pride and prejudice movie review essay

Pride and Prejudice: Film Interpretation Essay (Movie Review)

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

If you’re trying to conduct a Pride and Prejudice film analysis, you’re better to check some interpretations. Below, you will see one of them.

Pride and Prejudice , directed by Joe Wright, is a 2005 movie adapted from Jane Austen’s classic novel bearing the same name. The movie rated PG for some mild thematic elements, was produced by a British film production company called Working Title Films and written by Deborah Moggach. It has a running time of one hundred and twenty-eight minutes. This essay will provide a Pride and Prejudice movie review essay with a summary and examination.

The romantic film was released in September 2005 in the United Kingdom and two months later in the United States. Some of the main characters in the movie include Keira Knightley (Elizabeth Bennet), Mathew Macfadyen (Mr. Darcy), Talulah Riley (Mary Bennet), and Brenda Blethyn (Mrs. Bennet). Although the film version is short, it is persuasive, witty, powerful, and entertaining, making it far superior to the novel.

The movie illustrates the lives of the Bennet sisters. They consist of five young women who are looking for suitable husbands. Their overbearing mother aids them in this process. However, the father seems to be unaware of the unfolding drama. Elizabeth, the second of the five sisters, prevails in the movie. The story’s main plot depicts the relationship between Elizabeth and Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy, the affluent owner of the pompous family estate of Pemberley in Derbyshire (Austen, 2009).

As the movie begins, they seem not to be attracted to one another. However, as the story continues, circumstances compel them to scrutinize their hearts and notions about one another to dig out the truth about their lives. In addition, there is also a parallel love story between Elizabeth’s older sister, Jane (Rosamund Pike), and the amiable Mr. Charles Bingley (Simon Woods).

The story also follows the rejection of the marriage proposal made to Elizabeth by a detestable emotional clergyman, Mr. William Collins (Tom Hollander). The underground illicit activities of the open and bighearted Mr. George Wickham (Rupert Friend) are also revealed.

The Bennets are anticipating the coming of Mr. Bingley, an affluent bachelor who recently moved to a house in their neighborhood. Mrs. Bennett is busy strategizing how to let one of her daughters marry this rich neighbor without his knowledge. Jane and Mr. Bingley seem to be attracted to each other.

However, Elizabeth immediately dislikes Mr. Darcy, Mr. Bingley’s reserved friend. Mr. Darcy is the kind of person who does not like to relate to people who are not of his status in society. And since the Bennets were not very rich, Darcy coldly rebuffed Jane’s attempts to talk to him. After that, Mr. Bingley and Mr. Darcy unexpectedly return to London, leaving the Bennet family astonished at what happened to the love between Bingley and Jane (Moler, 1989).

Since Mr. Bennet does not have a son, Mr. Collins, the cousin of the five sisters, is the probable heir to the family’s estate because of his close kinship to the family. When Elizabeth refuses her proposal, her father welcomes the idea, but her mother does not.

Collins ends up marrying Charlotte Lucas (Claudie Blakley), a good friend to Elizabeth. Charlotte married him to gain financial security. In the midst of the journeys between London and Derbyshire, the viewers are introduced to the influence of Mr. Wickham, an old friend of Darcy from childhood.

Superficially charming, he convincingly talked to Elizabeth concerning several distorted tales about Darcy. From here on, things start to take a drastic turn. Viewers witness the fall and rise of Mr. Darcy. The fall of the Bennet family is also depicted when Lydia Bennet (Jena Malone), the youngest in the family, elopes with Mr. Wickham. However, it seems that this marriage is not founded on love. As the story ends, Jane and Mr. Bingley are engaged despite the difficulties. In addition, Elizabeth accepts Darcy’s second proposal.

Many changes are often made to literary works when they are adapted into a movie (Geraghty, 2008). Pride & Prejudice is no exception, as a number of notable changes from the original novel are evident throughout the film. The movie was compressed into one hundred and twenty-eight minutes, significantly reducing the time for several major sequences. For example, Elizabeth’s visits to several places, such as Rosings Park and Pemberley, were not adequately covered.

The filmmakers also did not include several supporting characters. Some of them are Louisa Hurst, Mr. and Mrs. Phillips, and several friends of the Bennett family. Numerous sections whereby the characters talk about experiences, which had already taken place, are also emitted in the film version. For instance, the chapter describing Elizabeth’s change of perspective after receiving the love letter from Darcy. This may be the only weakness in the movie.

Any person who has read Austen knows that possibly her greatest strength rests in her use of supporting characters and detailed explanations of events. Abbreviating some sections fails to convey this richness in her writing. In as much as there is a lot of sacrifice in adapting the book into a two-hour film, the pacing issue in the film makes some scenes suddenly rush forward and fail to depict Austen’s intentions in writing the novel.

