How sad is this?

best movie i've ever seen.

When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

Although this version gets great reviews I found it seriously lacking in its faithfulness to the original Jane Austen novel. I didn't like it. There are far too many 'innovations' most especially the scenes of Darcy in his bath and worse Darcy diving into the lake and meeting Elizabeth half dressed and soaking (!). Ridiculous - and not in the original novel. In the novel Darcy and Elizabeth meet at Pemberley and the shock to both is real, but they are both fully clothed. The action is in their mutual surprise/embarrassment at meeting. Obviously the producers did not, for some reason, like the original Austen scene and thus this ludicrous innovation. Mrs Bennett is way overacted - her voice is loud and harsh and grates for most of the movie. Her frantic and real concern over her daughters' plight should their father die first is completely lost in this bizarre over the top acting. The younger Miss Bennetts are also overdone. In the novel they are silly, mindless girls but in this movie they are wildly dashing about the place in a loud, boisterous manner. Mr Collins in the novel is a quasi-comic character but here he is depicted as a predatory, creepy character. I found his scenes to be particularity disturbing rather than comic. Maybe the object of this production was to make Pride and Prejudice accessible to a wide audience and it seems to have succeeded in doing this.but it sadly left Jane Austen back at the starting gate. I recommend reading the novel for a fascinating look at the Regency Period and the manners and norms of that day. Sadly, this version will not do that.

Watched all six episodes in one sitting. Absolutely loved it! Just as timeless and superb as the beautiful novel from whence it came. So faithful to Jane's text, whilst including believable additions in dialogue and in setting. Fantastic! And Colin Firth's performance! The affection and growing love in his eyes conveyed with no dialogue whatsoever. Ehle's "fine eyes" and witty delivery make her THE Elizabeth Bennet in picture form. Love this to pieces, and will watch it many times, just like I will re-read the book again.

This 1995 BBC version remains unchallenged as the best filmed interpretation of Austen's masterpiece, for many reasons.First, the script. The 1995 version has the luxury of being the longest at nearly six hours, and much of Austen's dialogue is gracefully interpolated into it. The 1980 version is closest and is similarly rich in Austen's prose. Both film versions - 1940 and 2005 - contain snippets of Austen's dialogue and are better than expected. But they're still too truncated to uncover all the nuances of the story.Next, production values. The 1995 BBC and 2005 film versions lead here. Both give a better sense of Austen's time and place than earlier versions, and take the stiffness (which sometimes hurts the 1980 version in particular) out of the performances. The interiors and sound of the 2005 film are sumptuous, but the blu ray edition of the 1995 BBC version brilliantly rescues it from the sometimes washed-out colours of previous video and DVD editions. The 1940 film is in MGM's best black and white and is also lovely, but the anachronistic costuming is unfortunate and the studio filming can't help but somewhat distance the storytelling from the viewer.The locations used for the 1995 and 2005 versions are wonderful. The 1995 one has the edge, as each home takes on more personality thanks to extended scenes within them. And the first view Elizabeth gets of 'Pemberley' (Lyme Hall) when her aunt and uncle visit it is magically filmed, again because the scenes prior to its appearance carefully lead the audience to expect something even grander than Lady Catherine's estate - and it does NOT disappoint! Chatsworth House in the 2005 film makes a magnificent Pemberley, too, but it doesn't have quite the same emotional impact.The music is superior in the 1995 and 2005 versions, though the fuller orchestrations of the 2005 one - especially during the dance scenes - are a bonus. But the use of actual snippets of Handel, Haydn and Mozart played by various characters in the 1995 version make it – for me - more realistic and representative of the time.Finally, the performances. Greer Garson was too old to play Elizabeth Bennet in 1940, but she still supplies enough spirit and wit to make a quite surprisingly good 'Lizzie'. Elizabeth Garvie gives a lovely performance in 1980, though her interior monologues underline the claustrophobia of that production. Keira Knightley in 2005 gives a better performance than I expected. She doesn't have enough time to portray some of the amused observation of the follies of the society she witnesses, and some of her giggly, teeth- baring reactions come across as a bit too young. Still, it's a refreshing take. However, Jennifer Ehle in 1995 superbly embodies Elizabeth's character, especially her mordant wit. Her eyes are particularly expressive and convey complex emotions more subtly than the other actresses who've portrayed Lizzie. Too 'matronly'? I think that charge should be levelled more fairly at the Empire dresses of the period (which the 1940 film rejects in favour of more flattering fashions from several decades later). Ehle's act will be almost impossible to follow.Quite impossible to follow is Colin Firth's sublime, star-making performance as Mr. Darcy. Other actors have cut dashing figures as Darcy, with varying success. A little too indifferent (Olivier, 1940), aloof (Rintoul, 1980), or confused (Macfadyen) and the character loses some of the drive and complexity it needs to fully challenge Elizabeth. David Rintoul has the time to flesh out the role, and though he's an exceedingly handsome Darcy, there's not enough warmth or subtlety in the performance to make it the equal of Firth's (or Garvie's Lizzie). Another reviewer was spot on in writing that in Firth's performance we really feel Darcy's struggle to convey his conflicted feelings for Lizzie. The growing interest in Lizzie by Darcy's character is brilliantly portrayed, again thanks in part to wonderfully expressive eyes. And the transformation into a loving, caring partner packs a devastating punch from the moment Darcy bumps into Elizabeth at Pemberley. Truly, an iconic performance. That Firth is a simmering knockout doesn't hurt(!), but his acting is what brings Darcy indelibly to life.The rest of the cast members in 1995 are ideal. Yes, Alison Steadman's Mrs. Bennet is ridiculous (Mary Boland runs her a close second in 1940), but her take on the character contrasts most fully with Benjamin Whitrow's (wonderfully amused) Mr. Bennet and makes the union that much more pitiable (and funny). Susannah Harker is a lovely Jane, and it's a mystery to me that others think she's plainer than Ehle's Elizabeth (and therefore not suited to the role). Her closeups remind me of beautiful ivory cameos, and she plays the role to perfection. The 1995 Kitty and Lydia give the best idea of each individual's personality, and David Bamber's Mr. Collins is dry comedy of the best kind. Crispin Bonham- Carter's Bingley is the most sympathetic ever, and Anna Chancellor's Caroline Bingley the most vicious (though 1940's Frieda Inescort gives a delicious portrayal too). Barbara Leigh-Hunt gives in 1995 the very best performance of Lady Catherine De Bourgh. I love Judi Dench in 2005, but she's given too little time to really make the role shine as it must. Barbara Leigh-Hunt plays the over-the-top 'grande dame' snob perfectly, and her confrontation scene with Elizabeth at the end is the ideal rendition of that explosive meeting. Special mention also needs to go to Joanna David's warm, knowing portrayal of Lizzie's Aunt Gardiner. That and a dozen other characterizations too numerous to mention here add grace notes to an already stellar production.In short, if you want the richest available filmed expression of Jane Austen's work of genius, I think you need look no further than the 1995 BBC version. Hats off to the director, producers, and - imperishably - the wonderful cast!

