User Score
8.8

Universal acclaim- based on 474 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 35 out of 474
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jun 29, 2015
    8
    I cannot believe that there are people who do not appreciate this film. It is beautiful in its own sense. The setting, characters, and plot were shown as described in the novel, though I cannot deny the fact that there are slight changes done. It is not perfect, but it is awfully wonderful. I love it no matter what.
  2. Feb 25, 2015
    10
    I see this movie as the best adaptation of Pride & Prejudice, better than the production of BBC in 1995, that don't like me nothing, with his scenes that don't excite you and his cast which is a disaster in the sense of affinity for the characters (for me, of course). The version of 2005 is the most delicate, elegant and romantic, just as the book is, with a natural charm who loves. KeiraI see this movie as the best adaptation of Pride & Prejudice, better than the production of BBC in 1995, that don't like me nothing, with his scenes that don't excite you and his cast which is a disaster in the sense of affinity for the characters (for me, of course). The version of 2005 is the most delicate, elegant and romantic, just as the book is, with a natural charm who loves. Keira and Matthew has a special sparkle, this is a cast with chemistry. Joe Wright concentrated on providing us landscapes full of beauty that delight the eye, and that help illustrate the story of love / hate of Elizabeth and Darcy, not only acting and dialogues tell the story if the effects (visual and sound) help spice. Perfect for me. Expand
  3. Jan 15, 2015
    8
    Pride & Prejudice was basically exactly what I expected, so I was very satisfied with this one when it was over. The acting from Keira Knightley, Matthew Mcfadyen, Donald Sutherland, Judi Dench, Rosamund Pike, Carey Mulligan, and Jena Malone, was very good. The costume design was brilliant and felt very time appropriate for the period it was set in. I loved some of the shots from thisPride & Prejudice was basically exactly what I expected, so I was very satisfied with this one when it was over. The acting from Keira Knightley, Matthew Mcfadyen, Donald Sutherland, Judi Dench, Rosamund Pike, Carey Mulligan, and Jena Malone, was very good. The costume design was brilliant and felt very time appropriate for the period it was set in. I loved some of the shots from this one. Really some beautiful gems that knocked me on my ass here, including one particularly ravishing shot of Knightley standing on the edge of a cliff. Great, great stuff there. On top of that, it was really well adapted from Jane Austen's novel, which I have never read, but have obviously heard quite a bit about. For a romance film, I did not find it necessarily romantic (though it certainly is), rather it works quite well as a period piece from the late 18th century, which is enough for me. Thanks to great acting, strong direction, good writing, and some really gorgeous shots, Joe Wright's Pride & Prejudice is a winner. Expand
  4. Aug 25, 2014
    8
    This delightful adaptation of a British classic never strays from charming. Direction from Joe Wright is well-matched with his muse, Keira Knightley, and a band of astounding supporting actors.
  5. Jun 7, 2013
    9
    This film really took me by surprise, not by how good it was, but by how much I liked it. This excellent film completely took me in and I absolutely loved it. With a fantastic screenplay, beautifully adapted from the famous Jane Austen novel, excellent cinematography, great music, and a stunning lead performance from Keira Knightley, you are absolutely taken into the era and fall for everyThis film really took me by surprise, not by how good it was, but by how much I liked it. This excellent film completely took me in and I absolutely loved it. With a fantastic screenplay, beautifully adapted from the famous Jane Austen novel, excellent cinematography, great music, and a stunning lead performance from Keira Knightley, you are absolutely taken into the era and fall for every bit of this powerful romance. Pride & Prejudice is an excellent film! A must see! One of the best films of 2005. I'll likely lose "man points" for this, but I'm proud to have this in my personal collection. Expand
  6. Aug 23, 2012
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This is the best adapted screenplay that i've ever seen, it even surpass the novel, i think. Keira's performance is perfect, every movement shows Elizabeth's archness and thoughtfulness. Just like Atonement, Pride & Prejudice is a typical Joe Wright's film, delicate and creative. Expand
  7. Feb 26, 2012
    10
    I loved it! It is beautifully done, great performances, and it was never dull! The art direction was outstanding and the script delightful! Darcy and Mr. Bingley are my favourites characters for they were soo real...! Keira did great as Lizzie! An amazing film! !
  8. Feb 20, 2012
    10
    A great Reader's Digest version of the classic tale. The cinematography is astoundingly beautiful. The cast is great, especially Knightly, who in my opinion really captures the character of Elisabeth Bennett. So good.
  9. Jul 4, 2011
    10
    Read the book and saw the movie and I must admit is a pretty good adaptation. Keira Knightley is stunning, the rest of the cast is also really good.
  10. May 29, 2011
    8
    One of the most beautiful movies i've ever seen so far, it excites me to think like formerly life was very simple, without the easiness of technology like nowadays, the honor and morals prevailed even on the difficulties of the time.A handsome movie that indeed accosts a story acording to the title, very good sound track and a amazing self-story. I only thought that missed something at theOne of the most beautiful movies i've ever seen so far, it excites me to think like formerly life was very simple, without the easiness of technology like nowadays, the honor and morals prevailed even on the difficulties of the time.A handsome movie that indeed accosts a story acording to the title, very good sound track and a amazing self-story. I only thought that missed something at the end, but i loved the all movie. Expand
  11. Sep 10, 2010
    9
    Fresh, engaging and beautiful. A period piece as it ought to be: it transports you to a different age and makes the character feel real, "six inches deep in mud."
  12. LunaL.
    Feb 16, 2010
    2
    2 points given for the great visual beauty of the film, and the obvious care taken by the director in composing the shots, as well as the visual artists in designing the sets. 8 points taken away for turning the Bennets and their home into a muddy wreck; casting such young-looking younger Bennet sisters that I was very uncomfortable during the scenes when Lydia returns after marrying 2 points given for the great visual beauty of the film, and the obvious care taken by the director in composing the shots, as well as the visual artists in designing the sets. 8 points taken away for turning the Bennets and their home into a muddy wreck; casting such young-looking younger Bennet sisters that I was very uncomfortable during the scenes when Lydia returns after marrying Wickham; turning Mr. Darcy into a puppy dog and Mr. Bingley into a dolt; wasting Judi Dench on the role of Lady Catherine; making me feel sorry for Mr. Collins; and the several times I was completely brought out of the world of Pride and Prejudice because I could clearly see Keira Knightley's short hair jutting out from under the bottom of her wig! Expand
  13. NicoleL.
    Jul 15, 2009
    10
    I've watched this movies for countless times. It's perfect.
