Pride & Prejudice

7

RhettW.Dec 28, 2005

Kiera Knightly is this generation's Audrey Hepburn. I admired movie more than enjoyed it.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

GretchenG.Dec 27, 2005

Would have been a 10 but for the stupid ending apparently tacked on for Americans.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

russl.Dec 15, 2005

In a competitive field this production lacks the qualities that made the 1995 production with Jennefer Ehle and Colin Firth so remarkable. Darcy is unappealing; the camera lingers so long on Keira Knightley that it begins to look feel more In a competitive field this production lacks the qualities that made the 1995 production with Jennefer Ehle and Colin Firth so remarkable. Darcy is unappealing; the camera lingers so long on Keira Knightley that it begins to look feel more like a promotional vehicle than a film, and the atmosphere of Austen, writing about 18th century morals and manners, can't survive the hectic pace, noticeable immediately during the first ball where the music is reminiscent of the New York Philharmonic strutting its stuff rather than a small eighteenth century orchestra recruited for a country ball. In this production the book is a excuse to mount an extravagant Hollywood romance. If that suits your taste, you'll probably enjoy it. If you're more interested in these interesting characters and the class complexties of 200 years ago, you'll probably feel shortchanged.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

LucyP.Dec 15, 2005

Obsessively addictive! Can't seem to get MacFayden's beauteous eyes out of my consciousness.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

TiffanyY.Dec 8, 2005

Wonderful! Romantic and funny... a great combination.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

LauraDec 8, 2005

My expectations were probably too high when I went to go see this (after all, the 1995 version was so superbly done). I was pleasantly surprised by Keira Knightly's performance, although she seemed a little rougher than Elizabeth Bennet My expectations were probably too high when I went to go see this (after all, the 1995 version was so superbly done). I was pleasantly surprised by Keira Knightly's performance, although she seemed a little rougher than Elizabeth Bennet should have been. It was unfortunate that so many characters and scenes had to be removed from the book in order to make the movie two hours long. Also, the casting of some roles (Mr. Bingley, Mrs. Bennet, Mr. Collins) could have been better. Overall, the acting was average, the writing was a little weird, and the interpretation from the book wasn't quite true to the story-but I would have to say it's a good "Cliff's Notes" version of the book.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

10

SHFBDec 5, 2005

The best of the Austen movies to date! The acting is wonderful and engaging. But the real feat is in the abundance of details and the interesting camera work (I love the scene in which Darcy and his friend's sister are sitting at the The best of the Austen movies to date! The acting is wonderful and engaging. But the real feat is in the abundance of details and the interesting camera work (I love the scene in which Darcy and his friend's sister are sitting at the table when Lizzie is introduced - the whole scene is shot from behind their backs). I really can't say enough good things about this movie. I've already seen it twice and will probably see it again.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

EmilyMDec 4, 2005

It brought out all of the beautiful parts of the book without imposing on the emotions created by reading it.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

LouC.Dec 3, 2005

A lively and earthy rendition of Pride and Prejudice.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

CriticsRmadDec 1, 2005

Great romantic movie. Haven't seen a period piece that didn't put me to sleep in quite a while. Story hits upon the main points in the book and was great. The ballroom scene makes you want to dance. Nice characterization and Great romantic movie. Haven't seen a period piece that didn't put me to sleep in quite a while. Story hits upon the main points in the book and was great. The ballroom scene makes you want to dance. Nice characterization and beautifully filmed. Good times for those looking for a bit of humor and romance.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

KristenW.Dec 1, 2005

I loved this movie. After reading the book over the summer for school, I was so excited that it was being redone and my friend and I just had to see it when she was home for thanksgiving.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

chelseaDec 1, 2005

Pride & prejudice had some lovely moments, beautiful scenery and some very good actors but keira knightley was so wrong for the part of elizabeth bennett!!!!! i was vastly dissapointed, as she is the main character. she was too smirky, Pride & prejudice had some lovely moments, beautiful scenery and some very good actors but keira knightley was so wrong for the part of elizabeth bennett!!!!! i was vastly dissapointed, as she is the main character. she was too smirky, forward, gangly and looked like a street urchin. her hair looked greasy and unwashed for most of the film which brought to my notice the fact it wasn't even her hair but a wig. and would lizzie ever have worn a piece of rag in her hair? -- especially when her sisters were dressed prettily in soft coloured gowns and ringleted hairstyles!!were they trying to make lizzie a tomboy rebel? i did like d'arcy. i thought he was handsome and did a good job showing the change from d'arcy's cold/proud/shy demeanor to the turmoil that we find in him as he exposes his love for miss bennett. oh, i went in with such expectations...but for God's sake does keira knightley have to take every major englishwoman's role even if she is completely not the actress for the part just because her name might herd in the viewers?!!!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

