How can I not give 5 Stars to Robert Z. Leonard's 1940 version of "Pride and Prejudice?" As a child, this film was my first introduction to Jane Austen. My delight in watching it motivated me to read her novel at an earlier age than I would have normally. I know that at least two later versions of this classic have been made, one by BBC in 1980, and another by A&E in 1995. I adore both adaptations, especially the one with Colin Firth as Mr. Darcy. However, Greer Garson is magnificent here as Elizabeth Bennet, even if she is a bit old to be playing a debutante, recently out in society. And Laurence Olivier epitomizes Fitzwilliam Darcy, with his overly proud bearing and manner. (He too is a little long in the tooth for the part, as written.). However, together, they illuminate the screen and exude a special magic. Their charisma, the rare chemistry which captures the audience's imagination and enthralls, allows all else to become possible. That is what an outstanding film is all about - creating belief and enchantment. One might get the impression that this is more a Cinderella story than a comedy of manners and social satire - but that still doesn't detract from the movie's strengths, and there are many.
Leonard's version is not, by any means, a faithful adaptation of Miss Austen's portrayal of morals, mores, marriages and the class system in Georgian England. Scenes have been added: the archery "lesson" - which I loved, and the carriage race. However, to be fair, various scenes were added to Simon Langton's film, most notably the one where Colin Firth takes a swim, and his sword practice. These scenes enrich rather than detract, to my mind. I am not so much of a purest, that a few variations bother me. It is unfortunate that important scenes and sequences at Pemberley, in London, and at Lambton are omitted. Some of my favorite minor characters, like Mr. and Mrs. Gardner, and Georgiana Darcy are absent too. Charlotte Lucas, (Karen Morley), who is an extremely important personage in the novel, plays a very small part here, as do Sir William Lucas and Col. Fitzwilliam. The costumes are not faithful to the period, overly crinolined and too elaborate. And the dialogue makes little use of the author's brilliant language.
So, why am I rating this a top notch film? I already spoke of the brilliance of Garson and Olivier. As for the rest, well, let's look at the story. Word is out, in a small Hertfordshire community, that the empty Netherfield estate has been leased to a new occupant - a wealthy bachelor. Mothers and daughters upset their daily routine, and shatter the local tranquility - buying dress material, sewing, embroidering, planning and fantasizing about balls and marriage. The latest gossip pours from everyone's mouths, at least those of the women, young and older. Nowhere is there more excitement than at the Bennett home, where five very marriageable daughters anticipate news of their neighbor. The Bennett's have a particular reason for wishing their girls settled. Their estate, Longbourn, is entailed. It can only be inherited by a male successor. Since the Bennett's have no son, their entire estate will go to Mr. Bennett's cousin. The girls must be married well and settled, so they will have a secure home when their father dies. If their mother should outlive her spouse, they will have to provide for her also. Marriage is a serious business in this period. The film succeeds in clearly reflecting Ms. Austin's theories on the importance of marriage for women of the period. Most women were not educated, except for the social graces; acquiring, at least, some proficiency in music, needlework and "acceptable" literature, and learning skills essential to running a household. Considerable pressure was placed on women to marry well, to obtain financial security and social position, not just for themselves, but also for their immediate family. Love matches were rare.
An Assembly Ball is held to honor Charles Bingley, (Bruce Lester), the new resident at Netherfield, and for the friends who accompany him. Bingley is very taken with Jane Bennett, (Maureen O'Sullivan), the eldest daughter, and a lovely young woman with a sweet disposition. The feelings are reciprocated and the two form an informal attachment. It is at this ball that Elizabeth Bennett (Ms. Garson), the family's second daughter, meets Bingley's friend, the aristocratic Fitzwilliam Darcy, (Olivier). Darcy, is much wealthier than Bingley. He is a handsome, intelligent man, and the Lord of Pemberly, a large, sumptuous estate in Derbyshire. Darcy, however, is the height of haughtiness when he arrives on the scene, and looks down his noble nose at the local gentry. Elizabeth Bennett, is quite different from most young women of the Regency Period. She has a strong intellect and her father has encouraged her to become literate, and to enjoy fine books and literary conversation. She is bright, spirited, with a sharp wit, more independent than her sisters, and very pretty. Darcy is attracted to her immediately, but snubs her unknowingly. She overhears Darcy explain to Mr. Bingley that he is not dancing because: "There isn't another woman in the room who it wouldn't be a punishment to stand up with." That bit of snobbishness makes him odious to Elizabeth. Then he adds, about Elizabeth herself, "Oh, she's tolerable, I suppose, but I'm in no mood to give consequence to the middle classes." Elizabeth responds in kind, thinking him to be boorish and far too proud. Thus she is prejudiced against him from their first meeting. (I would have smacked his face - but that's me, and I'm no lady)!
