Pride & Prejudice

A simple glance at the thickness of the book suggests that the task of cramming a sprawling plot into two hours of film was a daunting one for the director. Wright opts for a rather unfortunate method of occasional abbreviation, which produces a terrible stew of names and family-social ties right from the get-go. This hesitation is unfortunate because if the runtime had been extended by 20 minutes, the beautifully staged emotions would have stood out a hell of a lot better. Thus, all we have left is a promising hint of how catchy of a story the director can tell: the cinematography is charming, the set design is settling, the actors are decent - as befits the English - and the overall composition smacks of the sweetest kitsch. However, this merry-go-round of engagements and weddings is so sensitively, humorously, pleasantly, and above all sincerely filmed that much can be forgiven. At present, the boundaries of the genre could not be better. (03/11/2007)

Gorgeous. With the very first shot and the first notes of the piano, I was captured and only released with the closing credits, emotionally enriched. It's hard to see a film so well directed, so easily narrated and so wonderfully acted. Artistically, too, it is flawless – thoughtful composition of images, imaginative cinematography, elaborate sets and costumes, here the Oscar nominations are very appropriate. Same with Keira Knightley, she doesn't really appeal to me as a woman (see Tetsuo's comment), but here she was divine, in both her acting and expression. And I can hardly imagine a better Mr Darcy than Matthew Macfadyen's either. In short: for the first time in a long time, a film that struck a chord with me. PS: I'm getting really interested in Jane Austen adaptations, I'm going to look for Lee's Sense and Sensibility. (08/27/2022)

Formally it’s absolutely great, but, unfortunately, in every other shot or dialogue I felt like I've seen exactly this countless times before and executed better. Pride and Prejudice did not offend me in any way, it has unusually sharp and witty dialogues for the period it is set in. Similarly, I liked Keira Knightley’s frankness and honesty. However, as a story about love and relationships, this piece didn’t resonate with me deeply, which is quite a mystery considering my taste and feelings. Perhaps it is too artificial – that's how I would characterize the whole thing in one short and telling sentence. There is emotion, yes, but everything somehow drags on, it creeps... concealment, true love, artificial love, the customs of the aristocracy... I've seen it all elsewhere... nothing new under the sun. (10/15/2006)

One would think that a guy wouldn't enjoy this, but the opposite is true. Magical performances, as well as a timeless love story that almost didn't come true just because people are idiots, simply captivate even today's men. True, at times it can be a bit boring, but this time it's not such a high price to pay. However, those two hours still go by quite quickly, thanks to Wright's confident direction. (02/26/2014)

The folly of the powerful in a British form from the pen of Jane Austen couldn’t have been better. Her world is very far from what I imagine as an ideal bedtime story. Reading her books would be make me totally desperate. The movie is a different case, however. Joe Wright honors the source material and so there is a number of higher-class conceited characters that you would like to shoot with a cannon from a Soviet T-100 tank. But the film is lucky because the dialogues are brilliantly written so there is always somebody to shut them up with a polite, cynical word. That and the very pretty shots prove that it would be a shame to overlook this film. (09/21/2018)