Before I am commence writing this review, I have to tell y'all that I am absolutely in love with the BBC adaptation of Pride & Prejudice - so much so that I even have the soundtrack of the series. I hated Bride & Prejudice when I saw it and now that I have seen Pride & Prejudice on the big screen my faith in adaptations has been restored.
The thing I liked about this film was it was so different from the first. It was an entirely new approach. They changed the scenarios and the meetings but these changes are more than welcome: for example when Mr. Darcy meets Lizzie again it is in Lady Catherine DeBourgh's parlour and the proposal is outside in the rain (which I think captures the moment beautifully). The approach to the characters was also different - their lives and characters aren't as polished as the one in the BBC adaptation. There isn't that kind of restraint.
Next, the dialogues - I loved them. The film-makers did an excellent job of condensing the film without losing the essence. The last scene with Lizzie and Darcy is proof of excellent dialogues - they are not completely true to the original but they are fantastic. Dramatic and kudos to the actors for delivering them beautifully. The other thing to note about the dialogues is the fact that in condensing the film, some sub-plots have been removed but the film does not try to refer to them (or 'stuff' them in) everywhere - what they have left out they do not refer to at all (such as the strength of the relationship between Lizzie and Jane).
Next to the acting. Keira Knightley was not one of my favourite actresses - she is now. I think she did an excellent job as Lizzie Bennett - she was very convincing and when she spoke I felt that she believed was Lizzie Bennett. Matthew MacFayden has had unnecessary flak - he was a brilliant Mr. Darcy given the environment and restrictions he had to work with (limited time) - he is completely believable. He is very silent but his eyes - they speak volumes.
I do have one issue though - the portrayal of Mr. Bingley - I had him down as a nice man not a goofy man but then that is my perception. I think Rupert Friend also got a rough deal as Wickham because he didn't have many scenes to do his character justice - but with the scenes he did have the made him seem cowardice and pathetic throughout so for that reason the character didn't detract and managed to looked believable.
The scenery and cinematography of this film were excellent - one of my particular favourites is when Lizzie was standing on the rock formation in Derbyshire (I believe she is at Peak District).
People need to stop thinking about the old adaptation and look at this as a completely different kettle of fish - it is an excellent film and that is solely because they have taken a completely different approach to the film. The old adaptation had 5 hours while this had merely 2 hours. This is a fantastic film and like a previous comment said - I can't understand why the film is getting negative press from some quarters.
WATCH THIS FILM! It is something to be seen.
The thing I liked about this film was it was so different from the first. It was an entirely new approach. They changed the scenarios and the meetings but these changes are more than welcome: for example when Mr. Darcy meets Lizzie again it is in Lady Catherine DeBourgh's parlour and the proposal is outside in the rain (which I think captures the moment beautifully). The approach to the characters was also different - their lives and characters aren't as polished as the one in the BBC adaptation. There isn't that kind of restraint.
Next, the dialogues - I loved them. The film-makers did an excellent job of condensing the film without losing the essence. The last scene with Lizzie and Darcy is proof of excellent dialogues - they are not completely true to the original but they are fantastic. Dramatic and kudos to the actors for delivering them beautifully. The other thing to note about the dialogues is the fact that in condensing the film, some sub-plots have been removed but the film does not try to refer to them (or 'stuff' them in) everywhere - what they have left out they do not refer to at all (such as the strength of the relationship between Lizzie and Jane).
Next to the acting. Keira Knightley was not one of my favourite actresses - she is now. I think she did an excellent job as Lizzie Bennett - she was very convincing and when she spoke I felt that she believed was Lizzie Bennett. Matthew MacFayden has had unnecessary flak - he was a brilliant Mr. Darcy given the environment and restrictions he had to work with (limited time) - he is completely believable. He is very silent but his eyes - they speak volumes.
I do have one issue though - the portrayal of Mr. Bingley - I had him down as a nice man not a goofy man but then that is my perception. I think Rupert Friend also got a rough deal as Wickham because he didn't have many scenes to do his character justice - but with the scenes he did have the made him seem cowardice and pathetic throughout so for that reason the character didn't detract and managed to looked believable.
The scenery and cinematography of this film were excellent - one of my particular favourites is when Lizzie was standing on the rock formation in Derbyshire (I believe she is at Peak District).
People need to stop thinking about the old adaptation and look at this as a completely different kettle of fish - it is an excellent film and that is solely because they have taken a completely different approach to the film. The old adaptation had 5 hours while this had merely 2 hours. This is a fantastic film and like a previous comment said - I can't understand why the film is getting negative press from some quarters.
WATCH THIS FILM! It is something to be seen.
Tell Your Friends