The Best Pride and Prejudice Adaptation, According to Rotten Tomatoes

It’s time to talk about Jane Austen’s “Pride and Prejudice”, one of the most enduring novels in English literature. It’s such an age-old story and countless modifications—official and unofficial—have been madeapproaching the source material from all sorts of perspectives. Apart from inspiring cinematic adaptations, Austen’s novel has also spawned a world of related stories, including Janet Aylmer’s popular “Darcy’s Story” and the more recent “Pride and Prejudice and Zombies”, which blends period drama with ultra-violent zombie-horror tropes. .

Due to the breadth of modifications, it can be difficult to ascertain which one is the “best” for sure. To begin with there is a mix of faithful adaptations against those loosely inspired by the 1813 novel, such as the Bollywood-style “Bride & Prejudice” or the Emmy-winning “The Lizzie Bennet Diaries”. For the sake of simplicity, let’s stick to simple adaptations, which place themselves firmly within the novel’s text and carve their own legacy around it.

I will argue that the biggest popular Joe Wright’s 2005 version is an adaptation with Keira Knightley and Matthew Macfadyen (the hand flex view alone confirming its appeal), followed by the BBC series in 1995 with Jennifer Ehle and Colin Firth. The latter is truly brilliant, as it manages to bring aspects of the novel that are overlooked to life while offering a highly complex interpretation of Mr. Darcy, who is perfectly balanced by the lively, quick Elizabeth.

However, Rotten Tomatoes considers the 1940 adaptation of “Pride and Prejudice” to be the best, which 100% perfect sport on the Tomatometer for good reason. Let’s take a closer look at this Academy Award winning title.

Writer and playwright Helen Jerome wrote a stage adaptation of Austen’s novel in 1935, which premiered at the Music Box Theater in New York, and starred Adrianne Allen and Colin Keith-Johnston as the leads. The enduring popularity of this theatrical version directly influenced the 1940 version of “Pride and Prejudice,” which combined elements of the novel with Jerome’s interpretation, resulting in a watered-down, but admirable, adaptation that deserves repeated reconsideration. .

Big names were involved in this project, including the author of “Brave New World” Aldous Huxley, who wrote the script alongside the playwright Jane Murfin, and Laurence Olivier, who slipped into Mr Darcy’s shoes. The prolific actress Greer Garson (“Madame Curie,” “Sunrise at Campobello”) took on the mantle of Elizabeth Bennet, investing the character with a cracking satirical wit that took on new meaning in this comedy of pointed manners.

Although the film sticks to the basic beats of Austen’s story, it has fun with the liberties it takes. For example, when the news comes about the occupation of the Netherfield estate, Mrs. Bennet (Mary Boland) takes part in an intense chariot race against Lady Lucas (Marjorie Wood) so that she can deliver the news to her husband before anyone else. This kinetic sequence shows how far she is willing to go to ensure the future of her daughters (sometimes, a little too far).

Garson is very charming as Elizabeth. Her characterization is rather shallow compared to the versions that succeeded her, but this has everything to do with how the script makes her seem volatile and indecisive. Olivier’s Darcy has none of these the angry awkwardness central to most portrayals of the character: if anything, he comes off as too friendly. The change in perspective we’re meant to experience with the two leads is sudden rather than gradual, and their relationship, while worth rooting for, feels removed from its beating heart. Austen’s world, which delights in the interior.

However, the 1940 version began a trajectory of better Jane Austen adaptations that would cement the legacy of these timeless storiesis repeated with changing lenses and perspectives. If you want a fun and light rendition of “Pride and Prejudice” that ventures in new directions, this Garson-Olivier joint is worth your time.