  14. Nouki
    Jun 8, 2009
    10
    I think it was absolutely fantastic.I read the book years ago and also seen the adaptations and this one has totally enchanted me. I know that the one from 1995 is more a book like version, but I certainly like this one better and to think the time they took to make such a great accomplishment. Knightley and Macfadyen did a perfect job leading it and the rest of the cast did a astounding I think it was absolutely fantastic.I read the book years ago and also seen the adaptations and this one has totally enchanted me. I know that the one from 1995 is more a book like version, but I certainly like this one better and to think the time they took to make such a great accomplishment. Knightley and Macfadyen did a perfect job leading it and the rest of the cast did a astounding job as well! Though I must say I like the US ending! Soo romantic!. I laughed,cried and regained hope with this movie! Congratulations! Expand
  15. JoJoBeans
    Mar 25, 2009
    1
    Didn't like it, didn't like it, didn't like it. No one else holds a candle to an Andrew Davies adaptation.
  16. LizzyB
    Mar 16, 2009
    1
    This adaptation only deals for entertaining the viewer, but misquots Jane Austen's brilliant novel. The best adaptation I've seen was the BBC-version of 1995. The characters are very true to the original, just like all the dialogues and properties.
  17. MegD
    Mar 2, 2009
    10
    As faithful as a movie can be to a book, the conversations were very true to the novel and as much fit in as possible. Keira did a fantastic job as did Macfadyen. The subtleties of his affections for Lizzy are perfect. Gorgeous cinematography. I've never loved a movie more.
  18. JaneA.
    Jan 25, 2009
    4
    If you want to see a brilliant adaptation of this book, watch the BBC version. It has an unparalleled cast where Elizabeth and her father are actually witty, Mr. Dary actually comes off as arrogant, and Mrs. Bennet is actually the obnoxious woman Austen intended her to be. Unfortunately this film, though of course not able to touch on everything the five hour BBC version or three volume If you want to see a brilliant adaptation of this book, watch the BBC version. It has an unparalleled cast where Elizabeth and her father are actually witty, Mr. Dary actually comes off as arrogant, and Mrs. Bennet is actually the obnoxious woman Austen intended her to be. Unfortunately this film, though of course not able to touch on everything the five hour BBC version or three volume novel encompassed, hardly reflected one theme. Austen titled her book Pride and Prejudice, yet the movie failed to even include Mary's insight on the difference between pride and vanity, or Elizabeth's self-realization at the vanity that caused her own prejudice against Mr. Darcy. This was nothing more than a shortened plot summary of a novel that deserves so much more and should not have been made if it could not have painted a more beautiful character portrayal of Lizzy and society than the BBC series--most definitely not worthy of Academy recognition. Expand
  19. DrewLumpkin
    Nov 23, 2008
    10
    Keira Knightley was absolutely brilliant.
  20. GabiPardal
    Nov 21, 2008
    10
    What a amazing novel and movie!! Great message in so many ways, very positive and comfortable. The soundtrack are just great! The "universal acclaim" is fair.
  21. AlanT.
    Oct 24, 2008
    0
    A film that has been thought in terms of ingredients : how much grinning or greenery should be put into into it to do the trick. Utterly artificial and boring.Elisabeth constant knowing smirk is unbereable and her diction is abominable.
  22. KassieB.
    Oct 9, 2008
    10
    I think this is one of my favorite movies of all time. The cinematography is brilliant and the casting is spot on. I think Kiera Knightley is the perfect Elizabeth Bennett and Matthew Macfadyen is soo dreamy as Darcy. I also think the sound track is absolutely amazing. Basically I just love everything about this movie.
  23. EmmyS.
    Mar 30, 2008
    2
    I much preferred the version made in 1995. I understand some prefer a shorter version, but I do not like the way they shortened it. I also think Keira Knightley was a terrible pick for Elizabeth, she totally missed it. She made Elizabeth much too snobby and irritating. I also thought the way she revealled her letter from Jane about Lydia was so stupid. They also seemed to be running I much preferred the version made in 1995. I understand some prefer a shorter version, but I do not like the way they shortened it. I also think Keira Knightley was a terrible pick for Elizabeth, she totally missed it. She made Elizabeth much too snobby and irritating. I also thought the way she revealled her letter from Jane about Lydia was so stupid. They also seemed to be running everywhere. I did like some of the cast. But when there has been two very wonderful versiongs to Pride and Prejudice, if you can't make a version that at least competes with the other two than don't make one at all. I think the only reason there was anyone that liked it was because they either had never seen the previous films or they love Keira, although I personnally find her very annoying and the only thing I really liked her in was Pirates. But it is only my opinion. Expand
  24. CarissaB.
    Mar 8, 2008
    1
    This movie could have been so much worse, but it could have been so much better (and is in the BBC version). For thos of you (which amazinly is a lot) obviously the storyline is good (right thats why its a classic). I'm grading this movie based on the acting and casting and scenery and costuming. One aspect of this movie that drove me wild was how fast the charcters talked. For those This movie could have been so much worse, but it could have been so much better (and is in the BBC version). For thos of you (which amazinly is a lot) obviously the storyline is good (right thats why its a classic). I'm grading this movie based on the acting and casting and scenery and costuming. One aspect of this movie that drove me wild was how fast the charcters talked. For those of you with high rating could you really understand half the stuff Elizabeth said?? Another part that was disapointing was the lack of color in the movie. Granted the Bennets are poor when compared to the extremem wealth of Bingley and Darcy but they aren't street rats they own an estate and therefore are much wealther than they are portrayed. Overall those of you that really liked this movie read the book, and watch the BBC version (which is just like the book almost word for word and so well done), and experience what Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice can be. Expand
  25. hw
    Dec 13, 2007
    9
    Loved it until the end. That ending scene! Yes, it needed a Kiss, but did it have to be done in that over-the-top way? The dialogue did not fit with Jane Austen's writing & the way that characters express themselves generally. There must have been a better way to do that ending...