Wright and his screenwriter, Moggach, modified numerous scenes to create a more loving environment than the ones in the novel. For example, in the movie, Darcy first gives his proposal outside in a rainstorm near a beautiful lake, while in the novel, this scene occurs inside a church house.

In the movie, in another attempt to engage Elizabeth, Darcy proposes to her on the misty moors in the early morning, while in the novel, the scene takes place when both of them are strolling down a country lane during the day. In the United States version of the movie, the last scene depicts the newly married Darcys having a good time outside their home in Pemberley. However, this additional final scene is absent in the book.

This romantic ending received a hostile reception in the United Kingdom; therefore, it was secluded for the country and international audience. The UK film version culminates with Mr. Bennet giving Elizabeth and Darcy his blessings on their relationship. This circumvents the last chapter of the book. The book ends by summing up the lives of the main characters in the story over the next numerous years.

The tone of the movie differs from that of the novel. As the movie starts, the director and the screenwriter fail to include the author’s well-known, cunningly satirical, aphoristic opening line. This instant shift in tone continues throughout the whole movie. The filmmakers placed more emphasis on romance. However, the novel’s author intended to portray the morals and the mores of a marriage relationship.

As pointed out above, several important scenes are shifted from the drawing room to the countryside. This complements and strengthens the teeming passions of the characters. Perhaps, the secret weapon for the movie’s success lies in its romantic aspect. On the other hand, Austen did not portray this in the novel. The cinematographer, Roman Osin, also captured the film’s skillfully designed surface well. The old saying ‘beauty is only skin deep’ depicts the outstanding cinematography in the film.

As the director made full use of the spectacular scenery of England’s countryside, the cinematographer did his best to bring the correct mood to every shot, whether it was warm, broad daylight, chill, or spring morning. The filmmakers used attractive scenes to allow the moviegoer to lose themselves engaging with the film’s captivating performers. The making of such an elegant and captivating world is likely to charm many viewers.

Credit goes to the film director for casting performers closer in age than the ones in the novel. However, there are some weaknesses in the characters in the film. Although the actors are handsome and talented, they fall short of hooking up with the audience in some places.

Austen’s classic novel has an emotional pull that the movie fails to portray to the audience. Some parts are too cold and distant. It is as if the characters were deriving their cue from the brooding personality of Darcy. The movie’s older generation of actors achieved a higher caliber of performance.

Donald Sutherland, Dame Judi Dench, and Brenda Blethyn headlined these veteran actors in providing the film’s best moments. Brenda Blethyn understands the significance of the quandary facing his family, but simultaneously he only wants his children to get the best husbands. The hen-pecked, world-weary Sutherland prevails in every scene he is in with his laconic dry sense of humor. This contrasts Blethyn’s restless, one-track-minded display of character.

On the hand, the younger group did not portray an engaging performance as did their more senior counterparts. For example, Austen portrays Darcy as unapproachable; however, in the film, Macfadyen treats him so unfriendly that he fails to give an engaging performance.

Darcy is less engaged in the activities, so Elizabeth’s attraction to him is difficult to explain. The Bennet sisters are not convincing as siblings since none of them looks similar to the other, and their interactions with one another fail to sell the bond of sisterhood. Elizabeth seems to be the only one who is full of life.

The supposed relationship between Jane and Bingley seems to exist in the films to maintain the same running joke. The relationship is underplayed, and it lacks chemistry. It is difficult for someone to believe that the two are in love, except by closely scrutinizing the characters as the story develops.

The incarnation of Pride and Prejudice makes it to be occasional anachronistic. For example, there are moments when the performers portray very modern habits that differ from when it is set. A number of the women characters are especially liable to instances of defiance and vivacity. This is a more common behavior of women in our age than people in the early nineteenth century.

However, the filmmakers intended to make the performers more approachable to viewers of this age with these mannerisms. Besides the weaknesses that exist in the film, it is very intriguing. In addition to its great story outline, the five-star characters did an excellent job. The soundtrack and the costumes used portray the setting of the 1813 classic by Austen. The film is best suited for persons aged sixteen and above, especially those who adore stories concerning love, disloyalty, guilt, and desire.

The adaptation of Pride and Prejudice is a demonstrative confirmation against any protests to the perpetual significance of Austen’s beloved classic of behavior, relationship, and riches. The movie opens up and unfurls Austen’s tightly drawn work of literature. In this manner, the actors are able to breathe and move about. This could not have been possible in a slavish version. One feels alive in the movie as there is a pulsating vitality, which is usually so distinct that it diverts from the story.

