While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

I first got to see this movie when it appeared on television, I personally found it a cute little flick. I know most people would feel that this movie is a bad screen adaption...but it is not meant to follow the book directly. If it had been meant to be it would would have been taken in a way more serious direction and it would have been like every other movie that used Jane Austen's book as it's premises.Yet, like every movie it has it's short comings, I for one, think that it lacked in substance at certain points and didn't always flow right and the acting, at times could come off as sub-par at a few points. But all in all I found it a good movie over-all.I rated this book a 9/10 due to its creativity and sheer adorableness.

i am crazy about modern day takes on classic stories--clueless is one of my favorite movies because it so perfectly retells Emma. so, of course, when i saw this movie was coming on TV...i was eager to give it a try (though skeptical, considering i'd never heard of it)...to be honest, i wish i had that hour and a half back.it's a ridiculously saccharine, terribly written, horribly acted movie--certainly, filled with clever tricks (like the Austen quotes that bookend all the scenes), but, at its core, a boring, unsexy, uninteresting version of a remarkably sensual novel. Darcy is more dopey than brooding, and Lizzie is cute--but too flat to play such a rich, nuanced character.i didn't know it was a "Mormon" movie until i just looked it up--but i'm not surprised. that explains the constant references to church and the reason why everyone was interested in marriage--rather than dating.if you're Mormon and a Jane Austen lover--i imagine you'd enjoy this...but if you're not a Mormon--rent Bridget Jones--it's a better bang for your buck.

I think this film is an excellent modern rendition of Pride and Prejudice. Those familiar with Jane Austen's novel realize it would be impossible to precisely recreate it. First of all, the BBC has done that 3 times. Secondly, what was common in 1796 (or 1813) is taboo now. Adult women rarely live at home once grown, marrying well is no longer of great importance to comfort, and in most societies we have more entertainment at our disposal then a ball.And this movie shows it. I felt that the actors represented the personalities of the original characters. Their choices and actions, if not nearly exact, seemed to be a modern equivalent. I believe Kam Heskin's interpretation was right on. Her performance stood out; she represented a Lizzy who had a strong independence, high level of intelligence, and a sense of humor.The cinematography is creative and, considering it's low budget, the film has a realistic beauty. The music and colors do a great deal to represent the emotions of the characters. All of this lends to the movie's calm sort of energy.

There are a great many negative comments on this movie, mostly by people who seem to abhor the very idea of it. Well, that's their prerogative. But is it really that dreadful? Ought an Austen-lover to scream in horror, and then flee in disgust? Is it truly a horrid idea, one that ought never to have seen the light of cinema?NO! It's not sacrilege; it's fun, and rather hilarious in bits, and perhaps a little silly. As much could be said, perhaps, of a great many other interpretations of the story. As someone who is a great admirer of the Great Author Austen, I am a little surprised by the violent reaction of my fellow devotees. But since all the less-than-brilliant aspects have been expounded upon at length, let us mention the better ones.1) the cinematography. Quite amazing.2) the characterizations. One truly does dislike Mr. Darcy in the beginning, as one ought. Kitty and Lydia are properly silly, Lizzy a little impetuous. And Mr. Bingley, while perhaps a tad more dense than the original, certainly has the same sort of personality. And Mr. Collins is astoundingly perfect. 3) the screenplay. It isn't MEANT to be what Austen wrote; it's how things might happen now. And it's done hilariously, particularly the small ironic bits frequently thrown in.