  26. NicoleL
    Oct 2, 2007
    10
    Brilliant and relatively faithful rendition of one of Jane Austen's most popular titles, not to mention a most endearing soundtrack. Knightely's and Macfayden's portrayal of Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy respectively are most memorable and moving.
  27. MartinJ.
    Sep 21, 2007
    8
    The U.S. ending is just awful - I liked much more the European one.
  28. JaciS.
    Sep 4, 2007
    10
    I love this movie so much, whenever I'm in a bad mood i put this movie on and it makes me feel better. its got amazing plots and the acting is flawless. i love it.
  29. DoreyaS.
    Aug 22, 2007
    10
    I loved this version better than the old version.I say that Keira Knightly was the best choice for Elizabeth.I wish everyone that stared in this movie,including the producer and director, a best, happy,and loving career.Oh! Keira Knightly don't worry about the people that don't like you because you was the best person for Elizabeth.
  30. LisaS.
    Jul 25, 2007
    1
    Romance yes, but to make it more suitable for modern audiences the main themes are diluted or lost.
  31. JennH.
    May 21, 2007
    2
    Keira Knightly is possibly the worst choice for Elizabeth. Most of the characters do not come close to achieving their purpose as in the BBC version. To a person who didn't know the story they would be lost as many key moments have simply been left out or rushed along. The ending was completely unsatisfying and left me confused as to the point of the last scene as it seemed nothing Keira Knightly is possibly the worst choice for Elizabeth. Most of the characters do not come close to achieving their purpose as in the BBC version. To a person who didn't know the story they would be lost as many key moments have simply been left out or rushed along. The ending was completely unsatisfying and left me confused as to the point of the last scene as it seemed nothing more than a sappy bit of drivel. Perhaps the only good to come out of this movie is the discovery of Matthew as Darcy and even he is sorely underused int he film. And amazingly under the circumstances and the poor excuse of a love interest in this film manages to give a moving performance. And all that's left is to thank God Austen will never see this catastrophe that I'm sure she would have sincerely regretted having inspired. Expand
  32. EileenW.
    May 18, 2007
    10
    I absolutely love this version. It is very romantic. I own a copy and rewatch it frequently. Everyone was great and music and editing top-notch.
  33. NatalieL.
    Jan 29, 2007
    10
    Director Joe Wright is one to watch! The cinematography was grand yet not afraid to get down into the dirt; this movie truly deserved its Best Picture nomination. Magnificently sweeping, I fell in love with the English countryside. I was heartbroken to see it end despite its two hours. This movie hardly deserves the red-level ratings other reviewers gave it. I hate to think that all the Director Joe Wright is one to watch! The cinematography was grand yet not afraid to get down into the dirt; this movie truly deserved its Best Picture nomination. Magnificently sweeping, I fell in love with the English countryside. I was heartbroken to see it end despite its two hours. This movie hardly deserves the red-level ratings other reviewers gave it. I hate to think that all the women who rated this curiously low did so because they felt personally threatened by Keira Knightley. Expand
  34. MikeC.
    Jan 15, 2007
    10
    This is one of the best romantic movies ever made. Completely enchanting.
  35. GlyssaV.
    Jan 11, 2007
    10
    For most fans of the 1995 BBC production of the novel with Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle, a 2005 feature adaptation (the first in 65 years) was considered mutinous, and many doomed it for a clumsy failure when Keira Knightley and Matthew MacFadyen were cast to respectively play the tall-order roles of Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy. However, the refreshing cast is genius from top to For most fans of the 1995 BBC production of the novel with Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle, a 2005 feature adaptation (the first in 65 years) was considered mutinous, and many doomed it for a clumsy failure when Keira Knightley and Matthew MacFadyen were cast to respectively play the tall-order roles of Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy. However, the refreshing cast is genius from top to bottom, Knightley and MacFadyen highly underestimated and perfect with each other, with director Joe Wright making a spectacular onscreen debut. Expand
  36. GailK.
    Dec 19, 2006
    10
    Pride & Prejudice never made it to the local theaters in my home town, so I had to wait for the DVD. This is without a doubt one of the best movies I have ever seen, and even with seeing it over and over, the pleasure doesn't pale with repetition.
  37. PatrickD
    Dec 13, 2006
    7
    I enjoyed this film with the cinematography being the major highlight. My problem with most period pieces adapted from novels is that usually fims are rather stuffy and drawn out. Here the plot moves fairly quickly and makes it entertaining for some with me included. It is evident that Keira Knightley is very comely, but cannot carry a movie by herself. I would recommend this movie toI enjoyed this film with the cinematography being the major highlight. My problem with most period pieces adapted from novels is that usually fims are rather stuffy and drawn out. Here the plot moves fairly quickly and makes it entertaining for some with me included. It is evident that Keira Knightley is very comely, but cannot carry a movie by herself. I would recommend this movie to anyone wanting to see a deftly shot film with quicki pacing. One more note I watched the American version which is worth mentioning because it adds a happier ending. Expand
  38. SueJ.
    Dec 6, 2006
    10
    This movie is amazing! It is a perfect summary of the novel.
