, everything! I tried reading the bool first, I ended up DNF’ing because the language got a tad too complex for me, so I opted for the adaptation, and as far as I’m concerned, the first few scenes I read from the book were just as I had imagined them. I particularly love how they summed up Austen’s first line from the book in a chaotic mess of the daughters gushing over Bingley. In a nutshell, as a foreign who still struggles with English, I enjoyed the film, and normally period pieces are not for me, but I actually sat through with this one and finished it.

[@vanyadolly]

Yes, and it's all the more frustrating because P&P is about so much more than the romance. Lizzie isn't even interested in Mr Darcy for the majority of the story, but that seems to be all some audiences -- and adaptions -- care about.

[@alyssakays367]

Sooooo happy I’m not the only person who feels this way about this movie!

[@annnee6818]

You are not I almost loathed it when I saw it and never wanted to rewatch

[@hellund2874]

Yes! Elizabeth's rudeness and cockiness (which tbh borders on arrogance, ironically) in this version reminds me of the abhorrent Netflix Persuasion 2022. It's like since the mid-2000s every historical film or series must have an overly confident, outspoken "modern" heroine, who is supposed to be relatable to 21st century viewers, but who just comes over as arrogant and rude. It's like the calm. It's like calm, subtle confidence is not enough to convey they message that these characters are strong and intelligent. It's the strong-female-characte syndrome in which only boldness and over-the-top gestures work for the audience.

[@freudulant]

Agree wholeheartedly and the 2020 adaptation of Emma is the worst offender. It’s like every scene you can hear in the distance “yeah slay girl…mic drop” 😂

[@hellund2874]

@@freudulant That one, too!! They managed to make Mr. Woodhouse the only sensible character 😅

[@ElliMasterton]

I couldn't agree with you more @hellund2874 !! So glad I'm not the only one who thinks this 🤦‍♀️

[@danieldarcy7862]

Joe Wright famously claimed he hadn't read the book. And it shows!

[@josephmayo3253]

You were so much kinder than I could possibly be about this movie. But now that Netflix has made Persuasion, I can say this is no longer the worst Austen adaptation I've ever seen. If I start on the reasons I feel this way, it will come across as a diatribe. Good review. I really enjoy the content of your channel, and your perspective is always so thoughtful.

[@Weiselberry]

Thank you!

[@supergran1000]

What a great review! So much to agree with. 2005 is enjoyable to an extent when one just wants a quick P&P "fix", but contains too many faults to be completely satisfying. The main flaw, as far as I'm concerned, is with the characterisations. I'll just concentrate on what I consider the two BIGGEST misrepresentations. First of all Mr Bennet. Sutherland plays him as a likeable and harmless curmudgeon who is affectionate to his wife. In the book, Bennet is a rather caustic character, in my opinion. Yes, he's funny so we all like him. But he's a negligent father and husband, who openly ridicules his wife in front of his children and encourages Elizabeth in the sport. He is substantially responsible for the family's woes. In my opinion, his cruel mockery of the other family members and indulgence of Elizabeth (together with the way he draws her in and makes her almost a co-conspirator), is detrimental to her. My other concern is with Darcy. McFadyen plays him as merely shy. WRONG! Darcy is NOT shy! He's a snob, pure and simple. As he admits in chapter 58: "I was given good principles, but left to follow them in pride and conceit. Unfortunately an only son (for many years an only child), I was spoilt by my parents, who, though good themselves (my father, particularly, all that was benevolent and amiable), allowed, encouraged, almost taught me to be selfish and overbearing; to care for none beyond my own family circle; to think meanly of all the rest of the world; to wish at least to think meanly of their sense and worth compared with my own." He meets Elizabeth and she challenges all his misconceptions. Shyness doesn't enter into it. Just to say that I'm not disagreeing with YOU, but with McFadyen's interpretation of the role. :-) Oh, and may I add my congratulations on getting 2000 subscribers.

[@akschmidt2085]

THANK YOU!! I fully agree with you. The adaptation is just flat out wrong, objectively wrong. The pig in the house and the hair and bonnets being among the nitpicky, if obvious, mistakes. The first proposal happens IN THE RAIN (like seriously? Hollywood cheese, anyone?!) and then they actually yell at each other? Yell? In an Austen adaptation?! And after she refuses him, he puts his face against hers, she breathes heavily and looks at him as if to say "are you as horny as I am rn?!" It's WRROONNG. And the "I love love luuurrve you" nearly made me barf. Blargh. Kudos to anyone who managed to enjoy this dreck.

[@melb5665]

I can’t help but love the 2005 version in spite of myself. This movie came out when I was 14, and I didn’t see it until I was about 16 or 17, when my friends and I became somewhat obsessed with it whilst simultaneously ripping into it mercilessly. I often refer to this film as Pride & Prejudice *Lite* - it’s just such an easy, concise and visually delicious watch that though it may not be nourishing to my Austen loving soul, it certainly tides me over for 1 hour 20 min

[@jeffreykaufmann2867]

Have u seen the 1995 P&P with Jennifer Ehle & Colin Fith? It's a masterpiece

[@frmm123]

Wonderful review, can't imagine how Austen would think of this movie. I'm commenting because, finally, someone else has pointed out that pig...why o why is there a pig in the house...

[@mgthestrange9098]

“WTF have they done to my book!?” The pig annoyed me too and as for the costumes, urgh!

[@dobrilajovovic-schultz3636]

Agree 100%. It pained me to watch and spot all inconsistencies If I closed my mind to all that, the movie is a nice romantic story , pleasant to watch and enjoy. But not P&P at all.

[@janellvanbebber8988]

I watched the movie immediately after reading the book and was so shocked at how much i didn't like it, probably my biggest complaint was that darcy and lizzy seemed to spend no time together, no time conversing. it's a slow burn romance that takes course over more than a year- you can barley fit that into a two hour movie and also give all the intresting side characters any sort of development, and in my opinion they failed in both regard. i don't know, i didn't like it at all, and i think it's the definition of style of substance, i would have no idea what was going on if i hadn't just read the book, it's impossible to follow the plot.

[@judyr0berts]

I agree with your review. I found the movie barely tolerable. Though there was the cinematography that you mentioned, the glaring flaws distracted me from that. I think it's a mistake to patronize modern audiences by dumbing down a period piece for them.

[@sadiedavenport]

I clench my fists every time I hear someone say they loved the 2005 version, and watching your review has been quite cathartic! I tried to give this movie a second chance and couldn't finish it. When I saw Caroline Bingley's sleeveless shift thing again I just couldn't go any further. When I criticize this film it seems there's always someone who wants to use the fact that it's an adaptation as an excuse for its awfulness. Perhaps it is, and of course they can take artistic liberties, but to anyone who knows and loves the book, it's impossible not to see it as the demented corpse of a fantastic story. I don't think I would love it as a stand-alone movie, but the fact that they used Jane Austen's gorgeous work and did this to it... Ugh

[@JamieRobles1]

There's a cute KZbin video of a play of Pride and Prejudice. The backdrop is a life size desk and the actors look like miniatures walking about giant books and pens. They are accurately dressed and accurately played. You knew which sister was which (yeah, the screenwriter didn't put much into who was who) A little slow but . . . . I would watch that version than watch the 2005 version.

