Pride and Prejudice

Rating:
Summary: Adequate adaptation
Review: If you are a Jane Austen fan, you'll probably enjoy having this production in your collection. It's biggest detraction is that it is not A&E's P&P, and if you love that one, you may find yourself comparing the two with this one suffering by such comparison.

So setting aside A&E's version, the dialogue on this one is wonderful, very true to the book (with a few exceptions). However, the acting is sometimes stiff and awkward, and at times the movie suffers from over-acting, with the exception of Lizzie (played by Garvie).

The costumes, settings and music are wonderful. Mrs. Bennett is true to the book, but I found Mr. Bennett portrayed worse than he should have been. There was little to like about him in this movie (he is one of my favorite characters in the book), and his lines are delivered with nastiness and little wit. Fortunately he makes only a few appearances.

Charlotte is given the role as Lizzie's confidante, which should be Jane, who is reduced to a very shallow, peripheral character. Mr. Collins is wonderfully silly, but Wickham and the rest of the Bennett sisters are not well-developed.

If you've seen the other BBC Austen productions from the 80's you will enjoy seeing some of your old "friends." Charlotte is played by "Elinor" from the BBC production of "Sense & Sensibility." Julia from BBC's "Mansfield Park" plays Miss Bingley very well.

Rating:
Summary: Actually it's the BBC at its best..
Review: Pride and Prejudice is my favourite book of all time by my favourite author, and I first saw this adaptation of Jane Austen's masterpiece when I was still at school.
It was originally shown as an episodic serial over several weeks on BBC2.
I first bought it as a complete work on VHS in ooh must have been the late 1980's, when it first became available, and I have watched it many times.
I also own and have watched the Andrew Davies adaptation from 1995 and the MGM movie made in 1940.
All these productions have their merits and in their way are beautifully done, but without any question this is the version most faithful to the book, in both content and style.
Elizabeth Garvie should have become a huge star as a result of this performance, but she has since chosen to work almost exclusively in the theatre, and David Rintoul is her perfect foil. His Darcy almost anal retentive in his stiff upper lippedness.
And how prophetic, now that he has sold Diana's private video's to the American media, that Peter Settelen should have made such a wonderfully slimy and sycophantic Wickham.
If ever a Wickham deserved a Lydia....his did.
I'm sure there will be those who find the tempo of the piece somewhat pedestrian, but that was the nature of the beast in 19th century England.
The 1995 version, [oh and for the record may I clear up a misconception that some people seem to be under. The 1995 version starring Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle, was and is a BBC production. It may have been released under license in the USA by A&E, but it is NOT and never was an A&E production.]
...anyway..
The 1995 version was much faster paced, and the smouldering relationship between Lizzy and Darcy intensely exciting for the viewer to watch, however, many of the nuances of the piece are far too modern to represent a truly faithful adaptation.
For example, if Elizabeth and Darcy's relationship had indeed been as toe curlingly sexy as portrayed, Elizabeth's shock and dismay at Darcy's proposal would have been ingenuous to say the least.
I also take issue with the portrayal of: Mrs Bennett, who though undoubtedly ditsy was never a common vulgar fishwife, and a far too old and far too buxom Lydia.
And whilst much more accurate than the 1940 movie version, this production was not also entirely faithful to the original text Add to this the excruciating performances of Alison Steadman and Julia Sawalha, both fine actresses, who on this occasion were just horribly miscast, and the 1980 version is a clear favourite for those of us who don't like their Austen tinkered with too much.

Rating:
Summary: Not true to the spirit of P&P
Review: So rarely do I disagree with the majority of Amazon reviewers that I watched this movie twice, so as to be sure I felt the same way after viewing it again.

While it is true that the script follows the dialogue of the novel more closely than does the later production, I cannot see how it is more true to the book. I feel it fails in some of the most interesting aspects of the book in that it doesn't capture the comedy and is far from being light, bright and sparkeling as JA herself described the story. Tongue in cheek she mentions in a letter that it 'wants more shade'. It seems to me that the actors and director introduced a bit too much shade.

I respect Fay Weldon but take issue with the way she wrote the script to have the actors repeat what is actually narration in the book. This makes for very uncomfortable and heavy dialogue, which the actors are incapable of carrying off. Further, their acting is very wooden, and I do not find Rintoul in the least handsome except in profile, and while Elizabeth Garvie is a pretty girl, the actress who played Jane has the beautiful eyes that should be necessary in the actress who plays Lizzie's part.

