Review of Pride and Prejudice

Adapted from Jane Austen's 1813's novel of the same name. This 1940 MGM gold diggers comedy partially written by Aldous Huxley & Jane Murfin involving a family of sisters finding prosperity & love before their estate get destitute in Regency England felt a little rushed. The film directed by Robert Z. Leonard was jarring with its pacing. One such example is the assembly ball where Elizabeth Bennett (Greer Garson) meets Mr. Darcy (Laurence Oliver). It's weird to see Darcy ask Elizabeth for a dance just minutes after insulting her in earshot. I doubt he overcame his pride in a few seconds after seeing her face for the first time. In the novel he stated out that she was not attractive enough to dance with him. He declined in the book. Yet in the movie she is the one that says no and chose to dance with George Wickham played by Edward Cooper instead. A character who happens not to be at that event in the novel. To add onto that it wasn't until much later that Darcy starts to respect her strong will approach when they spent time in his estate of Pemberley; which the movie also cut out. It's a shame because that location was a symbol for their budding romance when both Elizabeth and Darcy cross the small bridge to reach an understandable with each other when it comes to class prejudices. Here both of them has little to no connection. Furthermore, the voice over readings of love letters in the novel is none existed in this film. To make it worst the thespians had hardly any chemistry with each other in any of the romantic sequences. Even the new scene at the semi entertaining archery garden party was somewhat of a letdown. To be honest none of the relationships in the film felt genuine. That also includes Liz's sister Jane portrayed by Maureen O'Sullivan and her suitor Charles Bingley played by Bruce Lester whom barely get any screen time beside the first act to establish themselves. Then there is Charlotte Lucas (Karen Morley) who comes out of nowhere to marry Mr. Collins (Melville Cooper). The film really doesn't explore how they met at all. At least she wasn't cut. Two characters I was really surprised not to see in the movie was the Gardiners and Darcy's younger sister Georgina. In the novel they were instrumental in bringing Darcy and Liz together. Here they're just name drop comments. Honestly, I would love to see them over Colonel Fitzwilliam (Gerald Oliver Smith). At least I would totally believe the exposition dump they give to Elizabeth rather than the colonel offscreen chat with her. Don't get me wrong I do understand that adapting a 300 pages book for a 2hour watch will call for combining and condensing major plot points and characters. Still the film failed to keep the essence of the novel and maintain the overall narrative arc. In short it fundamentally changes who these people are and the society that they live in. For instance, we see a much more personable and charming Darcy & more determined and sarcastic Elizabeth in order to please the audience to liking them more. Then we have Lady Catherine de Bourgh (Edna May Oliver) whom is transformed into a matchmaker whom test relationships. It seems out of character seeing how in the novel her ardent desire wanting Darcy to marry her own daughter Anne (Gia Kent). I would rather have this redemption arc go to Mrs. Bennett played by Mary Boland. She is the one that go too far at times like risking her own daughter's life in the rainstorm sequence. It makes more sense for her to redeem herself by making sure Darcy and Elizabeth's love is sincere. As for Mr. Bennett portrayed by Edmund Gwenn, he really didn't seem like he was dying like he was in the book. I guess the movie wanted to make the comedy merry and not focus too much on confusing dated entailment laws. They also change Wickham. The filmmakers cut down on how much of lying pedophilic vermin he is; so that climatic wedding with a 15 years old Lydia (Ann Rutherford) isn't as disturbing. That being said the performance is a mostly a miss from me. Much of this comes from the really dry somewhat rushed delivery of satirical lines. Don't get me wrong I know that the performers will have to hold back some emotion in order to show the pressures of social etiquette of the time. Still certain actors were playing this, a little too somber for my taste. Oliver was one of them. He really wanted his wife Vivien Leigh as Elizabeth and it kinda show. He seems mostly depressed than fun. Then there is Greer. She acts and looks really out of place here. She doesn't come across as natural nor youthful. Even the hoop skirts she wore make her look like a sassy mother hen than nonconforming young woman. It should also be noted that the costumes in this film was recycled from the 1939 film 'Gone with the Wind'. The studio was on the verge of bankrupt so they took many shortcuts as they could. They didn't care if the production didn't match the time period. That's why the 1995 BBC television adaptation is better. It was faithful to the novel. To add onto that it utilized moving cameras, outdoor locations and a musical score better than this movie who overused sets and melody like the Mr. Collins theme. Overall: While the novel has since been adapted into several more films over the years. This is sadly not my favorite. I'm not like Ralph Waldo Emerson who hate the story so much that he found suicide more respectable. I just found the story and this movie not my cup of tea. Sadly, I don't love it most ardently. It could had been better.