The first time I saw the 1995 BBC production of “P&P” was at Christmas one year in the early 2000s. The provincial public TV broadcaster, TVOntario, showed the six episodes on six consecutive evenings between Boxing Day and New Year’s Eve. My son wasn’t at all interested in Jane Austen, but my two daughters were just entering their boy-crazy early adolescence and simply loved the characters, the costumes, the settings, and of course, Colin Firth.
Oddly enough, the character whose name was evoked most often in our household during the succeeding weeks and months was that of Lady Catherine de Bourgh. It was, “What would Lady Catherine de Bourgh say if she knew you almost missed your dance class because you couldn’t find your ballet slippers?” Or, “What would Lady Catherine de Bourgh think if she knew you were the one who drank the last of the milk without putting another bag in the pitcher?” Or, “What would Lady Catherine de Bourgh say if she knew you had a project for school due Monday morning but waited until Sunday night to start it?”
When the 2005 film adaptation was released, my oldest daughter and I went to see it. We liked the lush, romantic, rural look of the film, but agreed that Colin Firth was still our favourite Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy. Last summer, the local arthouse cinema had some screenings of the 2005 version. I went to see it, and found that I enjoyed the film more than I thought I would. It had apparently improved with age. However, I still prefer the 1995 production for its classic, late Georgian/Regency atmosphere.
I love hearing how people first encountered the movie or the miniseries. And love the Lady Catherine running joke too :) For me, it was Bingley's line in the miniseries delivered with great gusto: 'I can't TELL YOU HOW DELIGHTED I AM...' This can be repurposed for any occasion calling for forceful enthusiasm!
Just finished listening to the marvelous podcast with Tash and Haley and thoroughly loved it! Thank you so much, and it was enlightening to be sure. I have to say that as I emerged from the discussion, what hit me was how our first impressions really do stick. That is to say, when we fall in love with a first impression, we can have others, and can even see the value and wonder of them, but there is something in that first experience that we favor. I have this impression that Tash really prefers -- in the final analysis -- the 1995 version, and that Haley kind of prefers the film from 2005 (correct me if I'm wrong here!), and in just watching the 1995 version myself for the first time, I have to say it was wonderful. I would tend to favor it but haven't seen the film yet. I will get to it, as a result of this conversation, and just to see how they do compare. But one observation that Haley brought up was when you were discussing the costumes and hair styles. I was thinking about this a lot as I viewed the series, but I seriously detested Lizzie's hair style -- all of them, really -- forgive me, because I do know they were closer to the styles of the day, as were those hideous dresses that made everyone look like vestal virgins who were also pregnant (again, apologies if this is too crude), but you know, it was something I really didn't like. So I'm curious about how the film depicts these styles differently. You both piqued my curiosity about that!
On another note, I do have to say I kind of fell in love with Colin Firth! Although it sounded like Haley didn't prefer his depiction of Darcy, I found him a rather trapped animal, actually. Trapped in the austere formalities of the culture of his day. There was something seething underneath his formality and perceived "meanness," -- seething in a kind of passionate way -- but I didn't see that that was all there was to him. There was some inner goodness there. Some ability to see people. He was thoughtful, he was capable of turning everyone's outcome around at the end, and if the disposition wasn't there to do that in the beginning -- well. I guess what I'm saying is that he was attracted to Elizabeth for a reason, since it's obvious he could have had any woman he wanted. But he was attracted to her resistance, her intelligence, her wit, her assertiveness, her confidence. Most men of the time would have shunned such a woman. Anyway, I did see him as a more sympathetic character, perhaps!
Yes, I think you're probably right Nancy about our first impressions. I tried my best to be open-minded but early opinions, especially passionate ones, can be difficult to dislodge!
Yes, I agree with everything you say about Colin Firth's Darcy. And now I'm really interested to hear your impressions of the movie!
