The Two Pride and Prejudices  

I am glad to find out that there's other people who appreciate both of the film and mini series. Like you, I love the atmosphere and the music in the film and over all, it's a lot more aesthetically pleasing than the miniseries which is very important to me. However, the miniseries was the first adaptation that I saw and in a way it has that nostalgic element that really makes me love the miniseries in a bit more if it makes any sense. They both are very comforting, though, and that's why I love them both very much.

I love both of the adaptations! The bit when Darcy is proposing to Elizabeth in the rain is my favourite scene in cinematic history

I completely agree with that combo idea! Perfect way to describe it! I do think Jennifer Ehle and Colin Firth were great and I do like that adaptation but the 2005 one has my heart because it was the first one I saw and it just amazed me. And yes Matthew Macfadyen is Mr Darcy for me too. He is one of my favorite actors and this will sound cheesy but his natural stutter he has with some of the lines in practically everything he is in makes him so endearing to me and completely makes the love confession scene in P&P :) One thing I would add is putting the 95 Mrs Gardiner in the 05 but that is just because I don't care for Penelope Wilton's acting :(

I also recommend the Emma adaptation with Kate Beckinsale. It's perhaps my favorite portrayal of the novel. Very authentic.

I loved the one with Kiera Knightly. And oh my goodness, McFadyen.... drool.

I definitely don't understand the hate for her, either. She was brilliant. I get that it may not have gone deep enough for people, but I loved everything about it and helped me through the actual reading of the book.

I appreciate both adaptations, too! :) Lovely discussion!

This was such a lovely video, I agree with pretty much everything you said about the two adaptations. Matthew Macfadyen will always be my Mr. Darcy.

I personally don’t think Colin Firth was a great Darcy, he wasn’t bad but he didn’t embody the reserved, introverted, prideful nature of Darcy in the book in my opinion. I also love Keira Knightley as Elizabeth, perfect fit.

I agree with you, I think both adaptations are very good, and I don't favor one over the other. I think both Jennifer Ehle and Keira Knightley were exceptional as Lizzie. I agree with you about Matthew Macfadyen - it's hard to top his portrayal of Darcy, and his chemistry with Keira gives the film a slight edge over the series in that respect. The directors commentary on the '05 version is very interesting. He has some nice things to say about Keira Knightley's work ethic. I really enjoy your videos, Katie. They are an uplifting respite from some of the current news.

Hi, first time commenter 😀 just discovered your channel the other day and enjoying catching up enormously. I'm not a hater of the 2005 film but I much much much prefer the 1995 TV adaptation. That's partly nostalgia for watching it with my mum aged 12 and discovering Austen for the first time (I remember begging her to tell me what happened - I was on the edge of my seat) and partly because I love the dynamic between Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehles. I didn't think the 2005 film captured the mutual dislike and fascination as well. The way Matthew Macfayden played the social awkwardness put him in that mode of YA heroes: I'm mean but I'm just so misunderstood. Darcy is meant to be disdainful, and I seem to remember he spends too long in the opening scenes making mournful puppy eyes at everything. Also I'm can't forgive the ending, the whole clinching embrace in the morning mist thing. I love the restraint of the 1995 version.

I have seen and enjoyed both. I have to say, I preferred the film but the series was good too. That said, I also didn't love either, but that doesn't mean either was bad. I'm glad you said about Keira Knightley - I really don't understand why she gets hated on so much either! Excellent video as always. :)

I absolutely agree, I have always enjoyed both adaptions for various reasons, the tv series for the faithful depiction of the book and the move for the faithful depiction of the era (history nerd in me loved that the different generations wore varied fashions, the ball rooms were dimly lit and the homes resonated with the social standings).

Omg this was like listening to myself. I agree with EVERYTHING you said.