[@strll3048]

"The demented corpse of a fantastic story." If these are your words, I think that you can be a great writer.

[@rkgrkg]

Me on the outside: Jerome Me on the inside: @sadiedavenport's post :D

[@sadiedavenport]

@strll3048 well shucks. Thanks! 😊

[@outsideofenough6466]

I didn’t like the affectionate relationship between the Bennet parents. Their toxic relationship was a big reason Lizzy wanted to be married for love. I think I have an even more unpopular opinion that you, Jerome, because for me, one of the worst pieces of dialogue was I love, I love, love you, or however it went. This Darcy was a wuss. I can’t see him standing up Wickham or any other unscrupulous person he did business with. His painful shyness turned me off. Darcy did have a hard time talking with people he didn’t know and he was awkward in that sense, but he was otherwise pretty self-assured. He would never have a puppy dog look on his face because he was so shy. The actor is just not Darcy to me at all.

[@kevint5451]

Good review Jerome. Like many I regard the BBC 1995 version as definitive. I enjoyed this movie for the beautiful cinematography, and on the whole as an enjoyable viewing experience. I remember thinking at the time of it's release.."Why even bother after the BBC version?" it had been done as brilliantly as possible..but I did enjoy the film nonetheless. For the TV version I appreciated how American actress Jennifer Ehle smiled with her lips together modestly as an English lady of that era would,. Colin Firth has never been better than in his smoldering portrayal as the manly but repressed Mr Darcy. I know the one I will watch again and again is still the Collin Firth and Jenifer Ehle version. Their chemistry and the whole of the cast was perfection.

[@reasonablyserious]

The mini series is so much better suited a format in general. This one was my first introduction to any Austen, as I was a child when it came out (7, to be precise. I have older sisters). It is clearly different from most proper Austen adaptations (not counting the unwatchables), but I hold it in high regard as a more conceptual/artistic interpretation, and it is a good film in its own right. As long as one is aware of that, it is thoroughly enjoyable, I find.

[@hupotasso4705]

This movie was Carey Mulligan’s very first professional acting job so her playing a part wasn’t an indication that she had a more significant role than any other actor.

[@jamesdevoe5945]

"I know," they said to themselves, let's take one of the most beloved works of English literature--that depends on rational sensibility, and has its backdrop in Regency society--add some Sturm und Drang, smother it in Romantic iconography, rewrite Jane Austen's narrative and make a movie." It's no surprise that Austen lovers disliked the movie--It's not Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice. It's not our Pride and Prejudice. The question is whether or not themovie works onits ownmerit

[@asdabir]

I agree with everything you said. What baffles me is all the glowing reviews it got. I was like am i going crazy or is this really bad? I agree the visuals and music are beautiful. But the pacing of the dialogue and body language are unnecessarily rushed and just feels bizarre. the bennet sisters look all indistinguishable because of the same drab colored clothes and unkempt hair. The are supposed to be quite rich and are only financially insecure because if the entail. What I did like was Charlotte confronting Elizabeth on judging her and standing up for her decision. The way this scene was done and the dialog Don't you dare judge me' was pretty pedestrian though. As was Jane's reply to bingley "a thousand times yes". What is this a hallmark movie or the bachelor?

[@ElliMasterton]

Hahaha yes, preach! 👏

[@stephenmorse8811]

A charming review. I love this movie (and, of course, the classic 1995 TV production). I agree that Bingley comes across as ridiculous and no way would the gorgeous Rosamund have fallen for him. I too love the cinematography and, being in the UK and fairly close to the Peak District, have stood on that outcrop that Keira Knightley stood on. The music is gorgeous, one of my favourite soundtracks, too. I believe that all of your criticisms are valid but I just enjoy the overall film and the vast majority of the cast choices. Keira looks so beautiful in this and I think is believable as Elizabeth, within the tone of this adaptation.. Maybe I'm biased, being a male !

[@henrywayne5724]

I actually really LOVE this adaptation. See, I’m not a native English speaker. I tried reading the book and it got a bit exhausting for me to read. But this film was easily accessible for me, and it was fun. I might read Pride And Prejudice again, after sometime when I’m more experienced with the language. Ironically, I kept up with everything in this movie.

[@aneleway]

Why not read it in your own language?

[@henrywayne5724]

@@aneleway It's not translated in my language. Kiswahili is still pretty niche.

[@aneleway]

@@henrywayne5724 oh, so sorry to hear. Keep practising your English then, it’s a beautiful book!

[@henrywayne5724]

@@aneleway Thank you. I am practicing. I really want to read Classics as much as possible but the weird sentence structures and vocabulary can get a bit too taxing for my foreign brain to handle. 😢😂. But I am practicing and hopefully in five or so years I'll be able to comfortably read Classics

[@mgthestrange9098]

I wouldn’t lose heart. As a native English speaker, I struggle with it sometimes myself as do many others. Languages evolve over time and Austin’s language is different to modern English.

[@Paladin12572]

Thanks for another thoughtful review. And remember, your introversion is not a disease in need of being cured! :-)

[@sueneimoyer5043]

Great review! It’s refreshing to at long last hear and read so many opinions of this film that match my own. Two other things that really bother me about this adaptation, in addition to the pig in the house is, first, the portrayal of Mr. Bennet as some sort of experimentalist gentleman farmer whose activities more closely resemble George Washington’s than the bookish, indolent character Austen created (who spends much of every day in his library reading books and otherwise avoiding everyone and everything else). Second, I agree with the criticism of the house being so run-down and outright filthy. What research I’ve done suggests that the Bennets’ “£2,000 a year” would have put them somewhere in the lower 6-figure salary range, placing them in more of an upper-middle class to moderately wealthy range income-compared to Mr. Darcy’s income, which would be more in the 7-figure range. It’s also interesting to note that Austen’s brother inherited an estate that brought him £15,000 a year-making her brother even wealthier than the Darcys.

[@stephanieb663]

they tried to make it into a Cinderella story and thats not what it is

[@williamblakehall2773]

As others have already said, congrats on 2000 subs. I've never been into Austen, especially the whole modern movie renaissance of Austen, but I have to applaud you on your standards, your fairness, and your courage. They're why we show up, and they're why we will always look forward to a next video.

[@Weiselberry]

Thank you!

