Your IP has been blocked. Please perform the action below to regain access.
75.126.130.58-
Customer Reviews
Average Rating:
-
Not Much Austen Left
Finally got to see the Keira Knightley version of P&P on cable. It can't hold a candle to the 1980 version with Elizabeth Garvie and David Rintoul. [I have not seen the Firth version].
The actors in the Knightley film are just that -- actors, playing parts.
In the 1980 version, we see Elizabeth, Darcy, Mr Bennet, Mr Collins, Lady Catherine and everyone, as Jane Austen describes them and their actions.
This adaption has taken away most of the Jane Austen and left nothing in its stead. Beautiful to look at, but not much else....
Rating: 
-
love
A beautiful portrayal for Jane Austin's amazing piece of work. Truly one of the most lovely films I have ever seen in my life.
Rating: 
-
Don't waste your money - buy the A&E Version!
This version of Pride and Prejudice is pretty bad. It is more like a poorly produced junior high play than a movie. Not even Judi Dench and Donald Sutherland can rescue this one. The main actors are so flat. They seem to want to rush through the movie to get it overwith and do not have any stage presence at all. Only the camera angle and choreography of the scenes keeps your attention. The acting of the main characters just isn't up to snuff - at all. Buy the A&E Version with Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle from Amazon. It is an exquisite version that is exceptionally well done. The "Americanized" air of this modern version leaves you wanting to watch the A&E version, even if it is much longer.
Rating: -
The best!!!
I am willing to admit it, I am a shallow woman because Darcy and only Darcy made this movie so magic for me! His vulnerability, his shyness and reserve I found extremely attractive. This is the best version and adaptation of my favorite book. Chemistry between the actors is just unbelievable!
Rating: -
Pride goeth before critic's falls
Those reviewers who criticize the imperfect portrayal of the characters, fancying themselves to be pro Jane Austen, need to go back and read the book again to get it right. They missed a lot of things which the movie picks up beautifully. yes, there isn't time for complete character development in a 2 hour movie. yes, some scenes are combined, which wonderfully serves the purpose of retaining the emotion and atmosphere one gets from reading the book. keeping the scenes strictly by the book, and then cutting it down to 2 hours, would give a watered down version of the overall tone. these people who call themselves fans of Jane Austen seem more to be the narrow minded prejudiced snobs that she abhors. The costumes are different styles, because certain people would be able to have the lastest fashions, and others not. There is a lot of reality in this film that many peple are overlooking, and much of the original dialogue is incorporated. And who cares that Georgiana is a little extroverted? The BBC version, BTW, didn't stick strictly with the book - they added things that weren't in the book, like the "most beloved" lake scene. (What would Jane think about that?) I think Jane would appreciate all these versions as compliments to the book's timeless popularity and introducing it to new generations. It's interesting that some parts of the film, while not necessarily in the Austen book, are very similar to scenes from P. Aidan's trilogy about the whole story from Darcy's viewpoint. Interesting read to go along with a great movie!