  39. YvetteG.
    Nov 29, 2006
    1
    I absolutely agree with Alice M (who gave it a 2)! Keira Knightly could not play Lizzy's witty and intelligent character and the expressions seemed to be recited rather than naturally out of Lizzy. Keira could not reflect any of the strong and intelligent character through her eyes. Her eyes lack any intelligence or vividness. The BBC Series of 1995 is at least 100 times better, with I absolutely agree with Alice M (who gave it a 2)! Keira Knightly could not play Lizzy's witty and intelligent character and the expressions seemed to be recited rather than naturally out of Lizzy. Keira could not reflect any of the strong and intelligent character through her eyes. Her eyes lack any intelligence or vividness. The BBC Series of 1995 is at least 100 times better, with Lizzy's eyes speaking her character. I do not think justice is done to Jane Austin or Elizabeth Bennet. Mr Darcy was so so ordinary in the film and it ruined the legacy of him. The mere attempt at making another "pride a prejudice" is beyond comprehension and should not be encouraged lightly. Expand
  40. KristinaD
    Nov 24, 2006
    9
    I will always prefer the 6 hour BBC version with Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle but this version was beautifully done and well acted. Definitly deserves acclaim!
  41. CoriL.
    Nov 9, 2006
    10
    I couldn't take my eyes from the screen, when I read the book I have my own idea's on what it would be like, and I am pleased to say that the movie delivered just that. Kiera Knightley did amazing and Matthew MacFadyen was just as I imagined Mr. Darcy to be. I watched over about three times before taking a break, it nice to finally have a good romance to watch again.
  42. SusanB
    Oct 24, 2006
    10
    KK was by far the best Lizzy I have seen. I loved the way MM played Mr. Darcy. I loved Colin Firth's, but I dare say MM's was better. I thought the mini series to be a bit dragged out. I will watch this version again and again!
  43. RebekahW.
    Aug 18, 2006
    8
    i thought this was a very good film and that Kiera Knightleys performance was absolutly brilliant, you could not have cast a better Lizzie. I must however say that i was disapponted at best with Mttherw MacFadyen's attempts at the character of Mr. Darcy. All in all however a good film which i have no shame in saying i have watched numerous times!
  44. MariaV.
    Jul 28, 2006
    10
    I have watched this twice in theaters and then again when I bought the DVD. It's really a film that I will not hesitate to watch again.
  45. AliceM.
    Jul 27, 2006
    2
    A really poor adaptation of Jane Austen's brilliance. Keira Knightly looks out of place in Austen's world, and her acting in the role was poor. [***SPOILERS***] The Bennet's are not hugely rich but they are not as poor as this film makes them out to be. Elizabeth should certainly not be dressed in near-rags. Darcy was ok at best. Really, there is no comparasion betwee this A really poor adaptation of Jane Austen's brilliance. Keira Knightly looks out of place in Austen's world, and her acting in the role was poor. [***SPOILERS***] The Bennet's are not hugely rich but they are not as poor as this film makes them out to be. Elizabeth should certainly not be dressed in near-rags. Darcy was ok at best. Really, there is no comparasion betwee this and the 1995 BBC version. No comparasion at all. I own the BBC version, I will not be owning this one. Ifyou were to see this movie before reading the book you would be doing it a great injustice. No proper feeling of the time it was set and far too much time listening to Lizzys stupid giggling (since when did Lizzy giggle?) and close-ups of her face purely to show us how pretty she is. *yawn* boring. Go see the BBC version and stay away from this Hollywood/American rubbish. Expand
  46. AnastasiaP.
    Jul 24, 2006
    10
    It is an excellent movie! As far as I am concernd, I believe that the last version of Pride and Prejudice is the best! I could say that it is the most interesting movie that I have ever seen! Congratulations! You offered us a movie which is special because it has something that the movies in our era has not, it has quality!
  47. Dave
    Jul 5, 2006
    10
    It seems that all the people that have read the book hate the movie. Remember, this is a movie not a miniseries. I loved the movie because they didn't follow the book. They condensed and modified the story to fit into a movie format. The acting was superb and the sceenplay exceelent as well.
  48. KathyC.
    Jun 29, 2006
    10
    I absolutely love this movie. I have watched the DVD several times and think Keira Knightley and Matthew Macfadyen are perfect together. I especially liked Matthew's performance because his face shows such yearning for Lizzie. I have also watched the 1995 Colin Firth miniseries and feel the 2005 movie has so much more life and romance. Joe Wright's direction put the emphasis I absolutely love this movie. I have watched the DVD several times and think Keira Knightley and Matthew Macfadyen are perfect together. I especially liked Matthew's performance because his face shows such yearning for Lizzie. I have also watched the 1995 Colin Firth miniseries and feel the 2005 movie has so much more life and romance. Joe Wright's direction put the emphasis where it should be - on the relationship between Lizzie and Darcy. The camera work and cinematography was stunning and really showcased the energy of the balls and the emotions of the characters. Expand
  49. Nancy
    May 26, 2006
    1
    This movie made me want to vomit in my mouth. The praise and accolades it received from critics and viewers made me lose all faith in people (except those few who are TRUE Jane Austen fans and have seen the 1995 BBC version). Terrible casting, terrible acting, terrible adaptation. Just plain terrible.
  50. SammyP.
    May 25, 2006
    3
    Nothing compared to the book or the mini seies. Keira Knightly is completely out of place in austens world, and the beautiful story is completely lost amongst rushed dialog and poor acting.
  51. EllenL
    May 14, 2006
    10
    I think that this moving interpretation of the novel is brilliant. Though of course this is different from the BBC adaptionof 95, i do not think that the differences detract from its quality. When i see a couple falling in love throughout a movie, even if they do not see it themselves yet, I have to be able to FEEL the chemistry between the characters. In this adaption the chemistry I think that this moving interpretation of the novel is brilliant. Though of course this is different from the BBC adaptionof 95, i do not think that the differences detract from its quality. When i see a couple falling in love throughout a movie, even if they do not see it themselves yet, I have to be able to FEEL the chemistry between the characters. In this adaption the chemistry literally oozes off the screen. I felt their passion, i felt Lizzy and Darcy's pain. Matthew Macfadyen makes a magnificent Darcy, and his interpretation of the character made me fall in love with him also. Though his faults were evident, his love and passion for Lizzy was even more so. You could see his character evolve on screen, surface and flourish in his love for Lizzy. And because of Kira Knightley's fresh, youthful and witty perfomance you could understand why his character would do so. Altogether a magnificant film. Expand