NancyM.Nov 30, 2005

Best movie in a long time.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

JosephSNov 30, 2005

For a short brief movie comparing to the completed movie in the 90's, I will see it again, full of divertion,amusement,and terrific scenes.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

BuckL.Nov 30, 2005

Darcie is less aristocratic, and more shy. Lizzie is more cute than beautiful; and more forward.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

LaurenH.Nov 28, 2005

I loved it. I thought it an extremely good adaptation.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

JenineL.Nov 27, 2005

Besides the immensely appealing cast of characters delivering outstanding performances, the script was beautifully written in language that was both eloquent and piercingly poignant. The classics, like" P & P" and "Much Ado About Besides the immensely appealing cast of characters delivering outstanding performances, the script was beautifully written in language that was both eloquent and piercingly poignant. The classics, like" P & P" and "Much Ado About Nothing",for example, remind us of the wonderful richness of the English language without being condescending or boring.. Bravo!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

ZakT.Nov 26, 2005

The filmmakers did an excellent job of retaining the humor of the novel. The set design is excellent, especially the Bennet's home. I usually dislike Keira Knightley, however I think that she was excellent in this role.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

bobrNov 26, 2005

Yawn, boooooooooooriiiinng.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

JimK.Nov 26, 2005

Not one for period dramas and screen adaptations of novels, I was skeptical before I went to see this film. But Keira Knightley's stunning performance and superb cinematography - along with a healthy dose of wit and humor - combined to Not one for period dramas and screen adaptations of novels, I was skeptical before I went to see this film. But Keira Knightley's stunning performance and superb cinematography - along with a healthy dose of wit and humor - combined to make this a truly satisfying cinematic experience. I highly recommend this film to the most cynical period-drama haters.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

ErinF.Nov 26, 2005

It was awesome. It was a wonderful adaptation of Austen's characters. They had the same life to them that they had in the book. It was wonderful.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

DanielP.Nov 25, 2005

Mike R is wrong. I am a man and i thought it was excellent.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

amandaw.Nov 24, 2005

I never wanted the movie to end. Mr. Darcy is perfect.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

[Anonymous]Nov 24, 2005

No one go see Pride & Prejudice. It is the most wretched, boring, miserable movie I have seen all year. Keira Knightley does not look or act the part (note how she chooses to act with her chin every time she gets emphatic) and I've sold No one go see Pride & Prejudice. It is the most wretched, boring, miserable movie I have seen all year. Keira Knightley does not look or act the part (note how she chooses to act with her chin every time she gets emphatic) and I've sold lumber more charismatic and interesting than the man who plays Mr. Darcy. There are so many clichéd shots (if I ever have to see someone stare at a candle in the foreground for an entire shot while having a conversation, and then blow it out for the scene change, or a door slamming shut with a dull, resounding crash directly into the camera, I may scream.) Darcy is boring; Collins is boring; Bingley looks like a woman; Mrs. Bennett is not funny as she is in the BBC version, she is merely irritating. And oh the giggling. The horrid, horrid giggling. I think a good 15 minutes of this movie is comprised of giggling. Another 15 goes to "moving" shots of the beautiful landscape, while Lizzie stares pensively into the distance. I offer this as an especial warning to anyone who has not read the novel, who would be doing themselves a horrible disservice by seeing the movie before reading the book and watching the delightful Colin Firth BBC version - which is in every imaginable way a superior film to this sack of sugary rubbish. Thank you. It felt good to get that out of my system. Please take my advice. For your sakes.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

FrankN.Nov 24, 2005

Wonderful film editing, direction, story, and good acting... Enjoyed the entire experience.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

LindaL.Nov 23, 2005

I loved the A&E movie and have watched it several times. And I also enjoyed the 2 hours version very much. Acting is great, sets are beautiful and the romance very haunting. I will buy the movie and will watch it again.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

ChristineL.Nov 22, 2005

I have no idea how people can praise Kiera Knightley in this performance - unfortunately she was the glarring flaw in an otherwise well-cast film. Several times in the movie, the director leaves us staring at her face, which is supposed to I have no idea how people can praise Kiera Knightley in this performance - unfortunately she was the glarring flaw in an otherwise well-cast film. Several times in the movie, the director leaves us staring at her face, which is supposed to be showing us some kind of depth or emotion, but actually just has a blank, weird smirk that someone must have told her looks "enigmatic" or something. She was simply awful, giving us no sense of any personality at all, much less that of Lizzie Bennet. And why does she always talk like she has a mouthful of marbles? The director also seemed to confuse Jane Auten with one of the Bronte sisters - no Austen heroine stands on a cliff in the mist or stares for hours at herself in a mirror. The climax of Darcy walking out of the mist (Heathcliff!) while Lizzie stands in her underwear and an overcoat is just ridiculous. If you've read the novel at all, you're aware this is all blatantly out of character with the tone of the book and the characters Austen creates. A few interesting scenes and the refreshing "non-coiffed" look to the actors saved this from getting an even lower score.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