[@april091965]

When Lizzie steals Mr. Bennett's lines to Mr. Collins during dinner about his talent for flattery, "...May I ask whether these pleasing attentions proceed from the impulse of the moment, or are they result of future study?"... I can't help but feel that I am witnessing an unforgiveable crime. It makes me nauseous no matter how many times I see this film. That said I purchased the DVD and watch it for the gorgeous cinematography and soundtrack that you talk about in your review. The textures and lighting and color palettes of the costumes and sets, though I agree can swing far from period plausibility (shabby Bennet home) are so full of visual interest that I will pause the film to stare at certain scenes as if a painting. Thanks for the review. It was fun to hear you flush out so well the pros & cons of this film. For me it's one of several ways (even if not my fave) to get my Austen fix when I crave it.

[@canonwright8397]

This movie had a lot of firsts for me: First time i ever threw my popcorn at the screen. First time i got into a fight in the movie theater. (Pop corn hit someone and I had to defend my X-girlfriends honor). First time I was ever "almost" thrown out of a movie theater. First time i ever demanded my money back. First time getting thrown out of a movie theater. First time drinking at the bar after a movie. And finally, first time breaking up with my X-girlfriend. But all in all, a pretty good night.

[@harringt100]

First time breaking up with your ex-girlfriend? So you got back together and then broke up again?

[@mrsstewart1997]

Lmao

[@canonwright8397]

@Gal De Som Yup, I understood that the movie was bad, and still is. May everything that's good in the world have mercy on my soul. Have a nice day.

[@akschmidt2085]

Hahaha. I feel you. What a bunch of dreck that movie was.

[@strll3048]

Your critique of this movie is the most well considered that I have ever come across. Thank you. I feel that they should have written their own story and enacted it how they choose, if they are so great writers to feel that they could do better than Jane Austen. However, they should not use her name.

[@anamacedo8303]

I enjoyed listening to your review. I have read the book & seen the 1995 BBC adaptation, but still like this movie regardless of its flaws.

[@BelovedCaptain]

Actually, you've voiced pretty much all of the reasons why I also don't like this version. I especially cannot stand Knightley as Elizabeth. She's too childish and almost silly at times. And the fact that they felt the need to dumb down the dialogue really annoys me as well. Actually, the dialogue change is also why the 2006 Jane Eyre is not my favorite version as well lol

[@JamieRobles1]

Agreed. She suppose to be one of the well brought up daughters . . . when their parents cared. And then after Mary . . . you can tell they gave up :D

[@Whatsisface4]

Just watched your review again, and will say i pretty much agree with everything you've said.

[@scott09g96]

I remember seeing this version in the theater. At the time I wasn't as familiar with the original text and so I enjoyed it....although I felt it had some serious pacing issues, and was also off put by a few of the historical inaccuracies that you mentioned. Overall I thought (then) that it was decent, but haven't had much desire to revisit it. Just can't beat the Colin Firth version ;) Another outstanding review Jerome, replete with astute observations, fair criticisms, and valid arguments. You nailed the description of how it feels to be introverted (tending to lean that way myself, that part was relatable.) Glad you ultimately decided to share your opinions with us. I can see how that would be intimidating, but your views were too good not to be heard.

[@Hcb37]

I like the way the 2005 film uses light, the soundtrack, and moments of the characters to advance the story. There are a number poignant images that have stayed with me since I first saw the film on a plane. I don’t think the film is a particularly faithful adaptation, and your review does a good job of outlining its limitations. But your review also does justice to its benefits. Well done.

[@pingvinererkule]

I totally see where you're coming from. I think the reason why I don't mind the changes in dialogue and the historical inaccuracies that much is that looking at the movie as a whole I see it as an effective way to ease modern audiences into not only Pride and Prejudice but into Jane Austen and the whole world of period-dramas. It was pretty much my first introduction to this whole genre and lead to me checking out the more faithful adaptations and eventually to read the book. It's kinda the same way I feel about, say, the 2006 Jane Eyre adaption. In my social circle I'm pretty much the only one who's into this genre except my one friend who does enjoy watching these modern adaptions with me, so they serve as a nice way for me to have someone to discuss it with who maybe wouldn't be able to get into the book or the more faithful adaptions.

[@Weiselberry]

So glad you left this comment! What you describe is very similar to the way I feel about the 1996 version of Emma, a movie that technically has a lot of the same issues as this one. I saw the 1995 Pride and Prejudice several times when I was little, but I wasn't really aware of other period dramas or Austen stories. But one day my mom and my sister and I caught Emma starting on tv, and we all fell in love with it. It was like we'd stumbled on a whole new genre of movies and we couldn't wait to dive in. I've seen other versions of Emma since that are superior adaptations of the book, but even though I'm aware of its flaws now, nothing's going to change my affection for it. I'm looking forward to reviewing it sometime, though I'm sure I'll experience a similar kind of apprehension as I felt reviewing this movie, except I'll be on the opposite side. :)

[@RosavaDo]

I was scared of Lizzy in this version. She looked like she could literally chew poor Darcy out. Poor poor this version Darcy. They should have called this movie 'Prey and Predator'. I'm not going to re-watch this movie never again.

[@rebecamaynart]

I watched this movie yesterday and spent the whole time complaining about it lol, you just said everything I thought about this piece! Thank you!

[@Weiselberry]

You're welcome. :D

[@Ray-my7gu]

I love (I love , I love, love) this movie and I still agree with almost all your critiques. The Bennetts are too slovenly, Bingley too stupid, and wickham was an undeveloped character. But I disagree with your criticism about Jane and Lizzie being too silly. I think the movie portrayed them perfectly for a modern audience. They certainly do have a lighthearted side to them, and giggles in private are not inappropriate. I think in general all the characters (except Caroline Bingley) are portrayed in a more sympathetic light than any other version or the book. It certainly made me think.

[@kellyjkennedy]

You should feel free to 'go against the grain' anytime you want - you have 2000 followers now!! Congrats Ms. W!

[@Weiselberry]

Thank you! :D

[@coloraturaElise]

About Darcy, I could see they were going for the shy, socially-awkward version, which he describes himself as, and so thought it was valid. Is it my favorite? No, but it's better than David Rintoul's inhuman version of 1980.

[@akschmidt2085]

Rintoul definitely overdid the snootiness but I just love Elizabeth Garvie so so much that I still watch that adaptation.

[@tyleraharden]

Omg. You are exactly right on point! Good for you

[@annnee6818]

Thank you. I agree that this is not a good adaptation. The movie is competently made and well acted. But pride and prejudice it ain't. The proposals were both so cringe worthy I felt I might die of embarrassment by proxy. And your "maybe we kiss now" position is my "are you as horny as I am right now?" position. Sexual tension is NOT called for there, Lizzie detests D'Arcy at this point. And yeah, obviously you can be horny for s.o. you hate, that's just not this story.

[@joansharky]

my favorite channel for book reviews ❤️

[@Weiselberry]

Aw, thanks!