In my opinion the 1995 version is a faithful adaptation and the 2005 is an ✨aesthetic ✨(which I enjoy more when I don’t compare it too much to the book or 1995—but even then get a little impatient with the amount of time spent spinning on swings and brooding at candles)
Ah! This is so exciting, and also a bit ironic, as my husband and I just finished watching the 1995 BBC series with Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle last week. I didn't know this would be the next subject but am delighted and look forward to digging in. Thank you, Tash, and thanks to Haley!
I loved every second of this discussion and can’t wait for part two 💕I only recently watched the 2005 film and felt it was a beautiful piece of art but it lacks the character growth for me. I’ll write more after part 2 as you’re both helping me to review both adaptations at a greater depth
Well Tash, I can't tell you how excited I was to see this post pop up. I really enjoyed reading To the Lighthouse with you, and Hayley has single-handedly changed my approach to reading this year through her close reading series. What a joy to be able to hear you together in conversation. I too watched the BBC series when it was broadcast in Australia as it coincided with my study of the novel in school. I'd never seen the 2005 movie, but that didn't detract from my enjoyment of your conversation. I watched about half of it last night, before continuing with part 2 of your conversation today. Can I admit to enjoying your collective in-depth analysis more than the movie? It's the concentration on the details and the different insights you both offer which I value and appreciate. I am now tempted to rewatch the mini-series, or at least more of the highlights on YouTube as millions of others have done.
I enjoyed Tash and Haley's conversation very much and look forward to part 2. To borrow a phrase from Lady Catherine, this Catherine “must be part of the conversation"! I loved the novel as a teenager and reread it many times over the years. As a young mother, I saw the 1995 BBC version and adored it and its leads, Jennifer Ehle and Colin Firth. The series felt very near to the novel, despite the garish pinks and other 90s looks that overlay the aesthetic choices of that time. Fast forward to 2005, I found myself mesmerized and fully taken in by the 2005 movie. My daughter, then 15 years old, was swept along, as well. Director Joe Wright captured the emotions of the novels better than the BBC series, particularly that of Elizabeth. Like Haley, I watch this movie repeatedly— a thoroughly romantic trait my daughter shares. The movie is more aesthetically pleasing to me, and I think provides a better depiction of Elizabeth’s emotional growth over the course of time. I rewatched the 1995 version this week, nerd that I am, and was taken aback when Elizabeth admitted that her feelings about Mr. Darcy changed when she first set eyes on Pemberley. That felt a bit too transactional to me! Another post commented on the 2005 version spending too much time spinning on the swing and brooding at candles, but to me it showed Lizzie struggling with her reaction to Charlotte’s willingness to marry and be proud of marrying Mr. Collins as well as trying to figure out what her feelings were to Mr. Darcy. And then there is Judy Dench! And Tom Hollander! The first proposal scene was much better in the 1995 version—hands down. In the movie, I ran to the book to see what was left out. Too much! So, to close my ramblings, I loved different things about each version, and don’t feel it is necessary to take a side!
Excellent comment! Excellent ramblings! Thank you! And that is very fair-minded of you not to take a side. Yes, Judi Dench and Tom Hollander were excellent. And I really liked that swing scene in the movie - the interaction with Charlotte Lucas - the seasons passing - all very well done. In fact, the emotion of the Charlotte-Lizzie interaction about marrying Mr Collins is probably done better in the film I think.
Regarding Lizzie saying, in the miniseries, that she fell for Darcy after she saw Pemberley, I took this as her making a joke - she has her tongue in her cheek! She has already turned Darcy down knowing he has '10 thousand a year' so we know she is unmoved by riches!
Just watched the 2005 film so that I can listen to your podcast, and reading through these comments I agree with the Charlotte-Lizzie interaction. The film really seems to emphasize the economics; it is not a rom-com in my view. The series IS a rom-com. But I haven't listened to your podcast yet so maybe you get into that there!
Oh good! You watched it! Actually, I hadn't thought about the two adaptations being slightly different genres. Interesting! I think we briefly mentioned in our chat that the series is funnier - I suppose it's rom-COM. While the movie is ROM-com or maybe ROM-dramedy... or even period-ROM-pastorale. I'm just freestyling at this point haha. (I wonder which movie ending you got? We talk about the endings in part 2.)
