I assume they tried their best!

Rating: 6/10 (8 November 2005)

In the music industry there are some records that should never be 'covered', that is to say sung by another artist. This is because the first or an earlier version was just too good. I am one of many who has seen the 1995 Firth & Ehle version of Pride & Prejudice and I just thought that it would be difficult for that version to be matched especially in less than half the time. Maybe I myself am, dare I say it prejudiced however I can also say that I have read the book and here is where the film lacks consistently when the 1995 version did not.
The excellent language and turn of phrase brought forth by Jane Austen is missing and then some of the phrases are said out of order and some are said by the wrong character. Also for the sake of time some of the characters in the book was missing from the 1995 version(although this did not diminish the story) but for some strange reason the Knightley version added a character, to own the truth Mr Hill. WHY? All he did was put some food on the table.
I assume that because of time sub plots could not be developed for example Wickhams true's nature,Lydia's flirtations and the hatred all of the Bennett family had towards Mr Darcy. Having said all of the above I believe the actors worked well with the material they had to work with and I dare say that a person who has not read the book or seen the 1995 version would have found this film quite diverting.