I like both! I don't know why people feel the need to be obsessively loyal to one version over the other. Both have their merits. Both have their flaws. The 2005 was a movie with limited screen time. They HAD to condense things. Although I couldn't help but think "If you had spent less time on Lizzie and Darcy walking through fields, you could have slipped in the letter from Lizzie's Aunt explaining how Darcy saved the family, instead of having Lydia mention it in passing." But I did love that Lizzie tells her father the truth in the 2005 version. I don't know why they leave that out of the 1995 one. Just like you said, I like both Darcys. Colin Firth has said that he concentrated on Darcy's arrogance and pride at the beginning. I'm not sure about Mathew MacFadyen's goals, but he clearly decided to go with more awkward as opposed to prideful. I MUCH prefer the elopement climax in the miniseries. They take time to develop the plot, to show how dire the situation is, to show Darcy going out of his way to fix things, to show Elizabeth's aunt's letter revealing the truth. Colin Firth portrays a Darcy that is NOT to be messed with. When Wickham stands up at his wedding, and Darcy looms up behind him you know Wickham doesn't have a chance to escape. I think that's part of the attraction of Firth's Darcy. He's very much a powerful man, who will stop at nothing to fix the wrongs he feels are his fault. And lastly, I LOVE the little scene in the 2005 version, where poor Bingley is practicing his proposal, and Darcy is patiently standing by, acting out the part of Jane for him. It's adorable, and shows Darcy as a true friend. If his best friend needs him to pretend to be Jane while he bumble through his proposal script, Darcy is up for it. Thanks for the wonderful video!

This is how I've always felt about the BBC series. If I wanted to spend 6 hours on P&P then I might as well read the book :D Love the 2005 version for the same reasons you do.

My preference is the 2005 film. But I will add that one of the things I love about it is, the moments you get in Lizzie's world. Moments when she daydreams, or is in her own head. Or: that moment when she reads Darcy's letter, but an entire day passes by while she's looking into her mirror (and the camera) ...If you've ever slighted an admirer, then immediately spent the entire next day worrying it was a huge mistake & feeling distant from yourself..... Also, that rainy scene at Temple of Apollo, is maybe the best example of another thing I love: that in the 2005 film, there is an actual erotic charge to their attraction throughout their romance. It's not over the top, but you feel it there, in natural ways...not just an obvious shirtless scene. Love the score (same composer did the 2013 "Jane Eyre" score!) love the performances from literally everyone...Jena Malone, Kelly Riley, Donald Southerland...Love it. Oh, also! I love the Bennets house.

I don't mind the Keira Knightley one, although I haven't watched it for ages! I feel a rewatch coming on! x

I'm actually on the same page with you: I like both, but don't absolutely love either. For me, the 2005 version was my first introduction to the story, and so I'm quite partial to it. And I'm also in the minority of people who really like Keira Knightley, her face just somehow fascinates me (which is quite a shallow reason to like her, I know, but there it is.) However, when I'm, let's say sick or feeling down, and I just want to immerse myself in an Austen story, I opt for watching the 1995 version just because it is so long and you can really lose yourself in it. And I do like Colin Firth, I've just personally never found him that attractive. I would agree that it is maybe a little bit too faithful to the story in that it doesn't explore the medium of film enough as an artistic form of expression.

I confess (a week late - so behind on my RU-vid!) that I am a 95 lover and 05 hater. I think which one you saw first has a *lot* to do with which one you prefer, especially if your viewing of it has some other connection to your life. For instance! I was a wee 10-year-old, watching with my mom (over and over again), and there was just no way for me to get out of that without imprinting on the miniseries. Which means that the film version never really had a chance. I recognize that that's a totally subjective and emotionally-based reaction, so I agree with you that the film has its merits (even though I've never been able to get through a watch of it in a single sitting), including many of the things you mentioned, particularly the music & the cinematography. Someone below mentioned that the music is too contemporary for the time period, but I love it and think it fits well with the emotional tone of the movie. I also love that it showed dances and balls that were crowded, hot, and presumably stinky! The miniseries has a much more genteel feel, but I've read contemporary accounts of parties that made them sound miserable in many ways, and I thought the film did a great job of showing how claustrophobic it could be in a house with *that* many people.

This made me laugh because it's like EVERYTHING you said I agreed with! Everything. Depends on the time I have and the type of mood I'm in for which one I want.

Wow! Thank you so much for the kind words and the awesome video! Great addition to the event! I have seen both and I might be in the minority who actually enjoyed both equally! I haven't read Pride and Prejudice yet (my shameful secret) which might be a reason why! Also, Matthew McFadden has been my favourite ever since I first saw him in MI 5!

