Pride and Prejudice

The miniseries.

The one thing that I liked better in the movie was that Lizzy tells her father what Mr. Darcy did for the family (paying off Mr. Wickham and forcing him to marry Lydia), in the BBC miniseries she doesn't tell him and I think Mr. Darcy deserves the credit for it so Lizzy's father can see what a good man he is.

The younger sisters were funnier in the miniseries. Lydia makes me laugh, though you want to wring her neck. Also Mary has more of a personality.

Their cousin the minister is also more ridiculous and funny in the miniseries.

In the miniseries Bingley's sister wants Darcy but in the movie they don't show that

The movie is visually stunning.

How was the P.D. James sequel to Pride & Prejudice: Death Comes To Pemberly? I never saw the miniseries.

Bridget Jones Diary

R2, the miniseries oddly cut short the very end of the book. I really missed Lizzy and Darcy's conversation after they become engaged, when she asks him why he didn't reveal his feelings sooner, and the description of their life together with Darcy's sister.

The miniseries was far superior but it's really not fair to compare the two, they are so different. The miniseries had the freedom and room to faithfully follow the book but the film has to distill it down to a single movie length.

One major mistake of the film is Darcy is too dour. He's boring with zero sex appeal. Darcy is supposed to be intimidating not just because of his money but also his good looks and breeding, but off-putting because he's so proud and judgmental. The movie mistakes that for him being a sourpuss. In the book and miniseries Darcy actually has moments of levity around Lizzy where he's teasing her and even nervous around her (but she mistakes him as being critical of her). The movie misses all that. I couldn't buy the Lizzy of the film falling for the Darcy of the film.

The mini-series. Colin Firth was perfect as Darcy.

Matthew McFadyen was gorgeous as Darcy. Not a sour puss, just very guarded and reserved. Loved Rosamund Pike as Jane.

Rosamund Pike was a better looking Jane. In the BBC miniseries I didn't understand why she was thought to be so beautiful. Also I thought the movie Lizzy was younger looking, the BBC Lizzy looked much older than 21.

Mrs. Bennett the mother was so annoying on the BBC version I wanted to slap her. I know that's the point. But I found the movie version of Mrs. Bennett a bit more likable.

I preferred Donald Sutherland as Lizzy's father.

Nope, sorry, I like Matthew McFadyen, but his Darcy was just boring. There's no there there.

I liked the Olivier version and I loved the aunt in that one. I don't care if her character was changed from the book. She was funny.

Much as I love Dame Judi, I preferred the aunt in the miniseries. She was the perfect mix of clueless bubble-living rich bitch from hell. And Firth's reaction to her sticking her nose into their conversation is another reason his Darcy is superior.

I just finished reading the book for the first time, and then I watched the miniseries on BritBox. I still want to see the Greer Garson version, but I'm not so interested in the Keira Knightley one.

In the novel, Elizabeth never tells her father about Mr. Darcy's generosity, but since his (her father's) sister knows, there's a chance that he may eventually find out about it.

Judy Dench was awful as Lady Catherine.

Lizzy does tell him, R18. He then has this hilarious line about how he will offer to pay Darcy back and Darcy will pitch a fit and rant about his love for Lizzy and refuse the money and so Mr. Bennett will be off the hook.

From the book, right after Lizzy tells her father she's engaged to Darcy:

"Well, my dear," said he, when she ceased speaking, "I have no more to say. If this be the case, he deserves you. I could not have parted with you, my Lizzy, to anyone less worthy."

To complete the favourable impression, she then told him what Mr. Darcy had voluntarily done for Lydia. He heard her with astonishment.

"This is an evening of wonders, indeed! And so, Darcy did every thing; made up the match, gave the money, paid the fellow's debts, and got him his commission! So much the better. It will save me a world of trouble and economy. Had it been your uncle's doing, I must and would have paid him; but these violent young lovers carry every thing their own way. I shall offer to pay him to-morrow; he will rant and storm about his love for you, and there will be an end of the matter."

I can't understand how Greer Garson got the role of Lizzy. She was far too old and they even had to change the era of when the story takes place- it probably was because Garson would have looked totally bloated in Regency waistline costumes so they changed it to the 1830s so the style could cover her in a more flattering dress.

R21, I had forgotten that, and now I remember smiling when I originally read it. Her father was very droll...

The movie took a lot of liberties with the characters. Mr Bennett for one was stripped of his sarcasm and aloofness. Lizzy was like some freewheeling Romantic heroine, not the smart but still practical Georgian woman.

"I am not one to be trifled with" made me laugh when Lady Catherine said it

Which movie, Greer or Kiera?

R24, which movie took liberties?

Jennifer Ehle looked like she could really have lived in the era. Keira Knightly looked like she should have been taking selfies.

The first proposal scene from the miniseries was perfection. Darcy's all hot and bothered, the awkward silences, and Lizzy is first completely shocked and then SEETHING but restrained. Ehle killed it with her facial expressions and the tone of her voice and Firth perfectly balanced Darcy's obvious hurt by someone he genuinely loves thinking so little of him but also offense at being rejected by a "lesser."

I adored Rosamund Pike as Jane Bennet, she was perfection.

But my all time favorite Jane Bennet is Susannah Harker in the 1995 TV series with Colin Firth as Darcy and Jennifer Ehle as Elizabeth.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The mini-series was better over all, but I thought Matthew McFadyen's tumbling stuttering profession of love to Elizabeth at the end of the film was a masterpiece. Totally lovable and authentic, although not really the Mr Darcy of the novel.

