Pride and Prejudice
discussion
Book first but after that which film was best?
message 1:
by
Gretchen
(last edited Sep 21, 2011 06:07PM)
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Sep 21, 2011 05:20PM
I admit I saw the Keira Knightly version first. However, I tried to watch the BBC version as well since I really admire Colin Firth's acting. However, I could not sit thru it. I found it lagged at points and ended up switching it off in favor of the newer version. The book did not lag in the way that the BBC film seemed to over minute details. What do you think, which is your favorite?
reply
|
flag
Definitely the Keira Knightly version. It was so much more entertaining,and although they condensed the book's plot to fit the average run-time of a movie, it still stayed pretty true to the novel. I liked Keira as Lizzie much better (there's something enchanting about her performance), and the actor who played Darcy really resembled what I imagined Darcy to look/act like.
Keira Knightly version. I adore Colin Firth, but I could not sit through something that was ruining one of my favorite stories.
The 1995 version will always be my favorite. I could watch the movie every day if I had the chance. Don't get me wrong, I could watch the 2005 version every day too...it's like my quick P&P fix but 2 hours just isn't enough sometimes! (I think one of the reasons why some people find it hard to sit through is because it's not actually in movie form. It was originally a TV "mini-series". Go back and watch it!!)
I saw the BBC first and fell in love with it and Colin Firth! I was convinced there was no way anything could ever top that version, so I refused to watch the Kiera Knightly one for the longest time. A friend finally convinced me and once I saw it, I had to admit, it was so much better! It took my breath away. I'm still in love with Colin Firth mind you, but he's not in the best Pride and Prejudice movie. ...he still might be the best Darcy, but the jury is still out on that one. :)
the BBC version is really good because it was a miniseries so they were able to include some of the smaller details where as the new version of it with Keira Knightley could not due to time constraints and director choice. I love the dance scene though from the new Pride and Prejudice where Darcy and Elizabeth first dance. But I am also a little prejudiced since I don't particularly like Keira Knightley
I love the dance scene too Stephanie. How everyone else just disappears. Showing how for them they are the only two in the room. The director shot with a very artistic eye.
I do like the 2005 version, actually saw it twice the night it came out in theaters. Went in with extremely low expectations so just about anything would have exceeded them. The cinematography and the music were absolutly beautiful. But Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle have been the best Lizzy and Darcy so far. In my opinion, Keira played her a little bit too mean. Darcy is supposed to be both proud and shy, I think Colin Firth pulled that off much better than Matthew Macfadyen.
BBC version much better than the new one , keira is good actress but not persuasive as elizabeth and so who play darcy but in the BBC version both colin faith and jinnfer ehle brought elizabeth and darcy alive
I love the BBC version! I have watched that one so many times. I bought the 2005 version without watching it first thinking -I love P&P so I will love this - not so much. It's alright, but the BBC version has so much more feeling and I really connect with it. Has anyone seen the 1940's version with Laurence Olivier & Greer Garson? I like that one too. It's amusing but very short with a lot of the original story is cut out. I like both Garson and Olivier though.
The BBC version is the best - no diss on the movie(s) that have been made of the book, but the average 90-150 minute running time of a movie is simply not enough time to deal with the plot and characters properly.
@Rachael - I've seen that one, it wasn't bad. Has anyone seen the 1980 BBC mini series version? It mostly seen from Lizzy's perspective and quite horrid. LOL But I still watch it because I love the story and it's on Netflix instant view. I'll put it on when I'm lazy and just want to experience the story.
@Amanda - I did like the scene, but you have a point, neither would never been seen outside their private rooms and not be completely dressed. Her standing in the hall at the Collins' house in her nightgown and robe.... Never would have happened.
I still haven't read P&P. I adore and love the '05 version and I love watching Keira and Matthew together. I love this version so much that I have no desire whatsoever to see the '95 version. Or any other for that matter. None at all. I rather watch the '05 version over and over. And I have. lol
box5angel wrote: "I still haven't read P&P. I adore and love the '05 version and I love watching Keira and Matthew together. I love this version so much that I have no desire whatsoever to see the '95 version. Or an..."Me, too! I actually lost the DVD to the '05 version, panicked, and went out and bought another. Of course, I found the first one, so now I have two! I get what you all are saying about it not being long or detailed enough to fully delve into the characters. Still a fantastic movie, and I for one adore the proposal at the end. Makes my heart go pitter pat.