  52. KimbaW.
    May 12, 2006
    1
    Despite being a huge Jane Austen fan, I found this version pathetic. I wanted to like it. I really did. However, not only is Kiera Knightly anything but an Elizabeth Bennett with her incessant giggling, Matthew MacFadyen's Darcy comes across as nothing but angry. The costuming is dreadful (this is the era of the empire waistline...so why then are none of the ladies' dresses made Despite being a huge Jane Austen fan, I found this version pathetic. I wanted to like it. I really did. However, not only is Kiera Knightly anything but an Elizabeth Bennett with her incessant giggling, Matthew MacFadyen's Darcy comes across as nothing but angry. The costuming is dreadful (this is the era of the empire waistline...so why then are none of the ladies' dresses made that way?), no one (apparently) even considered brushing anyone's hair (people did not run around looking disheveled), and the Bennetts, while certainly not the upper crust, were not poor & nearly destitute as this version seems to portray them. Don't waste your time. Expand
  53. AdamF
    May 1, 2006
    10
    Phenomenal.
  54. K
    Apr 28, 2006
    10
    I love this movie. I have become obsessed with it. I dont know why but Kiera Knightley just entralls me in this movie and makes me feel like I am in it. I did not read the book until after I saw it and I think the movie did the book justice.
  55. DanCisek
    Apr 17, 2006
    3
    Not a bad movie per se, but a truly terrible adaption of Jane Austen's rich and nuanced novel. It pales in comparison not only to the book itself, but to the magnificent 1995 BBC production (rent that instead). Of course, a two-hour film cannot accomplish the same thing as a five-hour mini-series. The filmmaker must make difficult choices about what to cut and condense. But in thisNot a bad movie per se, but a truly terrible adaption of Jane Austen's rich and nuanced novel. It pales in comparison not only to the book itself, but to the magnificent 1995 BBC production (rent that instead). Of course, a two-hour film cannot accomplish the same thing as a five-hour mini-series. The filmmaker must make difficult choices about what to cut and condense. But in this case, almost all of the choices are bad, occasionally to the point of incoherence (example: Elizabeth to Darcy during the dancing scene: "I am trying to make out your character. I hear such contradictory accounts of you, I cannot make it out at all." Unfortunately, the film does not include the key scene from the novel in which Elizabeth receives that contradictory information! WIthout it, her statement is completely inane.) The role of Darcy is badly cast. The film is forced to move so quickly that there is little sense Elizabeth's growing realization of the change in both Darcy's behavior and his formerly haughty manner. The encounters between Elizabeth and Darcy are all wrong in the second half of the film. Nowhere is the sense of tension and uncertainty that makes the novel so compelling. All in all, I was horribly disappointed by this film. Some who have never read Jane Austen or seen the BBC adaptation may enjoy it, but they are missing out on the real love story between Elizabeth and Darcy, which is one of the greatest romances ever written in the English language. Expand
  56. Monagh
    Apr 7, 2006
    9
    I think Keira was not the only powerfull player(what if nobody can ignore her talent)who made the movie lovely and romantic....,Except Sutherland & Dench as somehow supporters,it seems most of the people has forgotten about MacFadyen,he has done his best too;after reading articles and watching interviews i just thought he is not clearly noticed as Keira Knightley,what if i'm not his I think Keira was not the only powerfull player(what if nobody can ignore her talent)who made the movie lovely and romantic....,Except Sutherland & Dench as somehow supporters,it seems most of the people has forgotten about MacFadyen,he has done his best too;after reading articles and watching interviews i just thought he is not clearly noticed as Keira Knightley,what if i'm not his fan i think it is not fair,he deserves more....to be mentioned.....Don't u think so? Expand
  57. SusanJ.
    Apr 7, 2006
    10
    This wonderful movie, gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling. With all the violence going on in the world today, this movie brings peace and enjoyment.
  58. SaraR.
    Mar 26, 2006
    9
    I loved this movie but give it a 9 rather than a 10 because I love the book too, and it did take some outrageous liberties with the book. If I was Jane Austen, I would be hammering on my coffin lid in fury at the omission of Mrs. Hurst, and some of the priceless exchanges between Mr. Darcy and Caroline Bingley about Lizzy's "Fine eyes" and what a wonderful mother-in-law Darcy would I loved this movie but give it a 9 rather than a 10 because I love the book too, and it did take some outrageous liberties with the book. If I was Jane Austen, I would be hammering on my coffin lid in fury at the omission of Mrs. Hurst, and some of the priceless exchanges between Mr. Darcy and Caroline Bingley about Lizzy's "Fine eyes" and what a wonderful mother-in-law Darcy would end up having. And of course now I have the DVD, I have seen the USA ending and agree that the script of that is diabolical. Barbara Cartland could have written a better version. There was a beautiful ready-made conversation in the book, about how Darcy fell in love with Lizzy, which would have been better and the kisses still added... ....Having said that - this movie was beautiful visually, the music was superb and Matthew Macfadyen is the best Mr. Darcy I have seen of the three versions of Pride & Prejudice I have watched. He gave an exquisitely layered, sensitive pperformance, melting the proud Darcy into Darcy the lover by exciting degrees until you just have to fall for him as Lizzy does. Kiera Knightley was surprisingly good as Lizzy and Tom Hollander was a hilarious Mr. Collins. Judy Dench was as magnificent as she was frightening, as Lady Catherine de Bourgh. Watch this movie with an open mind and you'll love it as much as I did. Expand
  59. ElizabethP.
    Mar 23, 2006
    7
    Cute, fun and pretty (a lot like Keira Knightley herself). For the real thing, properly acted and paced, see the 1995 TV series with Jennifer Ehle and Colin Firth. Elizabeth Bennett should be calm and reserved, not PERKY, the mother should be shrill, the father should have more to say. And Colin Firth is just, well, Colin Firth.