However, this diversion is not detrimental to the story. Yes, it is evident that several changes have been made to the original text. Some subplots have been grouped, significant exchanges taken to unusual locales, new scenes incorporated, and others taken away completely. The filmmakers also changed the overall thematic emphasis of the story. However, the movie is persuasive, witty, powerful, and entertaining, making it far superior to the novel.

Austen, J., 2009. Pride and prejudice . New York : Feather Trail Press.

Geraghty, C., 2008. Now a major motion picture : film adaptations of literature and drama. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield.

Moler, K. L., 1989. Pride and prejudice : a study in artistic economy. Boston: Twayne Publishers.

• Why Do We Watch Horror Films?
• Twilight Saga: Book Series and Movies and Its Competitors
• Letters in “Pride and Prejudice” by Jane Austen
• "Pride and Prejudice" by Jane Austen: Characters Analysis
• “Pride and Prejudice” by Austen: Chapter 43
• Movie Babel by Alejandro Gonzalez Innarritu
• Impact of Modern Digital Technologies on Film Industry
• Fall From Power in ”The Last Emperor” Movie
• Pu Yi: The Last Emperor
• Star System in the Silent Cinema
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, February 7). Pride and Prejudice: Film Interpretation. https://ivypanda.com/essays/pride-and-prejudice-film-critical-analysis/

"Pride and Prejudice: Film Interpretation." IvyPanda , 7 Feb. 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/pride-and-prejudice-film-critical-analysis/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'Pride and Prejudice: Film Interpretation'. 7 February.

IvyPanda . 2019. "Pride and Prejudice: Film Interpretation." February 7, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/pride-and-prejudice-film-critical-analysis/.

1. IvyPanda . "Pride and Prejudice: Film Interpretation." February 7, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/pride-and-prejudice-film-critical-analysis/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Pride and Prejudice: Film Interpretation." February 7, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/pride-and-prejudice-film-critical-analysis/.

Movie Reviews

Tv/streaming, collections, chaz's journal, great movies, contributors, miss knightley meets mr. darcy.

Now streaming on:

It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife. Everybody knows the first sentence of Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice. But the chapter ends with a truth equally acknowledged about Mrs. Bennet, who has five daughters in want of husbands: "The business of her life was to get her daughters married."

Romance seems so urgent and delightful in Austen because marriage is a business, and her characters cannot help treating it as a pleasure. Pride and Prejudice is the best of her novels because its romance involves two people who were born to be in love, and care not about business, pleasure, or each other. It is frustrating enough when one person refuses to fall in love, but when both refuse, we cannot rest until they kiss.

Of course all depends on who the people are. When Dorothea marries the Rev. Casaubon in Eliot's Middlemarch, it is a tragedy. She marries out of consideration and respect, which is all wrong; she should have married for money, always remembering that where money is, love often follows, since there is so much time for it. The crucial information about Mr. Bingley, the new neighbor of the Bennet family, is that he "has" an income of four or five thousand pounds a year. One never earns an income in these stories, one has it, and Mrs. Bennet ( Brenda Blethyn ) has her sights on it.

Her candidate for Mr. Bingley's hand is her eldest daughter, Jane; it is orderly to marry the girls off in sequence, avoiding the impression that an older one has been passed over. There is a dance, to which Bingley brings his friend Darcy. Jane and Bingley immediately fall in love, to get them out of the way of Darcy and Elizabeth, who is the second Bennet daughter. These two immediately dislike each other. Darcy is overheard telling his friend Bingley that Elizabeth is "tolerable, but not handsome enough to tempt me." The person who overhears him is Elizabeth, who decides she will "loathe him for all eternity." She is advised within the family circle to count her blessings: "If he liked you, you'd have to talk to him."

These are the opening moves in Joe Wright's new film "Pride & Prejudice," one of the most delightful and heartwarming adaptations made from Austen or anybody else. Much of the delight and most of the heart comes from Keira Knightley , who plays Elizabeth as a girl glowing in the first light of perfection. She is beautiful, she has opinions, she is kind but can be unforgiving. "They are all silly and ignorant like other girls," says her father in the novel, "but Lizzie has something more of quickness than her sisters."

Knightley's performance is so light and yet fierce that she makes the story almost realistic; this is not a well-mannered "Masterpiece Theatre" but a film where strong-willed young people enter life with their minds at war with their hearts. The movie is more robust than most period romances; it is set earlier than usual, in the late 1700s, a period more down to earth than the early Victorian years. The young ladies don't look quite so much like illustrations for Vanity Fair, and there is mud around their hems when they come back from a walk. It is a time of rural realities: When Mrs. Bennet sends a daughter to visit Netherfield Park, the country residence of Mr. Bingley, she sends her on horseback, knowing it will rain, and she will have to spend the night.