I got married in 1995 and apart from that the BBC production was an absolute highlight of the year! I watched it again last year before seeing a play based around Jane Austen’s life staring Nadine Garner that was absolutely wonderful. Looking forward to listening to your interview!
It was definitely one of the high points of 1995! And there was also that beautiful movie adaptation of Sense and Sensibility. What a year for Austen on screen! (and getting married!)
Well you did it! i finally committed to listening rather than reading (though I'd still rather have a transcript to peruse). I find it really hard to abstractly listen without my mind wandering off, and I'm glad I wasn't dependent on the golden age of radio for my entertainment.
Having just finished reading with Haley and watching both adaptations, I was excited to hear your comparisons. While I enjoyed the artistic interpretation of the 2005 movie, for me it did not compare to the 1995 series. The biggest dissonance was how slovenly the Bennets lived - the mud, the pig in the front yard, the chickens running around, the disarray in the house, the disheveled hair and dress. As mentioned, this seems to have been a choice made as a visual shortcut to show the different status of the Bennets from the other characters. However, I was reminded that Elizabeth at one point reminds Darcy that she is the daughter of a gentleman, not a gentleman farmer. Even though having monetary challenges, I still saw him as a manager removed from the work of his tenant farmers. I acknowledge the creative license required to translate book to film, like changing the setting for the first proposal. I understand the necessary truncation of secondary characters. I just did not relate to this decision for the depiction of the Bennets.
I agree re the Bennet house!! And actually we do talk about that briefly in part 2. I didn't think it was quite accurate to have washing lines attached to the back of the house!While I wasn't too bothered by the liberties they took with costuming and hair, I suspect this will date the movie - we will look back and say that Mr Bingley's hair is 'so noughties.' (Just as in the movie Titanic - Kate Winslet's hair and make-up - the dark lipstick and very sculpted eyebrows - look very nineties to me.)
Thank you for putting up with audio when you prefer reading! (I understand that preference!) I think there is a transcript button near the top of the post if you access the post on your computer (rather than on your phone / in the app) but I checked the transcript just now and it looks rather hard to follow because it doesn't distinguish between the voices.
Thanks so much for the hint about the transcript button. Even though formatted without indicating who is talking, having the words in front of me will help me so much while listening. (Yeah, I'm one of those annoying people who likes to watch TV with the captions on. I even kinda like noticing how what must be AI translation frequently misinterprets. Hmm... I am who I am.)
Thanks, Tash and Haley, what a wonderful conversation! I watched the BBC series in Australia in 1995, hanging out for Sunday night every week, and my best friend and I would compare notes afterwards. Then she gave me the VHS tape for my birthday. I still have it, although I haven't had a VCR machine for a decade or more. The tape's probably worn out anyway.
I was totally underwhelmed by the 2005 movie. There will never be a better Lizzie for me than Jennifer Ehle. Ditto for all the casting: Mr and Mrs Bennett, Darcy, Mr Collins ... and, and, and .... okay, maybe Nancy's right that people fall in love with whichever they saw first.
I still remember first seeing Darcy emerge from the lake in his wet shirt ... oh! I LOVED him, despite his pride and his prejudice. He was so conflicted! But the way he went off, secretly, and rescued silly Lydia - and, btw, as we approached the end of the chat I thought, hang on, aren't you going to discuss Wickham!?! I'm so relieved to hear there's a Part Two!
One thing I'm really enjoying about these comments is just hearing how people first encountered the miniseries or movie. Jennifer Ehle was fantastic. I'm in fierce agreement.
Oh yes, there is MUCH to say about Wickham who is treated so differently in each!!
So looking forward to listening to this. I watched first two episodes in the UK in sept/oct 95 then moved to Australia for a gap year. I can’t quite remember but I think I only managed to see first 4 episodes with the family I was staying with before having to wait until mid 1996 to watch the whole series which my mum had carefully recorded for me!! Definitely left an impression and watched many times over the years. Only saw 2005 film for first time a few months ago. Wasn’t mad keen but will be interested to have a listen to see if I can be persuaded 😊
It sounds like you had a similar experience to me with the two versions, Hilary. I wonder whether you'll change your mind at all... Haley made some very compelling points!