Mary Boland was the wonderful Mrs. Bennett in the Greer Garson-Laurence Olivier film, which is a very condensed version of the book, but still a lot of fun. Garson pretty much zoomed to stardom after her debut in 1939 in a supporting but major role in "Goodbye, Mr. Chips". She got great notices, an Oscar nomination, and I think a very significant partner and protector at the studio. But she was box-office, so apparently she thrived and inherited a lot of roles the soon-to-be retired Norma Shearer might have done.

Miniseries, hands down. Granted, like someone said before, it is a bit like comparing apples and oranges.

At 14, I fell in love with the BBC version and subsequently read the book few times. By the time Kiera Knightley's version came around, it was ho-hum. A movie should be able to get the spirit and tone of the book down, even if it cannot faithfully follow the plot down to every detail. Knightley's version lacked the wit ane vivacity of the novel and MacFadyen always had a look like he just realized he stepped in dog shit.

Not even close. The miniseries with Colin Firth.

Another vote for the 1995 miniseries.

r28 I think the only time she looks like that with her hair down is when she makes the long walk to Netherfield because Jane caught a cold and had to stay there.

Mini series of course! Mrs Bennett was perfect, as well as all the sisters. I especially loved the little whore, Lydia, although the book made her out to be much sluttier. I loved how the book described how she used her mouth, pretty progressive if you consider the time it was written. Lol

Saffy Monsoon as Lydia the wayward sister

R28 how apt

I thought the movie was shot beautifully - some gorgeous scenes.

Neither one of them!

The mini series. P and P has always been one of my favorite novels - so many laugh-out-lout lines. And I had my own mental images of the characters - how they looked, how they walked. But the mini-series captured so many nuances of the novel and the acting of so many of the characters was so fine, that I told bought into it. It's not that I see Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle now when I reread it, but when I watch them in the mini-series, I believe they ARE that characters.

R16 Edna May Oliver, the aunt, was just the best. One of the sisters was played by Marsha Hunt, who is now 101. That film is charming.

Technically, the 1995 mini was the most efficiently made adaptation of P&P, but as far interpretive reading goes, it was an atrocious depiction of what Jane Austen is all about. The Joe Wright's version is an adolescent girl's attempt in rewriting P&P as a Bronte fable (with all those shabby settings and especially the Yorkshire Dales like mist in the background of the big love scene). Pauline Kael was actually right when she said that the 1940 movie was more Dickens than Austen, and the Andrew Davis take was an uncomfortable attempt at drugging poor Jane into William Thackeray's territory. (Unfortunately, Jennifer Ehle – a fine actress - was playing Elizabeth Bennet as Amelia instead of Becky Sharp, while sour faced Firth was forecasting the later film by playing Darcy as a poor man Mr. Rochester).

There is something elusive in Austen's writing which is best served, dramatically wise, by such unattractive characteristics as subtle humor, restraint, distance, even a touch of alienation. This kind of slightly somber approach doesn't make for a crowd pleasing candy, but when taken, the results are much better, as was the case of the 1995 version of Persuasion. And the same year Emma Thompson and Ang Lee successfully managed to mask the basic gloominess and subversiveness of their Marxist take on S&S in a very sly way.

My favorite filmed version of P&P is still the 1980 BBC mini. Slightly static, heavy going and too studio bound at times, marred by some wooden acting, it is the most intelligent and perceptive reading of the novel (by writer Fay Walden, whose "Letters to Alice, on first reading Jane Austen" is very illuminating too). It is also the best cast version physically. From Elizabeth Garvie relatively small frame body and huge eyes, perfect for Elizabeth Bennet as written to the striking resemblance between David Rintoul's Darcy and Judy Parfitt's Lady Catherine which demonstrate the fact that she is what he was about to become with age had he not met Elizabeth. And she get the politics and history of the Bennets marriage just right – and exactly the opposite way from Andrew Davis' misogynistic take – in hers, Mr. Bennet, who should have known better, is the villain while Mrs. Bennet is doing her best with the limited cards she was dealt. (And while we're at it – it was a match based on physical attraction alone, hence the five children born in six years, an attraction which, on his side, completely succumbed to some kind of a seventh year itch he was having, while she was totally unaware of).

Jane Austen's is such multi layered writing, so it can easily be striped of whatever is more profound or subversive or challenging and still the skeletal story telling will be enjoyed by many, especially when covered with manipulative romantic fat. I don't like it, but I'm afraid this is what made JA into such a hot commodity in recent years, so this is what we'll be fed with in the future too.

I thought the film was beautiful, but I thought Knightley was dreadful as Lizzy and going into it I had been fan of hers. Her sole acting choice seemed to be to smirk, I understand that Lizzy is generally supposed to be the smartest person in the room who never claims to be, but there has to be other choices to make besides smiling wryly.

Neither. Pride and Prejudice and Zombies is where it's at.

P&P&Zombies was disappointing. Great idea, lackluster execution.

P&P&Zombies is an idea for a skit, not a full length movie. Which reminds me: I haven't read Death Comes to Pemberley, R7, but the miniseries was pretty bad IMHO.

Wow, R45, I am very surprised to hear words like atrocious and misogynistic applied to the 1995 miniseries. Haven't seen it in years but I definitely remember thinking it was very true to the book. Austen herself was more savage to Mrs. Bennet than Mr. Bennet. When I get a chance I will give it a rewatch. And seek out the 1980 version.

I have to agree about the 1980 version. It was my favorite, though I liked the 1995 miniseries and particularly, the two leads. However, I hated the Mrs. Bennett in it. (though I loved her in Gavin and Stacey!) The 1980 version did something I've never seen before. We see Mr. Darcy through Lizzie's eyes. He's almost wooden in the beginning, but by the end he's become a romance novel character. Oh, and I do still love the original 1940's movie, partly because it's the first version I saw and particularly, because it has the perfect Mrs. Bennett and Lady Catherine in Mary Boland and Edna Mae Oliver.

r45 I do not agree with you regarding P&P 1995 actors. Ehle and Firth are flawless.