The plot by this point has grown complicated. It is a truth universally acknowledged by novelists that before two people can fall in love with each other, they must first seem determined to make the wrong marriage with someone else. It goes without saying that Lizzie fell in love with young Darcy ( Matthew MacFadyen ) the moment she saw him, but her pride has been wounded. She tells Jane: "I might more easily forgive his vanity had he not wounded mine."

The stakes grow higher. She is told by the dashing officer Wickham ( Rupert Friend ) that Darcy, his childhood friend, cheated him of a living that he deserved. And she believes that Darcy is responsible for having spirited Bingley off to London to keep him out of the hands of her sister Jane. Lizzie even begins to think she may be in love with Wickham. Certainly she is not in love with the Rev. Collins ( Tom Hollander ), who has a handsome living and would be Mrs. Bennet's choice for a match. When Collins proposes, the mother is in ecstasy, but Lizzie declines, and is supported by her father ( Donald Sutherland ), a man whose love for his girls outweighs his wife's financial planning.

All of these characters meet and circle each other at a ball in the village Assembly Hall, and the camera circles them. The sequence feels like one unbroken shot, and has the same elegance as Visconti's long single take as he follows the prince through the ballrooms in " The Leopard ." We see the characters interacting, we see Lizzie avoiding Collins and enticing Darcy, we understand the politics of these romances, and we are swept up in the intoxication of the dance. In a later scene as Lizzie and Darcy dance together everyone else somehow vanishes (in their eyes, certainly), and they are left alone within the love they feel.

But a lot must happen before the happy ending, and I particularly admired a scene in the rain where Darcy and Lizzie have an angry argument. This argument serves two purposes: It clears up misunderstandings, and it allows both characters to see each other as the true and brave people they really are. It is not enough for them to love each other; they must also love the goodness in each other, and that is where the story's true emotion lies.

The movie is well cast from top to bottom; like many British films, it benefits from the genius of its supporting players. Judi Dench brings merciless truth-telling to her role as a society arbiter; Sutherland is deeply amusing as a man who lives surrounded by women and considers it a blessing and a fate, and as his wife Blethyn finds a balance between her character's mercenary and loving sides. She may seem unforgivably obsessed with money, but better to be obsessed with money now than with poverty hereafter.

When Lizzie and Darcy finally accept each other in "Pride & Prejudice," I felt an almost unreasonable happiness. Why was that? I am impervious to romance in most films, seeing it as a manifestation of box office requirements. Here is it different, because Darcy and Elizabeth are good and decent people who would rather do the right thing than convenience themselves. Anyone who will sacrifice their own happiness for higher considerations deserves to be happy. When they realize that about each other their hearts leap, and, reader, so did mine.

Roger Ebert

Roger Ebert was the film critic of the Chicago Sun-Times from 1967 until his death in 2013. In 1975, he won the Pulitzer Prize for distinguished criticism.

Now playing

Made in England: The Films of Powell and Pressburger

Peter sobczynski.

Monica Castillo

Brian Tallerico

Sorry/Not Sorry

Matt zoller seitz.

Good Bad Things

Crumb Catcher

Robert daniels, film credits.

Pride and Prejudice (2005)

Rated PG for some mild thematic elements

128 minutes

Keira Knightley as Elizabeth Bennet

Matthew MacFadyen as Darcy

Brenda Blethyn as Mrs. Bennet

Donald Sutherland as Mr. Bennet

Simon Woods as Charles Bingley

Rupert Friend as Lt. Wickham

Tom Hollander as William Collins

Rosamund Pike as Jane Bennet

Jena Malone as Lydia Bennet

Judi Dench as Lady Catherine

Carey Mulligan as Kitty Bennet

Talulah Riley as Mary Bennet

Directed by

• Deborah Moggach

Based on the novel by

• Jane Austen

Latest blog posts

A Woman Without Peers: Gena Rowlands (1930-2024)

The Needle Drop Sessions: Pump Up the Volume & Untamed Heart

Locarno Film Festival 2024: Youth (Hard Times), Transamazonia, Moon

Thumbnails 8/15/24: Six Must-Reads You Don’t Want To Miss This Week

Katie Bachelder

Writing Towards Compassionate Connection

Pride and Prejudice (2005) Movie Analysis

Pride and Prejudice was published by Jane Austen in late January, 1813, a classic romantic tale involving one of the most tantalizing, tense hate-to-love relationship I’ve ever had the pleasure of reading. For those of you who don’t know, I’m reading it for my February Romance Reading Challenge . For my last reading challenge, the Middle Grade Reread Challenge , I read the Tale of Despereaux and decided to do a book-to-movie adaptation analysis ; for the romance reading challenge, I knew I wanted to do the same kind of analysis, but for Pride and Prejudice.

