Summary
- Joe Wright's 2005 adaptation of Pride & Prejudice took a more romantic approach to the novel, making it a critical success for blending traditional period-film traits with a modern approach.
- The adaptation focused on the romance between Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy, cutting down on subplots and condensing the novel into a 127 minute-movie. Keira Knightley's portrayal of Elizabeth was significantly feistier and more imioned than in the original novel.
- The Bennet family in the film was portrayed as much poorer than in the novel, but also more sympathetic and close-knit. The adaptation also cut minor characters and condensed subplots, making it a stronger movie.
Joe Wright's 2005 adaptation Pride & Prejudice had more differences from the Jane Austen novel than just changing the time period, making the film more realistic and romantic in the process. Starring Keira Knightley as Elizabeth Bennet and Matthew Macfadyen as Mr. Darcy, the film took a more romantic approach to the novel, grounded in realism, that turned Pride & Prejudice into a critical success for blending traditional period-film traits with a modern approach.
The adaptation stripped down the Pride & Prejudice subplots to focus on the romance between Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy, compressing the novel into a 127 minute-movie. Keira Knightley's Elizabeth Bennet was significantly feistier than Elizabeth's portrayal in the book, much like Knightley's similar performance as Elizabeth Swann in Pirates of the Caribbean. However, Knightley's modern interpretation of the character and Joe Wright's stunningly shot film pushed Pride & Prejudice out of the stereotypically perfect Regency-era world, and into one that was visually distinct. Differences between the Pride and Prejudice book and movie made Pride & Prejudice 2005 a much better adaptation than its predecessors.
Pride & Prejudice Changed The 1813 Setting And Costumes
One of the biggest changes Joe Wright made to Pride & Prejudice 2005 was changing the time period from 1813 to the 1790s. Wright made the decision partially to highlight the differences in England as a result of the French Revolution and examine the ways that the revolution created an atmosphere of fear within the English aristocracy (via Yahoo).
However, Wright also changed the time period because he hated the look of the empire silhouette that was popular in the Regency Era and a defining trait of all other Austen adaptations — such as the 2020 adaption of Emma (although deviated from the Austen novel as well.) As a result, the dresses have a corseted, natural waist as opposed to the exaggerated high waist of the empire style. Costume designer Jacqueline Durran also created a generational divide between the characters, dressing the older women in the outdated styles of the 1780s, and the younger women like the Bennet sisters in a proto-Regency look.
Jane Austen's Elizabeth Was More Mature
When it comes to Pride and Prejudice book vs. movie differences, Keira Knightley's portrayal of Elizabeth Bennet is significantly feistier and more imioned in Pride & Prejudice than in the original novel. While Knightley's Elizabeth grows apart from Jane over the course of the movie, the two actually become much closer in the book. Knightley's Elizabeth is comfortable pushing back on her parents — and in one scene, even shouting at them — while Austen's Elizabeth might be headstrong, but she is never immature.
Though this contributed to sparking the prominence of feminist messages in modern movies at the turn of the century, the film also received criticism from Austen fans for cutting one of Elizabeth's most famous lines, "Till this moment, I never knew myself," and taking away her moment of self-recognition. However, the changes made to Elizabeth's characterization make her more relatable to a modern audience and make for a fresher, younger take on the classic character.
The Bennets Are Poorer But More Likable
In the Austen novel, the Bennet family might be down on their luck, but they're still a member of the landed gentry and retain some wealth and status. The Bennet family in Pride & Prejudice 2005 is portrayed as much poorer than their novel depiction, partially due to Joe Wright's shifting away from the formal portrayal of the Regency Era by putting the family home in a more rural setting. The Bennet sisters wear worn-out dresses that don't quite match, and the family home is in a state of clear disrepair.
Pride & Prejudice 2005 also changed the characterization of Mr. and Mrs. Bennet to make them more sympathetic, turning Mr. Bennet into a loving and attentive father, and presenting Mrs. Bennet's machinations with understanding instead of scorn. The Bennet family might be chaotic, but in the film, they're very close-knit. However, Jane Austen presents the family as dysfunctional and unhappy. Contrasting the clear financial difficulties of the Bennet family with the closeness and love between the sisters and their parents makes them much more relatable to contemporary audiences in the Joe Wright adaptation.
Joe Wright Cut Several Minor Characters
While the 1995 BBC miniseries had six episodes to tell the full story, Joe Wright's adaptation pared the novel down to 127 minutes, cutting minor characters and condensing subplots. Wickham's departure with the militia was massively condensed, and Lydia Bennet, played by Hunger Games actress Jena Malone, saw her storyline and elopement massively reduced in the film.
In addition, minor characters including Mr. and Mrs. Hunt, Mr. and Mrs. Phillips, and Lady and Maria Lucas were cut entirely from the film in favor of focusing the story on the romance between Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy. Although die-hard Jane Austen fans criticized the film for cutting the characters and condensing the subplots, narrowing the scope made Pride & Prejudice 2005 a much stronger movie.