I found myself not caring in the least if Darcy and Lizzie or Jane and Mr. Bingley finally get together as there was no chemistry between those actors at all. The actresses who played Lydia and Kitty were much too old for the part, as was the actress who played Mrs. Bennet. After all, Jane is but almost 23 and her mother surely would not have been more than 43 and was a beauty in her day. Overall I felt almost the entire core cast was actually mis-cast. Every single actor is entirely forgettable.

The music was reminsiscent of an old BBC soap opera.

I gave this movie 2 stars because the sets and costuming were spot on and is leaps and bounds better than the worst P&P production of all time - that horrible 1940's Greer Garson movie where they are wearing Victorian, instead of Georgian/Regency clothing.

I don't find the Ehle and Firth production in the least dumbed down and far prefer it. In fact, that production has been more instrumental in bringing the works of Jane Austen to the 20th and 21st centuries than any other because it includes all the major elements, though perhaps not all the dialogue of the book. It captured the spirit of the book

If you are a Janeite, by all means rent this movie. But do rent before you buy.

The happiest part for me is that while I did buy the movie, I got an excellent deal on it, or I am afraid I would have felt even more disappointed than I do.

Rating:
Summary: It's about time...
Review: this 1980's version was released on DVD. Like so many others, I had purchased the VHS, 2 tape copy and was disappointed in seeing a good amount was edited out. I remember seeing it when it was aired on Masterpiece Theater over a five week period. It instantly become my favorite British presentation, apart from "Flambards".

I have also seen the 1996 version with Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle. I liked the version very much. Colin did an excellent portrayal of Mr. Darcy and Jennifer was a lovely Elizabeth, but I never forget this earlier version. I kept picturing Elizabeth Garvie and David Rintoul when I watched the newer P&P and realized, they will always be Elizabeth and Darcy to me.

This older version perfectly captured the overall feel of the novel. True, Rintoul's performance was stiff compared to Colin Firth's, but I honestly feel he really showed the proud and arrogant Mr. Darcy of Jane Austen's story. Sorry, but Colin Firth was just too likable. Elizabeth Garvie was dead on as Elizabeth. She was exactly how I pictured Elizabeth to be. Jennifer Ehle seemed too cheerful at times and was missing some of the archiness and wit that Garvie displayed.

My favorite scene in this version was when Elizabeth and Darcy meet again at Pemberly. It was word for word from the book, with every embarrassed look and uneasy feeling captured. The newer version I would said followed the story line more. There were several scenes in this older version that were condensed, such as when Elizabeth visits Charlotte in Hunsford. And the newer version adds scenes which I thought was unneccessary.

I have a hard time choosing between the two version since both were wonderful in their own special way. But if I had to choose, then this 1979 version would be number one with the 1996, a very, very close second. The main reason being whenever I think of Mr. Darcy, I see David Rintoul!

Rating:
Summary: Pride and Prejudice (1980)
Review: This adaptation is true to the Jane Austen wit. Even without its hollywood frills and thrills, it delivers the visual impression that my imaganation carries from the book. I've had this video for about ten years and have read the book (at least) twice annually for fifteen years. Why the devotion to this 1980 adaptation? Well, the book and the video are one in the same for me because Elizabeth Garvie and David Rintoul ARE Eliza and Darcy. Not even the great Colin Firth can pull off a better Darcy. I think only a Jane Austen fan will truly understand the value of this version. For the rest of the world...I'm afraid you'll have to settle for A&E's glamourized version.

Rating:
Summary: The Greatest Version
Review: This is my favorite version of P & P ever. I really feel that it stays more true to the message of the book than any other. So many versions forget that this isn't a love story, but a class story. It's purpose was to illustrate the classism present in GB at this time. The script varies only mildly from the book. Elizabeth, Jane, and Mr. and Mrs. Bennett are all superb! The note the movie ends on is just delicious. I could be biased by having watched this version throughout my formative years, but I think it's a must-see.

Rating:
Summary: Honest
Review: This is the most faithful production of the Jane Austen classic.
Great acting throughout. Contrary to some reviewers comments, the acting was not stiff, but accurate to the culture of the time. The A&E version was nice, but too "watered down" or "dumbed down". Moreover, in the A&E version, much of Austen's best dialogue was changed, IMHO, if you cant improve it, leave it alone. This version is the standard to judge the other versions of Pride and Prejudice.

Rating:
Summary: Pride and Prejudice. Stars Elizabeth Garvie, David Rintoul.
Review: This production is more faithful to the book by Jane Austen than the others, both in character and plot. It's also more comical and lighthearted than the other versions, but that's because it doesn't present any character as a cartoon or caricature (e.g., compare Mrs. Bennet and Mr. Collins here to their 1995 miniseries counterparts). A caricature, to me, is like a lump of lead: throw it in water and it sinks.