Of course, the big question was which adaptation to watch. Apparently, there have been many, and that does not even include the Pride and Prejudice and Zombies (which, despite a strong dislike for horror elements, I am still half-tempted to watch just out of sheer curiosity). The major contestants were between the 1995 television show and the 2005 movie. A gold star goes to anyone who can deduce which one I ended up watching. In the end, it was really a question of timing.

A proper review of the book will be included in the rapid book review post I have planned for March 5th, but I can at least say now that, like Tale of Despereaux, I found myself pleasantly surprised by the book. It had a relatively large cast of characters, but it did not take me long to figure out who was who. Each had their own little story in addition to Elizabeth’s, and they all tied together neatly by the end.

One thing to note, though, is that the book spans well over a year, and a lot happens in that time. With four marriages to set up, and almost two dozen characters to keep track of, I knew it was going to be a lot for one movie to tackle. It might’ve chosen to somehow cut out a few key characters, thus minimizing the set-up of said marriages, or else it would have to rush through the timeline to hit as many events as it could. Thankfully, it did the latter, and we’ll discuss below the efficacy of that choice. But first, a warning: spoilers abound.

The Language of the Classics

Considering the year it was published, the language of Pride and Prejudice is unsurprisingly antiquated, and for the modern reader, it may be difficult to translate. Modern readers may also find it difficult to get attached to any of the characters’ plights now that women are not pressured to marry into a rich family in order to assure their own future, and that it’s no longer considered a scandal to have an intimate relationship with someone you’re not married to.

The point of any adaptation, though, is to reach a broader audience than the book might have. Classics are an even more poignant subject because of the reasons mentioned in the previous paragraph. Having a visual representation of the events can help people understand the plot even if they found the book hard to read. Of course, as we learned in the Tale of Despereaux analysis, it’s easy for movies to take their source material and create an almost completely different story. Jane Austen’s work is not immune to this, either; there have certainly been very loose adaptations.

The 2005 version, however, is choc-full of dialogue pulled straight from the text. Through a basic understanding of language from the 1800’s and the visual cues offered by the movie, it’s a lot easier to untangle the meaning of some of the more convoluted phrases. It’s a similar thought process to Lord of the Rings , which likewise takes at least some of the dialogue from the books and puts it into the movie. You don’t need to insert dialogue from the text for it to be a good movie adaptation, and, conversely, inserting dialogue doesn’t automatically make it a good adaptation either. But when the lines of dialogue are able to align so closely with the movie’s plot progression, it means you’re doing something right. All of this is to say, even with the antiquated language of the text, the movie can still remain so close to the source material as to borrow actual lines of speech, and still be understood by the audience. It doesn’t necessarily need to be modernized to be understood.

The Perfection of the Cast

It’s one thing for an actor or actress to embody their character, and quite another when it’s clear they’re having fun doing it. It was hilarious to see Mr. Collins visually represented as less than those around him, one of the shortest men on the set (or at least, made to look so.) Mrs. Bennet’s actress embodied the nervous, fluttery gossip to such a point that wave after wave of second-hand embarrassment came through the television. Mr. Bingley was a romantic sop who was so awkward it couldn’t be anything but adorable. They added a scene towards the end where, after a failed first attempt to ask for Jane’s hand, he paced outside and practiced proposing with Mr. Darcy, and it would certainly be in my top five favorite scenes of the film.

A lot of big-name actors and actresses are part of the cast, which is always a good sign, especially if someone like me (who’s terrible with remembering them) knows what they’re from. There’s Keira Knightley from Pirates of the Caribbean, Rosemund Pike who I know will be in Wheel of Time (though I could not get it out of my head that it was Jewel Straite from Firefly), Donald Sutherland from Hunger Games, etc. I didn’t know Mr. Darcy’s actor, Matthew Macfadyen, though he kept giving me Ianto Jones from Torchwood vibes.

This is all to say that they put in a lot of effort to make sure the cast, even small roles like Mrs. Gardiner (who I know from Doctor Who as Harriet Jones, former prime minister), were played by talented and dedicated actors. Unfortunately, because of time constraints, some characters did get cut, most notably Mr. and Mrs. Philips, although they aren’t the only ones, and several others had their roles severely minimized. Mr. and Mrs. Gardiner were two that I understood and wasn’t angry about, though in the books they were meant to show the respectable side of Elizabeth’s family, and the true extent to which Mr. Darcy had pulled away from his snobbish habits. One character, however, did get unjustly cut back, and that is none other than Mr. Wickham.

