Pride & Prejudice

I still can’t believe I loved this movie so much. A sprawling and unimaginative plot stretched out over two hours, peppered with Keira Knightley's sweet smile, romantic sets and a perfect happy ending... am I really supposed to like that? Well yes. Perhaps I forgot to mention what a huge charm that sweet smile has, how apt and captivating the romantic and history-laden production design is, how skilled a director Joe Wright is and that the story under his baton is brimming with weddings, engagements and carefully spaced out emotions so unobtrusively, and of course, you just can't resist. It's a pity that the director sometimes visibly skipped ahead a few pages and tried to shorten and simplify the very rich plot of the book, and it took me a while to sort out everything in my head. Otherwise, however, a refined and brilliantly executed spectacle with all the trimmings... (07/16/2012)

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)

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)

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)

I've read the book, I haven't seen any other adaptation of it, so I can say I'm very satisfied. This breathtaking production won me over with beautiful images, superbly shot scenes like the one at the second ball, Marianelli's haunting music and, of course, the performances of the actors. You could say that I imagined all the characters exactly as I saw them here while reading. Only, admittedly, Mr. Collins wasn't as funny in the book, and old Mr. Bennet as likable (Donald Sutherland is Donald Sutherland). As for Keira Knightley or the fantastic Matthew MacFadyen, I have no reservations. The only flaw is the few moments that I found slightly boring and unnecessary (they came in the last third), which I could tell by suddenly looking at how many minutes were left to the end. Four and a half. (07/23/2011)