[@8114梦见]

Same

[@abdulrahmanahmed6502]

My first seen video on this channel 👍😎

[@rosezingleman5007]

I had a hard time watching this one, really. I’m in my sixties and first read P&P at the age of nine, so like Mrs Bennet’s nerves and Mr Bennet, it’s been my old friend, so seeing it dressed in slept-in clothes and living with actual pigs is distressing. It’s like the family needed an intervention with a television home show organizer. The things you point out as inappropriate are more galling because Darcy’s response to her refusal specifically mentions her family’s “lack of decorum”! Awful. Simply awful.

[@carlybishop6160]

Thank you! You are spot on. Well done. The only thing you missed which annoys me is how the dialogue has been edited and changed to explain things which shouldn't need explaining. It is like 'Pride and Prejudice' for Dummies. I get that not everyone will understand the significance but I think that is up to family and friends to help. To me these lines are jokes, if you have to explain the joke, it just ruins it.

[@annnee6818]

Lol well put😃

[@sandraalexander4690]

I thought it was beautifully shot. I found Lizzy not very likable here. She is abrasive.

[@laurawestenra]

The dialogue in the 2005 version was too cheesy, formulaic, and full of movie executive manipulation. It gave me major icks. Also Keira Knightley's "jaw acting" and pouty modeling faces are too much for me. She seems like a nice person in real life but how she gets so many historical roles is mind boggling to me.

[@elizagaskell7957]

IMO, its an OK movie. I agree with the review especially with the lack of screen time of Mr Wickham. Whilst I do like some of the visual scenes, but on the whole the film is just...blah. Give me Pride and Prejudice (1995) mini series any day; or Pride and Prejudice and Zombies (2016) which is a secret indulgence for me to watch.

[@pag9128]

Having read the book I felt the movie seemed rushed.

[@theoriginalbearbear]

My thoughts exactly!

[@8114梦见]

Dario Marianelli is a master at the period soundtrack

[@riverbeee9643]

I agree! Well deserved Oscar, that!

[@darkwolf9253]

I know how you feel about critiquing a movie that a lot of people love... I'm kind of an anti-Disney person that's related to a lot of Disney fans. It's kind of hard to hold my tongue whenever movies come up at family gatherings.

[@gozillafan-ts9vc]

I love your channel I just discovered you from Godzilla and now I’m branching out on your other content and girl I love ALL of you channel, keep up the fantastic work!

[@Weiselberry]

Thank you! :D

[@Massinissathefirst]

It was my then teenage daughter who saw the movie (dubbed into our native Russian), fell in love with it and said I should see it too. And so she and I watched the original English-language version on DVD together. And we both love it to the day. I'd never read the book before, barely heard of Jane Austen. So, unlike you, I had the opportunity to experience this movie for what it was, or for what it was intended to be: a great MOVIE with an engaging story and relatable characters. I guess, being raised on or in the shadow of great works of literature in one's native language does tend to give us the whole lot of expectations, as far as film adaptations are concerned. Never did I have any trouble following the plot or dialogues or remembering who was who in the Bennet family. I felt really confused when you said all these things, especially that the story was rushed. I can only assume you meant the story was rushed COMPARED to the book. So... Expectations, eh? We're all entitled to our opinions and I'm not going to argue or disagree. I'm actually really grateful. Your video sent me along this wonderful memory path, after all. And so, in return, I also want to share my personal experience, a foreigner's one. First of all, the movie got both me and my daughter to read the book! Did enjoy it. Have read it 5-6 times by now. But to be honest, I enjoy the movie more. Know why? Because of... the language! The book's a tiiiny bit too complicated, the language's a tiiiny bit too old-fashioned for me. I have to strain juuust a little bit. And it gets tiring. But the language in the movie, it's just perfect on my ears! No strain, pure pleasure. Then, I work with teenagers and among many other things my work sometimes involves watching movies and discussing them. I've watched this particular movie with about 15 teenagers over these years. Perhaps, not a very impressive number. But how many of them liked it? All of them. How many fell in love with it? Almost all of them. How many were enticed enough to read the book too? Almost all of them! But how many ended up reading it in the original? Half of them! Think about it. After watching this movie eight teenagers I actually know were motivated enough to improve their English to the point of being able to read Austen! And that IS impressive! And so is the magic of this movie.

[@Weiselberry]

It's nice to hear a fresh perspective! It absolutely can make a difference whether you approach an adaptation with familiar knowledge of the book or not. There are movies I've seen where I wasn't familiar with the book, and I had a much more favorable reaction than the book's fans did. As an example, I generally point to the 1996 version of Emma. I saw it on tv knowing nothing about the book by Jane Austen and I loved it. I still do, even after reading the book several times (and loving that too) and acknowledging that there are far superior adaptations out there. Sometimes when a new film comes out that's based on a book, people rush to read the book beforehand. But I think there's great merit in just going ahead and watching the movie so you can be free of preconceived notions and distractions. I wish I could know what I'd think of this movie if I was unaware of the source material or its historical and social context. Who's to say what my response would be then? I think that's wonderful that so many of the teenagers you've worked with have been inspired to read the book and to improve their English! It's always great when a movie leads people to read more and take the opportunity to expand their minds. There's value in any film that manages to accomplish that. Thanks for sharing your story!

[@Massinissathefirst]

Wow, thank you for such a nice reply! And your example is great! In my case, I'm basically unable to enjoy any adaptation of Russian classics filmed by a non-Russian studio. Sometimes it's because the plot's been changed, and sometimes it's the hairstyles or manners, which I KNOW are supposed to be different... Shall we call these preconceptions "Prejudice"? And then shall we call my refusal to even consider a fresh perspective "Pride" ? The only adaptation of Emma I've seen is the 2009 mini-series starring Romola Garai. I'm a great fan of this production and I've never even thought about watching any other adaptations! Now I think I'll be checking the 1996 version soon! (Still haven't read the book, though.) Thank you! Good luck!

[@Weiselberry]

That absolutely makes sense! A lot of us end up feeling that way about something, it seems. I think it actually requires some effort to watch a movie, especially an adaptation, with zero expectations. I remember I didn't care much for the 1956 film version of War and Peace when I saw it shortly after reading the book; though there were actors I liked in the cast, it just didn't measure up. So I can imagine you would be even more critical, being from the novel's country of origin and cringing at every cultural inaccuracy. Oh, that's an excellent adaptation of Emma! I think it's the best one. It's detailed, accurate, and well-made, but with some creative additions (like delving into Emma's childhood at the beginning) that spark the imagination. But each version has its devoted fans. I should clarify that there are actually two 1996 adaptations. The one I referred to is the Hollywood movie with Gwyneth Paltrow (who I'm not a fan of personally, but I overlook that) and Jeremy Northam as a verrrrry charming Mr. Knightley. That's the one I saw first which introduced me to the characters and the story. The other is a made-for-tv version with Kate Beckinsale and Mark Strong that a lot of fans still consider the best adaptation, superior to the 2009 one. I agree it's very good and I enjoy it, but I'd already become attached to the other one when I saw it. Which version you see first can have a big effect on your preference. It's another matter of perspective. :) (There is also a 1970s miniseries and the 2020 film, but I haven't seen either of those yet.) I hope all this information isn't overwhelming! I've always intended to talk about more Jane Austen works, not just Pride and Prejudice, but I got sidetracked for a couple years by an in-depth Jane Eyre project. Hopefully I'll be tackling Austen again in the not-so-distant future. Thanks so much for replying!

