The Pitfalls of Adapting Pride & Prejudice 

i don't agree that it's inappropriate to give lizzy/eliza/elizabeth bennet the opening lines of the book as in the 1995 version. though i've always wished that a different way to incorporate the lines had been found, the manner with which they are delivered is totally in keeping with her character. lizzy IS above that sort of mentality. i mean, maybe she is naive (she's only 20 after all) but she does declare rather emphatically that she could not consider marrying solely for security, which she proves by turning down mr. collins and mr. darcy. and on the matter of casting mr. collins, jane austen doesn't suggest that there's anything particularly offensive (to the bennet girls) about his physical person and he is actually only 25; it is his manner that offends. i think the casting should reflect this idea rather than relying on making a character less physically appealing (than they are described in the book) to convey to the audience that he/she is a jerk or unworthy as a romantic interest or a villain. and thanks for the heads-up about the 1980 version which i hadn't actually considered watching, but now i know better.

I think it's sad that you tell people not to bother with the 1980 version at all and suggest they'll need therapy if they do. Like every version it has it's good points and bad points. And like every version it is shaped by the times in which it was filmed and the sensibilities of the intended audience. Lizzie speaking the opening line is no less ridiculous than a pig walking into the Bennet's house, or a carriage race. We are blessed to have so many and so varied versions of our beloved tale, and each one gives us a different way of thinking about things and challenging our own assumptions. Thank you for your thoughtful and informative video.

The swoony aesthetic in the 2000s version ruins the film for me. I just want to shout at the screen, "He's soooo into you. Big wup. He's wetter than a boiled cabbage."

I watched 7 adaptations of Pride and Prejudice, and the version from 1995 remained my favorite, although I liked a lot in other versions.

I may be in the minority of millennials, but I prefer 1995 P&P over 2007. This, I think, stems from the captivating performances of the actors and, frankly, its faithfulness to the source material. Also, I have a general distaste for moody heroes (lol).

I hope you plan on doing all of Austen books adaptations!

I think Emma is the most challenging of Austen’s works to adapt. It’s challenging for people in the modern era to see Emma as anything other than a self-absorbed snob. Emma is a caged bird. Clever & beautiful but she isn’t allowed to walk alone off her own property. She was homeschooled. Is only allowed to socialize with people of a certain standing in society. She’s has never been places (even nearby ones like Box Hill or London) even to visit her sister. She started managing the family household at age 12. She’s not resentful of her father and tries her best to make him and all his friends/guests comfortable. She lives a lot in her imagination because she has never really had an equal companion. Some relationships are forced on her (the Eltons) as a social responsibility…she has little control over her world but exerts it where she can. It’s very hard to build that depth in an adaptation. Elizabeth is much more relatable as a character. She isn’t set apart from society. She has outlets for her wit and gaiety

I think a nicer example of giving more attention to Mary is in the 1940 version, where she's played by Marsha Hunt. In this version, she feels more "innocent" than her more extroverted sisters, and she gets some sweet moments, like the exchange about Mr. Collins with the wonderful Edmund Gwenn as her father; the tiny moment of sharing her book with Lizzy at the beginning; her earnest but off-key singing (Hunt really could sing, so she knows also how to throw Mary's singing off); followed by the charming follow-up at the very end of the movie. Kitty gets very little to do in this version, that's true, but Heather Angel has a delicacy that feeds into Austen's hints about Kitty's physical state.

Love your Jane Austen deep dives! Still hoping for a Persuasion Part 2 :)

Your insights are so amazing. Beautiful work; and completely accurate in your assessments.

Subscribed and awaiting the next Austen video. This made me want to rewatch all the adaptations. Each one has some wonderful parts so I'm looking forward to your opinion.

Love this Becky!

I've watched the 1980 version, I found this Darcy a bit too stiff to start with, but then in the novel itself, Darcy doesn't really speak much, but I now really enjoy watching it, as there are some funny bits, particularly Mr Collins. My favourite adaptation is the 1995 version. I have watched the 2005 version, but I can't get used to the soft voices of Kiera and Matthew.

My favorite is the 1995 version. Colin Firth is my favorite Darcy.

Love your insights!

I really enjoyed your video!

Loving your analysis here! Intelligent and balanced. Looking forward to the Glories of Adapting Pride & Prejudice.

So wonderful - thank you for this! I am tempted to watch that 80s version, but might have to have a pitcher of margaritas (or some spiked milk punch or sherry) at hand :) Love these! Thank you for making them!

