Pride and Prejudice - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Pride and Prejudice Reviews

Page 2 of 27
March 25, 2013
Pride And Prejudice is an imperfect, but still very enjoyable romance film. While the script could use more fine-tuning since the film kinda jumps around too much at times, the performances are great, the writing is witty, and it's a consistently entertaining film that's fun to watch.
½ March 5, 2013
Strays too far from the novel. If someone has not read the book more than once, they might enjoy this adaptation. However when you know the book backwards and forwards, the script becomes as annoying as the mother. The only bright spot to the movie is the cast. Olivier as Mr. Darcy is the best representation to date. Too bad the writers took too many liberties with the story to overshadow his performance.
March 5, 2013
The opulent setting is standard issue fare for 1930s Hollywood, but it strikes the modern viewer as ridiculously inauthentic. While Greer Garson does a nice enough job, the acting overall is little better than high school level. Even Olivier seems wooden. The acting is so over the top that the cast does not seem to know that movies value subtlety and naturalness. The cast seems to be projecting from the stage to the person in the last row, and not to the camera.
February 22, 2013
Really horrible, clothes all wrong, thought it was Gone with the Wind.... really didn't like the characters looking so much alike...girls were all too pretty for the story. Really didn't like this version and I like old movies.
½ February 6, 2013
A classic despite the horrendous adaptation from Austen's novel. The period, costumes, sets, dances, basically everything was captured so much better in the BBC version and is in my opinion a much better film. However, given that this film was made in 1940 we can overlook and somewhat appreciate the liberties taken by the filmmakers and simply enjoy a lovable story delivered by some amazing actors and beautiful performances.
January 15, 2013
I've seen it and its the best in my opinion
December 26, 2012
i did like this version, though the casting was not much settling... Olivier, to me, did seem too tightly wound for Mr. Darcy, he is good but just plain old good..
December 3, 2012
anything old is perfect.
½ September 30, 2012
Didn't think it was possible to mess up Jane Austen... I've been proven wrong.
July 3, 2012
still the best version of this:warning don't bother with the 2005 kiera knightly version
July 1, 2012
The best movie adaptation of one of my favorite books! The 1995 A & E television version is also good, but this movie is the best if you love Jane Austen.
June 30, 2012
Only watched the last forty minutes of this and I was horrified by it's lack of respect to the original story. Where sometimes it works to speed things up and change plot devices this does not work for this story. You need the time and distance between Lizzie and Darcy for the change of heart to work. Thought the actress playing Lizzie had her character all wrong. Darcy was a little too friendly... overtly obvious in his attentions, which is not faithful to Austen at all.
½ June 18, 2012
Even though it strays from the book quite a bit, it's a fun adaptation! :)
June 16, 2012
Quaint and charming, very 40s, not historically accurate but it must be judged on his age.
½ May 9, 2012
A well made not entirely accurate re-telling of the Jane Austen classic...
½ May 6, 2012
If you want to follow the book then don't watch. However, if you like creative takes, then watch. This is entertaining and some of the mannerisms are just hilarious.
½ April 28, 2012
Even though the BBC version is the only one, I decided I had to see this one as well. It's so staged! Makes you appreciate the less contrived & more realistic, superiot acting in the BBC version.

Memo to MGM: why are you filming Pride & Prejudice if you're going to rewrite it?!

Olivier looks like a Darcy, but again, it's so unnatural & staged.

Only after the BBC version existed could one realize how truly bad all other adaptations were.

Light to the point of near-screwball. Overlooks the profundity of the story.

The pace is blistering and the dialogue crammed. It isn't 15 seconds after someone decides that they want to play cards that they now want to get food. It's very unnatural storytelling. There is not one moment of breathing room. No second where dialogue isn't mechanically being uttered.

I can't really judge as a movie on its own. i judge it as an adaptation of a story i'm well acquainted with.
And in that sense, it is painful.
I can't watch it without comparing every scene to the 1995 version.

If they were going to make it in the 40s, they picked the two perfect actors.

It did portray the desperation of becoming an old maid well.

His own pride & sour disposition is not very well presented, as he takes to Liz almost immediately.
If there's no resentment toward her, there is nothing to overcome. This effectively kills the drama of the story.

"At this moment, it's so difficult to believe you're so proud/prejudiced" ...worst line in movie history.

For instance, they try to pack like 4 chapters worth into a single scene, where everybody just arrives in one place. This is the detriment of adaptating to two hours, something that should take much longer.

The way in which they come together doesn't make sense. If "news travels fast" (rather than Darcy hearing it from Liz), then what's the point of Darcy saving Lydia's reputation? Also, what is the point of telling her he'll offer help, since the attraction Liz had for him was that she found out he had done it all honourably in secret. And he just asks her if he can help, and then leaves saying he may never see her again...why would he say that? makes no sense. too much mish mash.
And then she concludes that she loves him before finding out what he did, and doing nothing to restore Jane & Bingley? Absolutely nonsensical.

And where exactly did Bingley's sister receive news about Lydia? Who wrote the letter to her?

The idea that Lady Catherine being most seriously displeased was a farce & that she really loved Liz, is beyond credulity. The fact that Lady Catherine becomes a protagonist & is merely testing Elizabeth, and is in cohoots with Darcy, is a violent offense bordering on literary rape.

And the costumes are absurd.
April 25, 2012
This is the second best version of the Jane Austen classic. I had some problems with some of the subplot details in this film, being such a huge fan of novel and the mini-series, which mirrored the novel. I must admit that the chemistry between Garson and Olivier was sweet and it made the figurative language in the film even sweeter. It's fun to watch.
December 10, 2011
There are so many reasons why I did not like this movie:

1. The innacurate costumes for the time period. Gross poofy sleeves.
2. The American english spoken
3. The MANY diversions they took from the original story
4. The portrayal of Elizabeth and Darcy. He's suddenly a well-reasoned man, and she's an over emotional, uninformed woman. Ugh.
Page 2 of 27