The Venerable Mr. Wickham

The question of Mr. Wickham’s character was a major point for the novel. To paraphrase Darcy and Elizabeth, (movie version at the very least; I don’t remember for sure if it was in the novel), Mr. Wickham is really good at making friends and less good at keeping them. He uses people without any moral compunction, primarily to pay off his gambling debts. It is later revealed in the novel that Mr. Wickham has basically forced Mr. Darcy to pay off his debts out of moral obligations (Mr. Wickham having grown up like a second son to the late Mr. Darcy), had run off with Mr. Darcy’s sister (which, at that time, would have been considered an unforgivable scandal) in the hopes of marrying rich to support his gambling habits, and very nearly ruined Elizabeth’s sister’s reputation by nearly doing the same to her.

The book is neatly divided in the before-the-marriage-proposal, and the after-. The before sets up Mr. Darcy to be the worst of them, and one of the first sticking points, before even his interference with Jane and Mr. Bingley, is the question of Wickham’s character. The worst kind of charismatic, Wickham sets himself up as the poor fool whose fortunes were ripped out from under him by Darcy, and because Elizabeth has no point of reference beyond Darcy’s established snobbery, she finds the accusation easy to believe. Then Austen brings it full circle, because Wickham plays the family for a fool once again when he convinces Lydia to run with him to London, thereby proving Darcy’s innocence on that count and Wickham’s own questionable morals.

The film has to cut down on the narrative where it can, and Wickham’s storyline was perhaps the one most pared down. The extent of his courtship with Elizabeth Bennet becomes almost nonexistent, her indignation on Wickham’s behalf is little more than an excuse, and Wickham’s later wooing of Lydia Bennet is a horrible yet unprecedented incident. Fortunately, the movie did choose to make Elizabeth’s and Darcy’s romance both more central and inevitable than the book did, which means Wickham was portrayed as little more than a bump in the road, turning the film less into a social commentary and more into a forthright romance.

Pacing: Condensing Four Marriages into 2 Hrs 15 Min

I have already spoken throughout the post of the necessity of cutting back on some of the side plots. Why Mr. Wickham’s flight with Lydia was so random, unexpected, and damaging lost some of its weight in the film because of the aforementioned adjustments to his character’s role. Additionally, Charlotte Lucas’s marriage to Mr. Collins was even more abrupt than in the book; I don’t even think it showed that she was the one who initiated the courtship. Even so, with Charlotte’s visit to Lizzy right after, the film still managed to explain her actions, saying that Charlotte was almost too old to be considered marriageable, and that not everyone could afford to be a romantic.

Mrs. Bingley’s sister played a much larger role in the book, both in keeping Jane from her brother and from trying to keep Mr. Darcy from marrying Elizabeth. However, the strength of Mr. Bingley’s affection for Jane was obvious, and one can only assume that they set up his going to London as a result of Mr. Darcy telling him the feeling was unreciprocated. Additionally, as I mentioned above, wheras the book made it seem like Darcy and Elizabeth would never get their happy ending, not after she already denied his proposal the first time, the film made it abundantly clear from the beginning that the two liked each other against their better judgment, and that they just had to get over their own prejudices to get their happy ending.

Because I read the book first, I knew everything that the film had to leave out. But condensing the plot, removing elements and hurrying through others, may make those who didn’t read the book a little confused. It was hard to tell as I was watching it whether I understood everything that was going on because I read the books, or if perhaps it could still make sense to someone who hadn’t. I’m not in a position to say that everything left out was clarified by what was kept in or added, but really, that was my only main concern for the film.

Conclusion: Things Lost to Lack of Time

In my Tale of Despereaux movie analysis post, I made the point that an adaptation can certainly make whatever adjustments it needs to as a result of the different medium of storytelling, but that it should strive at least to tell the same story as the book it was adapted from. It’s clear from the cast, the outfits, the very lines that the characters speak that the intent was to create a film as dedicated to the source material as possible. While the book was certainly far more full of social commentary, I think we can forgive the film needing to cut most of that out.

Perhaps the main question for an adaptation like this is whether or not it will keep interest alive for the original work, and I think the answer to that question is, invariably, yes. The 2005 version is true enough to the original that someone who hadn’t read the books could still talk at some length about the plot and perhaps even some of the points that Austen was trying to make. Better yet, for those who tried to make it through the book but found it hard to read, the 2005 film would easily give them points of reference that might, with luck, help those very same readers try the book again.