Love, love, love these! I don't remember the 1980s version very well, probably five years since I've seen it, but I've been toying with the idea of rewatching it lately. My two big memories of it are 1. Mr. Darcy being very stiff and 2. after he gives her the letter it's the loooooongest scene of watching him walk away. I have a special place in my heart for the 1940s version just because of that race and what they do with Lady Catherine!! It's so not like the book but so funny, that said, Pride and Prejudice isn't my favorite Austen novel so maybe if it was more of a favorite, I'd be more annoyed... Looking forward to the glories!!

Thank you for this analysis Becky. I love P & P having studied the novel for my ‘finals’ in my last year of high school (am in Australia and I think that’s the best way to translate if for the US) and then read it many times since. I’ve only seen the 1995 BBC version (that was ‘appointment’ viewing over 6 Sunday nights when it screened here and I couldn’t wait for the next episode) and the 2005 Joe Wright film (saw that solo in the cinema). The book is obviously the best, however each of the adaptations have their pros/cons as you note. I’m not going to seek out the 40’s / 80’s versions as neither seem to have much merit. Looking forward to more of your vlogs on Austen!

My theory as to why it's difficult to adapt Austen is that we don't get a whole of of detail - we don't know what the characters look like; we don't know what the houses look like, etc. With Jane Eyre, for example, Bronte tells us pretty much everything, so adapters don't need to make up quite so much.

I wrote about your wonderful talk on Persuasion. Today I am checking out this.

I'm going to disagree with you again about the casting of Garson: for me, at least, she is the only actress who has been able to capture an elusive sparkle and wit that pairs with Austen: there's a richness to her voice, and a subdued devil in her eye that I have not seen in any other Elizabeth. The aging up doesn't bother me, because I feel that Garson understands Elizabeth so very well, and understands how the Elizabeth in this version functions. I need to say that, for me, the 1940 version is the only one that consistently makes me smile, and makes me truly believe that this collection at Longbourn is a family. And I also must add that Melville Cooper, complete with his little motif, is the most perfect Mr. Collins I have watched.

To me it makes perfect sense that Elizabeth is voicing the introductory lines of the novel. I am surprised that you think differently. Her being part of her own social environment has not prevented her from voicing her own opinions in other parts of the novel?

I actually always thought that Lizzie saying the opening line is a great insight and introduction into her character. As I recall, she IS in fact painted as being intelligent, well-read, and detached enough to see the silliness of the way all the girls (including herself) chase after a good husband. She DOES play the game, but she knows she's playing it. I think the 1995 version is easily the best, as it has the time to really paint a good portrait of the nature and personality of each character. In all other ways, I totally agree with your analysis of all the pitfalls! Unlike what seems like _all_ my fellow GenZers, I actually don't like the 2007 version very much. I think they went SO moody and "candid" with it, and made the characters -- especially Lizzie -- SO bold and modern, that they lost all the etiquette and formality of the era. And that plays a HUGE part in the romantic tension, to me. It's the fact that no one will say how they feel plainly that makes the tension so delicious. But modern Austen adaptions seem to all be so keen on making the main characters "girlboss" and "quirky" and "feminist" and "not-like-the-other-girls", that they are far too bold, and completely speak their mind, and lose all of that tension of unspoken longing.

Lots of fun. I have seen all of the P & P film versions but not the long TV series. I think your comments just on that famous opening line are fascinating. I like hearing the line but I get your point about assigning the line to the wrong person. I don't have a ready solution, but I see it as an issue that has to be solved by a production and not a trivial point. Thanks for bringing this out.

This was a great watch! Have you seen the youtube vlog adaptation, the "Lizzie Bennet Diaries" series? It'd be interesting to hear your take on that :)

I prefer to steer people to libro fm instead of audible, but their adaptation with Rosamund Pike is exceptional and my nightly bedtime story! I loved this breakdown so much, looking forward to the next video ❤️

Well damn. I need to find P&P on my bookcase again 😊

I would love to hear a more in-depth review of the 1980 version from you. Since you already have a support group and all... 😉

You have some interesting stuff in here. I like it, but It makes me wonder. How much does age really matter? If Elizabeth had been older would the events of the book not unfolded the way they did? Or are their ages just to emphasize their personalities?

I always imagined that Mary was pretty but still plain or "bookish". In the 1995 version, they made her look very unattractive. I do agree that the age of the cast is usually a problem. While I love Ehle's performance, she was a bit too mature looking for the role of Lizzy. I also agree that the actress who plays Lydia in the 1995 version was too old. A great choice was the actress who plays Lydia in the BBC version of Death Comes to Pemberly. The producers of DCTP did a great job with casting (Jane, Wickham, Lydia, Mr. and Mrs. Bennet, Col. Fitzwilliam, Georgianna), EXCEPT for Lizzy and Darcy (too old, not the right look). It seems like we can't get a 100% in any film.

