I've never seen the Colin Firth version, but I actually prefer this one to the recent remake, mainly because it remembers it's supposed to be funny. Maybe too funny at times, some of the acting is a little cartoonish, but "Pride and Prejudice" is, after all, a comedy of manners. Plus Aldous Huxley's script, despite changes to the story, preserves a lot of the great dialogue from the novel. It's really all about the witty, literate language, unlike the latest version which is more about gorgeous scenery, and long, moody, silent scenes which are more appropriate to "Wuthering Heights." Also, other than Elizabeth, the Bennett sisters are barely characterized. The older version, corny as it sometimes is, does a good job in individualizing the sisters and explaining their relationships. I also prefer most of the performances in the older version. Caroline Bingley is the remake is a standard, boringly-acted bitch who might be at home on "The O.C." Frieda Inescort, however, is so comically snobby she doesn't seem to realize she's snobby. And Mr. Bingley in the remake is a complete twit, where I actually liked Bruce Lester in the old version and rooted for him to end up with Maureen O'Sullivan. I also prefer Edmund Gwenn and Mary Boland to Donald Sutherland and Brenda Blethyn, as much as I like the latter actors. Greer Garson is phenomenally gorgeous and much more subtle and witty than her later performances. Edna May Oliver and Melville Cooper are a little over the top, but still very funny. I don't think I laughed once at Judi Dench, who was just a nasty old bitch (can't believe I didn't like Judi Dench!) And finally, there is Laurence Olivier. I've been hearing for years how great Colin Firth was, but I can't imagine him matching the elegance, humor and emotion of one of Olivier's best performances._
reply
share
KindvomWolf
17 years ago
You should still see it. My grandmother, who had loved this version for years, threw out her tape when I made her watch the Colin Firth version. If you're totally stuck on Olivier, you might not like it, but Firth himself has acknowledged Olivier's greatness in interviews, and pays him a nice homage.
Olivier, to me, was the only good thing about this film.
I need a new signature.
reply
share
HarlowMGM
17 years ago
About the only thing I can agree with the original poster is that Charlotte is too pretty for the character but Karen Morley is such a fine actress she conveys the modest and timidness of someone who is not a beauty.
Besides the book not mentioning Lizzie's hair color, Greer Garson (Lizzie) is of course a redhead not a blonde.
And the character is "Mr. Collins" here, if anyone calls him "Mr. Cullins" it's just the way some pronounce the name, like some say Mon-roe and some say Mun-roe for Monroe.
I appreciated the poster who compliments all the many fine performances found in this 1940 version which is quite typical for posts pro this version, for all the devotees of the later editions I've never encountered a post anywhere on the net that goes down the line and praises most of the cast of them. Usually they are gaga over a D'Arcy or an Elizabeth and basically ignore the rest of the players.
Garson and Oliver ARE Lizzie and D'ARCY in my opinion and no later actresses came anywhere close to giving as fine a performance as Mary Boland and Edna May Oliver in their roles. Boland and Oliver were genius actresses who knew who to play eccentrics without making them abrasive, it's a skill many actresses don't have. As the earlier poster noted, even the superb Judi Dench could not pull off Oliver's role correctly.
reply
share