Not sure about this one

Rating: 5/10 (24 October 2005)

Yes, I have seen the 1995 version and the 80s version, as well. I have also read the book (more than once, more like a dozen times).
I never thought Ehle/Firth as the personification of Lizzie/Darcy but still was sceptical about Keira Knightley as Lizzie.
The movie has some good points, I liked the way the assemblies were pictured, probably more realistic than in the BBC adaptations. I also thought Jane was very well cast.
The main weakness, I thought was in the script. Some scenes were out of character, both for the characters and the original author. also some shots were more Bronteesque than Austen and you couldn't get further away from the original. This version spelt things out a lot (e.g. Lizzie's reaction to Collins' proposal, Charlotte's telling her, the exaggerated difference in status between Darcy and Lizzie) but these weren't necessarily the important bits. Did they really have to picture the Austen family as a slovenly family living with pigs?
It's a hard task to put Austen books into 2 hours. So much is happening. But than they had time for some added scenes which might have been better spent on elaborating the existing plot. And the second proposal scene was ridiculous. What were they thinking of!?! (No need to ask Mr Bingley for approval, how could he deny it with his daughter showing up in the early hours of the morning in her Nightshirt with a man?)
Oh, and I thought Mr Collins was a let-down. He seemed more malicious than stupid. His scenes should be funny but they weren't at all.