PDA

View Full Version : Pride & Prejudice: your favorite version?



Pages : 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Wyliefan
05-24-2012, 04:09 AM
Jeremy Northam is my favorite Mr. Knightly. :)

He's definitely the cutest. :D The Romola Garai film isn't bad, except that Garai mugs for the camera way too much.

shan
05-24-2012, 04:10 AM
I've seen it, but my favorite adaptation is the A&E version with Kate Beckinsale as Emma. That version really brings in the Frank Churchill/Jane Fairfax story strongly. I don't like Mark Strong's Knightly, though - waaay too angry/preachy! Jeremy Northam is my favorite Mr. Knightly. :)

I love that one too!

emason
05-24-2012, 04:23 AM
Note to Tinami:

Pride and Prejudice is not set in the Victorian era.

star_gazer11
05-24-2012, 04:27 AM
Definitely prefer the 1995 BBC miniseries. The movie is okay for when I don't want to settle down for hours to watch.

And yup, I like the Paltrow version of Emma because of Jeremy Northam. :) If we could mix and match, Beckinsale with Northam.

Canadians, I don't know if the sale price is still on, but I picked up the 2008 BBC Sense and Sensibility dvd for $9.99 at Best Buy in late April. :kickass: price, it also includes Miss Austen Regrets which aired on PBS Masterpiece a while back.

Cachoo
05-24-2012, 04:49 AM
I like the 2005 version but for me the 90's versions of P&P, Persuasion, and Sense and Sensibility are three of my favorite movies/mini-series of the decade. There was also a non-Austen little gem called Enchanted April that I loved from the 90's. Now it seems that zombies need to be added for us to see Elizabeth again on film.

mag
05-24-2012, 04:59 AM
Me too! I love it, have it on my iPod. This would be such a typical Csizny program.

Does anyone know how to get a hold of the music score for Dawn for piano?

I have the piano score. I'm in Canada and I picked it up at Long & McQuade. It was published by the Universal Music Publishing Group www.universalmusicpublishing.com and distributed by Hal Leonard.
ISBN 1 - 4234 - 1113 - 7

Nomad
05-24-2012, 05:04 AM
Note to Tinami:

Pride and Prejudice is not set in the Victorian era.

The Victorian era began in 1837, two decades after Jane Austen died. Austen's novels were published between 1811 and 1818, which places them in the Regency Period.

ChelleC
05-24-2012, 05:20 AM
I've liked Matthew Macfayden since he was on MI-5/Spooks, so I love the 2005 version for him.

I've only watched the BBC version a couple of times.

IceAlisa
05-24-2012, 05:26 AM
I have the piano score. I'm in Canada and I picked it up at Long & McQuade. It was published by the Universal Music Publishing Group www.universalmusicpublishing.com and distributed by Hal Leonard.
ISBN 1 - 4234 - 1113 - 7

Thank you! :)

Tinami Amori
05-24-2012, 05:57 AM
Note to Tinami:

Pride and Prejudice is not set in the Victorian era.

Sorry, you're right. Then "pre-victorian"... Regency?... I believe that standards of conduct and propriety between a man and a woman were pretty much the same from Regency into Victorian... unmarried young men and women could not be alone without a guardian, females had to have escorts and companions to go out and to travel, not even kissing before marriage, minimal physical contact... Austen's novels a very respectfull of such rules. The last espisode in US version of 2005 film is very out of line.

znachki
05-24-2012, 06:27 AM
Add me to list of those who love the 1995 Persuasion. I do think it's the best of the Austen adaptations. I strongly dislike the newer version. Just couldn't buy Rupert Penry-Jones as Wentworth - not enough gravitas, and Sally Hawkins, yuck. I especially hated the whole running through Bath thing, and IIRC they totally blew the reading of the letter too.

AYS
05-24-2012, 02:07 PM
... As I love the Amanda Root/Ciaran Hinds version of "Persuasion" I often wonder if they are a bit older than the characters in the book. I don't care though because I thought they were magic together. Good acting trumps almost any objections I have about age.
I love this movie and agree it was one of the best Austen adaptations. I've watched it many times. Anne is 27, and past the "bloom" of youth, so I felt their ages seemed not too off. From what a couple of people have told me, though, it is much richer and more enjoyable if you know the novel well. Anne's internal life is such an important part of the novel, and you miss that if you watch the movie without that background.

I also love the Kate Beckinsale's Emma, much better than the Paltrow version.

DCA
05-24-2012, 02:30 PM
I am so happy to see so many votes for the 1980 P&P with David Rintoul. It is the best version. You can even follow along in the book while watching the film. The changed ending of the 2005 movie was ridiculous. In the 1995 BBC production, it always bothered me that Jane was not better looking. There are so many references to Jane being the prettiest Bennett sister, and this was rather a plain Jane.
My favorite adaptation is Persuation with Amanda Root. It was even the first DVD I ever purchased. There are so many wonderful, subtle touches in it--I love the brief scene where Captain Wentworth is helping Anne into the carriage, and he gently squeezes her arm.

Asli
05-24-2012, 03:24 PM
For me the 1995 BBC version of P&P was terrific and the 2005 version all wrong!


I did notice the mud but thought it was OK for a gentleman farmer.

Mr. Bennet is not a "gentleman farmer". He owns the estate, he's the squire. A gentleman farmer would be his tenant and would not even be invited to his table.

Indeed the way the 2005 P&P pictures the Bennets as barely genteel - living right beside a pigsty and having to pass through drying linen to reach their front door - is completely grotesque. :rolleyes: Maybe the creators of this version thought that the audience would not understand the difference between the Darcy and Bennet families, unless one family lived like kings and the other like peasants? Ridiculous.

As for Elizabeth, while she is clever, lively and ever so slightly ahead of her time in her ideas about a woman's place, she is not - as Keira Knightly pictures her - wild, half mad and downright rude. :rofl: A Jane Austen heroine cannot lack propriety. Otherwise the whole novel doesn't make sense, because much of the humour and the plot are based on ridiculing those who lack propriety. Why does Elizabeth censure Lydia for eloping with Wickam at all? I am sure Keira Knightley's character would have eloped with him herself! ;)

Matthew MacFadyen is a brilliant actor. I have seen an interview with him about P&P, where he said that he had not read the novel and had deliberately only read the script. (Which is just as well probably, since the two are not compatible.) He was brilliant in showing Darcy's passion, but absolutely didn't look and act like a powerful man who governs over half Derbyshire - which is an important side of Darcy and which Colin Firth had nailed. Anyway, I always love watching him and hearing his wonderful voice. :swoon:

One thing that was superb about the 2005 movie was the photography. Mesmerising :swoon:

Thanks to everyone who has pointed out the 1980 version. I'll try to find it, wheee!

Zemgirl
05-24-2012, 03:36 PM
Mr. Bennet is not a "gentleman farmer". He owns the estate, he's the squire. A gentleman farmer would be his tenant and would not even be invited to his table.
While I agree that the 1995 version is fabulous and the 2005 film is all wrong, I don't think the above is accurate - a gentleman farmer would have been just what the name implies: a gentleman, but one who farms for pleasure, out of scientific interest, etc. and not as a source of income. But definitely not someone's tenant who's not fit for polite company.

I don't believe Mr. Bennet was a gentleman farmer under either definition, but he is also not a squire, or he would have been referred to as Squire Bennet.

Anyway, I seriously doubt a gentleman farmer would have pigs running around the house. The film exaggerated the Bennets' situation to create a contrast between them and Darcy and his relations, which was unfortunate.