Miniseries, without doubt.

Miniseries, mostly for the two leads.

Colin Firth was a meh Darcy for me, but a vote for the miniseries. Lady Catherine and Lizzy were excellent.

There's also a good 70s BBC miniseries, without the production value of the 90s version but great actors.

No one has mentioned the 5 episode mini-series from 1980.

David Rintoul as Darcy and Elizabeth Garvie as Elizabeth.

Rintoul appears frequently on British dramas (you may have seen him as Hastings' friend, John Cavendish, accused of killing his mother, in Poirot's "The Mysterious Affair at Styles".

Every time I see the more recent acting roles of Rintoul, I think "Yes, that's what the older Mr. Darcy would look like."

As for the 1940 version, the period clothes are all wrong, and Greer and Olivier are older, but their interactions are charming. Greer can do the smart, funny Lizzie and Olivier is sexy when he pursues her. And his defense of her after Caroline Bingley's snide remarks are great. This was the first one I ever saw so when I read the book I was surprised to find that Lady Catherine was not a nice character at all. The 1940 version changed her reaction to their marriage.

One complaint I had about the newer movie was Keira K's hair. No woman of that time would appear in public with her hair like that. It looked like she had just climbed out of a haystack. Would have been scandalous.

I like something from each of versions.

Here is the first proposal from the 1980 version with David RIntoul and Elizabeth Garvie.

R55, well I meant to mention it, just got my decades wrong. I think David Rintoul did Darcy best.

The 1980 version was mentioned at r45, r49 and r50...

Didn't the later movie have barnyard animals running around the Bennett household? It seemed as if the movie makers couldn't be bothered with doing a bit of research about the life and times of the novel's setting.

My mistake, R57. Yes it was.

Colin Firth's Darcy is for the most part kind of cold and remote, but looks so perfectly beautiful, that anything else is overlooked by most, I'd say.

The pic of Colin Firth at [R17] is proof that God (or the generic equivalent) loves us and wants us to be happy. Sigh.....

Amen, brother.

I think that Oscar-winning Colin Firth is an under-appreciated treasure.

Just check him out in A Single Man...

Under appreciated indeed. You know, I don't believe I've ever seen him give a bad performance. I know that's subjective opinion, but I can't be the only one. He can do drama, comedy, even a bit of slapstick. Long may he wave....

Personally, I'm a big fan of "Roots."

R60, it's funny to me you think that because I think Firth's Darcy is the only one of all the versions who seems to truly have the hots for Lizzy. Firth and Ehle had great chemistry and ended up in a relationship IRL.

In the scene when he unexpectedly runs into Lizzy at Pemberley (after the infamous lake scene) you can practically feel his boner growing.

Knightly played a Lizzie as a giggling simp.

I couldn’t watch Death Comes To Pemberly because the actress playing Lizzie was just not pretty at all. I kept waiting for Ehle to show up.

Knightly's Lizzy was fine, she just wasn't the Lizzy of the book. She was more brash, immature, and impulsive, less witty. The whole 2005 movie was off from the book's tone. It missed a lot of the humor and dry wit and what should have been some laugh out loud moments. McFadyen's Darcy had one facial expression during the entire movie and it was not a good one. Darcy is debonair, proud, and intimidating, not Ross from "Friends" pining after Rachel.

[quote]I loved how the book described how she used her mouth, pretty progressive if you consider the time it was written.

I haven’t read the book. What does it say about Lydia?

Death Comes To Pemberly fell into the dumb modern romance trope of grown ass adults having issues that go on way too long and could have been resolved with a single gown up conversation.

I think Pride and Prejudice is actually the source of that stupid trope because lesser writers don't understand that Austen's story is so compelling because it's realistic. Lizzy doesn't just "oopsie" misunderstand Darcy--he was an asshole at first, he did insult her during his first proposal. And then she lets her bad impression of him cloud her judgment. And he didn't just oopsie mistake her behavior towards him as a sign she was interested--he legit thought that because of their respective social stations she should be flattered by his proposing to her regardless of how she actually felt about him.

R65, yes. That scene in the Ehle/firth miniseries with a wet Darcy surprising Lizzy is one for the books. It's also a scene created for the miniseries. That does not happen in Austen's tome. but who cares, right? I mean, a wet Colin Firth... yes please!

I love the Ehle/Firth miniseries, prefer it to the Knightly movie. However, there is a sequence in the film that I absolutely adore... it takes place at a party and the camera just glides along, following characters, leaving them for others. There's dialogue going on as well. Incredibly complicated.

Another nice touch added for the mini-series: Mr. Collins turning the wrong way when dancing with Lizzy. And of course Mr. Darcy takes it all in.

I wonder if Ehle is still "nutty." I encountered a few years back in NYC. She's...definitely an actress.

R73 some deets?

Was I the only one who squeed in the theater to see them "reunited" in The King's Speech?

Firth was the character described by Austen. Disdainful, aloof, and dissagreable, so the first night at the assembly in Meriton, everyone hated him. He played Darcy wonderfuly. Those glances at Ehle... great chemestry and a credit to Colin, who can express so much with mere flickers of his eyes. This is the essence of acting IMO.

Bride and Prejudice was a lot of fun. Martin Henderson as a present day Darcy.

^ And, most importantly, Firth wasn't afraid to have Darcy straight up lust after/long for Lizzy.

