Watch Pride and Prejudice For Free

Thanks for the memories!

Good movie but grossly overrated

Best movie of this year hands down!

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

This early BBC mini-series of "Pride and Prejudice" is the first production to flesh out most of the significant characters of Jane Austen's novel. Of course, it needed the nearly 4 ½ hours to do that. The production values are very good. The scenery and filming are excellent. The cast is very capable, but only a couple of the performances seem exceptional. Those would be Sabina Franklyn as Jane Bennett and Judy Parfitt as Lady Catherine de Bourgh. Irene Richard also was quite good as Charlotte Lucas. David Rintoul made a striking figure for Fitzwilliam Darcy. But, in his transformation at the end, his character still seemed to be dour. There was no apparent warming and enthusiasm with his love for Elizabeth. Elizabeth Garvie is good as Elizabeth, but I think her character was too uncertain at times. She sometimes seemed wishy-washy. Whether this was from her interpretation of the role, or the director's lead, it seemed to weaken the character. I don't think that's the image of Elizabeth that Austen had in mind. Overall, I just didn't sense much life or enthusiasm in the characters. Before this 1980 mini-series, the BBC had made three other mini-series of P&P — in 1952, 1958 and 1967. But those were all in the 3-hour range, with 30-minute installments. They barely touched on some of the characters. The interest has been there for Jane Austen since at least the last half of the 20th century. So at intervals the BBC would put out a new production. Yet, none seemed to improve on the story. By that I mean, succeeding versions didn't add much more from the story than the earlier ones. And no exceptional stars or role insights emerged. So, the preferred version for many movie buffs over four decades was likely the 1940 film with its cast of big name stars – Laurence Olivier, Greer Garson, Maureen O'Sullivan, Edmund Gwenn, and Edna May Oliver. But, with the 1980 mini-series, we had the first flushing out of characters that were ignored or barely mentioned in the movies and shorter series. While it's not a particularly exciting rendition, the 1980 mini-series production is a good wholesome treatment of Austen's great novel of pride and prejudice. And, it would retain the foremost position of P&P films until 1995 and the last great mini-series on the story. A word to the wise – for those who may want to acquire or watch all the various versions of Pride and Prejudice. Watch this 1980 mini-series version before you watch the 1995 version. The difference will become pleasantly clear when watching the second series. To do it in reverse invites awareness of the differences that will be not so pleasant and may even lead to uneasiness or lack of interest when watching this series last.

Definitely the worst of the three versions of P&P that I've seen. (The others being the best, the 2005 movie, and in the middle, the Colin Firth TV version.) While it may be somewhat faithful to the book, almost none of the energy, vitality, or even wit of the book comes through here. The production is overcome by too many dull scenes, some bad acting (esp. David Rintoul as Darcy, who provides another answer to the question from Monty Python's Sir Bedivere, "What else is made of wood?"),and way too much inappropriate music. At times I thought I was watching a nature film made in the 60s or 70s.Skip this one. If you want something faithful to the book, try the Firth version. If you want one that captures the feeling, the energy, and the spirit of the book, then definitely try the 2005 Keira Knightly version.

Without doubt, this is the truest to the original novel by Jane Austen of all the versions made to date, and equally the quietest, the most stately and sedate. I won't worry about the story; anyone likely to watch this now will know already what it's about. It seems more and more likely to my sense that Elizabeth Garvie's Lizzie best represents the vision Jane Austen had of her brightest, most sparkling character: the sweetness is there, an interesting but not a perfect face (just as it should be); though perhaps just a little of the liveliness and archness that Austen wrote about is missing that you can find more easily in either Jennifer Ehle's excellent 90s TV Lizzie, or even Keira Knightley's more recent film outing. But in her bonnet and parasol, her curls wilfully asserting themselves, she's almost exactly what I imagined (apparently not everyone agrees).David Rintoul's Darcy is on first watching, excessively stiff and not particularly entertaining to watch. There is so little mobility in his face, and on occasion even in his voice, that only careful repeated viewings reveal nuances in his performance. I do find myself liking his portrayal more now: it's very subtle, to be sure, no diving into pools or striding open-shirted through dawn meadows, but once you're used to the subtlety, the great formality provides a backdrop against which Darcy's own wit and growing interest in Lizzie stand out in the gentlest relief, like the pattern on a damask cloth.So rich a text is bound to be full of favourite moments; and Weldon's script manages to include much of the wit – and some of the humour – of Austen's original, while also teasing out themes on marriage and happiness which suit her personal brief as a great feminist writer. I particularly love Lizzie's singing (I think it's dubbed but Garvie's acting of the singing is itself a pleasure to watch). The supporting cast is on the whole very good; I liked Uncle and Aunt Gardner and thought Mr Bingley and his sisters well cast. Mr Bennett was a little severe, and didn't seem to take the requisite pleasure in tormenting his wife.I didn't find Mr Wickham very charming; but then I never do. It seems to me they never make him handsome enough – how else could he charm her so much as to blind her to real goodness and excellence? I guess the makers of these programmes are always afraid he'll steal the limelight from Darcy – but since that's exactly his function in the book, take the risk! Perhaps this version has receded into time and been superseded by later attempts that speak more directly to women now. But I'll be keeping it on my DVD shelves for a long time to come, to remind myself how well a little stately simplicity can work.

I'm so glad others think as I do that this is an excellent version. I just don't understand why it is never mentioned in any reviews when reviewing new version of P&P. Even in IMDb, there is hardly any extra information. And is it true that this mini series is not available on DVD? I saw it on tape and it was such a good series and so true to book. I can see why the Colin Firth one is so popular; it was more sensual and as someone commented, Firth was more like a smoldering Heathcliff. I think that book influenced the movie because didn't you think the scene with Elizabeth and Darcy coming out of mist was more of Heathcliff and Cathy type scene? I suppose that's the next book that will be made into a movie yet again.I've just read a review of all the popularity of Austen books, movies and look-alikes and think it's quite good that they have become popular but am sad that no one will make movies like the above version because it is too purist. Everything for the new generation has to be 'sexy' and snazzy and cool. Oh well, even if one young person is motivated or interested enough to read a Jane Austen book after seeing one of the movies, then I'll be happy.