Pride and Prejudice Reviews

  • Feb 02, 2019

    The best comedy romance movie ever made!

    The best comedy romance movie ever made!

  • Oct 05, 2018

    A good cast is wasted with bad casting and a travesty of a script, with even the period setting and costumes totally wrong, as well as the plot being changed from what was perhaps the most perfect book in the history of English literature. Having a 36 year old Greer Garson playing a 20 year old girl, with her "older" sister being a young 29 is way off kilter. Making the cousin a librarian instead of a vicar, setting the story in the 1840 or 50s instead of the Napoleonic eras just so wrong, as well. Then making even Elizabeth Bennet a crying "watering pot" as Jane Austen would have put it. Then having Lady Catherine say that she could strip Darcy of all of his estate as guardian, when males had all of the primogeniture and a woman would never have been the guardian of a grown man's estate, which everyone knew at that time as well as this! Aldous Huxley may have written the screen play, but he did Jane Austen's novel no favors!

    A good cast is wasted with bad casting and a travesty of a script, with even the period setting and costumes totally wrong, as well as the plot being changed from what was perhaps the most perfect book in the history of English literature. Having a 36 year old Greer Garson playing a 20 year old girl, with her "older" sister being a young 29 is way off kilter. Making the cousin a librarian instead of a vicar, setting the story in the 1840 or 50s instead of the Napoleonic eras just so wrong, as well. Then making even Elizabeth Bennet a crying "watering pot" as Jane Austen would have put it. Then having Lady Catherine say that she could strip Darcy of all of his estate as guardian, when males had all of the primogeniture and a woman would never have been the guardian of a grown man's estate, which everyone knew at that time as well as this! Aldous Huxley may have written the screen play, but he did Jane Austen's novel no favors!

  • Jan 19, 2017

    Classic film rendering of Jane Austen's classic novel. It boasts of fine performances, direction and cinematography. It does cut some corners though given the length of the film and the even longer length of the book. Book purists may be annoyed by the cuts to the story but for most this film should suffice for the story.

    Classic film rendering of Jane Austen's classic novel. It boasts of fine performances, direction and cinematography. It does cut some corners though given the length of the film and the even longer length of the book. Book purists may be annoyed by the cuts to the story but for most this film should suffice for the story.

  • Jan 03, 2017

    This is one of my all time favorites and will watch it if ever it is on. I just love everything and everyone in it. Just adorable.

    This is one of my all time favorites and will watch it if ever it is on. I just love everything and everyone in it. Just adorable.

  • Apr 03, 2016

    I was really enjoying this movie on TCM...right until the last 15 minutes. I understand films sometimes deviate from novels but Lady Catherine did not like Elizabeth. Making her some sort of ambassador for Mr. Darcy left me irritated.

    I was really enjoying this movie on TCM...right until the last 15 minutes. I understand films sometimes deviate from novels but Lady Catherine did not like Elizabeth. Making her some sort of ambassador for Mr. Darcy left me irritated.

  • Jul 16, 2015

    It's good. Very good. One of the original tales brought to the big screen of the Jane Austin novel of the same name. It's a pretty fun story and the awesome personality of Liz and Darcy make the story so fun to watch. The plot can drag on sometimes like all films do of this era, but still it's a very good film.

    It's good. Very good. One of the original tales brought to the big screen of the Jane Austin novel of the same name. It's a pretty fun story and the awesome personality of Liz and Darcy make the story so fun to watch. The plot can drag on sometimes like all films do of this era, but still it's a very good film.

  • Feb 08, 2015

    Played for a comedy...kinda odd...but still somewhat amusing. Fun fact, the screenplay was written by Aldous Huxley!!!

    Played for a comedy...kinda odd...but still somewhat amusing. Fun fact, the screenplay was written by Aldous Huxley!!!

  • Feb 08, 2015

    Adaptation of one of the most popular and enduring 'novels of manners' done to delicious satirical effect and the excessive costuming to go along with it. Garson and Olivier clash and banter until the inevitable climax, but I most enjoyed Edna May Oliver and Mary Boland. Great fun.

    Adaptation of one of the most popular and enduring 'novels of manners' done to delicious satirical effect and the excessive costuming to go along with it. Garson and Olivier clash and banter until the inevitable climax, but I most enjoyed Edna May Oliver and Mary Boland. Great fun.

  • May 28, 2014

    I love the book, it is hands-down brilliant. And I like this movie, it is delightful, the casting was excellent all around; Olivier and Garson were both excellent in their roles, and Edna May Oliver as Lady Catherine De Burgh was brilliant. I deducted one star for costuming and hairstyles of the female actresses in particular. The costuming was completely wrong, more like 1860s styles, which is not correct for the Regency period (1811-1820). Most of the women's hairstyles were ok, but again, some were not correct for the period, which was about 1810. In the first half of the movie, Greer Garson's hair was styled in the then popular 1940s style which looked bizarre, and in the second half, they made an attempt for something a little closer to period and then switched back to the 1940s style. Bizarre. Other than these defects, the movie is completely enjoyable and doesn't stray too far from the book. That being said, it must be remembered that this movie was made during the "Golden Age" of moviemaking in Hollywood, and they lavished it up, sometimes without concern for whether or not everything looked right, doing what might increase ticket sales, the bottom line. Even so, it's well worth watching and appreciating.

    I love the book, it is hands-down brilliant. And I like this movie, it is delightful, the casting was excellent all around; Olivier and Garson were both excellent in their roles, and Edna May Oliver as Lady Catherine De Burgh was brilliant. I deducted one star for costuming and hairstyles of the female actresses in particular. The costuming was completely wrong, more like 1860s styles, which is not correct for the Regency period (1811-1820). Most of the women's hairstyles were ok, but again, some were not correct for the period, which was about 1810. In the first half of the movie, Greer Garson's hair was styled in the then popular 1940s style which looked bizarre, and in the second half, they made an attempt for something a little closer to period and then switched back to the 1940s style. Bizarre. Other than these defects, the movie is completely enjoyable and doesn't stray too far from the book. That being said, it must be remembered that this movie was made during the "Golden Age" of moviemaking in Hollywood, and they lavished it up, sometimes without concern for whether or not everything looked right, doing what might increase ticket sales, the bottom line. Even so, it's well worth watching and appreciating.

  • May 26, 2014

    This movie was interesting. It's told of a society where class and money was nothing to be toyed with; it was life. This movie was all about marrying off 5 daughters to secure their future at the top of society.

    This movie was interesting. It's told of a society where class and money was nothing to be toyed with; it was life. This movie was all about marrying off 5 daughters to secure their future at the top of society.