[@Massinissathefirst]

Thank you for replying in such a nice way! It feels so great to be having an actual conversation! Thank you for the clarification on the 1996 versions of Emma and all the details you've found time to get into for me! I really appreciate that! Not overwhelming at all, no worries, it's all absolutely invaluable to me! I feel like I'll end up watching both adaptations you mentioned, hehe. And I'm yet to find a single film adaptation of War and Peace that could suit my fancy. Not even the, you know, one made by the natives here. *facepalm* Be watching your other reviews soon. And do hope you'll get back to Austen some day! Thanks again! And good luck!

[@ilovehouse888]

Well done. Good and honest review. I don’t know about anyone else but im sick of seeing fairytales. It’s always a poor girl getting with the rich and powerful man. It’s giving some women false hope and they think this can actually happen in real life.

[@moremileyplease4387]

This movie was a masterpiece! The 'rushing through' you mentioned is made right by the film's density, which makes it more like poetry, making it many times rewatchable. Pschologically, anger comes from frustrated expectations. Try to quell your inner voice saying things 'should' be this way.

[@akschmidt2085]

I agree with her. We can't make ourselves like things, nor should we. I hated P&P 2005 pretty furiously when I first watched it and I haven't felt the need to watch it since. Not that this should detract anyone else, but I don't like this preachy "because I like it, everyone who doesn't is clearly being unreasonable"

[@reasonablyserious]

I wholeheartedly agree.

[@iluvmusicals21]

Why should she quell her inner voice when it is valid?

[@moremileyplease4387]

@@akschmidt2085 the goal is to know yourself. Try to understand WHY you disliked it, and why you like the things you like. These questions will definitely yield to introspection & analysis. The answers will make your life better.

[@GoGreen1977]

I've been to "Pemberley", which was filmed at Chatsworth, the home of the Duke of Devonshire. Yes, the sculptures are there and are made of marble. Well, not the bust of Darcy. I didn't see that.

[@helenatesarova5631]

15 years and I am still in love with Matthew Macfadyen. I just can't help it... Regardless... I agree with you. There are many scenes in this movie where the characters are acting out of their character (table manners of Bennet's family, Lizzy's behavior, listening behind the door, foolish Jane, dumb Bingley, Bingley coming into Jane's bedroom (this scene always makes me angry), Lady Catherine visiting Lizzy in the middle of the night (urgh! another nonsense!), relationship between Mr a Mrs Bennet, completely different from the book). I never liked the sun rise scene (aka second proposal) too. My major thought about this scene from my very first time: why the heck are they in their pyjamas? :-) But for some strange reason, despite all the nonsenses, the movie IS working. I consider it a very good adaptation.

[@reasonablyserious]

The director said this on many occasions, but I'll repeat it here, because I think it relevant. The 2005 adaptation has always been meant to be more of an artistic interpretation (liberties were taken at points to achieve a certain ambience etc), than a simple recount of the book, which in and of itself does not make a valuable contribution to the world of film. Whether or not these alterations go to far is up for debate (and make no mistake, I wished they'd done quite a few things differently), but film, as literature, is an art, and feature films are a medium wholly different from novels, you can't just copy and paste. Of course, an adaptation has to be respectful to the source material, but there also has to be given leeway for less literal interpretations, like this (not that I am implying you are not doing this, I just felt like making the point for what it's worth). There are obvious aberrations, but I always enjoyed this film, because the underlying theme seemed to me to be still intact, unlike many so-called adaptations/homages that miss the mark to the point I get frustrated by their very existence.

[@sageantone7291]

I could not agree with you any more on this issue. I have problems with friends who prefer this to 1995. If I ever post a dating profile, one inclusion will be "must prefer 1995 P&P over 2005." Liz is not supposed to be as beautiful as Keira Knightley.

[@bighuge1060]

A recent re-watching of this movie with the audio commentary had me giving this adaptation more praise as I wasn't fond of the movie when I first viewed it. As I did the first time, I started off being cool to Knightly's portrayal in the lead but as the movie continued, it grew in depth and I was impressed. Similarly, the family home seemed more "lived in" and relatable. For the first time, I got a sense of the source of the Bennet's income where past adaptations I wondered how they could afford any servants. There were other touches in this version that was nice to see, the love still remaining between Mr. and Mrs. Bennet for one and the way Mr. Bennet reacts to Lizzie's acceptance of Darcy's marriage proposal. I will still love the 90's miniseries over all other adaptions because it had the time to flesh out the characters, especially Wickham and Bingley. I also miss that glorious lump named Mr. Hurst from that mini-series; a character who lived for cards, food and falling asleep on the couch. What is nice is both movie and mini-series are worthy works and can be enjoyed for what each brings to the story.

[@gingerbee6660]

Girl you said what we where all thinking!

[@stephanieb663]

the movie was so on the nose, jane austen is subtle. big clash

[@luthval]

First time i saw the film, i haven't saw other versions, and I like it much, but after reading the book again and again and seeing other versions, I agree with your analysis. I'm not convinced by Lizzie here, some smiles (not natural at all). Historical accuracy doesn't disturb me so much, and images are superb, but I miss a lot in Rosing's part and Pemberley too, and I think Wickham does not have the place he should in the plot. Anyway, when I don't have time to see the entire '95 BBC, I have an eye on this one...

[@lmschmidt6165]

I don't like this movie at all! Darcy looks like a crying baby and Keyra was absolutelly not a good choice!

[@debbeborders5762]

I also feel like we are speeding too quickly through the story. I find myself wanting to see Elizaband Darcy happy together. They should have made it longer and given us more time with the characters.

[@JamieRobles1]

The 2007 Persuasion was WAY better than this version of Pride and Prejudice. I don't know if you checked that out with the 1995 version, which is my favorite. Yeah, right there with you. I liked the Lawrence Olivier version more than the 2005 version and will watch that instead. Adaptation or not. Yeah, it's a work of fiction, but it regular run-of-the-mill fiction. It's not Steampunk, or high fantasy, or what not- to where you can have the Bennets living in a barn (which is what it looked like to me.) The things that make it fiction is that there is no village, Longbourne, or the people who lived in (sigh.) The characters and the names of the character are fictional, save for everything else. This is Regency England and it ought to look and feel like it. The people ought to act like it is Regency England. 21 century anything shouldn't be there at all, and quite frankly, that not is not what we came to see. I want to see bonnets, a gloves, and hats, and carriages, and horses all in ocean of candlelight. Regency to the letter, not what your interpretation of it. Yeah . . . this was an interpretation, not an adaptation. People need to understand the difference.