  60. V.Miller
    Mar 10, 2006
    1
    The movie doesn't compare with the BBC Version. This movie was boring, slow-paced as well as poorly acted by Keira Knightly. The younger sisters acted better than she did. The music was dull. Overall, the movie isn't worth watching.
  61. EllenM.
    Mar 6, 2006
    7
    A solid Calssic Comics version with much detail and many characters trimmed and scnese moved to more dramatic and less-domestic settings (e.g. the Rosings temple folly in the rain confrontation). Pemberly, too, is inflated beyond belief. However, well-acted, moving and with many period charms. The best version is still the BBC TV serial--6 one-hour episodes (minus commericals it's 4 A solid Calssic Comics version with much detail and many characters trimmed and scnese moved to more dramatic and less-domestic settings (e.g. the Rosings temple folly in the rain confrontation). Pemberly, too, is inflated beyond belief. However, well-acted, moving and with many period charms. The best version is still the BBC TV serial--6 one-hour episodes (minus commericals it's 4 hours on screen!), but this one got me into the book and the other versions. Expand
  62. JenW.
    Mar 4, 2006
    6
    It was good for what it was a hopped up hollywood version of a beautful classic. knightly was what made it good but no one could beat jennifer and colin in the 1995 version. it must be hard for the actors to know that their movie will never ever come close to the a&e production the plot was undeveloped and the costumes were drab. ball gowns were supposed to be beautiful and flattering notIt was good for what it was a hopped up hollywood version of a beautful classic. knightly was what made it good but no one could beat jennifer and colin in the 1995 version. it must be hard for the actors to know that their movie will never ever come close to the a&e production the plot was undeveloped and the costumes were drab. ball gowns were supposed to be beautiful and flattering not pinched and dull. the lack of colour and taste was disappointing. the novel described the estate(longbourn) to be that an estate not a cottrey cottage. the countrside however was brilkiant. althought the a&e production had a good ending although it wasnt romantic the kiss scene made it worthwhile mr darcy was written for colin firth i think he plays it brilliantly but then again they dont make them like that anywhere else but England do they? Expand
  63. SamB.
    Mar 3, 2006
    10
    A masterpiece. The most charming movie of the year, and Keira(whom I usually dislike) swept me off my feet. I'm rooting for her on Sunday even though I know she doesnt have a prayer.
  64. HollyN.
    Mar 2, 2006
    10
    One of the greatest movies ever made!!!!
  65. Tim
    Feb 28, 2006
    9
    Watching it the first time through I was blown away by the speed of the story and could hardly catch my breath as I tried to follow along with the story as I know it. But after the initial rush and my second viewing I was impressed and moved and inspired by the richness of the production and especially the lovely Keira. Some very wonderful performances and worth watching. The definitive Watching it the first time through I was blown away by the speed of the story and could hardly catch my breath as I tried to follow along with the story as I know it. But after the initial rush and my second viewing I was impressed and moved and inspired by the richness of the production and especially the lovely Keira. Some very wonderful performances and worth watching. The definitive Pride & Prejudice when you want a quick fix of Austen. Expand
  66. HayleyS.
    Feb 22, 2006
    9
    Very good but not as good as the old film. Because nothing can best that one.
  67. IstvanB.
    Feb 7, 2006
    2
    This doesn't even come close to the BBC series' quality. Jane Austen's spirit is not present, the thing is unwitty and illustrative. Ewen worse, it's conceived in an eye-pokingly populist manner. The proper costumes of the period were changed from classisict to romantic for a 'better' look, and the story itself was relieved of Austen's socialThis doesn't even come close to the BBC series' quality. Jane Austen's spirit is not present, the thing is unwitty and illustrative. Ewen worse, it's conceived in an eye-pokingly populist manner. The proper costumes of the period were changed from classisict to romantic for a 'better' look, and the story itself was relieved of Austen's social observations, and warped into something imponderous like a short story in a woman's magazine. Through the film I could only think of the 'creative' team behind, brain-storming about how to make just about every aspect and detail 'consumable'. Too bad that so many reviews proved to be unreliable for me. Expand
  68. Steve
    Feb 4, 2006
    4
    The British Heritage industry strikes again. Lovely and insubstantial, just like Keira Knightley. No wonder she's up for an Oscar.
  69. NikkiD.
    Feb 1, 2006
    10
    This movie was completly amazing! Kiera Knightley was stunning and Matthew MacFadyen superb! It is by far, as some are saying, the best movie of the year!! I saw it three times and each time it just gets better. You will fall in love with Elizabeth Bennet's beautiful, strong, daring personality and the mysterious hearthrob, Mr Darcy, who shows his true colors as the movie builds and This movie was completly amazing! Kiera Knightley was stunning and Matthew MacFadyen superb! It is by far, as some are saying, the best movie of the year!! I saw it three times and each time it just gets better. You will fall in love with Elizabeth Bennet's beautiful, strong, daring personality and the mysterious hearthrob, Mr Darcy, who shows his true colors as the movie builds and develops into a heartwarming, funny, engrossing tale of romance. The worst part of it all was that it had to end! Expand
  70. Kharma
    Jan 30, 2006
    0
    Nothing compared to the BBC series, you dont know wether to laugh or cry....do yourself a favor and read the book again... just skip this movie.
  71. MelissaM.
    Jan 27, 2006
    10
    this was by far the best movie ive seen all year and i would recomend it to my friends and watch it myself over and over agian.
  72. BruceM.
    Jan 26, 2006
    9
    An extraordinary telling of a remarkable love story. Only the first few minutes were OTT.
  73. GerronK
    Jan 26, 2006
    10
    Excellent!
  74. JuliaL.
    Jan 25, 2006
    4
    the worst part about this movie was that it could have been so much better. it suffered terribly from lack of proper editing. certain scenes took far too long (i had time to get the point ... wonder if i got the point ... then realize, oh, yes, i got it! .... several times...); other scenes showed baffling period choices that just seemed silly.
  75. AnonymousMC
    Jan 24, 2006
    9
    It's ashame the award groupies are not giving this superbly excellent film more noms. Cinematography, adaptation, direction and acting is completely on the mark. This one will be in my collection. I went twice to see it as well...as much as I try not to like Kiera Knightley...it can't be done.