I loved part 1 :-) I need to watch the movie again, interesting points about the landscape in particular still prefer 1995 version though ;-) On my 10th anniversary DVD edition (of series) there are various making of videos which I watched recently - a lot of the choices (e.g. clothing colours etc were very deliberate) as was the decision to increase the importance of the Darcy character (they show more of him than is in the book really). Looking forward to listening to the rest of your conversation.
Currently walking to Canterbury with Chaucer (just short of Dartmouth) so not listening in just yet... But the only thing better than the BBC "wet shirt" miniseries is the book itself. (Jennifer Ehle is just slightly too smiley though). Have both adaptations on DVD. And even a DVD player fancy that!
I maintain that the 1995 version is the best. I also watched it on Sunday nights. There's also a creditable TV version I think from the 80s which we watched in class when we studied the novel in high school.
Oh, I knew there were a bunch of movie adaptations but didn't know there was another TV version. How interesting! - I'll have to see if I can track it down. I'm curious!
The first time I saw the 1995 BBC production of “P&P” was at Christmas one year in the early 2000s. The provincial public TV broadcaster, TVOntario, showed the six episodes on six consecutive evenings between Boxing Day and New Year’s Eve. My son wasn’t at all interested in Jane Austen, but my two daughters were just entering their boy-crazy early adolescence and simply loved the characters, the costumes, the settings, and of course, Colin Firth.
Oddly enough, the character whose name was evoked most often in our household during the succeeding weeks and months was that of Lady Catherine de Bourgh. It was, “What would Lady Catherine de Bourgh say if she knew you almost missed your dance class because you couldn’t find your ballet slippers?” Or, “What would Lady Catherine de Bourgh think if she knew you were the one who drank the last of the milk without putting another bag in the pitcher?” Or, “What would Lady Catherine de Bourgh say if she knew you had a project for school due Monday morning but waited until Sunday night to start it?”
When the 2005 film adaptation was released, my oldest daughter and I went to see it. We liked the lush, romantic, rural look of the film, but agreed that Colin Firth was still our favourite Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy. Last summer, the local arthouse cinema had some screenings of the 2005 version. I went to see it, and found that I enjoyed the film more than I thought I would. It had apparently improved with age. However, I still prefer the 1995 production for its classic, late Georgian/Regency atmosphere.
I love hearing how people first encountered the movie or the miniseries. And love the Lady Catherine running joke too :) For me, it was Bingley's line in the miniseries delivered with great gusto: 'I can't TELL YOU HOW DELIGHTED I AM...' This can be repurposed for any occasion calling for forceful enthusiasm!
The 95 version spawned a bunch of catchphrases between my mum and I that we repeated for years, especially "I must be part of the conversation!"
Lady Catherine! haha. Hilarious!
Just finished listening to the marvelous podcast with Tash and Haley and thoroughly loved it! Thank you so much, and it was enlightening to be sure. I have to say that as I emerged from the discussion, what hit me was how our first impressions really do stick. That is to say, when we fall in love with a first impression, we can have others, and can even see the value and wonder of them, but there is something in that first experience that we favor. I have this impression that Tash really prefers -- in the final analysis -- the 1995 version, and that Haley kind of prefers the film from 2005 (correct me if I'm wrong here!), and in just watching the 1995 version myself for the first time, I have to say it was wonderful. I would tend to favor it but haven't seen the film yet. I will get to it, as a result of this conversation, and just to see how they do compare. But one observation that Haley brought up was when you were discussing the costumes and hair styles. I was thinking about this a lot as I viewed the series, but I seriously detested Lizzie's hair style -- all of them, really -- forgive me, because I do know they were closer to the styles of the day, as were those hideous dresses that made everyone look like vestal virgins who were also pregnant (again, apologies if this is too crude), but you know, it was something I really didn't like. So I'm curious about how the film depicts these styles differently. You both piqued my curiosity about that!