In sum, a perfect adaptation doesn’t need to include every single minute detail of the book. Really, what it should do is consider the weaknesses of the story and try to improve upon it where needed while putting emphasis on what made it worth adapting to begin with. So, while I think some of the more subtle themes of Austen’s Pride and Prejudice got lost in translation, I still think that what the film managed to accomplish was commendable.

Share this:

Leave a comment cancel reply.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

• Frequently Asked Questions
• Join HS Insider

About                   FAQs                       Join

Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth dance together at the ball. (Universal Pictures)

Arts and Entertainment

Review: how the 2005 film adaptation of ‘pride and prejudice’ vivifies jane austen’s classic narrative.

Her works include romance, but instead of pursuing sentimental language popular in her time, her characters reveal natural imperfections and flaws. Amongst her well-known classics, “ Pride and Prejudice ” proves to be the most famous among them. This story has been adapted into numerous TV shows and films due to its widespread adoration and integration of both romantic and satirical elements.

Although it is hard for movies to explore the same level of depth given its time limitation, “Pride and Prejudice,” starring Keira Knightley and Matthew Macfadyen, nevertheless successfully illustrates the reserved yet beautiful romance that blooms between Elizabeth and Darcy through its own film language.

The story follows Elizabeth Bennet (played by Keira Knightley), an intelligent, independent-minded young lady and the second oldest daughter of Mr. Bennet of Longbournm. However, since Mr. Bennet’s estate can only be passed to a male heir and the Bennet family has no son, it is necessary for at least one daughter from the family to marry well.

A perfect chance arrives as Mr. Bingley, an affluent bachelor, visits the neighborhood with his sister and friend, Darcy. Mr. Darcy is also extremely wealthy, but his arrogant and aloof personality drives others away. Bingley falls in love with Jane, the Bennets’ eldest daughter, and through the two families’ relationship, Elizabeth increases interactions with the infamous Mr. Darcy. As Elizabeth learns to overlook initial prejudice and differentiate between authentic and superficial traits, a dynamic connection forms between them.

The Magic of Camera Perspective

Specific camera shots elevate the chemistry between Darcy and Elizabeth. The movie’s close-up shots on objects and facial expressions add nuances to the development of their relationship without blatantly declaring the characters’ feelings.

The scene when Elizabeth leaves Bingley’s manor at the beginning of the film perfectly exemplifies this narrative technique; as the camera follows Elizabeth up the carriage, it suddenly cuts to a closeup of Darcy’s hand holding hers, helping her get inside the vehicle.

The perspective then dramatically returns to Elizabeth, this time a more focused shot of her startled expression at Darcy’s gesture. Finally, a close-up frame of Darcy’s hand ensues as he expands and retracts his fingers, feeling the lingering temperature of her touch.

Although the only physical interaction in this scene is a brief graze of hands, this camera paneling technique of their hands, Elizabeth’s expression and Darcy’s reactions speak volumes of their underlying romantic tension.

Mr. Darcy (played by Matthew Macfadyen) holds Elizabeth Bennet (played by Kiera Knightley)’s hand as she steps into the carriage. (Universal Pictures)

Another instance of excellent camera close-up and placement is when Elizabeth and Darcy meet again at Lady Catherine de Bourgh’s manor, and the former plays the piano. She speaks to Darcy’s friend about Darcy’s puzzling behavior at the Netherfield Ball while the camera encompasses all three characters in the scene.

However, when the friend exits and only Elizabeth and Darcy talk to each other, each shot focuses on their expressions separately. Chemistry overflows the screen as the camera concentrates on only one face at a time, capturing nuances in their facial expressions and implicitly demonstrating each character’s contrasting emotions: Darcy, embarrassed and wanting to justify himself, and Elizabeth feeling sarcastic toward him.

Elevation Through Weather and Atmosphere

Aside from strategically placed camera angles, the movie adds layers to the story’s atmosphere through weather that isn’t present in the book to showcase the fervorous intensity of the main characters’ relationship.

When Darcy proposes to Elizabeth for the first time, a pouring storm happens simultaneously. Their clothes and hair soak with water as they argue after Darcy’s rude elaboration of his confession, and the background audio of rain creates more drama to their intense conversation.

While the book describes their quarrel vividly, it does not present any details about the weather. The movie production team intentionally added a gloomy downpour to give this proposal a tense ambiance, hinting its failure.

Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth Bennet argue intensely in the rain. (Universal Pictures)

Darcy’s second proposal suggests an entirely different aura from the former; at one of the film’s emotional peaks, weather plays crucially to the scene’s romantic chemistry. As Darcy walks toward Elizabeth, a soft morning fog envelops his figure and a hint of the orange sun appears on the horizon.