A lot of mistakes in "genteel" period pieces are made in failing to realize that just because the rules of propriety were super strict doesn't mean people still didn't feel all the feelings.

That's what was so great about Hopkins and Thompson in Remains of the Day. Hopkins made clear even though the character would not show his intense love for her, he still had them. Thompson was similarly great as Elinor in Sense and Sensibility.

Colin Firth the one and only Mr Darcy.

Miniseries. The exchange of looks between Lizzie and Darcy at Pemberly says it all.

Colin Firth has no sex appeal, even as Darcy. None. Try as I might I can’t get worked up over him.

r73 Do tell, please!

Where else but the data lounge can we have discussions about Pride and Prejudice alongside discussions about gay hockey players, Peter Lawford, public bathroom stories, madonnas sex book, Gen Z's stinky feet, inside Broadway gossip and Wendy Williams, all in one lively, irreverent place?

R77 you beat me to it

R83, you forgot Mount Everest.

[quote]How was the P.D. James sequel to Pride & Prejudice: Death Comes To Pemberly?

I for one love it & have seen it twice.

One thing I really liked about Death Comes to Pemberley is how they updated Lady Catherine (although she was barely in it). This scene isn't as good as the one where she first arrives, but she's still the same clueless self-centered ass that only the really rich can get away with being. And of course she's "nice" to Lizzy now.

^ Forgot to add, and Lizzy recycles a great old line that was originally Mr. Bennett's about making sport of the neighbors.

Miniseries, no contest.

I preferred the miniseries, but I though the movie did a far superior job showing just what country bumpkins the Bennetts truly were. There was one scene in a muddy yard with chickens running about and a shot of a disaster of a kitchen. In the miniseries the mother and the two youngest daughters were rather vile, but the family as a whole - and their home - seemed genteel enough. In the movie, you really understood where Darcy's prejudice came from.

"the movie did a far superior job showing just what country bumpkins the Bennetts truly were"

That may make for a nice story, but the Bennetts in the novel weren't really country bumpkins. They didn't farm or do any kind of manual labor. Mr. Bennett was a landed gentleman, they had servants, and they mixed socially with other gentry. Their estate is in a small village in Hertfordshire, which was a historically wealthy area favored by nobility who wanted to live outside of London. They are supposed to represent a land rich but income/cash poor family.

The reason Lizzy marrying Darcy was so offensive to Lady Catherine (and even Darcy at first) was because her mother was a nobody with a lawyer for a brother who lives in tacky Cheapside (and then of course because of Lydia's 19th century equivalent of a sex tape scandal). The daughters were also presumed to be desperate and scoping to land rich husbands for lack of a male heir which means they'll really be poor if they don't marry well.

In her younger days Lady Catherine de Bourgh had a surprisingly nice rack.

I really liked the gay version of this as well “Before the Fall”. I think I saw it on Netflix or maybe Amazon Prime.

The book version of Death Comes to Pemberley was terribly boring. She spent 50 pages recapping P & P. If I am reading a sequel, I know what happened in the first book!

Priceless first line of the original:

[bold]It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a wife.[/bold]

That young Jane Austen was very perceptive...!

I didn't see the movie, but I enjoyed the series.

I loved the series so much I don't think I could enjoy the movie.

Colin Firth was dreamy as Mr. Darcy. Did anyone see Austenworld or whatever that movie was with Felicity and Jane Seymour? Silly but kind of fun.

What about Becoming Jane? Any good?

I liked Becoming Jane a lot.

Another superbly done crucial scene from the miniseries: the second proposal. I love how at 1:30 they're barely containing wanting to jump in each others arms. And the "dearest, loveliest Elizabeth" line was beautifully delivered.

R92 thank you!

I briefly belonged to the local chapter of the national Jane Austin Society of North America (JASNA), having been an avid reader and re-reader of her books for some time. I like to reread my favorites at Christmastime every year, I especially like how Austen skewers priss-pots and phonies like Mr William Collins and Lady Catherine De Bourgh in Pride and Prejudice and Vicar Philip Elton and his new wife in Emma.

The JASNA Christmas party I attended was quite interesting. Obsessed ladies quoting Austen line for line in competition for prizes based on questions about the books and a tasty spread of tasty little sandwiches and tea. I realized I wasn't THAT obsessed and eventually my membership lapsed. Such competition over details I could not abide, I forgot what I knew and confused characters and events from book to book. I still love the books and her exquisite nailing of the more ridiculous aspects of human character and I never tire of watching the various filmed versions either.

R98 I saw it and enjoyed it.

[quote]There was one scene in a muddy yard with chickens running about and a shot of a disaster of a kitchen.

Not what Austen wrote. This is just one instance the movie taking enormous liberties with the novel.

Or what R91 said.

Does anyone remember the amusing website that had Jane Austen characters writing an advice column? Lady Catherine de Bourgh had much to say.

The miniseries stayed true to the spirit of the novel (which is a social satire as much as it is a love story)

The 2005 film is great is you wanna watch Joe Wright mansplain regency England to Jane Austen's ghost for 135 minutes but other than that it's a pass.

R105, do you mean the Lizzie Bennett Diaries? I loved that, it was very clever and well done.

Turns out it was at the Republic of Pemberley, R107. Looks like some of it is preserved on the wayback machine.

Here's one that addresses Lady C as "an esteemed witch of consequence." Fanny's reply is pretty cute.

R81, nor can I. He has what the kids call potato face. And during the 90s miniseries scenes where he was supposed to be exuding lust for Lizzie he instead looked like he had indigestion.

Speaking of Jane Austen . . .