I find the relationships between the characters develop naturally. The plain settings allow this development to come forth, like really good theatre. Our reward is that we see the characters interacting in a world that has particular conventions. Some of these conventions are difficult to explain to today's audiences, who get off on movies...like "Titanic." Certainly, Fay Weldon crafted a couple of new scenes and there are some minor logical errors, but she's kept the dialogue, aired it out with discretion without twisting it. Today's audiences tend to expect actors to show a good deal of emotion. I think that Darcy's "stiffness," as portrayed by David Rintoul, is right on key. It's a function both of his pride and social standing, and makes for positive change as the series progresses.

Elizabeth Garvie is very beautiful to look at as Elizabeth, but what sets her above other actresses in the role is her intelligence and curiosity about the world. Her eyes are beautiful because they are open. She is prejudiced against Darcy because he sleights her, he has contrived to separate Jane from Bingley, and is dislikeable, not because, for example, she is smugly superior to a likeable man. Her discoveries of what a scoundrel Wickham is, and of Darcy's actions on behalf of her sister's honor, lead her (and the audience) to change judgment.
Today's audiences tend to dislike her narration (but the book was originally narrated, no?) and to impose a modern standard of sex appeal. (However, if there's a woman out there like
Garvie's Elizabeth, I'd certainly like to meet her...before I'm 35.)

The other actors get into the meat of their parts, but I'll only recognize a few here. Barbara Shelley is a warm and attractive Aunt Gardiner, the aunt you wish you had to warn you against evil. Moray Watson is Mr. Bennet, a man of intelligence who suffers a wife-become-frivolous, and has a close bond with Elizabeth, despite being hemmed in by silly daughters. Judy Parfitt is a pompous and caustic Lady de Bourgh ripe for shaking by Elizabeth at the end. Sabina Franklyn (Jane) is beautiful and straightforward: though acquaintances of mine find her not voluptuous enough, I don't think that's a problem.
The actress who plays Charlotte Lucas is plain, but not at all unhandsome and emphasizes the practicality of the character.

The thing about pre-circa-1985 BBC dramas is you can watch them and imagine grand settings around the basic integrity of the characters and plot, without having so many bucks and pounds poured in for eye candy, or to do the work of the imagination. And that's what reading the book is about anyway, coming up with one's own pictures.

P.S.
To the reviewer who would like to see the 5-part Michael
Jayston and Sorcha Cusack "Jane Eyre" (1973) on DVD, I'll second that. The BBC hit a sweet spot in the 70s. Any idea who owns the rights to distribute? As the 1980 Pride and Prejudice went to DVD with stiff competition from the 1995 version, it doesn't seem impossible that Jayston/Cusack's "Jane Eyre" could go there too.

Rating:
Summary: A faithful adaptation to Jane Austen's beloved novel.
Review: Would it be blasphemous to say that I love this 1985 version almost as much as I love the famous 1995 Jennifer Ehle/Colin Firth version?

Yes, I saw this version well before the A&E version and watched it regularly since it came out on VHS. Thank goodness for this dvd because my videotape is about to wear out! I just think this version feels closer to the book somehow. There are no tight bodices or a wet shirt Mr. Darcy, but it is enjoyable and engaging all the same. I love Elizabeth Garvie as Lizzy Bennet. She just completely captures the spirit of Elizabeth Bennet for me: playful, pretty, charming, witty and engaging, and with those lovely big brown eyes. David Rintoul is a handsome, aristocratic Darcy and all the actors are perfectly cast. I must say I always had a problem with the casting of Jane Bennet (not pretty enough), the Bingley sisters (no resemblance) and Mr. and Mrs. Gardiner (not elegant at all) in the 1995 version, but not so here. Jane is perfectly amiable and lovely in the guise of Sabina Franklin and the Gardiners are elegant and well-bred as they should be. The actresses who play Mrs. Hurst and Miss Bingley also do look like sisters. There is also no over-the-top acting which sometimes overshadowed other actors/characters.

The only downside of this version is, of course, that the budget was less than its 1995 counterpart and so most of the filming took place on sets instead of on the real thing. The costumes and locations are simpler. However, the actors and story treatment more than make up for its shortcomings and this version is a must have for any Jane Austen fan's movie library. If you've only seen the 1995 version and a true Jane Austen fan, be sure to check this one out. It is a gem that deserves to be seen!