Darcy's Proposals Were Way More Romantic
Part of Joe Wright's approach in his Pride & Prejudice adaptation was turning a decidedly non-visual novel into a stunningly-designed film. The director emphasized romanticism with his visuals, accomplished by moving away from the formality of the Regency Era; as a result, one of the major differences between the Pride and Prejudice book and movie was to Mr. Darcy's famous proposals.
Mr. Darcy first proposes in a downpour while the two are trapped in a beautiful, Neoclassical building — but in the novel, it takes place inside a parsonage. Similarly, his second proposal in the film takes place on the scenic misty moors as dawn breaks over the scene, and is strongly characteristic of Joe Wright's postmodern romantic style, though it's a complete departure from the novel. In the novel, Mr. Darcy proposes on the street in the middle of the day. While Jane Austen fans may concede that the changes make for a beautiful film, the approach to these scenes is more stylistically appropriate for Wuthering Heights than Pride & Prejudice.
Pride & Prejudice Didn't End With A Wedding
The single biggest controversy from Pride & Prejudice 2005 was Joe Wright's decision not to end the movie with a wedding. This is similar to the ending of Fire Island, the LGBTQ+ adaptation of the novel. Instead of a wedding, Pride & Prejudice ends with a sentimental scene between the now-married Darcys, enjoying an intimate moment at Pemberley.
That decision caused a major backlash from the Jane Austen Society of North America before its release, and the scene was removed from the British release of the film after complaints from the preview audiences (via The New York Times). The British release instead had a scene where Mr. Bennet blesses Elizabeth and Darcy's union, in a nod to the final chapter of the book that summarizes their lives after the events of the novel. However, after audiences complained that they were excluded from the true ending, Wright's original conclusion was reinstated.
Why The Changes In Pride & Prejudice Made It The Best Adaptation
Pride & Prejudice 2005 might have made major changes from its source material, but in the end, it made Joe Wright's adaptation a better and much more stylish film. Joe Wright's trademark commitment to realism and his postmodern romantic style, also seen in his 2017 film Darkest Hour, was an unconventional choice for the adaptation – but ultimately paid off. Approaching the source material with a more modern and stylized eye refreshed the story and helped it appeal to younger audiences. Undoubtedly, Joe Wright's decision to turn the Bennets into a more loving family while narrowing the focus to the romance between Elizabeth and Darcy ultimately makes Pride & Prejudice 2005 the best modern Jane Austen adaptation.
Likewise, the decision to change Jane Austen's ending is better for the film version, since a wedding scene would have been a massive tonal shift following the languid romanticism of the rest of the film. Although it's true that this change made it less satisfying for die-hard fans of the novel, the faithfulness of any adaptation isn't just hinged on how much it can copy the source material. Sometimes, it's ing the adaptive medium to give an interesting new spin on the original. Like Netflix's The Sandman, Francis Ford Coppola's Godfather movies, or Universal Pictures' Dr. Seuss films, Pride & Prejudice 2005 succeeds at changing many elements of the original story while never veering away from its core messages and themes.
Indeed, Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice isn't exactly known for its visuals. However, Wright's emphasis on cinematography worked well in translating the emotions stirred up by Austen's words. Given the limited space of the feature film format, Wright pulled off a miracle by compressing 82,000 words into just 2 hours, all without losing the essence of what made the novel so great.
Is Pride & Prejudice 2005 The Most Faithful Adaptation?
With all the differences highlighted in Pride And Prejudice 2005, it’s not the most faithful adaptation of Jane Austen’s novel. Simply moving the time period of the story from the Regency Era creates a ripple effect in the movie causing even more differences between the Pride and Prejudice book and movie. There’s no doubt that the movie is visually stunning and a great adaptation of the novel itself, and certainly, other adaptations have even more differences.
Take the web series The Lizzie Bennet Diaries. It sets the story of Jane Austen’s Bennet family in the modern day with vlogs being used to tell the story of the characters. It might keep the spirit of the love story alive, but it’s certainly the least faithful adaptation (though still incredibly beloved by Jane Austen fans).
The most accurate Pride And Prejudice adaptation is the 1995 miniseries. The miniseries is benefited by all of that extra screen time given to the characters. As a result, it doesn’t have to cut minor characters, and it doesn’t have to cut whole sections of dialogue from Austen’s original words. In fact, the 1995 miniseries is almost an exact page-for-page adaptation of Jane Austen’s novel.
There are some differences, but they are used to expand the story. For example, the contents of letters read in the novel are actually shown as events happening in the series instead. Characters get to play out the scenes instead of simply talking about them. It’s widely regarded as one of the most faithful adaptations and often rivals Pride and Prejudice 2005 as the best Jane Austen adaptation.