The Keira K. movie is very attractive and watchable but the director apparently wanted to make it easier for viewers who don't normally watch period films. He made Lizzie very "relatable". She walks around with her hair down and has a very animated face and a heaving bosum. It was a time period that valued restraint and being indirect which is what makes Austen so much fun to read. She's merciless.

The most egregious scene was Lady Catherine showing up *in the middle of the night!* to accuse Lizzie. The family received her in their nightclothes. I mean, it's inconceivable that a character of her rank and snobbery would arrive at such a bizarre time of night, no matter how angry and upset she was. It was bad manners.

Meant to add: other than that, I think the movie is well cast, beautifully filmed, and the two leads had great chemistry despite being anachronistic.

Colin Firth is still the ideal however.

I found some Youtube clips of the 1980 Pride & Prejudice. The production values suggest Sapphire and Steel might turn up at any moment.

R113, I looked up "Sapphire and Steel" - that program sounds fascinating!

There was something authentic about the 80's version. I like it as much as the 90's one.

It's an odd but oddly compelling show, R114. If you ever check it out, may I suggest series 2 or 4. Those are the best ones IMHO, and there's no need to watch them in order.

While looking that up I learned that Susannah Harker played Sapphire in some audio dramas. Not totally off topic!

More firmly on topic, Amazon has the 1980 version so I'll watch it at some point.

Sapphire and Steel is available on youtube. I started watching the first episode and it really does have a creepy vibe to it... I love how the writer and producer simply introduce S&S... no explanation, so their telepathy, Sapphire's ability to change her appearance, Steel's lack of emotion are a surprise and intriguing for the viewer.

I'm sure this won't be a popular opinion, but I do not find Jennifer Ehle appealing or attractive. R109 SHE is the potato face, not Colin Firth. I feel exactly the way about Ehle as R81 feels about Colin Firth, absolutely no sex appeal. Brenda Blethyn knocks it out of the park as Mrs. Bennett in the movie version. She is a wonderful actress.

[quote]I can't understand how Greer Garson got the role of Lizzy. She was far too old and they even had to change the era of when the story takes place- it probably was because Garson would have looked totally bloated in Regency waistline costumes so they changed it to the 1830s so the style could cover her in a more flattering dress.

There was a much more prosaic reason for resetting the period. Legendary MGM costume designer Gilbert Adrian had always wanted to work in the 1830s/40s period but an opportunity had never presented itself. Among other things, he seems to have been fascinated with those huge leg-of-mutton sleeves. Neither the director nor the rest of the production team minded and he was given free rein to do as he liked.

The clothes aren't truly authentic. They are a sort of fantasy mélange of fashion elements from both decades.

^ And the ball gowns are more 1850s than 1830s/1840s. All the clothes are wonderful though and show the mastery of Adrian and the fabled MGM costume workshop at their peak.

Any film with young Colin Firth in it is better than any film without.

The one with David Rintoul and Elizabeth Garvey is not as dynamic as the Firth one, but Garvey is a better Elizabeth Bennet than Jennifer Ehle and her eye-rolling and her Wonderbra.

As previous posters have noted, there is something 'off' about the whole feel of the 2005 film. The lack of Darcy/Elizabeth chemistry is the most obvious thing, but the worst part is the way it manages to suck the comedy out of two of the greatest comic creations ever, Mr Collins and Lady Catherine de Bourgh.

Since Tom Hollander and Judi Dench are accomplished actors who have been funny elsewhere, I think the blame lies with director Joe Wright. He misjudged the pace and tone of the material; it was his hand that turned Austen's sparkling yet serious tale into something heavy and lifeless.

[quote] Brenda Blethyn knocks it out of the park as Mrs. Bennett in the movie version. She is a wonderful actress.

The 2005 film's take on Mrs Bennet was the one thing I liked about it. She was due for reassessment/reinterpretation - Alison Steadman's braying caricature in the miniseries was funny, but ultimately an unfair take on the character, when you consider that Mrs Bennet's desperation to get her daughters married is an entirely rational response to the precarious situation they are in, and it shows a care for her daughters' welfare that Mr Bennet lacks.

Indeed, perhaps she has had to become so pushy because Mr Bennet isn't even trying to find suitable matches for his daughters, despite the fact that he knows that without husbands they will likely end up in poverty after he dies.

Lady Catherine 1995!!!

The miniseries. Seen it maybe 20 times.

[quote] Alison Steadman's braying caricature in the miniseries was funny, but ultimately an unfair take on the character

Alison Steadman was playing Abigail. She is capable of playing other characters, but nearly always plays Abigail.

Lady Catherine in the 1995 series was strangled with a tie in Hitchcock's Frenzy.

I liked them both but I preferred the movie's Lizzie and the series' Darcy. I thought Matthew McFadyen was awful, actually.

I much preferred the series. Maybe the movie was more realistic about life in those days (?) but I felt like I needed a shower after watching how the Bennett family lived in the movie.

Keira Knightly is a dreadful actress. In the extras of the dvd her director claims Mrs Bennett to be the warm beating heart of the family. WTF? She was a grotesque only interested in her own comforts. Hideous woman. Much preferred the Firth- Elhe version. Sublime casting all round.

R124, I agree. The depiction of Mrs. Bennett is the one and only thing I think is superior in 2005 film. Mrs. Bennett is pushy, a busybody, a royal pain in the ass and superficial about many things, but her fears for her and her daughters' futures are very real and understandable.

^ Forgot to add, one thing Mrs. Bennett gets never gets credit for is her knowledge that they can and should not trust Mr. Collins. Even though she sucks up to him to try to get him to marry one of her daughters, it's because she never doubts for a second that he will otherwise get rid of them as soon as he can. (That scenario happens and is an important plot point in Sense and Sensibility.)