On another note, I do have to say I kind of fell in love with Colin Firth! Although it sounded like Haley didn't prefer his depiction of Darcy, I found him a rather trapped animal, actually. Trapped in the austere formalities of the culture of his day. There was something seething underneath his formality and perceived "meanness," -- seething in a kind of passionate way -- but I didn't see that that was all there was to him. There was some inner goodness there. Some ability to see people. He was thoughtful, he was capable of turning everyone's outcome around at the end, and if the disposition wasn't there to do that in the beginning -- well. I guess what I'm saying is that he was attracted to Elizabeth for a reason, since it's obvious he could have had any woman he wanted. But he was attracted to her resistance, her intelligence, her wit, her assertiveness, her confidence. Most men of the time would have shunned such a woman. Anyway, I did see him as a more sympathetic character, perhaps!
Yes, I think you're probably right Nancy about our first impressions. I tried my best to be open-minded but early opinions, especially passionate ones, can be difficult to dislodge!
Yes, I agree with everything you say about Colin Firth's Darcy. And now I'm really interested to hear your impressions of the movie!
In my opinion the 1995 version is a faithful adaptation and the 2005 is an ✨aesthetic ✨(which I enjoy more when I don’t compare it too much to the book or 1995—but even then get a little impatient with the amount of time spent spinning on swings and brooding at candles)
Ah! This is so exciting, and also a bit ironic, as my husband and I just finished watching the 1995 BBC series with Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle last week. I didn't know this would be the next subject but am delighted and look forward to digging in. Thank you, Tash, and thanks to Haley!
How serendipitous!
BUT what are we going to think of the Margot Robbie 'Wuthering Heights'? Await with trepidation.
Not to mention Jacob Elordi co-starring as Ken ... er, I mean, Heathcliff.
haha
I loved every second of this discussion and can’t wait for part two 💕I only recently watched the 2005 film and felt it was a beautiful piece of art but it lacks the character growth for me. I’ll write more after part 2 as you’re both helping me to review both adaptations at a greater depth
Look forward to hearing what you think Jaimie!
Well Tash, I can't tell you how excited I was to see this post pop up. I really enjoyed reading To the Lighthouse with you, and Hayley has single-handedly changed my approach to reading this year through her close reading series. What a joy to be able to hear you together in conversation. I too watched the BBC series when it was broadcast in Australia as it coincided with my study of the novel in school. I'd never seen the 2005 movie, but that didn't detract from my enjoyment of your conversation. I watched about half of it last night, before continuing with part 2 of your conversation today. Can I admit to enjoying your collective in-depth analysis more than the movie? It's the concentration on the details and the different insights you both offer which I value and appreciate. I am now tempted to rewatch the mini-series, or at least more of the highlights on YouTube as millions of others have done.
Oh thank you Juliet for this kind and generous comment!
Also please check out my Substack for a deep dive into the novels themselves, Jane Austen's language and Jane's characters.
I'd appreciate being added to your roster of faithful Janeites.
https://open.substack.com/pub/eastondrive/p/sense-and-sensibility-analysis-part?r=3co35r&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
Oh how fantastic! Sorry to miss you in my short Austen round-up.