[@ginadoyle4089]

I love P&P but I found this version too distracting because it streamlines way too many things. Keep up the good work!

[@frndofbear]

I watched this movie on my small screen by myself the first time. I was 45 years old at the time and had never seen any adaptation, or read the book. So I lived your assessment that any P&P virgins would have trouble keeping up. Ten minutes in I was lost. Then Darcy came on the screen and I was bitterly disappointed. THIS was the male lead? I found him completely unattractive. But I was stuck at home sick and kept watching. He looked better in the scene when Lizzie visited Netherfield. Still not attractive, but better. When he took her hand as she departed I felt the first skip of my heart. The scene in the rain made me breathless. And when he smiled at her right before he invited Mr. Gardner fishing I was utterly, completely and hopelessly in love. That is the magic of this film for me personally. She didn't like him, neither did I. Lizzie and I fell in love simutaneously. I had only done that once in my life, so it was an AMAZING thrill. I loved the morning second proposal scene. I loved Donald Sutherlands performance. I agree that Lydia and Kitty could have switched places halfway through the movie and would not have noticed. Bingley was bad. Just really bad, but I liked Jane's performance. The pig was ridiculous. I agree with your main point was that the main problem with the movie is that it is too short. Hell, I would have loved four more hours of it! I appreciate the 1995's version's extra dialogue and yearn to see it put into this 2005 production.

[@frndofbear]

But while I liked the two leads in the 1995 production, I felt no passion Love and admiration, yes, but no thrills. I am surprised you did not mention the amazing performance by Judy Densch. The Bingley sisters and Lady Catherine DeBerg were such caricatures of a human in the 1995 version. I enjoyed their lines, but could not take them seriously. But Ms. Densch was a formidable, intimidating presence and perfect for Lady Catherine. I don't mind that she came to the Bennet's in the middle of the night. She heard the rumors and this was going to destroy her daughter's life plan, a plan that Ms. Deberg had been working on her entire life. She likely could not sleep and was frantic to find out if the rumor was true and if so, to put an end to it. Perhaps they could have had their dinner interrupted instead? By the way, two scenes I would love to see portrayed; Nasty Mr Collins telling Lady Catherine the rumor (I feel certain it was him as he was always trying to find her favor in disagreeable ways) and then Catherine confronting Darcy...only to have him have the final word.

[@Whatsisface4]

Nice review. What I like about the film are the moods it creates. The cinematography and music contribute to this. Whatever, the acting isn't the main strength of the film but is maybe on an equal level as the cinematography and music. I think the film was trying to relate to a modern audience with a lot of it's elements, whether this is a good or bad thing is open to debate, what isn't is that in this respect it wasn't true to the book. I agree that the film had things happening that wouldn't in those times. Still, nice review.

[@lindazee126]

I don’t like this version - the aesthetics, scenery and costumes are awful. The Bennet family did not live in squalor. They rushed the story. It’s a dumbed down version of a classic. 👎

[@jamiedianne6778]

YES. You totally nailed this. 🙌

[@philipgior3312]

Jerome...Congrats to you on attaining 2 K! You should have way WAY more. Keep up the good work kiddo!

[@Weiselberry]

Thank you! :D

[@MsYulia2702]

Interestingly, for a while I, too, thought that the length of this film is the root cause of its problems. But then I watched P&P 1967 (some kind soul uploaded it on youtube :), which is about same length, but is really lovely for all its old-fashioned style and doesn't leave you with that unpleasant aftertaste. And not even a moment that would make you want to squirm in your chair. So I came to a conclusion that in spite of all its audio-visual magnificence, the 2005 version simply shows total disrespect to the original book - most likely unintentional. It lacks intelligence and taste, but these things are not necessary at all to appeal to mass audience.That's sad.

[@Weiselberry]

I haven't seen that 1967 version in its entirety. I should watch it!

[@MsYulia2702]

Thank you for your reply :) it would be great to know your thoughts on that "vintage" adaptation, too. For me it was absolute delight, and I'd say in terms of general mood and spirit, it is closest to the iconic 1995 series. When I learned that the 1967 Jane Bennet was played by Susannah Harker's mother, it added to my feeling of mysterious continuity between these 2 productions. And perhaps Alison Steadman was inspired by this Mrs Bennet.. (just guessing :)@@Weiselberry

[@rul4522]

I can’t watch it! Modern is not always good as i noticed. So, brave that you dare do it, moreover to take time for it.

[@rul4522]

I not only didn’t like it - I couldn’t watch it!

[@danbendix1398]

Well thought out. Thank you. Well wishes to all my fellow introverts.

[@iluvmusicals21]

Rewatched your review. I agree with you on all points. I think they were trying to modernize the characters actions/motivations, while making the setting more "realistic" but not checking historical accuracy. It all seems a bit slipshod. BTW did you catch Jennifer Ehle reading P & P in her car during the stay home order?

[@EclecticSB]

We recently watched this film again, it had been a long time. I do prefer the 1995 version , but this one has great merits too. The dance at Meryton really appeals to me now, and I am over 60. So much fun and life! The rustic element of their home was odd, I agree, but I could take it more now. The scenery and music are so lush. If you have not seen this one in awhile, please give it a whirl.

[@martinlguzman7711]

I mostly liked a lot of the cinematography , cute joke at the end " first impressions" : }

[@rachelport3723]

Not true to the story, not true to the dialogue, not true to the period, not true to the characters. I always wonder at the number of women I know who have Matthew MacFeyden as their favorite Darcy. Darcy is not shy and socially awkward, he is snobbish, and that's what has to change before he wins Elizabeth. Elizabeth would never wander around outside in her nightclothes before dawn; Lady Catherine would never visit anyone at night. Ever. Not in a million years. Elizabeth would never wander alone through Pemberley while making a stately-home tour. It's just bad manners if nothing else. The second proposal is so far from anything Darcy would say even on their honeymoon or after some years of marriage. He might at some point in their lives use the word passion, but body and soul? I saw this movie once, and have not wanted to see it again. Still don't. You are fairer minded than I am.

[@lizzy-wx4rx]

Agree completely with all of this. I do think he's an introvert who doesn't enjoy talking to new people, which makes him appear less good-natured than he turns out to be, but he IS also a snob, as he himself admits. He DID say it would be a "degradation" for him to marry her. He had to evolve from that perspective for them to come together. I like McFadden as an actor, but Darcy is described as being so "haughty" at times that he even intimidates Elizabeth. This Darcy may have been more "relatable" but that's because he wasn't actually Darcy. (I also could not get over him calling her "Miss Elizabeth" throughout.) And the shots of Keira Knightly being pensive off on her own (like at the Netherfield ball), or yelling at her family, were also totally out of character.