  76. IsabelF.
    Jan 22, 2006
    7
    Although I rather prefer the BBC series, I was quite 'flabbergasted' with the movie.
  77. NathalieB.
    Jan 21, 2006
    10
    Great movie, loved it so much i saw it a second time. :)
  78. JarrettF.
    Jan 20, 2006
    8
    I would say that I walked away from this movie satisfied, pleased with the gentle pull and outcome of the storyline. I was certainly left with a thorough feeling of happiness. Addressing the negative reviews of Kiera Knightley, I will say that she was somewhat lacking in the vulnerability department for her character. However, for me, her smile, her knowing look, her wit, all essentially I would say that I walked away from this movie satisfied, pleased with the gentle pull and outcome of the storyline. I was certainly left with a thorough feeling of happiness. Addressing the negative reviews of Kiera Knightley, I will say that she was somewhat lacking in the vulnerability department for her character. However, for me, her smile, her knowing look, her wit, all essentially made the movie for me. I was entranced by her, and sense a rather clear sense of jealousy by those who spurned her. Young as she is, she is outstanding in her character work and diversity, brilliantly able to tackle strong female roles, and even a certain piece of my heart. Expand
  79. DWilly
    Jan 20, 2006
    3
    Oh, my God, this is an overrated movie. It's really pretty awful. Like those tone deaf singers on Star Search, it just flails about for effect; and, judging from the critical numbers, this is successful with most critics who likewise are out of touch with their humanity; and, for them, if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck they can't tell it feels like plastic. It's Oh, my God, this is an overrated movie. It's really pretty awful. Like those tone deaf singers on Star Search, it just flails about for effect; and, judging from the critical numbers, this is successful with most critics who likewise are out of touch with their humanity; and, for them, if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck they can't tell it feels like plastic. It's especially galling in that it comes from that new, British snobbery that thinks it's real earthy, but actually isolates the hip from the hopelessly unhip, as they move among ciphers (i.e. servants) who don't count as people at all. This movie about class has no class. Expand
  80. ChristinaJ.
    Jan 18, 2006
    2
    A complete disappointment for any Jane Austen fan, or anyone looking for a good period story or romance. I am baffled by the positive reviews that Kiera Knightley received from some critics. She is the worst part of the film (which is saying something, as it is all horrifying). She looks like an emaciated runway model, not like Austen's Lizzie Bennett, who is supposed to be a bold, A complete disappointment for any Jane Austen fan, or anyone looking for a good period story or romance. I am baffled by the positive reviews that Kiera Knightley received from some critics. She is the worst part of the film (which is saying something, as it is all horrifying). She looks like an emaciated runway model, not like Austen's Lizzie Bennett, who is supposed to be a bold, bookish tomboy. Knightley could not carry any picture, much less one as clever and nuanced as this story should be. There are many shots in the film that seem to be there only to show the beauty of her face. Okay, the first time you think, "Wow, she really has a beautiful face." But by the 10th time it seems like a never-ending Revlon mascara advertisement--and is about as exciting. For the last hour, the film felt like it was never going to be over. And the last 20 minutes were positively excruciating. We actually laughed out loud in parts. Oh, and Darcy? Who is this actor, and why, why did they cast him in this role? I have never seen an actor in an Austen adaptation with so little charisma. Give me Jeremy Northam in Emma or Colin Firth in the far superior BBC adaptation of P&P. In fact, I swear, the first thing I did when I got home was put in the BBC version in an attempt to erase this one from my mind. I don't think I can ever watch another film with Knightley in more than a supporting role--that toothy grin and that giggle she used to replace any real emotion have prejudiced me against her forever! Expand
  81. Dotty
    Jan 10, 2006
    10
    Everything is perfect.
  82. ElizabethK
    Jan 6, 2006
    10
    Fantastic. Beautiful in every aspect, minus perhaps the immature acting of Jena Malone. Sountrack is gorgeous, costumes are simply divine and authentic, acting is superb, just a perfect package. Kept me smiling all throughout the movie. Knightly does fantastically in this film.
  83. Christina
    Jan 6, 2006
    10
    Utterly fantastic! Keira played the role of Lizzie excellantly, completely capturing her free-spirited nature and runaway tongue! Darcy was absolutely SMOULDERING! with the right touch of gentlemanliness about him and the connection between the two...OOOH...!!!
  84. ritaj,
    Jan 5, 2006
    10
    Kira Knightly is wonderful in this film. She graces the screen like I have never seen any actress do before. You must see this movie! It is wonderful.
  85. richardb.
    Jan 2, 2006
    8
    Quite exquisite. Best Art Direction & Costumes used in a modest naturalistic way. Wonderful moments of surreal subjectivity. Mr Darcy & Ms Knightly wonderfully morose & captivating, as suits each. Great, but you are constantly thinking of Bridget Jones and Bride & Prejudice and all the other versions of the tale.
  86. JDRally
    Jan 1, 2006
    1
    I have been so excited to see this movie and I was utterly appalled by it. Lizzy is played like schoolyard brat who, judging by wardrobe and stature, looks as though she just escaped from a concentration camp. Darcy has the acting skills of a box of hair. Donald Sutherland's portrayal of Mr. Bennett was completely without wit and he sounded, and looked, rather like a wounded hound I have been so excited to see this movie and I was utterly appalled by it. Lizzy is played like schoolyard brat who, judging by wardrobe and stature, looks as though she just escaped from a concentration camp. Darcy has the acting skills of a box of hair. Donald Sutherland's portrayal of Mr. Bennett was completely without wit and he sounded, and looked, rather like a wounded hound dog throughout. All of the supporting characters where totally bizarre. And the giggling... at one point I quite wondered if Knightly's choice was to play Lizzy as though she suffered from Tourets Syndrome. If you haven't, see the BBC version as soon as possible. Expand
  87. RhettW.
    Dec 28, 2005
    7
    Kiera Knightly is this generation's Audrey Hepburn. I admired movie more than enjoyed it.
