tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2285208067022054016.post4107748156727552838..comments2023-06-24T00:50:00.302-07:00Comments on Complete & Unabridged: In Defense of Joe Wright's Pride and Prejudicebookwormanshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05149396697581709129noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2285208067022054016.post-51486578146190575062014-05-31T17:44:52.093-07:002014-05-31T17:44:52.093-07:00I loved this post! :) P&P 2005 isn't my fa...I loved this post! :) P&P 2005 isn't my favourite adaptation of Austen's book - you know what that is! - and it's taken years for me to enjoy it as much as I do now but it really is a stunning film. <br />It has a terrific cast (with a few exceptions). Its soundtrack is one of the best ever. It has incredibly beautiful cinematography. I can happily deal with the changed settings for the proposals. Film is a visual medium after all! Yes, this film has its flaws and isn't the most accurate adaptation but it still captures the spirit of the book remarkably well and is very accessible.<br /><br />I've read those comments on your comparison post. Ouch! I'm really not fond of the 1995 version actually. I'm not a fan of the added Darcy scenes and many of its characterisations are really nothing like my own interpretations of the characters. Mrs Bennet is too shrieky. Mr Collins is too slimy and creepy. Jane Bennet isn't as beautiful as she should be, etc. Although I did used to like it well enough I became so tired of hearing its fans saying that it was "perfect" and "flawless" and that anyone who could prefer another adaptation isn't a real Austen fan. It makes me so angry. Criticise an adaptation as much as you want but don't criticise its fans!<br /><br />I think that as adaptations the 1995 and 2005 versions are of equal quality but the faults in the 1995 version annoy me more. Maybe that's a case of me going for the underdog. <br /><br />Great post :)Hannahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08112080523452829647noreply@blogger.com