Fay Wheldon who was the screenwriter of the 1980 TV adaptation made a documentary in the early 1990s about how she was not a fan of Jane Austen. Sadly it translated to her adaptation

So agree with your point regarding age appropriate actors. It has always annoyed me, too..

An important aspect of the 1940 version is that it's an adaptation of a play of the novel, so we're getting this adaptation through a couple of filters. I disagree with your assessment of how they handle the pace of Darcy's attraction to Iizzy: we see germs of it while Lizzy is at Netherfield, when he lightly jibes her about the accomplished woman, and her walking with Caroline Bingley: Olivier is able to convey iotas of emotion very nicely. In the archery scene, we take a big leap forward, and it's one of my favorite scenes in the movie. He continues conflicted through the middle part of the adaptation, and again, Olivier paints this for me very well, including the hesitance within his stiffness during the Wickham confession scene. The drastic change in Lady Catherine aids the development of this Darcy, and I know I should be furious about what they do, but it's Edna May Oliver! And the encounters with her and Garson are, for me, pure gold. I forgive it.

This is a fun video! You made me laugh! I just love Matthew McFayden's Darcy. Mr. Collins should be in his twenties so they have always cast him too old as well. I have zero desire to watch the 80s version so, alas, I won't be a part of your support group. HA HA! 😊😊

Only the 1995 version will be remembered

Lol i wonder what you think of the Bollywood musical version. Bride and Prejudice. Personally i love it. Oh and then then there's a couple of writers that have added dragons, zombies or vampires to her stories. Personally i like the dragons.

I watch 80 version and yes bad but favorites 95 version and 05 was good too

Credo che ogni regista possa dare la sua versione di qualunque libro. Pero' deve essere un'azione "onesta". Cioe', se non gli piace rispettare il testo originale e vuole dare una "sua" versione diversa, faccia pure ma abbia l'onesta' intellettuale di cambiare il titolo. E sto pensando a molte versioni di P&P, ma anche all'ultimo Persuasion o all'ultima Emma. Non dico che siano brutti in toto ma non sono il libro originale ed e' meglio non fare i "furbetti" solo per catturare pubblico. Mi scuso se scrivo in italiano ma temevo che il mio inglese non fosse adeguato

I discovered your vlog today and funnily watched P&P 1980 some days ago for the first time. The screenwriter in that version was Fay Weldon (a not so unknown writer). My first thought was: this is going to be god, since she was a successful writer. After the first minutes I felt so disappointed. So staged, so wooden and flat. Austens novels are a huge basket of witty lines and deep thoughts. Actors should be allowed make a feast with it. And then Weldon and the director gets everyone of the character wrong or unnuanced. Horrible waste.

The 2005 film is awful.

I do not agree with the basic premise of this commentary. The plot may be a 'Love' story but Q.D. Leavis identified a theme, and the theme here is the intrinsic value to a man of a companionable wife, stimulating and exciting for the mind as well as pleasure for the body, and it is interesting that adaptations that share the premise of the commentator miss out two important words and ideas . Darcy in his letter to Elizabeth writes 'I demand it of your justice' That is an interesting word, it testifies to the high opinion Darcy has formed of Elizabeth, and in the celebrated debate between Lady Catherine she delivers these crushing lines 'Allow me to say Lady Catherine that the arguments you have offered for this extraordinary petition are as frivolous as the venture was ill judged. [the gist is here if not a precise quotation. I have not the book at hand] This is the coup de grace to Lady Catherine's pride and hauteur, If she quotes it to Darcy he must have realised that no other woman could be mistress of Pemberley and she promised to be not only a female presence but also a feminine Power . Through out the entire canon of JA's works she chronicles the futility and the stupidity of the manners, pretensions and conduct of the Gentry culminating in 'Persuasion' Anne Eliot turning her back of the Gentry and Kellynch Hall. My preferred Adaptation of P.&P is the BBC adaptation featuring Elizabeth Garvie as the heroine. The Darcy is not right, but the best Darcy is no longer extant [Alan Badel, in a earlier BBC production.] but if you want some idea of how good he was look at the Final Scene of the Winslow Boy featuring Badel and Michelle Dotrice [here on utube as is my preferred adaptation] where the encounter has similar emotional tension as must have existed between Elizabeth and Darcy. The Nymph is the girl on the cusp of womanhood between the ages of 16 and 23 [approx] Although men talk about God as 'He' secretly their credo is a goddess and fastidious Darcy recognises his Divinity, despite all his preconceived ideas. I fear this commentator has the wrong criteria for comparing these adaptations. I d not believe that an adaptor is at liberty to steal the title and miss the point by omissions and interpolations