Who dreads having to be forced to read a novel for English class? Most students would be nodding their heads yes right now, but how many times are you forced to read a novel only to find yourself falling in love with it? Now most students would be saying zero times. However for me, when I had to read Pride and Prejudice I caught myself falling in love with the novel by the end of it. Being so enticed by this novel, I began to look up adaptations of it. I then came across the 1995 TV series of Pride and Prejudice. It contains six episodes, about an hour long each, which were broadcasted by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). The main roles were played by Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle. I absolutely loved this adaptation of Pride and Prejudice. This TV series hit everything right on the nail. I only wish it never had to end because I enjoyed it that much. Pride and Prejudice is about a family of five daughters that are in search of suitable husbands. But most of the attention is on the rich, prideful Mr. Darcy and also the prideful, yet cunning Elizabeth Bennet, the second oldest of the daughters. Both overcome their pride and prejudice and fall in love with each other. The 1995 TV series adapted this well-known novel the best. Because it was a TV series each episode had time to be precise on every single detail of the novel and with this the series was very accurate to the novel. I appreciated the fact that for the majority of the series exact lines were said by the actors and actresses. And that made the series even more like the novel itself. I can just remember reading the novel and then pinpointing out the lines in the series when it was said. By doing that you can tell that the TV staff and cast really cared about vitalizing the novel into something visual and audible. Also because this was produced in the 1980's the series had that classic touch to it, something that a modern film/series would not have been able to capture. Furthermore, the selection of the cast was chosen very well. I felt that each actor/actress truly expressed their character to the max. Also a plus was that all the main characters had genuine British accents which accentuated the fact that Jane Austen wrote this novel in England. This TV series met and exceeded all of my standards of a well written adaptation of a novel/book. This TV series of Pride and Prejudice is by far the best adaptation I have seen of a novel or book. Events and lines were so accurate from all the episodes it certainly felt like I was reading the novel again. All six episodes were meticulously planned and written out that I never would have thought that I'd be excited to get to class to watch it again. If you love the novel as much as I do, the 1995 TV series of Pride and Prejudice will positively provide you with a lovely supplement.