I love both of them! I also enjoy the 1980s mini series, I think that one is underrrated.

I love both adaptations too! But I would say the movie is my favourite for all the same reasons you gave. I do love both Mr Darcy's though and it's hard to pick a favourite, but you're right about MM getting the awkward side down so well!

I love both! I pretty much agree with everything you said. I really enjoy your videos on Jane Austen. That must have been so fun working at the Jane Austen Center.

I really like the little things they put into the bbc miniseries. like how Mr Darcy rides a dark horse when he's in hertfordshire where he's hated, but a white horse in pemberly where he's loved. and Bingly always has white horses because he's always seen as the good guy, and Lady Catherine has a dark carriage and massive dark horses because she's imposing and also awful. I also love how much the father has all of his sarcastic and rude lines. I think I was just too disappointed in the father character in the 2005 movie to love it. I was already too far into the books. although I do like how the second declaration of love goes in the movie. in the book the line is something like "she assured him she had very much changed her mind" and you can imagine all sorts of awkward romantic goings on, but in the bbc miniseries she just says something like "I have changed my mind" and it's not as romantic or as satisfying.

I read P&P recently and have been thinking about whether I should watch an adaptation of it, so this video came at a great time for me! This is such a fantastic video idea too :) After watching this I've concluded that I need to watch both of these!

A very well discussed video on the merits of both adaptations. I have seen the BBC series many times - my daughters, wife and I love it. I love a beautifully photographed movie - Tess (T. Hardy's novel adaptation) by Polanski (1970s movie) is an all time favourite. I also appreciate a very good movie score. I haven't seen the movie but will do so. Nearly finished reading Wives and Daughters by E. Gaskell - a beautifully paced well written novel - love it.

Wonderful discussion and such a great topic. I really liked 2005 when I first saw it in the movie theater(yes, I was probably the only male there and I couldn't convince my GF at the time to join me...although she did enjoy watching Emma 09 later). It had been a while since I had read the book. In rereading book and rewatching it, it has sunk some. While most adaptations move stuff around and to probably other characters...some of changes 2005 makes are jarring(and I'm not a purist except with certain characters...Marianne Dashwod and Jane Bennet specifically). Soooo.....where 2005 really shines is with Rosamund Pike!!!! So very perfect as Jane Bennet. "A thousand time yes!!!" While Susannah Harker in 1995 isn't bad as Jane, they seem to dress her in an odd manner...and she certainly doesn't outshine Jennifer Ehle's Lizzy. I think she looks more like Jane Bennet in the UK version of House of Cards(haven't seen the US one)! I love love love your comment about Mrs. Bennet in 1995. I have to turn down the sound....nails on a chalkboard! Lastly(rambling on and on)....the US ending of 2005....runs screaming from the room. While I don't agree with Jane Austen purists about adaptations and her action to them....I'd love to see her reaction to the 2005 US ending!...."Dear Joe Wright.....I find your adaptation of my beloved child P&P........and ........however, permit me to expound on how to end one of my books....since clearly you haven't read my endings....."

I loved both adaptions. I enjoyed the 1995 version more. Thank you for doing this. I now have the 1980 version and the Garson/Olivier version on my list too.

I've only seen the film version but I really enjoyed it! I'll have to watch the tv miniseries at some point though.

I've only ever watched the 2005 Adaption so I can't compare, but I think I am going to give the mini-series a shot now.