During their exchange, the sky lightens gently to suggest the profession of love that lingers on Darcy’s lips. Finally, sunlight illuminates their profiles and blurs the camera as they hold hands and touch their heads together. Cinematography drives the emotional development of this segment, creating an atmosphere that leaves a heart-stirring impression for the audience.

Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy share a heartfelt moment under the rising sun. (Universal Pictures)

My hope for romantic love shifted drastically as I grew older; from dreamy fairy tales about princesses and knights to the reality of modern relationships, I was exposed to interpretations of romance but never truly experienced this mythic feeling.

In this era of speed-dating, people idealize the concept of love more than their true feelings toward their partners. Many teenagers around me take a similar approach, hurrying to leave their single identity but only to find themselves losing interest. For the first time, we expose ourselves to loving someone, but we are still too young to understand the responsibility that comes with it.

After watching “Pride and Prejudice,” I resonate deeply with the romance between Darcy and Elizabeth; throughout the course of their relationship, they also discover more about themselves and make improvements along the way.

Review: ‘Classicaloid,’ an underrated classical music anime

by Suah Jin | Arts and Entertainment

Some people wonder what it would be like if some of the greatest geniuses in history came back to live in the modern world. This is the case with "ClassicaLoid," a 2016 music anime focusing on the ClassicaLoids: artificial humans who carry the memories of famous...

Nine AP exams will only be offered in a digital format beginning May 2025

by Uy Pham | Education , News

Nine AP exams will be administered in a digital format for the May 2025 testing season, the College Board announced in July. The tests will still be taken on the high school’s campus and will have the same overall exam structure, including the number of sections,...

Artificial intelligence offers a murky path forward in education

by Roanne Lee | Education , Features , Features , Schools

As back-to-school season is around the corner, students and teachers share similar questions about what school supplies to buy and what should be prepared for courses. However, one question has not been answered: Should artificial intelligence, or AI, be used in the...

Los Angeles Chargers: The Bolt Facility Debuts Along With New Head Coach Jim Harbaugh

by James Lew | News , Sports

The Charger's Bolt facility headquarters has been in the works since 2021, and...

Discover more from HS Insider

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Continue reading

Home — Essay Samples — Literature — Pride and Prejudice — Critical Analysis Of The Film Adaptation Of Pride And Prejudice

Critical Analysis of The Film Adaptation of Pride and Prejudice

• Categories: Jane Austen Pride and Prejudice

About this sample

Words: 869 |

Published: Feb 8, 2022

Words: 869 | Pages: 2 | 5 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

• Expert in: Literature

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

4 pages / 1985 words

4 pages / 1738 words

4 pages / 1708 words

3 pages / 1428 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Pride and Prejudice

Pride and Prejudice, written by Jane Austen, is a timeless classic that explores themes of love, society, and personal growth. While much of the discussion around this novel focuses on its characters and themes, the role of [...]

The need to reconsider first impressions runs throughout Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice. Both Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy judge one another harshly based on first impressions, while Elizabeth also forms judgments of Mr. [...]

Pride and Prejudice is a romantic novel that combines the themes of marriage, wealth, class and self-knowledge to unleash an extravagant masterpiece. Since its immediate success after being released in 1813, it has remained one [...]

When Jane Austen published Pride and Prejudice in 1813, England was a society heavily divided by social class, where marriage was viewed as the ultimate goal for women, and where prejudiced opinions were rampant. Through her [...]

In the society described in Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice, money was as much a social currency as it was a means of exchange for goods and services. Money was often commensurate with social rank, yet there was a feeling [...]

“If marriage be such a blessed state, how comes it, may you say, that there are so few happy marriages?” (Astell 2421). Marriage is one of the main themes of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice, a key motivator for many of its [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Home / Essay Samples / Literature / Pride and Prejudice / Pride And Prejudice: Movie Review

Pride And Prejudice: Movie Review

• Category: Literature , Entertainment
• Topic: Jane Austen , Movie Review , Pride and Prejudice

Pages: 3 (1509 words)

Views: 2261

• Downloads: -->

--> ⚠️ Remember: This essay was written and uploaded by an--> click here.

Found a great essay sample but want a unique one?

are ready to help you with your essay

You won’t be charged yet!

Metamorphosis Essays

Things Fall Apart Essays

The Things They Carried Essays

Antigone Essays

Their Eyes Were Watching God Essays

Related Essays

We are glad that you like it, but you cannot copy from our website. Just insert your email and this sample will be sent to you.

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service  and  Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Your essay sample has been sent.

In fact, there is a way to get an original essay! Turn to our writers and order a plagiarism-free paper.

samplius.com uses cookies to offer you the best service possible.By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .--> -->