  88. GretchenG.
    Dec 27, 2005
    9
    Would have been a 10 but for the stupid ending apparently tacked on for Americans.
  89. russl.
    Dec 15, 2005
    7
    In a competitive field this production lacks the qualities that made the 1995 production with Jennefer Ehle and Colin Firth so remarkable. Darcy is unappealing; the camera lingers so long on Keira Knightley that it begins to look feel more like a promotional vehicle than a film, and the atmosphere of Austen, writing about 18th century morals and manners, can't survive the hectic In a competitive field this production lacks the qualities that made the 1995 production with Jennefer Ehle and Colin Firth so remarkable. Darcy is unappealing; the camera lingers so long on Keira Knightley that it begins to look feel more like a promotional vehicle than a film, and the atmosphere of Austen, writing about 18th century morals and manners, can't survive the hectic pace, noticeable immediately during the first ball where the music is reminiscent of the New York Philharmonic strutting its stuff rather than a small eighteenth century orchestra recruited for a country ball. In this production the book is a excuse to mount an extravagant Hollywood romance. If that suits your taste, you'll probably enjoy it. If you're more interested in these interesting characters and the class complexties of 200 years ago, you'll probably feel shortchanged. Expand
  90. LucyP.
    Dec 15, 2005
    10
    Obsessively addictive! Can't seem to get MacFayden's beauteous eyes out of my consciousness.
  91. TiffanyY.
    Dec 8, 2005
    10
    Wonderful! Romantic and funny... a great combination.
  92. Laura
    Dec 8, 2005
    5
    My expectations were probably too high when I went to go see this (after all, the 1995 version was so superbly done). I was pleasantly surprised by Keira Knightly's performance, although she seemed a little rougher than Elizabeth Bennet should have been. It was unfortunate that so many characters and scenes had to be removed from the book in order to make the movie two hours long. My expectations were probably too high when I went to go see this (after all, the 1995 version was so superbly done). I was pleasantly surprised by Keira Knightly's performance, although she seemed a little rougher than Elizabeth Bennet should have been. It was unfortunate that so many characters and scenes had to be removed from the book in order to make the movie two hours long. Also, the casting of some roles (Mr. Bingley, Mrs. Bennet, Mr. Collins) could have been better. Overall, the acting was average, the writing was a little weird, and the interpretation from the book wasn't quite true to the story-but I would have to say it's a good "Cliff's Notes" version of the book. Expand
  93. SHFB
    Dec 5, 2005
    10
    The best of the Austen movies to date! The acting is wonderful and engaging. But the real feat is in the abundance of details and the interesting camera work (I love the scene in which Darcy and his friend's sister are sitting at the table when Lizzie is introduced - the whole scene is shot from behind their backs). I really can't say enough good things about this movie. The best of the Austen movies to date! The acting is wonderful and engaging. But the real feat is in the abundance of details and the interesting camera work (I love the scene in which Darcy and his friend's sister are sitting at the table when Lizzie is introduced - the whole scene is shot from behind their backs). I really can't say enough good things about this movie. I've already seen it twice and will probably see it again. Expand
  94. EmilyM
    Dec 4, 2005
    10
    It brought out all of the beautiful parts of the book without imposing on the emotions created by reading it.
  95. LouC.
    Dec 3, 2005
    9
    A lively and earthy rendition of Pride and Prejudice.
  96. CriticsRmad
    Dec 1, 2005
    9
    Great romantic movie. Haven't seen a period piece that didn't put me to sleep in quite a while. Story hits upon the main points in the book and was great. The ballroom scene makes you want to dance. Nice characterization and beautifully filmed. Good times for those looking for a bit of humor and romance.
  97. KristenW.
    Dec 1, 2005
    10
    I loved this movie. After reading the book over the summer for school, I was so excited that it was being redone and my friend and I just had to see it when she was home for thanksgiving.
  98. chelsea
    Dec 1, 2005
    5
    Pride & prejudice had some lovely moments, beautiful scenery and some very good actors but keira knightley was so wrong for the part of elizabeth bennett!!!!! i was vastly dissapointed, as she is the main character. she was too smirky, forward, gangly and looked like a street urchin. her hair looked greasy and unwashed for most of the film which brought to my notice the fact it Pride & prejudice had some lovely moments, beautiful scenery and some very good actors but keira knightley was so wrong for the part of elizabeth bennett!!!!! i was vastly dissapointed, as she is the main character. she was too smirky, forward, gangly and looked like a street urchin. her hair looked greasy and unwashed for most of the film which brought to my notice the fact it wasn't even her hair but a wig. and would lizzie ever have worn a piece of rag in her hair? -- especially when her sisters were dressed prettily in soft coloured gowns and ringleted hairstyles!!were they trying to make lizzie a tomboy rebel? i did like d'arcy. i thought he was handsome and did a good job showing the change from d'arcy's cold/proud/shy demeanor to the turmoil that we find in him as he exposes his love for miss bennett. oh, i went in with such expectations...but for God's sake does keira knightley have to take every major englishwoman's role even if she is completely not the actress for the part just because her name might herd in the viewers?!!! Expand
  99. NancyM.
    Nov 30, 2005
    10
    Best movie in a long time.
  100. JosephS
    Nov 30, 2005
    10
    For a short brief movie comparing to the completed movie in the 90's, I will see it again, full of divertion,amusement,and terrific scenes.
Metascore
82

Universal acclaim - based on 37 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 35 out of 37
  2. Negative: 0 out of 37
  1. 75
    Romantic yearning hasn't looked this sexy onscreen in years.
  2. Reviewed by: Derek Elley
    80
    A movie for the age, and a keeper for the ages, Pride & Prejudice brings Jane Austen's best-loved novel to vivid, widescreen life, as well as making an undisputed star of 20-year-old Keira Knightley.
  3. If only Knightley had a co-star equal to her here: The 1995 edition of Colin Firth, come to think of it, would have been perfect.