Oh a subject that i can talk until the cows come home hahahaha So, i love with all my heart the 95 adaptation! I saw it when it originally aired in the UK, so you can guess my age - i was a teen and i fell in love with the whole atmosphere of it. The clothes, the settings, the houses, it all appeals to me. I marathoned it on Valentines Day. Recently the film was on tv and i tried to watch it...i say try because i didn´t saw it in one sitting, as it felt strange to me. I like Keira Knightley - ever since The Duchess - but she seemed very flat to me, without the sharp tongue that Lizzie is knowned for. She seemed more awkward and shy than anything. And that was not the impression i got of her by reading the book. And the wardrobe just seemed so shabby: Lizzie was almost always dressed in brown, like the kitchen maid. And what the Bingley sister wore at the Netherfield ball seemed more fit for a prostitute (with that low cleavage) than the upper-class snooty person that she was portrayed Mr Bennett, played by Donald Sutherland was within his character (sarcástic) but i found the Mrs Bennett from the tv show more lively and funny. I never thought that she lacked humanity: she just wants her girls settled and if that means to be a wee bit inconvenient, so be it. And McFadyen is definitly not MY Mr Darcy - Colin Firth all the way, for me. I cannot picture anyone else doing it. The same goes for Lizzie: Keira is not suited just because she is very pretty and Lizzie is always portrayed as someone more on the lines of Jeniffer Ehle: atractive but not full on pretty - that was Jane. I like my adaptations to be faihtfull to the book they proceed from, so i was completly fulfilled with the tv adaptation.

I will never understand the argument that Colin Firth is too old. He wasn't in 1995! Macfadyen was also over 30 when he played Darcy! For me, the 1995 version is perfect, also and especially artistically. I can actually speak along with it during watching and I can hum along all the tunes ;-)

I think P&P 05 is a very pretty movie. It successfully combines Bronte with Austen to give a very feel good chick flick. It's not Pride and Prejudice. The characters aren't Lizzie or Darcy just rather their namesakes. The characters are from the foundation up just stoutly unlike Jane Austen's characters it's hard to take them seriously. Which I found I couldn't do as an adaptation. I liked the movie..Keira is a very pretty Lizzie but she isn't a modern woman in a restrained society. Because everything is so darn modern. It's not just that everyone behaves over the top they seem to be no etiquette of any sort. Ppl half naked outside or wandering into bedrooms..it was weird to watch to say the least. In 95, you're right that it had more time to develop the relationships and characters. It doesn't mean that worked. The 95 version works because it's naunced, the attention to detail is astounding. The social etiquettes are very much in place as are the essence of every character. Which is why you understand the journey Lizzie and Darcy go through is so important. You feel it with them, and fall in love with them. Lizzie is a woman who doesn't want to be swayed by anything but love and respect. Darcy just very much ends up making acquaintances - something he didn't believe capable as they are all gold diggers according to him . It's a poignant story, one which is lost in the 05 version. I don't blame them for going the other way, as 95 version got it so right.

I loved the BBc version of Pride and Predjudice but didn't like the other :) My favorite adaptation is actually a "free" adaptation which is called Bride and Prejudice ahah it's Price and Prejudice with a Bollywood twist

Hi! Thank you for the comparison. I personally very much fall into the 1995 camp. It might be because the 2005 movie has a Bronte vibe that for me makes it less like Jane Austen. It is possible that you love both adaptations because you love both authors, and most people are divided because they strongly prefer Austen over Bronte (1995) or Bronte over Austen (2005). Just my take on it.

I also adore both adaptations although I prefer the bbc miniseries. Colin Firth's portrayal is just how I imagined Darcy. I would like to see a video on your opinions regarding the Emma adaptations.

I prefer both. The 1995 one has the book and all, but I can't feel the connection between Lizzie and Darcy like I do in when I read the book and the scenes without lizzie drag- in the book, it adds suspense in a way.The 2005 one I feel has captured the essence of the characters and story and I like how it did not try to be the 95 version- I also liked that they found actors that were close to the age of the characters in the books- I despise how most adaptions from that period always have older actor's. Though i hate the lack of bonnets, Knightely will always be Lizzie to me because of her wit and expressive eyes. I like the 95 version alot- but with all the time spent it didn't feel as fleshed out in the end- the last episode rushed my favorite parts.

I think you should watch the 1980 adaptation. While 1995 is my favorite, there is so much to like about the earlier one. (We may be older, but the adaptations from the BBC in the 70's and 80's would be worth you time to check out. They are stagey but generally well acted and more faithful to the book. Now for the movie - can you imagine Lady Catherine paying a call on the Bennets late at night when they are in their nightclothes? Can you imagine Elizabeth Bennet walking around at dawn, also in her nightdress? Really? Things like that ruined the film for me. And McFeyden, whom I loved in Little Dorritt, doesn't have Darcy's passion, or even his sarcasm (as with Miss Bingley).

