Pride and Prejudice
discussion
Read the book first or watch the film first?
date
newest »
newest »
Watch the BBC version whilst reading the book, I feel it's the most accurate (barring the Colin Firth lake scene)with quotes an such :)
I always read the books first.
Read the book first!
I read the bokk first and loved it. The 2005 movie was ok, but as usual there are many things that get lost. I prefer the book.
Darlene wrote: "I totally agree with An. The Keira Knightly version was too silly. Definitely read the book and watch the BBC movie/series. Love the book, but I have to say, Austen leaves out some important dialog..."Agree! The hole book talking about how the relationship starts to grow and when they finally get together it's so quickly that you don't even realize what happend, you don't end to understand their feelings.
By the way, there is also a modern adaptation on youtube right now. It's really nice, because it has all these references to the book without claiming to be an accurate copy of the story.
Lizziebennet.com
If you read and enjoy classics, then read the book first. The book is almost always substantially better than the movie. On the other hand, if for any reason you find that you aren't a huge fan of classic lit, then watching the movie definitely gives you a feel for the story and makes the book easier to read. In the case of Pride and Prejudice, I've read the book multiple times and have seen 4 or 5 tv/movie versions and good, or not so good, they were bringing me a story I love and I enjoyed them.
I think that I should read the book first
I watch first and read later. That way I get to "taste test" the book before spending money to buy it and I'm not horribly disappointed by the film adaptation. The few cases where I've read the book first the movie was a waste of money (with the exception of The Hobbit). I didn't even like the Harry Potter movies I got after reading the books as much, so everything after Chamber of Secrets isn't watched often (plus I loved Richard Harris as Dumbledore and I wanted to live in the old Hogwarts set). I read every Narnia book and because of that I rarely watch the movies (I watch The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe often enough since I watched it before reading). The first two Twilight movies were painful to watch (I haven't watched any since New Moon) partly because the books aren't that good, partly because I read them first, and partly because the movie just sucked. I rarely watch the Eragon movie because it's very inaccurate and they left out Orik.
However, in the cases where I watched the movie first it gets watched over and over again so it's not a waste of money and neither is the book. Actually, I tend to become obsessive for a while.
The Princess Bride is one of those books where everyone knows about the movie and has most likely seen it long before they even learn it's a book (if ever). I watched part of the movie when I was four and remembered it for ten years without seeing it at all, though if I'd known the name I would've hunted it down and watched it over and over. After I saw the movie for the first time in ten years I read the book, but in this case I prefer the movie.
I used to believe reading the book before watching the movie was always the best way to go. However, after spending money to watch the movies, and then being completely disappointed because the movie sucked in comparison to the book, I've changed my tune. So, now I have to recommend watching the movie first. It may allow you to enjoy the flick without hating how the book you love is consolidated and twisted.
Also, I've watched several movies without knowing they were a book, and would promptly buy the book once I found out. I do think watching the movie first can alter your own imagination of the character's looks or the scenery, but rarely does it alter it enough to ruin the story.
I always prefer to read a book first, before seeing the movie. I like to be free to imagine the characters in my head without the influence of a movie. But I like to read, so perhaps that has something to do with my preference for reading the book first.In stories with very complex plots, I think it definitely helps with understanding everything that is going on, to read the book before seeing the movie.
If someone is struggling with the language and phrasing, or if it's their first time reading period books, I recommend the movies first. That way, they have a general concept of the plot and characters. When they start reading, it gives them a heads up.While *I* think the language is easy to follow, I know plenty of people who struggle with the language of the 2005 version, let alone the BBC one. Not everyone is the same.
I sometimes also recommend the audiobook to people, since a good reader can help 'act' it out.
Read the book, then watch the 1995 BBC mini-series!
ALWAYS read the book first -- then watch the mini series with Jennifer Ehle. Enjoy!!
I seen the film first which made me read the book as the books usually have more in them. The nice thing was I had faces to put with the characters in the book
Denisa wrote: "I seen the film first which made me read the book as the books usually have more in them. The nice thing was I had faces to put with the characters in the book"Exactly my point. Especially if it is a new period to period fiction, this can actually be key into getting them to read the book!
Read the book, or the movie maybe. Now that I'm thinking about it I probably wouldn't of hated the movie so much if I had watched it first.
As a general rule I say read the book first they are always better. But I will say that in the case of P&P and Memoirs on a Geisha, I watched the movies first then read the books. Because I loved the movies first I think it allowed me to keep loving them after I read the books instead of being let down by the movies.
Always read the book first, unless its one that takes a while to get into - the film will (hopefully!) make you want to keep going.
"And can anybody comment if you like Jennifer Ehle's version Elizabeth? Why?"I like Jennifer Ehle's version of Elizabeth, and I do have my reasons.
1. She develops her character- Unlike the popular notion of Elizabeth as a perfect heroine and Mr. Darcy as the one who needed to change, Elizabeth Bennet had her flaws. The title of the book is "Pride and Prejudice." The Pride belongs to Mr. Darcy, the Prejudice to Elizabeth. I felt that Jennifer's performance at the beginning left me shaking my head sometimes, saying "just give the man a chance, would you?" And honestly, that's what SHOULD happen. Also, whe accurately portrays the change from disgust at Mr. Darcy's behaviour to love, as she learns to drop her prejudice and face the truth, admitting her faults to herself and to Mr. Darcy. In the 2005 version, it was much too impulsive and flighty a decision, leaving me feeling like Knightly's Elizabeth was more like Lizzy.