CelineC.Nov 22, 2005

A job well done! This 2005 version is way better than the 1940 one: closer to Austen's novel and much more entertaining.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

MIkeR.Nov 21, 2005

This movie is a man's worst nightmare. Run for your lives.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

RebeccaM.Nov 21, 2005

The New Yorker's Anhony Lane reveiw and should be considered, Issue of Nov. 14 Page 101.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

GerronKNov 19, 2005

Excellent!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

LeanneC.Nov 18, 2005

Thankfully, a movie that does not assume the audience is stupid. Allowing the script to flow without extraordinary historical explanation and decidedly exploring and interpreting the novel makes the film brilliant. I don't believe this Thankfully, a movie that does not assume the audience is stupid. Allowing the script to flow without extraordinary historical explanation and decidedly exploring and interpreting the novel makes the film brilliant. I don't believe this film to be for those who prefer less intelligent films or those who were looking for an exact interpretation, page by page, of the novel. Reading other reviews on this page makes me wonder if they understood this picture at all. From Ms. Knightly to Ms. Malone, I thought the acting excellent and the film wonderfully executed. I loved it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

BrettR.Nov 18, 2005

Spectacular! I was amazed in how much I really enjoyed it. Keira Knightly is phenomenal, an Oscar worthy performance. She makes Elizabeth intelligent, fun, and likeable rather than bitter and unrelatable. Also, fantastic direction, Spectacular! I was amazed in how much I really enjoyed it. Keira Knightly is phenomenal, an Oscar worthy performance. She makes Elizabeth intelligent, fun, and likeable rather than bitter and unrelatable. Also, fantastic direction, cinematography, and art direction.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

GregS.Nov 18, 2005

Wonderful movie, full of life and love, greed and pride, hostility and forgiveness. Photography excellent but tends to overshadow the story and leads to gaps in dialogue. Strange that some much of the lesser character details were left out. Wonderful movie, full of life and love, greed and pride, hostility and forgiveness. Photography excellent but tends to overshadow the story and leads to gaps in dialogue. Strange that some much of the lesser character details were left out. Great show.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

SusanneR.Nov 18, 2005

Better than I thought given the two parameter. The A&E mini-series still rules.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

MarcTornyNov 17, 2005

I'm curious why the New Yorker review is not listed here. Could it be because it isn't clear whether Anthony Lane liked or disliked the film? He finishes his review by saying something to the effect that 'any resemblence toI'm curious why the New Yorker review is not listed here. Could it be because it isn't clear whether Anthony Lane liked or disliked the film? He finishes his review by saying something to the effect that 'any resemblence to the Jane Austen novel is purely coincidental'. I'm not sure what that means, frankly.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

DanaM.Nov 16, 2005

Excellent. Go see it.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

MaryS.Nov 15, 2005

It was awesome! MUCH BETTER than the BBC version. Kiera Knightly and Matthew MacFayden have a great chemistry in this version and you can feel their individual torments as they each realize they misjudged each other at first. Will see it again.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

AmandaS.Nov 13, 2005

This was a wonderful film- of epic beauty with amazing camera work and cleaver shots. I was moved by Matthew MacFadyen's vulnerable rendition of Darcy.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

ClintH.Nov 13, 2005

A witty, well-acted adaptation of Austen's novel. Delightful and well-shot.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

LynnNov 11, 2005

VERY different from the BBC version, but very good. It truly brings new things to this story, and the director uses the cinematic possiblities at his disposal.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

RobertA.Nov 11, 2005

P and P "Lite" - It felt like it was made for the WB network. Not much dialogue, lots of swirling camera movements. The teenage girls were having a good time, laughing and screaming at the potential love scenes.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

chrisDNov 10, 2005

This movie was a huge disappointment for me. It pales in comparison to the BBC version. You just can't replace Colin Firth.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

WillH.Nov 4, 2005

I saw this in Switzerland two weeks ago, and it was weak. Keria Knightley was really miscast in this role, and to boot, she overacts it. Her toothy grin was annoying. There was no passion, no subtle undercurrent of feeling between her and I saw this in Switzerland two weeks ago, and it was weak. Keria Knightley was really miscast in this role, and to boot, she overacts it. Her toothy grin was annoying. There was no passion, no subtle undercurrent of feeling between her and Darcy. Watch the TV BBC version instead. It's a far better rendition.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

Pride & Prejudice

User Reviews