Colin Firth will forever be Mr. Darcy but, that ending when Darcy's like "Mrs. Darcy Mrs. Darcy Mrs. Darcy." It was creepy and weird. And I hated the way Longbourn was portrayed as a pigsty.

I wish I could contradict you but you're absolutely right with your predictions. I LOOOVE the BBC adaptation, it's as dear to my heart as the book is and I DESPISE the film because of how short and (in my opinion) badly acted it was. I totally agree that film Darcy portrayed the social awkwardness better than Colin Firth but I have a thing for older men so I actually fancy the pants off of him. There is just so much warmth and nostalgia for Mr with the BBC series as well because I always watch it with my mum and we quote it all the time xD. There's just no competition in my eyes.

2005 version drives me absolutely mad! Oh that wig that Keira wears, oh the hair that shows under that wig, it looks disgusting! I simply cannot look at Keira because of that in that film. Also, the music in 2005 is of course good because its done my Dario Marinelli. He is amazing at what he does, he did the Jane Eyre (the one with Mia Wasikowska). He is good.. But, there is a but, the music has a modern feeling (just as the screenplay.) Whereas 1995 version is strictly faithful to the tradition of the time. Just like the costumes and makeup (and no super obvious wigs!) I grew up obsessing over the 1995 version. I am 31. I was in love with Mr.Darcy (Colin Firth) and I even carried his picture in my wallet for a very long time! lol I think, Colin Firth is the perfect Darcy.. To me, 1995 version is perfect, Artistically and traditionally. I am a classical musician (professional pianist) and I appreciate the music in the 1995 version. It was too difficult for me to love the 2005 version.. It was messy, loud, there were screaming, there were extreme emotions, too much romanticism. I think, those elements were not suitable for Jane Austen's wit, classic style and realism.. So yeah, that version was the beginning of the Jane Austen obsession for me. It made a Turkish girl a true Anglophile. :) great video, great subject.....

Lizzie running around outside in her nightgown before dawn? Lady Catherine DeBurgh visiting a family she doesn't know in the middle of the night, when they are all in bed? There is no attempt to make any part of the film historically true. There is also 1980, which many of my friends like best of all. I don't because though a lot of Jane Austen's words are there, too often they are said by the wrong characters in the wrong scenes. But Elizabeth Garvie is a wonderful Elizabeth Bennet, and the scene at the Lucases where she plays the piano is done as I imagine Jane Austen meant it to be. I'm a 1995 fan, though when they have Joanna David playing Mrs. Gardiner, they really should have used her more as she is in the book. However, her daughter (Emilia Fox is her daughter) is wrong as Georgianna, who is supposed to be the more accomplished pianist, and tall and dark-haired.

I'm sorry I just don't like Macfayden's portrayal of Darcy. He's too obviously socially awkward and shy. And while it's charming it's not Darcy. Would Lizzie (and everybody else) mistake his shyness for pride if it was so much obvious? Everything in 2005 version is exaggerated - both proposal scenes seem to be taken from something written by Lord Byron. Yes, it's romantic to the extreme it just isn't Austen. Saying all that I like 2005 P&P. It's a really good romantic movie with lovely music and cinematography, I just dont think it's a good adaptation of Pride and Prejudice.

Neither fish nor fowl.....I'll agree; neither version is "definitive". I think AM is a much better Darcy than Colin F., but I do NOT like KK. She is over-rated. Making the Bennetts into dirt-ball rubes in the 2005 adaptation is unforgiveable. They were NOT that poor or shabby. Mrs. Bennett is not that good in either. We've already had this discussion. I think Mrs. Bennett is a near monster. The Bennett girls in 1995 are not pretty enough. In 2005, Jane B. was properly cast; THAT actress was lovely, as Jane is supposed to be. I'd like someone like Felicity Jones to play Elizabeth, but perhaps she is not sufficiently outgoing. EB is NOT an easy cast. The 2005 music and cinematography are superior.

no emotion transmitted by mcfayden and keira....