2. On that note, Jennifer follows the true Elizabeth in her character, especially considering the time period. Kiera's Elizabeth, while fun to watch, frequently reminds me more of a dramatic child than a mature, not quite 21 lady, brought up in society. Jennifer does a better job of balancing wit with the propriety common and required in that day and age. I love when she shows her embarrasment at her mother and sisters' behaviour, simply because that's what ELIZABETH would do. Her relationship whith Jane is exactly what I imagined it to be, very sisterly. Her relationship with Mr. Darcy may develop slower than the 2005 version, but it's true to the book, the time, and, in my opinion, to Jane Austen's vision.
3. This is picky, no doubt, but I actually think Jennifer Ehele pulled off the LOOK better. I think someone posted this elsewhere, but Kiera Knightly is beautiful- however, in a much more modern way. I feel like Jennifer Ehele could be in a painting from that time period, she looks like she belongs to it. She isn't a stick, she isn't a model, but she carries herself with a beauty and grace that I imagined Elizabeth to have.
Oh, and I don't want to make this a point because then I would have 4 and that would bother me, but I do like the long looks and the relationship she has with Colin Firth as Mr. Darcy. It may not be as smouldering and modern as the 2005 version, but I feel like it is truer to the book, and quite honestly, to love. It may not have all the fireworks, but you can SEE her growing to respect, appreciate, and care for him deeply, in a way that is touching and that you know will last. Ehele carries this out well.
So there you have it. My Opinion on why I loved her Performance. Comments and Questions Welcome.
Always, ALways, ALWAYS read the book first. Then leave some time, then see the movie.
Whilst I'm all for reading the book first I ahve to say... sometimes the movie can encourage people who never thought of reading the book to actually pick it up. That happened with a friend of mine after she watched the Keira Knightley film... she then absolutely adored the book (and she's not big on reading but was trying to get some classics under her belt).
Depends. When it comes to Shakespeare, I think it's better to watch the movie adaptations first. I noticed that it was easier to follow and I didn't have as hard a time with understanding the language because I already knew what was going on in the scenes.
If I see the movie first I would not read the book. So I was lucky to have read the book first.
Read the book first, and after, and at regular intervals throughout life.
read the book first ;)
Read the book first. Unless you've already seen the movie. Then, decide whether or not you REALLY want to read the book, because if you don't really want to, don't read it. That's a general rule-if it's something like Shakespeare, you could probably watch the movie first and get away with it.
Generally speaking i think that a book should be read first. However in the case of Jane Austen and the like i prefer to watch a TV or movie adaption first. The visual representation helps to overcome some of the language that people starting out with this era of writing might otherwise struggle with. After reading and watching quite a few novels/shows like this it is now much easier for me to pick up a book and be able to create the images myself but i highly recommend that a visual aid be used for those starting out.
I would generally read the book first :D However, I know that in some cases, with more difficult literature it can be useful to watch an adaption previously, as a guideline for the plot and characters.
Read the book. Period.
Marjory wrote: ""And can anybody comment if you like Jennifer Ehle's version Elizabeth? Why?"I like Jennifer Ehle's version of Elizabeth, and I do have my reasons.
1. She develops her character- Unlike the pop..."
Thanks Marjory.
To be honest, I like neither Jennifer Ehle's nor Kiera Knightly's version of Elizabeth. :p They disappointed me. lol
So Kiera's shortcomings don't suggest that Jennifer's good, and vice versa.
I think it depends on the reader. If the reader is used to reading the classics and the language used at that time, I'd vote for book-first. If the reader is new to that kind of book (especially for the younger reader), I'd say go BBC-mini-series first for P&P. I think the dialog will make more sense to a new reader once they've heard it spoken aloud and understand the context and cadence of it. I think they'll be more likely to understand the book and finish it. If the reader is already used to such dialog, then I think they'll be fine book-first.
Sandy wrote "to be honest, I like neither Jennifer Ehle's nor Kiera Knightly's version of Elizabeth. :p..."Haha, I know how you feel about movie characters not measuring up. Is there a version of P&P where you like the actor for Elizabeth?
I generally read the book first. If I watch the movie (which I have done a few times) I find it spoils the book for me and I don't enjoy the book as much. Also depending on the rating of the movie a lot is changed. I have never watched a movie that did not change something I felt was significant in the book and would not have made sense if I hadn't read the book and understood the characters and certain scenes. I find this in Nicholas Spark's movies, it seems that sometimes the crux of the story is changed, personalities and key points in the book are not expressed in the movies. Read the book first would be my advice...then watch the movie...you may still enjoy the movie...but it spoils the book for you.
Marjory wrote: "Sandy wrote "to be honest, I like neither Jennifer Ehle's nor Kiera Knightly's version of Elizabeth. :p..."Haha, I know how you feel about movie characters not measuring up. Is there a version of ..."
I'm picky and there isn't an actor of Elizabeth I like so far, haha.
I think Vivien Leigh could be a perfect Elizabeth, gorgeous, witty, confident and proud. Kiera and Jennifer are just nothing to her.
As I said P&P deserves an angel-like actress, doesn't it? lol
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Pride and Prejudice is one of them, I watched it in 2005 and a few years later read the novel and fell in love with it - the movie was good, but the book was divine!
So I guess that if people like to get both versions of the story, then watch the movie first.