Mr. Bennett gets that Mr. Collins is a thoroughly ridiculous human being, but he shows no apparent understanding or concern for what Collins can and will likely do to his wife and children if Bennett predeceases them.

What I liked about the movie Mr Bennet is that Donald Sutherland portrayed him as warm, but rather careless. Kind of hanging out in his study, bringing pigs into the house, laughing listlessly at stuff and he did the absolute bare minimum - the only think he did was introduce himself to Bingley - at raising them to take care of themselves, which in that day meant educating them to become governess and preferably making a good early marriage.

The 1995 Mr Bennet was snarky and disrespected his wife in front of his children and humiliated his children in public. As r45 said, he has the brains but none of the follow through.

Great to see some love for the 80s tv version with Garvie/Rintoul. That is my ideal for P&P, just perfection. I never saw why the 1995 mini-series was so famous and lauded as The Best version at all. Ehle was a potato-faced hoity toity little madam and sorry but Firth was just not tall or commanding/dashing enough. He was the best thing in it though, which says it all. As for the movie, that wasn't Austen as I understand her to be, though the music by Dario Marianelli is wonderful.

As a younger reader of Austen, I was enchanted by the romance of the stories, the Cinderella aspects and its only now, as a Crabby Old Bag that I read them with a clearer eye. Austen is unsurpassed in her writing of the truth of human nature, the reality under all the romantic froth. Consider: if Mrs Bennett didn't scheme and scratch to get her girls married off, they'd all end up like Miss Bates in "Emma".

I sometimes think the real heroine of P&P is Charlotte Lucas, who took her one chance at a respectable marriage and grabbed it with both hands, and will end up mistress of Langbourne in the end. With a decent, well-meaning idiot of a husband that she can manage and humour and restrain from his more egregious silliness, getting on well enough together and building a life. Not blissfully happy, for sure, but at least not living on hope, charity and £5 a year (as Austen herself so nearly might have done).

All for love is all very well in a novel, and its delightful to read. But read deeper, think of all the marriages we see in Austen in the background, those "imprudent" matches where people marry for love or lust or sexual thrills, for spite or simply because they are bored (the Bertram sisters in particular though Sir Thomas who married lazy Lady Bertram merely because she was so pretty aren't much better, though with better morals and self-control).

And conversely, the misery of cold calculation in a marriage for money and advantage alone - Willoughby jilting Marianne for that heiress, or even Maria Bertram again, poor cow. Maria's impulses are all selfish, all mean and spiteful - I think part of the reason she wanted Crawford was because Julia did too. Compare those brutal, bloodless schemings to Charlotte's honest and pragmatic marriage to Mr Collins, driven by good common sense on both sides and where she (and he!) will reap the reward.

It needs both sense and sensibility for true happiness, and looking at Austen's cast of characters, the ones who attain both are rare - and very lucky indeed.

Bravo, R135.

R130 It's hard to say if it is or isn't as none of us where there to experience it. Jane Austen however was, so I would always give her depiction of middle class regency England higher authority than whatever Joe Wright decided it should be. He removed all of the clever biting social satire that is so important to the novel in favour of what he deemed "gritty realism" and making the characters more sympathetic (I am rolling my eyes at him as I type) Really he should have just done the Bronte adaption he so clearly wanted to do.

Yes, Charlotte Lucas has that great scene in which she explains to Lizzie exactly why she's going to marry him. I did think the '96 Mr Collins was much more sly, not a "well-meaning idiot".

I wish Austen had developed the character of Lady Catherine's daughter more. Her role confuses me, is she supposed t o be brow-beaten by her mother? retarded? shy? sickly? miserable? She just doesn't register at all and yet Darcy is supposed to be engaged to her in Lady C's mind.

Agree with everything in R135 except the bit about Collins being 'decent'.

The gloating letter he sends Mr Bennet after Lydia runs off with Wickham shows his true nature.

The letter is pretty daming I agree R139, but remember Collins is a clergyman and also he came very close to marrying into the Bennett family himself. He would have been tarnished with Lydia's bad behaviour, perhaps losing Lady Catherine's patronage. Her sisters were nearly ruined as it was - the fact it was hushed up and Wickham was paid off to marry Lydia to preserve the decencies did salvage something of their reputation. I can't defend him there (he's a dolt and Charlotte is to be pitied) but he is human and being openly scorned by the Bennett girls (and the father) wouldn't have been nice for him. A better more decent man wouldn't respond so spitefully but you're right, Collins isn't that man. I will ponder my description of him - maybe "decent" is too strong a claim! But I still believe Charlotte will be the making of him.

Isn't it wonderful how much there is still to find in this novel after all these centuries?

Fuck me...the 90s version by far!

R135, I think the 90s version was so lauded because the production value was so high and because they sexed it up a bit. I quite like the staginess of 1980 miniseries, as it suits the novel, and David Rintoul is a very good Darcy.

I agree, R142.

I like the casting of the 1980s version, and I haven't watched it all yet, but I also think the characters, and the relationships between them, emerge with a bit more clarity. It was written by Fay Weldon, so it's not terribly surprising.

I like the 1980 version, but compared to 1996 it seems a little wooden. I really enjoyed the way Firth/Ehle sexed things up a bit and that the production really embraced both the ridiculous and the sly/witty humor in the novel.

Huh. The actor David Rintoul mostly does voice work now but he played Aerys Targarian in a flashback scene in Game of Thrones.

Any eldergays who saw the Broadway musical version "First Impressions"? 1959, starred Polly Bergen, Farley Granger and Hermione Gingold. Granger and Gingold I can see but --

Polly Bergen?

