No, no, no!

Rating: 1/10 (25 February 2012)

I didn't really expect that much when I popped this into my DVD player, but I was still disappointed. There is so much wrong with this movie it's difficult to decide where to begin.
Firstly, the script is abysmal. I know they had to cut stuff, but why did they have to mutilate Austens' beautiful language and perfect story? Here, Longbourn House is not the house of a gentleman but more or less a barn and the pig wandering through the kitchen gonads a-dangling is apparently the scriptwriters' idea of compensating the viewer for leaving out all of Austens' humour. Also, the characters are butchered almost beyond recognition. Elizabeth is portrayed as rather silly and quite aggressive at times rather than prejudiced but sensible. If you were looking forward to seeing any of the wonderfully crafted tongue-in-cheek banter Lizzy directs at Darcy in the book, you will look in vain. Darcy himself is portrayed as a man who conveys the impression of arrogance for a very short while but then becomes rather soppy. The Bennet girls are portrayed as fools who run around the house screeching like banshees. I also cannot forgive how the scriptwriter ruined the first proposal scene. For starters, Darcy and Elizabeth are standing in the pouring rain. How very modern and unnecessary! Then Darcy makes a surprisingly obsequious declaration (while the actor wears the facial expression of a frightened dog), Elizabeth turns him down and ensuing quarrel almost leads to yelling which is very unlikely for gentlefolk of that time in general and NOT what's in the book. Then, Darcy leans towards Elizabeth as if to kiss her. And she – who claimed to hate him 10 seconds earlier – doesn't recoil from him but rather gives him a look that seems to say "are you as turned on as I am right now?". What were they thinking?!!! I didn't like the interpretation of Bingley either, he is portrayed as completely spineless and the actor doesn't look much older than 18. At least Bingleys' proposal scene was alright. But Darcy and Elizabeth have no such luck, even the second proposal was written to smithereens. Darcy and Lizzy both wander through a field in the morning because they can't sleep. Luckily, they are both up at exactly the same hour and meet (yeah right) and are both half undressed because – naturally - in the regency era people often went out in their pyjamas. They declare their love while the sun is rising and Darcys' perfectly cringeworthy "I love, I love, I love you"s which are set off by the tacky moodlighting are enough to make anyone puke.
Also, though I'm no expert, some of the historical inaccuracies are just too blatant to pass unnoticed. There are almost no bonnets and gloves for three quarters of the movie, then they seemed to remember "Oh hang on, I think women wore bonnets back then". So they put in a couple of scenes where nearly everyone wears a bonnet but then they seemed to think "Oh what the hell" and the bonnets disappear again. The dance where the Bennets and Bingleys first meet is not the classy amusement the gentility of the period would have indulged in. Instead they staged a sort of peasant folk-dance in another of the many barns used in this movie. And at some point Miss Bingley wears a gown with straps instead of sleeves. Come on! I have already mentioned how Darcy and Elizabeth wander through the fields in their pyjamas - unlikely. When Jane is sick at Netherfield, there is a scene where Bingley just walks into her bedroom. And Darcys' letter of defence after the first proposal is delivered by him personally in the middle of the night to Lizzies' bedroom. As if! It would have been so simple to avoid these mistakes. So why didn't they? It almost seems like they weren't bothered.
To add insult to injury, some of the casting is off. In fairness, some of the actors' abilities were probably hampered by the abominable script, but judging by this movie alone it's quite hard to find anything to like. Matthew Mcfadyen is insipid as Darcy. Apart from the fact he isn't handsome enough and that he wears his hair mullet style, he seems to have only two expressions at his disposal. Arrogance and soppiness. Keira Knightly does slightly better, she's got three. Boredom, anger, and a very toothy girn. Donald Sutherland, brilliant actor that he is, is simply wrong as Mr Bennet. When Lizzy tells him she loves Darcy, he actually cries. It's so wrong it hurts. The girl who plays Lydia needs acting school. She uses very chichi hand gestures and her screeching gives the viewer tinnitus. I was pleased to find, however, that Caroline Bingley is portrayed as good-looking. She is so in the book and earlier film versions tended to use absolute scarecrows to portray her. Kelly Riley does a decent job. I was also pleased with Tom Hollander as Mr Collins and the formidable Judi Dench as Lady Catherine. The brief appearance of Rupert Friend as Wickham is quite funny, but for the wrong reasons. Someone described him as looking like Legolas and that is precisely what I thought when I saw him in this. It's the only time I laughed while watching this film.
To end on a more cheerful note, the camera-work is good and the scenery gorgeous. Especially when Lizzy is on tour with the Gardiners there are a couple of achingly beautiful landscape shots. But that is all that can be said in favour of this movie and it isn't enough.
To cut a long story short, I absolutely hated it. Although I'm not an Austen purist this left me completely cold. I've seen all the filmed versions of P&P and this is the worst. By far.