I prefer the BBC version with Colin Firth. I like the Keira version, but it seems too short in my opinion.
Nicole R. wrote: "box5angel wrote: "I still haven't read P&P. I adore and love the '05 version and I love watching Keira and Matthew together. I love this version so much that I have no desire whatsoever to see the ..."That is something I would have done if I thought I lost my copy. lol I love the proposal. Makes me want to watch it again. :)
And someday, I might read the book too. lol
I love the BBC version best!! The newer one just left out too many characters that I love reading about, like both of Bingley's sisters. I think I will always love the book best, but my second is the BBC version. The newer one is a good movie, but it does not compare to the book like the BBC one does.
I've seen all four versions mentioned here. All but the early BBC versions have their merits. I can't even remember anything about the early BBC one. But the Colin Firth mini-series was my favorite simply because it had so much of the book's scenes and lines included. True, the scenes of undress were not period, but most of the rest seemed close enough. Hmmm. I'm feeling the urge to watch one of these versions again . . .
BBC forever! The Keira Knightly version was good... except for the Keira Knightly part. Keira is acceptable for a short version (and amazing scenery) but to understand the movie, you gotta watch 5 hours.
Does anyone think that the 2005 version didn't have enough Mr Wickham? He and Lizzy were barley together, you don't really get to see how he really was able to "seduce" (for lack of a better word) her. Him being good looking helped, but that's all you really see, not how charming he was. Granted, Lizzy was probably looking for someone who also didn't think so highly of Mr Darcy, but she wouldn't have been so partial to someone that only talked bad about Darcy, he also had to have charm and manners. Everyone in the town liked Wickham.
The cast in the BBC version is brilliant. Mr. Collins for example. The faces he makes and the way he acts just suits the character from the book perfectly. The same with Mr. and Mrs Bennet. And the setting looks very genuine. I didn't like the Keira Knightly's version at all. I just cannot forgive them for taking all the elegance of the era (those wild dances!) and changing the most memorable moments. The cast didn't impress me either. Keira may look like elizabeth with her "fine eyes" but she definitely doesn't act it.
Definitely the BBC version with Colin Firth! I love it and can easily watch all of it in one sitting, especially on a rainy Saturday.
I really love the BBC version with Colin Firth, but I truly do love the Kiera Knightly one, too. I have to say the BBC version ekes the win in my book, though, just because it's more true to the book. But the heart-racing romance is more prominent in the Kiera Knightly version. They both have their qualities!
I'd have to say both. It depends on my mood as to which one I want to see. If really want to watch a Austen movie, but don't have much time I'll watch the Keira Knightly version. But If I really, really want to get into it, I'll watch the Colin Firth version. I like the both equally for different reasons.
The 2005 one is my favorite. I watched it right after I finally read the book for the first time and it captured all my favorite parts perfectly.I think my biggest beef with the 95 version is that it feels like more of an interpretation than anything else. Colin Firth's Darcy isn't social inept like in the books, he's just... a jerk. It's fine in it's own right and has some really great stuff (and the second half of the series is way better than the first), but it changed my favorite pieces and I couldn't get on board with his Darcy.
Plus Jane and Bingley were ADORABLE in the 2005 version.
Was Kate Winslett in the 1995 version? If so, it was definitely my favorite interpretaion of the book.
She was in Sense and Sensibility. A great film. She did a great job in that one before anyone knew her from her Titanic days.
Mia wrote: "I think my biggest beef with the 95 version is that it feels like more of an interpretation than anything else. Colin Firth's Darcy isn't social inept like in the books, he's just... a jerk...."But Darcy is a bit of a jerk. He masks his social ineptitude with arrogance. He say's during the proposal walk with Lizzy, "Unfortunatley, an only son (for many years an only child), I was spoiled by my parents, who, though good themselves (my father particularly, all that was benevolent and amiable), allowed, encouraged, and 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. Such I was, from eight to eight-and-twenty; and such I might still have been but for you, dearest, loveliest Elizabeth!"