[@marshaprice8226]

I have only watched this movie once years ago. I didn't like it then and, while I have recently watched videos about the way the scenes were filmed that were enlightening, they haven't changed my opinion. I basically agree with your negative comments. I particularly disliked the way the Bennetts and their house was portrayed. The pig was just too much!

[@barbarabrown7974]

We had a big debate about Caroline Bingley's dresses on a Jane Austen Facebook page I haunted. They dressed her that way to show the difference between city versus country. Evidently there were sleeveless dresses in the Regency era, and we found several portraits of Regency ladies in sleeveless dresses. As to whether this was on the extreme of fashion forwardness to be risqué, I don't know. Some Regency ladies also dampened their muslin dresses to make them cling and become the equivalent of a wet T-shirt contest. That was risqué, but still some young ladies did so.

[@sedumplant]

I had to laugh. I think I agree on most comments. The sound track is wonderful, I agree on that!!

[@fyodor371]

I’m so glad you made this video, as it was my introduction to your channel. I was down the rabbit hole of Austen adaptations when this review popped up and articulated so well, with such passion & humour (“MOST IMPROPER”), exactly what I found wanting in the 2005 adaptation. Though I was unprepared for the unbridled horror of the American ending [seriously, What. The. Fluffbutt?], of which I was hitherto blissfully ignorant. So thanks a bunch for that, but jump scares aside you should have no fear of broaching more of your contentious opinions if you do so with the same insight, research and scrupulous fairness. Since discovering your channel a week or so ago I’ve gone through most of your Jane Eyre project and I simply can’t go on without thanking you effusively for producing such delightfully informative and entertaining commentary. I’m gobsmacked at the work and passion you put into that series. You have a real talent for this and I suspect your series of comparisons is the definitive take on the Jane Eyre adaptations. No doubt you have a terrifyingly long list of movies to watch and review, but may I offer some suggestions/recommendations? Le Cercle Rouge (1970) - Melville’s definitive French New Wave/noir heist movie. Also stars Alain Delon, of whom you may be aware. Metropolitan (1990) - I gather you didn’t like Stillman’s Love & Friendship, and I don’t care much for it either, but his debut movie, Metropolitan, is a delight. It’s a loose adaptation of Mansfield Park, transplanted to a vaguely 1970sish Manhattan, focusing on a group of young “society” people attending debs and soirées. It’s a charming, Janeite combination of innocence and gentle satire, laced through with witty dialogue. Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence (1983) - another WWII POW movie...wait, don’t go! Directed by Oshima Nagisa, it’s a thoughtful, subtle take on the culture clash between Western and Japanese conceptions of courage, honour and masculinity, with an homo-erotic subtext to the central conflict between the camp commander (played by Sakamoto Ryuichi, better known as a musician and composer) and a headstrong English officer (David Bowie, in his best role IMO). Also features a terrific soundtrack composed by Sakamoto. Tampopo (1985) - Itami Juzo’s playful exploration of food and food culture. Set in contemporary Tokyo it’s a series of inter-connected vignettes within the overall framing narrative of a single mother trying to relaunch her failing ramen (noodle) shop, with the unlikely assistance of a couple of truckers, who just happen to be ramen gourmands. Described by Itami as a “noodle western”, it’s utterly charming and frequently hilarious, though I should warn that there is some sex (but nothing extreme) that might make it NSFWatching With Parents. Apologies for the long comment - got a bit carried away. All the best and thanks again!

[@Weiselberry]

Haha, "down the rabbit hole of Austen adaptations"--how well I know what that's like! I'm so glad you got a kick out of this video and thought it was a good review to boot. I feel like I've told myself a million times that I've got to review more Jane Austen stuff, but I keep shrinking away because the subject (like this movie) can turn so divisive. I ended up doing the Jane Eyre comparison series instead of tackling another Austen novel, and, well, I'd say that was the right choice. Thank you so much for your comments on that project! I'm pleased as punch that you enjoyed it so much. Suggestions of books and movies are always welcome, though, yes, the list I've got of titles people have told me about is running into the hundreds and I can't imagine I'll ever get to half of what's on it. But the more the merrier. Thank you for the recommendations, and comment again anytime!

[@Weiselberry]

Oh, and I had to laugh at your Alain Delon comment. I mentioned him quite a few times in the last year or so, to the point that I bet some of my viewers think, "Oh no, not again!" whenever I bring him up. I've already got that one on my "Delon movies to check out" list. :)

[@fyodor371]

Ha! Well, the movie has many things going for it but I could hardly leave unmentioned the elephant (alainphant?) in the room, so to speak, particularly as your asides on the subject tickled me so. Weirdly enough I have an odd sort of connection with Delon in that his version of Zorro is the first movie I can remember seeing. I must have been only four or five but it had such a profound impact upon me that I got into terrible trouble with my mum after playing merry hell with my crayons - Zs all through the house. Sorry to hear that you were dissuaded from doing more Austen stuff. I’ve enjoyed very much what you have created and, loth as I am to see you savaged by outraged, bloodthirsty Janeites, I would push my luck in asking you to do more, please? Hopefully the very positive reactions to this video - which you thought might be contentious, understandably - will embolden you to return to Austen!

[@Weiselberry]

I thought his Zorro was great fun (the minority opinion, c'est la vie) so I can totally understand being so inspired! And it could have been worse. It could have been one of the many movies where he plays a killer. Then what kind of trouble could you have found yourself in? :) Oh, I absolutely still intend to talk more about Austen's works. I just can't make up my mind about what I want to do and how I want to do it! I am tempted to just review movies and miniseries and books willy-nilly, going with whatever I'm in the mood to talk about, but that doesn't lend itself quite so well to a thorough review. And given how in-depth I was with Jane Eyre adaptations and, to a somewhat lesser extent, Pride and Prejudice adaptations, I don't want to shock everyone with skimpy commentary. I'm probably worrying over nothing, though. I've been familiar with Austen's other novels and many of the adaptations of them for years, so I doubt I would find myself with nothing to say, haha. Thanks so much for the encouragement!

[@fyodor371]

LOL! Yes, indeed, excellent point. Who knows what carnage would have been unleashed with premature exposure to, say, Le Samourai? No 5yo is cool enough to get away with the trenchcoat-fedora ensemble; heinous fashion crime right there.

[@winterburden]

Thank you for judging things on their own merits, I respect your reviews more than pretty much anything else, and the end was particularly dissatisfying 😄

[@Weiselberry]

Thanks, that means a lot! :)

[@heatheralice89]

I really hate this movie if I am being truthful.

