Visiting Pemberley

In the year of 1797, a middle-aged, middle-class woman changed the course of history.  With the publication of her novel Pride and Prejudice, Jane Austen introduced into the world a cluster of characters to snatch the hearts of readers for centuries to follow.  Capturing vivid scenes and poignant dialogue, her work has enveloped each reader in turn into the Bennet family’s daily life, allowing them to wince along at the shrill cries of  “Oh Mr. Bennet!” or cling like Lizzie to every word in the beloved line “You must allow me to tell you how ardently I admire and love you” of Mr. Darcy’s first, failed proposal (177).  Debatably her most renowned work of all time, Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice has been adapted into various film renditions, ranging from modern day spin-offs to lengthy British TV series.  Among the most popular variations, BBC’s 1995 mini-series and the 2005 Pride and Prejudice movie bid for recognition as the greatest adaptation. 

One of the immediately noticed differences between the two, the varying lengths of the films provide each with a unique set of strengths and shortcomings.  The 1995 mini-series’s six-hour screen time far surpasses the two-hour movie length of the 2005 version, and thereby it inevitably has more time to incorporate detail and verbatim dialogue that would be unreasonable to include in the limited time of the other.  With the extended duration of the series, the characters receive a greater level of development and context of the reasoning—if there so happens to be any—behind their decisions in the story.  While the timing of the 2005 movie may appear merely as a hindrance to the development and accuracy of the plot, the shorter length does have its merits.  Realistically, the movie’s duration conforms more closely with the average family’s reasonable watching commitment and requires a smaller attention span, in that sense appealing to a wider audience. 

As one of the more critical aspects in a narrative, the difference in character portrayal and accuracy to the book affects the overall impact of each subsequent adaptation.  Because of its time crunch, the 2005 film seized upon the sensational, relying on a heightened sense of drama to fill in the possible choppy points in the storyline.  The method of developing the different personas of each character follows a style of caricature with the inflation of certain traits to adequately convey to the viewer the general gist of the character’s initially intended personality.  Mr. Darcy’s dour expression and social awkwardness dominate his personality perhaps a bit too strongly and leave less room for his often concealed yet evident congenial side.  Likewise, the movie’s portrayal of Lizzie expands her teasing spirit to a point where her vivacious character obtains an unintended, overly vicious and serious streak that veers from the original.

The 1995 mini-series, with the upper hand of six hours rather than two, more adequately captures the balance between the joking buoyancy in Miss Bennet’s personality with her sense and prejudice, more accurately interpreting her character from Jane Austen’s work.  Mr. Darcy also has a more rounded character; his pride and desire for solitude level out with the additional scenes of him conversing with the select few he deems friends.  Though both adaptations provide insightful visual interpretation of the book and obtain differing advantages from their variances, the 1995 series is arguably better because of its attention to the narratorial and character details that give Pride and Prejudice its treasured quality.  Even if the film’s length requires a greater time commitment, the viewer gains the gift of an extended time spent in Jane Austen’s world. 

Work Cited

Austen, Jane. Pride and Prejudice. Arcturus Publishing Limited, pp. 9-352.

Photo Credit 

https://www.alittlebithuman.com/1995-pride-and-prejudice-adaptation/

https://medium.com/@shambhavi_io/bonnets-and-ballrooms-a8f23e97cbf0