Okay-I knew that was an old one-I had it on VHS:D
I absolutely love, love, love the BBC one! It's my favorite movie ever! Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle are just amazing in it! All the actors are perfect for the roles. The music is wonderful and Andrew Davies (the screenwriter) is a genius. I hate one with Keira Knightley!!! It's an insult to the book.
At the time I didn't see how anyone could make a better version of Pride and Prejudice than the 1995 BBC version but when I watched the 2005 movie I thought Keira Knightley was perfect in the Lizzie part. I wasn't keen on Matthew M. on the first couple of viewings, but he grew on me and I thought in the end his was an excellent interpretation of the Mr Darcy part. I love the first proposal scene in the rain - it gets better on each viewing I think.
The soundtrack for the 2005 version is amazing...
No competition here between the usual top contenders—definitely the BBC version. I adore Colin Firth and the lovely Jennifer Ehle. They were a far better Darcy and Elizabeth than the movie version played by Matthew and Keira. On top of their performance, the mini-series captured the story, and supporting characters, in a way that the 2005 version failed to do.Honestly, the movie butchered certain aspects of the book in my opinion. I won't go into everything I dislike in detail, because I actually enjoy the movie... but yeah, overall I’d say it wasn't true enough to Jane Austen’s vision. I understand the need for changes in order to retell a story within a shorter time frame, but too many of them were unnecessary in this case and affected certain characters in a way that bugged me.
But to be fair, I liked Matthew MacFadyen's interpretation of Darcy well enough. His looks and that voice! Definitely swoon worthy. Actually, so was Bingley. (And dammit, I loved his inappropriate laugh in spite of myself. Lol) I do like Keira Knightly, but she wasn't Elizabeth. Perhaps a more modern one, if you want to stretch it... but eh, to each their own. I personally wasn't a fan. :)
Just to add though, I saw the movie adaptation before reading either the book or seeing the Pride & Prejudice mini-series. Without any expectations going in, I enjoyed the movie very much. In particular, I found the movie version to be more visually appealing than its predecessor. However, after reading the real story and watching the other fan favourite, my choice is obvious. Superior story content trumps visual appeal.
Give me Colin and Jen any day! <3
For the most faithful adaptation of the book and superior casting the prize goes to the 1995 version which I will always think of it as the A&E version because that's where I first saw the mini-series. The 2005 version was more visually pleasing and I loved the soundtrack so I will watch it for a quick fix but I have to reach for Firth and Ehle when I want the real deal. Think fast food vs a home cooked meal lovingly prepared. P.S. As for the 1940 Olivier / Garson version while quite entertaining; any HS student trying to get away with watching the movie instead of reading the book would probably flunk the test.
Amanda wrote: "The 2005 version is fine if you're cool with Hollywood bastardization of a classic. What the hey-who was up with that ending? Darcy and Lizzie would never have sat around in their undies OUTSIDE, e..."...and I bet they would have never had sex either . I think that we try to sanitize life "back then" into something it was most definitely not. In the final scene Lizzy and Darcy were on a private patio opening off of the house. There are no houses around Pemberley where peeping Toms could get a look. Why would they not feel comfortable enough to be in their night clothes in their own home?
Karin wrote: "@Rachael - I've seen that one, it wasn't bad. Has anyone seen the 1980 BBC mini series version? It mostly seen from Lizzy's perspective and quite horrid. LOL But I still watch it because I ..."
I saw the scene with Lizzy in Mr. Collins parlour as more of a surreal dream sequence and not an actual real event. The events that took place were all reflected in the mirror as the hands on the clock turned. It was a symbolic scene where Lizzy looks herself in the mirror and realizes her deficiencies. In the book she says that until she read that letter she did not know herself. The mirror symbolized her looking inward and discovering her prejudice.
Mary wrote: "I saw the scene with Lizzy in Mr. Collins parlour as more of a surreal dream sequence and not an actual real event. The events that took place were all reflected in the mirror as the hands on the clock turned. It was a symbolic scene where Lizzy looks herself in the mirror and realizes her deficiencies. In the book she says that until she read that letter she did not know herself. The mirror symbolized her looking inward and discovering her prejudice. "Very interesting interpretation of that scene. I've never thought of it that way before. Next time I watch it I hope that comes to mind.