[@ViktoriaLovesSimon]

I hated this version. 🙊

[@johnzeszut3170]

The remake is in the works and it will titled "The Prejudice of Pride.".

[@bartolomeuomacduibheamhnad6855]

"There is a stubbornness about me that never can bear to be frightened at the will of others. My courage always rises at every attempt to intimidate me." ~Elizabeth Bennett. words worth contemplating if the feeling of being intimidated takes hold Lol. I believe your views on this version would be very difficult to disagree with, your points are put forward very well, I personally agree with each one, this film has problems, a lot, but I like it, it's not my favourite by any means but I get swept up in it for emotional reasons, I identify with this Darcy, all Darcy's based on awkwardness, but this one for the reasons you pointed out in particular, awkward example- right now I'm trying not to write another ridiculous Novel length comment again lol. failed, commenting about my comment made it even longer :| The score is very beautiful, but most of all, it reminds me of home, I'd walk across an open field on the way to my Grandparents house, sometimes early morning with the haze of the rising Sun shining through, it felt familiar and grounded in my life, a little nostalgic, to be fair all adaptions of Pride and Prejudice do, period pieces in general, but I do agree it's really just aesthetic almost everything that's important about the story and characters is shallow or missing, the BBC version is my favourite. all you do is appreciated. ~ thank you Ms Weiselberry ~

[@alessandrarocco1037]

Well...let's not call it P&P because it's another thing but I know ...Jane Austen's name is convenient

[@robmccray6360]

Seems a review of Bride and Prejudice (2004) would be in order.

[@kylebeckley194]

The incompleteness of many movies is due to money restraints. To beat that and and make the movie means making the movie work consicely and yet full of author intended meaning. This falls on the director and writers. Since writers will always write more than will fit in time. The director has to make it work. It might be that the director did not know the original material well enough, or the material was beyond thier ability?

[@marcco44]

Jane is supposed to be the prettiest daughter, and in many versions Elizabeth is prettier. my personal favorite is still the 1980 miniseries

[@danieldarcy7862]

Agreed. Elizabeth Garvie was the perfect lizzy Bennet.

[@murielbarker4311]

The difference between Co!in Firthes adaptation and Matthews is time 1995 one was over 6hours on TV 2005 was under 2hours you saw more how Darcy life was in Colin's version there was a joint wedding at the end liked the actor who played Wickham did not like the one in Matthews version but really liked the rain and mist scene region 2 did not get the kissing scene so film version had very weak end for UK DVDs

[@Prinaananas123]

For me it the biggest difference is the way he loke at her, Collin Fiths Darcy is saying everything with is eyes... it is priceless was it 2h or 6 it change nothing.

[@Barot8]

I don't think you are as socially awkward as you think you are. Speaking as someone who is really socially awkward, you seem very well spoken, and considerate in your thoughts of how you speak with people. Honestly I don't see you as introverted. I see you as cautious which is normal given how many people are skeevy or not well intended. I think people want to be seen in a good light and often say the wrong thing at the wrong time. I'm certain you are fine at parties you go to. Me, I never go to parties. As I've gotten older I just don't have anything interesting to say. I do think one has to make an effort to change their habits. As charming and lovely, and knowledgeable as you are, I can't imagine it being difficult for you. I can't see you as snobby either. I think you're a bit too harsh on yourself. I admit I'm not a fan of crowds. That's mainly me. It's wonderful to see how happy these stories make you. Thank you for sharing your time and opinions, and your stunning smile. Also bringing us all such joy that you share.

[@THEPETERC1]

When Persuasion?

[@boilingfrog783]

Hi. I had no idea that there was an alternative American ending. You made a number of valid points about this movie, particularly regarding the equine-like pace of the film and especially its dialogue. I'm by no means a massive fan but in my estimation, it improves upon repeated viewings. Personally, I liked the proposal scene. Seems to me that it quite effectively conveyed a mutual inner conflict on their part regarding the potential of the relationship. The dialogue of course expresses all the intellectual objections but yet there still exists that unquantifiable *something* between them that tantalisingly rears its head in the near-kiss moment. I agree, the ending was poor. Especially when contrasted with the lengthy post-proposal exchanges between Darcy and Lizzie in the book. To me, the meeting of their lively minds, expressed in the rather objective, almost analytical discussion of their feelings re the relationship, was far more interesting and stimulating than the comparatively slender, "You have bewitched me body and soul, etc." If you've not seen it already, a good example of a condensed Austen transferred to the screen is the 1995 BBC film version of Persuasion. It's on KZbin. Recommended. PS You appear to be confidently putting yourself out there on your channel. Maybe you just need to attend parties populated with film buffs 😉 Thanks for your time.

[@Weiselberry]

Great comments! I agree, I think repeated viewings help with this one. Not everything that stuck out to me the first time around has grown on me, but there are certainly a lot of interpretative choices that I've gradually warmed up to. It's not always a bad thing to see a different spin on something old and familiar. And my being slightly older each time I rewatch it probably doesn't hurt either. :) I have seen the 1995 Persuasion--one of the best Austen film adaptations currently in existence!

[@cjpreach]

This review is similar to - but MUCH kinder than - my response to the Hobbit Trilogy. For which I have been excoriated by those who believe that THEIR opinions are sacred, but mine are atrocious! hehehe

[@SunriseFireberry]

U wanted an extended edition of this, just like LotR. U want things less rushed, & a more faithful adaptation.

[@SlightlySusan]

While I thought the ending was a tad flighty, this is my favorite version. Someone called it "a romance of Pride and Prejudice." Well, maybe. A criticism that I thought was unfair was that Joe Wright moved the period a bit because he did not like the dresses that were fashionable at the time of its publication. Well, Jane Austen thought about this plot and its characters before she sat down to write. That the dresses were a little different has nothing to do with being true to the period. I never read the book until after my second time watching P&P. What struck me is in that edition, is Mr. Darcy is introduced on page 16 and immediately says negative things about Elizabeth, but, by page 25, he is changing his mind. In terms of acting, Matthew conveys that change. I had heard women swoon over Colin Firth. Yes he's good looking but I find Matthew more attractive because his face is a bit imperfect. And I like that Matthew allows Darcy to grow while being vulnerable. I also think the swimming scene is over-rated and reduces Darcy's feelings to sexual frustration. And Finally, I could not tolerate Jennifer Ehle.

[@iakona23]

This is off topic Weiselberry, but have you seen this new Criterion Collection Godzilla box set? www.criterion.com/boxsets/2648-godzilla-the-showa-era-films-1954-1975

[@Weiselberry]

Yes--it looks great, doesn't it!

[@iakona23]

@@Weiselberry I am a huge fan of Criterion Collection Blu-Ray discs and box sets. They have 50% off sales about 2 or 3 times a year at Barnes and Noble for the entire catalog. There is a sale going on right now, and another one in November.

[@lisawall9068]

Jerome - you made excellent points. Thank you.