MovieChat Forums > Pride and Prejudice (1940) Discussion > This version was horrible beyond words

This version was horrible beyond words

posted 18 years ago by wiction
35 replies | jump to latest

This version was horrible beyond words. Way to go Hollywood. I watched it yesterday and I don't know where to begin. (Contains spoilers)

* a black haired Jane and a Blond Lizzy?
*Jane was to emotional and even displayed characteristics of her mother’s eagerness to marry Bingley.
* Attempting to mimic a British accent. By the way it's Mr. Collins not Cullins
* Mr. Darcy was way to soft
* Dresses where appalling it was to much southern bell absolutely not what you’d expect when it is suppose to have an English setting.
*Charlotte was way to pretty.
* In one scene Lizzy actually runs after Darcy in an attempt not to let him go out of her life, which makes no sense since she should still have been angry at him.
*Lady Catherine telling Mr. Darcy that Elizabeth is a good match for him (wtf)

This version even made me like the one from 2005. It’s a nice attempt but I can totally understand why most British people said that it was to Americanized and therefore did not like it. No heritage film should be ruined like this.

[–] fantasyescapist 12 years ago

I enjoyed it, despite some reservations. So hilarious in parts and enjoyable as a film.

Subtitles misread: 'the Arch bitch of Canterbury'

[–] deadlyoctopus 11 years ago

I enjoyed the film as a whole because it displayed a playful twist to the original novel. I can't stop laughing at how Lizzie avoided Mr. Collins to the point of hiding from him and being saved by Mr. Darcy. Olivier played his character with the seriousness needed and intensity of a lover (the way he looked at Elizabeth).

[–] aciolino 11 years ago

Reading your thoughts on this movie is like chewing on tin foil while removing one's own gall bladder with an oyster fork.

You are clueless. You have no business watching films. Stay on Austen sites.

By the way:

http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2011/06/29/jane-austen-is-unreadable/

http://thatlittlepig.wordpress.com/2012/07/10/austen-sucks-a-new-journey/

http://open.salon.com/blog/randomidiociesblogspontcom/2010/02/09/is_jane_austen_overrated

[–] lizcarlo87 11 years ago

The writer was British and so were most of the actors. Jane Austen is one of my favorite writers. If I want to read the book ill read it. If I want to watch the best Pride and Prejudice movie ill watch this one.

[–] mdonln 9 years ago

My goodness, lighten up, will you! You're worried about hair color? That's a major concern? No wonder you can't enjoy the movie. You're too busy nit-picking about minor details. Can't people just enjoy a movie and stop comparing it to the source material?

When I read a book I visualize the scene, the characters, the action, everything in my mind. It's based on what the author has provided but it's also affected by who I am. The same is true for all readers. We 'see' the story unfold in our own minds. A movie is one person's take on the story. They may change some of the details or keep everything as close to the source as possible. Either way, it is still their take on the story.

Woman, man! That's the way it should be Tarzan. [Tarzan and his mate]

[–] louiseculmer 8 years ago

as films of the book go, it sticks reasonably closely to the original plot. I don't think Jane or Elizabeth's hair colour is actually ever mentioned in the book, Austen tended not to be specific about details like that. I thought Olivier was perfect as Darcy. I agree it's a pity about the clothes. And you're right about Charlotte being far too pretty. Lady Catherine's character was softened to make her more appealing to an audience that expected elderly ladies to be lovable. But in general I think it could have been much worse.

[–] elena-28 8 years ago

I don't think Jane or Elizabeth's hair colour is actually ever mentioned in the book, Austen tended not to be specific about details like that.

We don't get too much specific detail but we do get some hints about them:

Chapter 6: "But no sooner had he made it clear to himself and his friends that she hardly had a good feature in her face, than he began to find it was rendered uncommonly intelligent by the beautiful expression of her dark eyes."

Chapter 45: ""How very ill Miss Eliza Bennet looks this morning, Mr. Darcy," she cried; "I never in my life saw anyone so much altered as she is since the winter. She is grown so brown and coarse! Louisa and I were agreeing that we should not have known her again."
However little Mr. Darcy might have liked such an address, he contented himself with coolly replying that he perceived no other alteration than her being rather tanned, no miraculous consequence of travelling in the summer.
"For my own part," she rejoined, "I must confess that I never could see any beauty in her. Her face is too thin; her complexion has no brilliancy; and her features are not at all handsome. Her nose wants character—there is nothing marked in its lines. Her teeth are tolerable, but not out of the common way; and as for her eyes, which have sometimes been called so fine, I could never see anything extraordinary in them. They have a sharp, shrewish look, which I do not like at all; and in her air altogether there is a self-sufficiency without fashion, which is intolerable.""

Chapter 49: "Jane, who was not so light nor so much in the habit of running as Elizabeth, soon lagged behind, while her sister, panting for breath, came up with him, and eagerly cried out..."

So we know that Elizabeth has dark eyes; allows herself to tan; and is of light, active build. I think this reference in Chapter 49 is the only specific note about Jane's appearance, which is that she is not as light or active as Elizabeth - but is considered the most beautiful of the five sisters.