Pride and Prejudice - Book vs Movie

We know the book is always better than the movie, but how faithful is the movie to the book? How faithful is the 2005 movie to the book "Pride and Prejudice?" This is a love story for the ages. Several movies and TV series have been made from the book. In this video, I compare the book to what I think is the best movie version.

The book was written in 1813 by Jane Austen. She published the book anonymously, as so many women writers did at that time. It was a popular book when it was published. It sold out the first edition in the first year. According to Encyclopedia Britannica, the book never went out of print.

The movie stars Keira Knightley and Matthew Macfadyen. It was well received and was nominated for four Academy Awards. The movie didn't win though.

[annikabjornson]

As much as I enjoy this movie, it’s basically the Reader’s Digest condensed version of the story. So many conversations, meetings and events are completely left out because of it time limitations for a theatrical release.
The 1995 version with Jennifer and Colin tells pretty much the whole thing and he’s yummy gazing at Lizzy while she plays the piano. Not that that incident is in the book iirc.

[bubblesbubbly]

If I may - the book does explain why Mr. Collins will inherit the estate, right in the first chapter or two. Kind of genius move on Jane Austen's part, because it bridges the time gap for those who really don't know. Upon marrying Mrs. Bennett, his father wanted to continue a generations-long entail which passes to the next qualifying male in the family. He allowed this because he assumed he would have a son, and together they would abolish the entail and allow the estate to pass much more freely through the coming generations. They of course never had a son, and so the whole book unfolds.

Usually, when Mrs. Bennett and the others mention being "poor", it really means to point to the daughters. Of course, the parents have a comfortable higher income from the estate being landed gentry.... But because of the entail on the property, all of that will go to Mr. Collins upon Mr. Bennett's death. Each girl has (what the gentry consider) a very small sum that will act as their dowry - certainly not enough to live off the interest in their current sphere. So they have to marry well if they want to have anywhere near their lifelong standard of living. The girls are fine as long as they're home and their father is alive, but looking ahead is the concern.

Mrs. Bennett's main motivation in life is to ensure that her girls marry well because the estate is going away when her husband dies, even if she is still alive! Mrs. Bennett will need a place to live as a dependent of her daughters because her own dowry sum isn't that large, but her daughters' are even a fraction of that. This is also why it's such a big deal that Lizzy refuses Mr. Collins! He put in front of them a way to keep Longbourn Estate intact and in the family. The estate provides enough money for all of them to continue living as they do when Mr. Bennett passes, and Lizzy decided not to take that sacrifice for the family because she deeply values marrying for love. Of course, it all turns out in the end, but that's why Mrs. Bennett is so adamant to remind them that they have no money of their own.

[lastchancemonicam]

I'm glad someone did this b/c I have a personal qualm with all the movies. They constantly omit something from the book- something I think is extremely important. They omit the dinners! After the first ball but before Jane gets sick, the books mention that the Bennets, Darcy, and Bingley are all invited to many different dinners together. It's at these dinners that Darcy begins to see Elizabeth in a new light and learns to start loving her.

[johntubbs]

Pride and Prejudice is actually a comedy, That's why Lizzy 's mother is so over the top and Mr Collins is such a nerd. Jane Austin was a observer of society and had many diaries. of all that she knew. Her sister burned them after Jane died to hide the sources of her stories etc. Most of her ideas came from Bath, England which was like Las Vegas in that time Her brothers estate was a inspiration of the rich folk as well. Very advanced story for Janrs era - great novel even today/

[kellywhitaker]

"the other cast really doesn't matter" lol

[maggiemay]

I enjoyed the comparisons between the book vs. the movie. The movie is full of good actors and feels current without letting us forget it is a period piece. It cannot be compared to the amazing 1995 lush production with Colin Firth and Jenifer Ehle. For one it was truer to the book and much much longer letting the viewer linger over the scenery and the everyday life details. I also felt that as lovely as Keira Nightly is, I can't imagine her as Elizabeth.

[DidSg]

Aslo miss darcy is said to have been extremely shy which contradicts her behaviour in the movie and I was shocked at how they completely omitted certain characters like mrs hurst, mr and mrs phillips

[koho]

This seems like a weird critique. So many times complaining that the movie compresses several chapters and multiple walks into a scene or two. I read the book a few times, and if the task is to compress this into 2 hours, IMO it did an admirable job. I'd take the critique more seriously if an attempt was made to suggest how the movie might have done better in particular scenes. Still, I did get a lot out of the comparison of particular scenes with what was in the book.

[nolan]

I have rarely seen a movie that exactly follows the book, this no really no different. It conveys the heart of the book and these differences don’t take away from that. The most serious of the omissions are leaving out the many times Darcy and Elizabeth cross paths, making it difficult, if you haven’t read the book, how Darcy comes to be so ardently in love with Elizabeth…he barely knows her. For those who have not read the book, these differences do not matter. I think the movie is great and I have read the book at least four times over the years. The added dialogue and condensed scenes are important to convey the story in a shorter period of time. That what movies typically do.

[kathypryor]

I enjoyed the BBC production with Colin Frith as Mr D'Arcy MUCH MORE than the 2005 Hollywood movie

[pricegrisham]

As an Austen scholar, I did not like the movie. The mini-series from 1995 is far better.

[epiphoney]

Thanks. I like this kind of video. I just love the movie at the end though, when Darcy is walking to her in the dawn, and she's giving an intense laser-like stare.

[carolmeindl]

However poor someone was at that time, there was always someone poorer and in need of support. Even a poor family could afford to hire a young girl to help in the kitchen or with the kids. It may have only been pennies for hard work but it was better than starvation

[sophiajurisch]

I love the 2005 movie. Watched it many times ❤️. It doesn't need to cover the book to the letter. Most movies are not exactly like the books since novels are many chapters long and movies are only about 2 hrs long . P&P is a strong inspiration of the book, with some minor adjustments for modern viewers. And I appreciate the additional explanation of socioeconomic status .

[ninaklein]

I really enjoyed your comparisons between the novel and the movie. I never liked that version of P & P. I said it was Jane Austen on speed, flying through events at a heartbreaking pace. Of course, nothing compares to the BBC's with Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle.

[JeanT]

English isn't my mother language but I have my final oral exam (Dutch) tomorrow and my topic is this book. Eventhough the exam isn't in English this still helped a great deal to do a school project, thanks!

[julielevinge]

They are regarded as poor because they have 5 daughters.
As women cannot inherit, then that means on Mr Bennett’s death the entire estate will go to the nearest male relation. So in comparison to the rest of that class, yes they are pretty poor.

[avalangrin]

I hate the 2005 version. The director changed plot, characters, and dialogue. These changes diminish Jane Austen’s great novel. I actually prefer the BBC 1995 version that is more faithful to the novel. 🤨

[minnauyeda]

I’ve read the book many times over, and have watched the movie several times as well. I love the score, the soaring piano and orchestral lines fantastic with the setting. The discrepancies have annoyed me, such as the lacking characters, and Mr, Collins’ description. I greatly missed the scenes of walks at the Collins’ and the entire courtship between Jayne, Bingley as well as Elizabeth and Darcy. But truthfully, I like the movie, it’s entertaining . I’ll never tire of reading Austen.

[ginafromcologne]

That was a great video and very interesting with all the details! Pride and Prejudice is surely one of the best love stories. :)
I'm not a huge fan of Keira Knightley, I like the mini series with Jennifer Ehle much better, but I liked the movie too (and mother Bennet as well as Lady Catherine are cast much better than in the series, in my view).
I think you mentioned as a reply to a comment that you haven't watched the series with Ehle and Firth yet, I'm curious how you like it. :)