I enjoyed Tash and Haley's conversation very much and look forward to part 2. To borrow a phrase from Lady Catherine, this Catherine “must be part of the conversation"! I loved the novel as a teenager and reread it many times over the years. As a young mother, I saw the 1995 BBC version and adored it and its leads, Jennifer Ehle and Colin Firth. The series felt very near to the novel, despite the garish pinks and other 90s looks that overlay the aesthetic choices of that time. Fast forward to 2005, I found myself mesmerized and fully taken in by the 2005 movie. My daughter, then 15 years old, was swept along, as well. Director Joe Wright captured the emotions of the novels better than the BBC series, particularly that of Elizabeth. Like Haley, I watch this movie repeatedly— a thoroughly romantic trait my daughter shares. The movie is more aesthetically pleasing to me, and I think provides a better depiction of Elizabeth’s emotional growth over the course of time. I rewatched the 1995 version this week, nerd that I am, and was taken aback when Elizabeth admitted that her feelings about Mr. Darcy changed when she first set eyes on Pemberley. That felt a bit too transactional to me! Another post commented on the 2005 version spending too much time spinning on the swing and brooding at candles, but to me it showed Lizzie struggling with her reaction to Charlotte’s willingness to marry and be proud of marrying Mr. Collins as well as trying to figure out what her feelings were to Mr. Darcy. And then there is Judy Dench! And Tom Hollander! The first proposal scene was much better in the 1995 version—hands down. In the movie, I ran to the book to see what was left out. Too much! So, to close my ramblings, I loved different things about each version, and don’t feel it is necessary to take a side!
Excellent comment! Excellent ramblings! Thank you! And that is very fair-minded of you not to take a side. Yes, Judi Dench and Tom Hollander were excellent. And I really liked that swing scene in the movie - the interaction with Charlotte Lucas - the seasons passing - all very well done. In fact, the emotion of the Charlotte-Lizzie interaction about marrying Mr Collins is probably done better in the film I think.
Regarding Lizzie saying, in the miniseries, that she fell for Darcy after she saw Pemberley, I took this as her making a joke - she has her tongue in her cheek! She has already turned Darcy down knowing he has '10 thousand a year' so we know she is unmoved by riches!
Just watched the 2005 film so that I can listen to your podcast, and reading through these comments I agree with the Charlotte-Lizzie interaction. The film really seems to emphasize the economics; it is not a rom-com in my view. The series IS a rom-com. But I haven't listened to your podcast yet so maybe you get into that there!
Oh good! You watched it! Actually, I hadn't thought about the two adaptations being slightly different genres. Interesting! I think we briefly mentioned in our chat that the series is funnier - I suppose it's rom-COM. While the movie is ROM-com or maybe ROM-dramedy... or even period-ROM-pastorale. I'm just freestyling at this point haha. (I wonder which movie ending you got? We talk about the endings in part 2.)
I got married in 1995 and apart from that the BBC production was an absolute highlight of the year! I watched it again last year before seeing a play based around Jane Austen’s life staring Nadine Garner that was absolutely wonderful. Looking forward to listening to your interview!
It was definitely one of the high points of 1995! And there was also that beautiful movie adaptation of Sense and Sensibility. What a year for Austen on screen! (and getting married!)
Well you did it! i finally committed to listening rather than reading (though I'd still rather have a transcript to peruse). I find it really hard to abstractly listen without my mind wandering off, and I'm glad I wasn't dependent on the golden age of radio for my entertainment.
Having just finished reading with Haley and watching both adaptations, I was excited to hear your comparisons. While I enjoyed the artistic interpretation of the 2005 movie, for me it did not compare to the 1995 series. The biggest dissonance was how slovenly the Bennets lived - the mud, the pig in the front yard, the chickens running around, the disarray in the house, the disheveled hair and dress. As mentioned, this seems to have been a choice made as a visual shortcut to show the different status of the Bennets from the other characters. However, I was reminded that Elizabeth at one point reminds Darcy that she is the daughter of a gentleman, not a gentleman farmer. Even though having monetary challenges, I still saw him as a manager removed from the work of his tenant farmers. I acknowledge the creative license required to translate book to film, like changing the setting for the first proposal. I understand the necessary truncation of secondary characters. I just did not relate to this decision for the depiction of the Bennets.
I agree re the Bennet house!! And actually we do talk about that briefly in part 2. I didn't think it was quite accurate to have washing lines attached to the back of the house!While I wasn't too bothered by the liberties they took with costuming and hair, I suspect this will date the movie - we will look back and say that Mr Bingley's hair is 'so noughties.' (Just as in the movie Titanic - Kate Winslet's hair and make-up - the dark lipstick and very sculpted eyebrows - look very nineties to me.)