I do appreciate how it showcased Austen's wit, R144, but personally I find Firth to be as sexy as a poodle.

Jennifer Ehle had a Meryl Streep vibe as Lizzie and think she was perfect in every way.

R147, agree to disagree. Meanwhile, I'll be over here pretending it is I he's undressing with his eyes.

The colin Firth/Jennifer Ehle version sets the standard for all other comparisons. Olivier/Garson were horribly two-dimensional. Greer Garson was far too old to play Elizabeth. The entire film was overlit and now appears to fade away into nothingness. The Keira Knightly version was trying so hard to find edges to improve on the Firth/Ehle version, that it just got to be exhausting watching it. It turned into a humanities class assignment.

The book is excellent. It gives us answers to all the questions left by the film version, including intimate and finally truthful conversations between Lizzie and D'arcy, and the happy prospect that Mr. Bennett was finally able to escape his idiot wife and tragically autistic younger daughters (looking at you Mary), spending most of his time with his married older daughters. ( We're left to assume Lydia and Wickham soon overdose on morphine in some opiate den, never to be spoken of again, by polite people. --- or at least, it's what I assumed....)

And Colin Firth was way sexier than a poodle, R147. I'd say he was at least as sexy as a very tough golden lab.

"We're left to assume Lydia and Wickham soon overdose on morphine in some opiate den, never to be spoken of again, by polite people. --- or at least, it's what I assumed."

That's funny, but no we're not:

As for Wickham and Lydia, their characters suffered no revolution from the marriage of her sisters. He bore with philosophy the conviction that Elizabeth must now become acquainted with whatever of his ingratitude and falsehood had before been unknown to her; and in spite of every thing, was not wholly without hope that Darcy might yet be prevailed on to make his fortune. The congratulatory letter which Elizabeth received from Lydia on her marriage, explained to her that, by his wife at least, if not by himself, such a hope was cherished. The letter was to this effect:

“MY DEAR LIZZY,

“I wish you joy. If you love Mr. Darcy half as well as I do my dear Wickham, you must be very happy. It is a great comfort to have you so rich, and when you have nothing else to do, I hope you will think of us. I am sure Wickham would like a place at court very much, and I do not think we shall have quite money enough to live upon without some help. Any place would do, of about three or four hundred a year; but however, do not speak to Mr. Darcy about it, if you had rather not.

“Yours, etc.”

As it happened that Elizabeth had much rather not, she endeavoured in her answer to put an end to every entreaty and expectation of the kind. Such relief, however, as it was in her power to afford, by the practice of what might be called economy in her own private expences, she frequently sent them. It had always been evident to her that such an income as theirs, under the direction of two persons so extravagant in their wants, and heedless of the future, must be very insufficient to their support; and whenever they changed their quarters, either Jane or herself were sure of being applied to for some little assistance towards discharging their bills. Their manner of living, even when the restoration of peace dismissed them to a home, was unsettled in the extreme. They were always moving from place to place in quest of a cheap situation, and always spending more than they ought. His affection for her soon sunk into indifference; hers lasted a little longer; and in spite of her youth and her manners, she retained all the claims to reputation which her marriage had given her.

Though Darcy could never receive him at Pemberley, yet, for Elizabeth's sake, he assisted him further in his profession. Lydia was occasionally a visitor there, when her husband was gone to enjoy himself in London or Bath; and with the Bingleys they both of them frequently staid so long, that even Bingley's good humour was overcome, and he proceeded so far as to talk of giving them a hint to be gone.

The miniseries was the best of ALL of them. And Adrian Lukis as Wickham -- PHWOAR !

Ehle was great but her mother is the greatest --- the one, the only, the sublime Ms Rosemary Harris, currently setting Broadway to rights in MY FAIR LADY

Someone above described the 1995 version as lavish. It wasn't really. Since it was shot for TV and not for theaters, it was shot in 16mm on a limited budget. That said, it is exquisitely designed, dressed and photographed in the best of taste.

I've seen 1940 and 1995 versions, but Pride & Prejudice (2005), by far!

[quote]The 1995 Mr Bennet was snarky and disrespected his wife in front of his children and humiliated his children in public.

Very true to the book though. It's interesting how different adaptations shade the characters differently. This thread inspired me to start watching the 1980 miniseries; so far it paints Mrs. Bennet more gently than the book. She's still foolish but less annoying.

[quote]if Mrs Bennett didn't scheme and scratch to get her girls married off, they'd all end up like Miss Bates in "Emma".

I assume you're talking about the economic realities and not Mrs. Bennet's questionable matchmaking skills. ; ) And that's a great reminder. I enjoy the romance of the book so much that I easily forget that it's serious business. Lizzie took a real risk in turning down Mr. Collins when she had no other prospects.

Interesting titbit about the 1995 version: the then 20-year-old Lucy Davis (Dawn from The Office) was almost cast as Lydia. The producers were very impressed with her screen tests, but in the end decided they couldn't entrust such a big role to someone with virtually no acting experience, and ended up going with the much more experienced Julia Sawalha.

Sawahla is fantastic in the part, so I can't really fault them for that, but it has to be said she doesn't remotely convince as a 15-year-old (she was 26). Davis was given the much smaller part of Maria Lucas, and you can sense from her scenes what kind of Lydia she would have made: less brassy trollope, and more of a naive, silly, very young girl. Certainly casting her would have made Wickham seem even more of a scumbag - reminding everyone of how young Lydia actually was.

R94, I don't think it was that many pages, but the recap did serve a purpose. You get an account of the P&P events from their acquaintances' point of view, and you realize just how much all that had happened was the subject of gossip in the respective towns. It was also (I think) the author's way of signalling that she wasn't going to retcon anything.