The Keira Knightly version for P&P but the BBC version for Emma I think
Mary wrote: ...and I bet they would have never had sex either . I think that we try to sanitize life "back then" into something it was most definitely not.To be fair Austen did not sanitize life "back then". Kitty enjoyed her "elopement" with Wickham as much as Maria Bertram enjoyed her affair with Crawford. John Willoughby in his confession to Elinor about his seduction of Captain Wentworth's ward says "... because I was a libertine, she must be a saint." implying that 15 year old Eliza was just as carried away with passion as he was. Emma mentee Harriet was someone's natural daughter and it is strongly implied that Isabelle Thorpe was dumped by Frederick Tilney after his "conquest". So according to Austen the men and women of the early 19th century were very definitely having sex.
Definitely the BBC version with Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle, which followed the book so closely.- Keira Knightly seems just insipid. She always stands around with her mouth hanging open
I liked the 2005 Keira Knightly best. Is one of my favs :)Although I do like some of the remakes, like... my mind has pulled blank. Haha. The Colin Firth one was okay. The one that was the british one where she goes through the door... gah memory loss. Lost In Austen. I liked that one. Was super long but really funny! Haha
Karen wrote: "Mary wrote: ...and I bet they would have never had sex either . I think that we try to sanitize life "back then" into something it was most definitely not.To be fair Austen did not sanitize l..."
I agree that Austen did not sanitize life, so why do so many feel that anything that smacks of impropriety would NOT have happened? Lizzy was not your most conventional of heroines.
Mary wrote: "I agree that Austen did not sanitize life, so why do so many feel that anything that smacks of impropriety would NOT have happened? Lizzy was not your most conventional of heroines.LOL! I think we are in agreement Mary, I know many were appalled by the ending of the 2005 P&P I thought it was very natural.
BBC version for me.. I have to wath it at least one a year..Colin Firth willl always be Mr.Darccy to me.. :) The Kiera Knightley version is ok.. but nothing more than that..
Karen wrote: "Mary wrote: "I agree that Austen did not sanitize life, so why do so many feel that anything that smacks of impropriety would NOT have happened? Lizzy was not your most conventional of heroines...."
I agree
The Kiera Knightley version is my favourite. I found the Collin Firth version to be slow.
The best film version I've seen (and I've seen four) has been the BBC version with Colin Firth. While I agree that it may come across as slow, I wouldn't expect ardent lovers of the book to view it in that light only. The actors portrayed the characters in a very real and very accurate manner so as to see the book literally come to life on screen. Of course, I'm one of those people who wishes all films based on books actually remain true to the text and not put a cinematic spin on things. I'm willing to sit through a longer movie to do so, even if it's one with an intermission such as they had in the earlier days of cinema. And I'd much prefer that method to the separation of the film into two parts that I must wait months between viewing such as they've done with HPatDH and BD.
KatieGurumi wrote: "The best film version I've seen (and I've seen four) has been the BBC version with Colin Firth. While I agree that it may come across as slow, I wouldn't expect ardent lovers of the book to view it in that light only. The actors portrayed the characters in a very real and very accurate manner so as to see the book literally come to life on screen."I'm re reading it right now on my mobile, and I agree. I have to say that being slow is part of its charm.
I don't know how anyone who has read P&P could possible like the 2005 version with Keira Knightley & Matthew Macfadyen. I have watched it twice (1st time just to see for myself how it was & 2nd time because a good friend really wanted to see it so I watched it with her) and I hated it both times. I've also seen the 1940 version with Greer Garson & Laurence Olivier - it's okay. The 1995 BBC version however is my absolute favorite! We bought it just after it came out on VHS and I've watched it many times over.
I love the BBC version with Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle, however I always thought that Ehle looked a little old for Lizzy and the BBC Jane was not beautiful enough to be the most beautiful sister. Rosamund Pike who played Jane in the 2005 adaptation was more my idea of what Jane might look like. I think overall though, it is unfair to compare the two (the earlier BBC version with David Ringtol as Darcy was just a little too high school play "settish" for my taste). The BBC version with Firth and Ehle is over 7 hours long. There is time to develop the story and stay closer to the book when time is not a factor. The 2005 feature film with Knightley and McFadyden was an adaptation and was only 2.5 hours long. Working with those time constraints demands that the director choose what to leave in and what to leave out. I loved both films and think each has something to contribute to the visual representation of Darcy & Elizabeth's story.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