Thank you for putting up with audio when you prefer reading! (I understand that preference!) I think there is a transcript button near the top of the post if you access the post on your computer (rather than on your phone / in the app) but I checked the transcript just now and it looks rather hard to follow because it doesn't distinguish between the voices.
Thanks so much for the hint about the transcript button. Even though formatted without indicating who is talking, having the words in front of me will help me so much while listening. (Yeah, I'm one of those annoying people who likes to watch TV with the captions on. I even kinda like noticing how what must be AI translation frequently misinterprets. Hmm... I am who I am.)
Thanks, Tash and Haley, what a wonderful conversation! I watched the BBC series in Australia in 1995, hanging out for Sunday night every week, and my best friend and I would compare notes afterwards. Then she gave me the VHS tape for my birthday. I still have it, although I haven't had a VCR machine for a decade or more. The tape's probably worn out anyway.
I was totally underwhelmed by the 2005 movie. There will never be a better Lizzie for me than Jennifer Ehle. Ditto for all the casting: Mr and Mrs Bennett, Darcy, Mr Collins ... and, and, and .... okay, maybe Nancy's right that people fall in love with whichever they saw first.
I still remember first seeing Darcy emerge from the lake in his wet shirt ... oh! I LOVED him, despite his pride and his prejudice. He was so conflicted! But the way he went off, secretly, and rescued silly Lydia - and, btw, as we approached the end of the chat I thought, hang on, aren't you going to discuss Wickham!?! I'm so relieved to hear there's a Part Two!
One thing I'm really enjoying about these comments is just hearing how people first encountered the miniseries or movie. Jennifer Ehle was fantastic. I'm in fierce agreement.
Oh yes, there is MUCH to say about Wickham who is treated so differently in each!!
So looking forward to listening to this. I watched first two episodes in the UK in sept/oct 95 then moved to Australia for a gap year. I can’t quite remember but I think I only managed to see first 4 episodes with the family I was staying with before having to wait until mid 1996 to watch the whole series which my mum had carefully recorded for me!! Definitely left an impression and watched many times over the years. Only saw 2005 film for first time a few months ago. Wasn’t mad keen but will be interested to have a listen to see if I can be persuaded 😊
It sounds like you had a similar experience to me with the two versions, Hilary. I wonder whether you'll change your mind at all... Haley made some very compelling points!
I loved part 1 :-) I need to watch the movie again, interesting points about the landscape in particular still prefer 1995 version though ;-) On my 10th anniversary DVD edition (of series) there are various making of videos which I watched recently - a lot of the choices (e.g. clothing colours etc were very deliberate) as was the decision to increase the importance of the Darcy character (they show more of him than is in the book really). Looking forward to listening to the rest of your conversation.
Oh I RELISH a good 'making of' documentary. I haven't seen the ones you mention. Gosh, I'm going to have to track them down!
Currently walking to Canterbury with Chaucer (just short of Dartmouth) so not listening in just yet... But the only thing better than the BBC "wet shirt" miniseries is the book itself. (Jennifer Ehle is just slightly too smiley though). Have both adaptations on DVD. And even a DVD player fancy that!
I maintain that the 1995 version is the best. I also watched it on Sunday nights. There's also a creditable TV version I think from the 80s which we watched in class when we studied the novel in high school.
Oh, I knew there were a bunch of movie adaptations but didn't know there was another TV version. How interesting! - I'll have to see if I can track it down. I'm curious!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pride_and_Prejudice_(1980_TV_series)#:~:text=Pride%20and%20Prejudice%20is%20a,Darcy.
This is it
I still have not seen the 2005 adaptation but bc of your piece maybe I finally will!!
Curious to hear what you think! The miniseries set my expectations very high and probably made me overly critical and curmudgeonly towards the movie.
I forgot I'd left this comment and replied to another one on the thread; sorry for bad manners;) SO MANY THOUGHTS. :)
(Please feel free to share your thoughts if you have the time or inclination. I'm sometimes a bit slow to reply but I'd love to hear what you think!)