For the purpose of her story the author, for example, needed to show how mistaken so many people's perception of Lizzy acting deliberately to "land" Mr. Darcy. She recounts their unusual courtship through their eyes so that their perceptions make sense despite what we already know.

Has anyone read Longbourn by Jo Baker? It covers the same period as Pride and Prejudice from the perspective of the Bennetts’ servants. Elizabeth and Darcy are very minor though mostly likeable characters and Wickham is as villainous as ever (and Baker makes it clear that there are far worse fates out there then being shut up in a cottage with a couple of disapproving aunts for “ruined” girls who don’t have Georgiana Darcy or even Lydia Bennett’s family resources). Also, Baker expands on what seems to becoming the more accepted contemporary reading of the Bennett marriage - with a benighted Mrs. Bennett scorned for being the exact person she was on her wedding day (though no longer fuckable) and Mr. Bennett being a rather selfish coward of a man.

Trivia: since it was intended for pre-HD, small screen TV, the 1995 mini-series was shot on 16 mm film.

I was especially impressed by the Bingley of the Knightley film, Simon Woods. It's just a supporting role, but he brings such handsome reality to the figure of a young man who isn't smart and knows it and doesn't care, because he just wants to have fun in life and get along with everyone.

Woods really made Bingley more interesting than he usually is. And he's a cousin of ours and gay-married!

To the poster above who asked about First Impressions: I saw the show, but I was very young, so I don't remember it all that well. It was very beautiful visually--I think the curtain was a fan that closed up when it rose, but I might be imagining that. Polly Bergen is always fun, but it's odd that she made no attempt to sound English. Even Phyllis Newman sort of tried to.

Darcy is quite the catch. He's handsome, super wealthy, gallant, and a touch arrogant.

I like both for different reasons.

Firth was sexy as hell as Rochester, oops, I mean Darcy, but playing him as an intense, obsessive lover didn't make sense for the character.

Macfadyen was a little dull, but I liked the interpretation that at least some of Darcy's aloofness was due to shyness, and not necessarily arrogance. Also movie Wickham was believable as someone two young girls might destroy their reputations for.

There’s at least two P&P miniseries and although Jennifer Ehle is one of my favorite actresses the movie version was very romantic and the movie soundtrack is terrific.

Agreed R163. Dario Marianelli is an amazing composer.

If you want to go back to 1967, here's the imdb page for the 1967 English mini-series of Pride and Prejudice.

It's of interest because Polly Adams who played Jane in this version is the mother of Susannah Harker who played Jane in the 1995 version.

Randomness: Greg Wise, who played Willoughby, the Wickham-lite of Sense and Sensibility, turns 53 today. I thought it was so funny how much he resembled Adrian Lukis, who played Wickham in the miniseries.

I've often wondered about the bad boys that Jane Austen must have met for her to have created George Wickham and Willoughby.

If there’s any truth in the Becoming Jane story, Tom Lefroy was a big inspiration for both Darcy and the bad boys.

[quote]And Adrian Lukis as Wickham -- PHWOAR !

The best thing about the 1995 miniseries.

I topped off an all-nighter by finishing the movie P & P, which I started screening a few days ago..

I have to say, I love this version best of all. I do like the details the director added in, such as making the Bennets look like rustics, with their animals and, even, a vast hog being led into the house. He wanted to show a real gulf between the world of Darcy--remember the very precise ballet Bingley's servant executes when entering to announce a guest--and the Bennet household, with its very informal group of servants. (One girl wanders through the house singing.)

I also admire the photography and music. I loved the Assembly Ball at the beginning, with everyone dancing so boisterously--again, showing how different the two worlds (Darcy's and Elizabeth';s) are. And I thought Macfadyen was wonderful--so shy and uncomfortable that he's really going through life in extreme discomfort. That's why he seems to have only one expression. I loved seeing his shirt open for the second proposal, though surely showing chest hair would be a breach of etiquette at the time.

As for Lady Catherine showing up so late at the end, I think the director wants to emphasize how arrogant she is, how terminally self-centered. Of course it's rude. But that's the point, no? She IS rude, and when she wants something, she doesn't wait. She goes after it. Waiting is for others.

Incidentally., does anyone know how Matthew's name is pronounced? Is the y silent? Is it sounded before the d?

Wickham in the 2005 movie was HOT

I thought the movie’s cast was very unattractive with the exception off Matthew McFadyn, Lizzie’s parents, Wickham and some supporting characters. The sisters were all plain as hell. Charlotte was so unattractive that even Mr. Collins was too good for her.

Of course, Keira Knightly is truly unsightly R172. I didn’t know this but the 1967 BBC seems to have survived in black and white kinescope stock (it was broadcast in color or colour as the Brits used to say). There are several clips on YouTube. Celia Bannerman and Lewis Fiander aren’t the most charismatic Darcy and Elizabeth Bennet out there but Michael Gough and Vivian Pickles seem to be spot on as Mr. and Mrs. Bennet:

Here is the first part of Episode 5 where Lizzie rejects Darcy's proposal. Fiander is good but not a matinee idol. Bannerman is a good actress but missing sparkle or something. Very bad fifth generation copy and supposedly all the Youtube uploader has got. Good acting and good script as you would expect from the BBC. Cheap production values. Surprised this exists since the BBC supposedly wiped their archives years ago.

Hee Hee!!

r135 "Firth was just not tall or commanding/dashing enough."

What? Firth is 1,90 mt tall. This is tall.

Nothing before or since, has been able to touch the 1995 miniseries. It blew us away at the time, and similarly with "Tale of the City" which came out around the same time.