|
Pride and Prejudice | 
 enlarge | Director: Robert Z. Leonard
Actors: Greer Garson, Laurence Olivier, Mary Boland, Edna May Oliver, Maureen O'sullivan
Studio: MGM/Ua Studios
Category: Video
List Price: $19.98
Buy Used: $1.85
You Save: $18.13 (91%)
New (6) Used (36) Collectible (9) from $1.85
Rating:  163 reviews
Sales Rank: 13248
Format: Black & White, Ntsc
Media: VHS Tape
Running Time: 117
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.4
Dimensions (in): 7.3 x 4.2 x 1.1
ISBN: 6301977688
UPC: 027616011435
EAN: 9786301977685
ASIN: 6301977688
Theatrical Release Date: July 26, 1940
Release Date: November 28, 1990
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
| |
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Amazon.com
Jane Austen's wonderful novel has been adapted to the screen many times, with this 1940 version representing the golden age of the Hollywood studio era. Greer Garson, then just on the cusp of her stardom, plays the headstrong Elizabeth Bennet, smartest of five daughters who must be married off. Laurence Olivier is that difficult fellow Mr. Darcy, whose mulishness about the Bennet girls begins to thaw when he gets a dose of Elizabeth's sense and sensibility. The film is done up in the glamorous MGM house style, which means we're stuck with the less-than-inspired direction of Robert Z. Leonard (The Great Ziegfeld), redeemed somewhat by a collection of handsome sets (Cedric Gibbons and Paul Groesse won the Oscar for Interior Decoration) and the dandy photography by Karl Freund, one of the greats. Anyone accustomed to the 1995 miniseries version of Pride and Prejudice will need to adjust to the swifter demands of a two-hour movie, and to be sure this version, like the 2005 Keira Knightley remake, simplifies some of Austen's scenes. It's one of the few films, by the way, with Aldous Huxley as a credited screenwriter. Edmund Gwenn is lovely as Mr. Bennet, and Mary Boland brash as Mrs. Bennet; Garson, although MGM liked to corset her in fine-lady roles, manages to let Elizabeth's sauciness come through. Actually, the movie's weak spot is Laurence Olivier's elaborate performance as Darcy, which feels too theatrical. Not that it matters; Austen's story is so good, the film sails through to its delicious finish with all flags flying. --Robert Horton
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 158 more reviews...
 Sorry, I just don't like this film November 8, 2008
Having read the book (one of my favorites), I just can't stomach this film. What really turned me off was the depiction of Lady Catherine. In the book, that character is never reconciled to the marriage of Darcy and Elizabeth. And where did they get the idea for the archery scene? Certainly not from the book. If you haven't read the book, you might find it entertaining; but for anyone who loves the book, this film just doesn't do it justice.
I have the BBC version and the A&E version. I have not seen the version made this century. Of the two that I have, I would say that the A&E version is the most complete. The BBC version is very good but when the story gets to it's climax, it is rushed to completion as if the writer or editor were trying to wrap-up the story quickly due to time constraints. It's disappointing to invest so much time getting to the climax only to have some of the most beautiful scenes and THE most beautiful dialogue of the book chopped up. Neither of the films do the reconciliation scene between Darcy and Elizabeth justice, the BBC version being the least satisfying. But from the point of view of the filmmakers, I can see that they might find it too long. I would recommend reading that scene in the book; it is absolutely beautiful dialogue.
Despite the shortcomings of the BBC version mentioned above, I really like a number of the performances in that version, especially Elizabeth and Mr. Collins. And the apparent age of the actress that portrays Miss Bingly is a better fit in this version. Both versions cast the role of Elizabeth well; I really can't say that one is better than the other, just different.
If I had to choose between the two, I would select the A&E version. But each of the films have strengths that the other does not which is why I have and watch both versions.
 Pride & Prejudice October 24, 2008
This is the perfect addition to my library. Watching the old movies is so much fun and sometimes they add a little different slant on things, but this was great! The actresses were not as young as in subsequent productions, but it still made a good movie. Greer Garson is beautiful and Sir Laurence Olivier is brooding enough!
The original version of Pride and Prejudice ... October 9, 2008
I have the Colin Firth and the Matthew Macfadyen versions of the film, so it seemed only fit that I get the original version. I enjoyed the nostalgia of the Sir Laurence Olivier version, but my favorite is the Colin Firth version. As Meg Ryan stated in the movie, You've Got Mail ... "Don't ya just love that Mr. Darcy."
In answer to your question ... yes, I would buy this film again.
Not as True to the Book, but So What? A Great Version! October 7, 2008
I had read on IMDB that this version was not true to the book. I bought it anyway, because I love Pride and Prejudice and have seen several versions.
Having read the book many many times over the years, the times this movie strays from the book are obvious. But, these variances fit well into this version's story line. If you haven't read the book a whole bunch of times, you probably wouldn't even notice because the screenplay is seamless.
The costumes are wrong. It's more anti-bellum than Edwardian. OK. The costumes are just gorgeous--and the mens' costumes are just as elegant (and wrong). The interiors are wonderful-very detailed and have a real quality look to them.
Greer Garson is a tad old for this role. OK. Emma Thompson was even older in Sense and Sensibility (1995) and that movie rocked! Garson is beautiful, and she captures the character of Elizabeth Bennett perfectly. Wry, mischievous facial expressions, pert tone--perfect! Laurence Olivier was a most handsome Darcy, and portrayed that sardonic fellow just as well as Colin Firth.
And, Edna May Oliver is just superb as Lady Catherine De Burgh. What a character. I even like the twist of her character. She was nearly likeable, which is something that cannot be said for any other versions I've seen.
In short, this movie was made at Hollywood's grand movie era, and this movie was made magnificently. Just as entertaining as the other versions. If you must have a movie follow a book exactly to like it, this one may not be for you, but if you're just looking for a grandly performed variation of a classic book, with some good acting and quality photography, you won't miss with this one!
 I wanted to like this September 20, 2008
0 out of 1 found this review helpful
I am an avid reader and admirer of Jane Austen and I also love classic hollywood films, so I was really hoping to like this film. With such a cast as Laurence Olivier and Greer Garson, it is a shame they were not offered a better film adaptation of Pride and Prejudice to work with. The faults with this production are too numerous to list entirely; the screenplay, the costumes (Victorian, not Regency)...well, everything. Laurence Olivier would have undoubtedly been an ideal Darcy if he were allowed to actually play Austen's Darcy and not this watered-down Darcy. It is a shame but at least we have the BBC production, which is wonderful. Above all, there's Jane Austen's wonderful novel to enjoy--no production will ever replace it!
|
|
|
| |