Elizabeth and Darcy's strong mutual attraction, and the conflict between them, which prevents them from forming a potentially rich relationship, provide an interesting tension throughout the film. Darcy's proud arrogance in his social class and position, and Elizabeth's prejudice against such haughtiness, seem to inhibit all promise of romance.
The transformation of contempt into mutual friendship, respect and love is a major theme in Ms. Austen's novel, and this is beautifully conveyed here. The aversion, caused by pride and prejudice is later swept away through a series of events, and clear, honest communication between the protagonists, which clears up misunderstandings. Although both Elizabeth and Darcy exhibit both pride and prejudice in the novel, it is clear that Elizabeth is the more prejudiced of the two, and "pride" most especially refers to Darcy. When the they converse at the Netherfield gathering, these correlations are made quite explicit. "You're very puzzling, Mr. Darcy. At this moment it's difficult to believe that you're so...proud. At this moment, it's difficult to believe that you're so prejudiced. Shall we not call quits and start again?"
The ensemble cast is truly extraordinary. As I keep writing, Greer Garson, as an exceptionally cheeky Elizabeth, is fabulous. Her expressive face and gestures frequently communicate her feelings without speaking a single line. I think Laurence Olivier is the best Darcy, or at least his performance is the equal of my favorite, Colin Firth. Olivier's range is great, and even as a proud, haughty man, he is a three dimensional figure. Their acting style has a sensibility that suits the more rigid and formal behavior of the period. Ms. O'Sullivan's Jane is perfection. Miss Austen would approve, I am sure. Ann Rutherford, as the flighty Lydia does a fantastic job, as does Marsha Hunt as the plain, bookish, and absolutely tone deaf Mary. Frieda Inescort is the best Caroline Bingley I have ever seen. She manages to out-haughty even Mr. Darcy with her airs of superiority. Mr. Bennet, (Edmund Gwenn), is superb as the father who errs by distancing himself from his wife and daughters, (silly creatures he calls the women affectionately), with the exception of Elizabeth, his intellectual soul mate. Mary Boland is the flighty, high strung Mrs. Bennet, whose loyalties change with the wind, and who causes her husband to suffer silently. The film doesn't delve into the estrangement between the unlikely pair, but there is still a palpable tension at times between these two, who are so mismatched. The charming, handsome, (if somewhat smarmy), officer, stationed at Meryton, George Wickham, (Edward Ashley), does a fine job of playing the bounder and stirring up trouble. And Mr. Collins', (Melville Cooper), the sycophant cousin whose devotion to the very blue-blooded Lady Catherine de Bourgh, (Edna May Oliver), seems to be his raison d'etre, plays his part to the hilt. I love the scene where he pursues Elizabeth at the picnic.
The screenplay for this film was written by author Aldous Huxley and Jane Murfin, and was based on a play, not taken directly from the novel. They place the emphasis on romance and farce, not biting satire. And so this is much more a romantic comedy than the more recent adaptations. It is less true to Jane Austen's work, but it is faithful to her storyline, and succeeds in communicating her most important themes. It is also extraordinary entertainment, with wonderful humor, superior acting, and it stands the test of time. The musical score by Herbert Stothart is exceptional, and it is totally integrated into the film.
JANA
Enjoy fast, free delivery, exclusive deals, and award-winning movies & TV shows with Prime
Try Prime
and start saving today with fast, free delivery
Add a debit or credit card to save time when you check out
Convenient and secure with 2 clicks. Add your card
Frequently bought together
$10.49
Get it as soon as Tuesday, May 14
Only 4 left in stock - order soon.
Total price:
To see our price, add these items to your cart.
Choose items to buy together.
Similar items that may deliver to you quickly
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
From the manufacturer
Warner Bros. Home Entertainment
A division of WarnerMedia, Warner Bros. Home Entertainment (WBHE) brings together all of Warner Bros.’ businesses involved in the delivery of home entertainment content to consumers.
Based on the constantly changing ways by which consumers access entertainment, WBHE focuses on maximizing current and next-generation distribution scenarios to make the Studio’s content available to audiences through as many channels, platforms and devices as possible.
Warner Home Video
With distribution in 90 international territories, Warner Home Video has one of the largest distribution infrastructures in the global video marketplace. In 2019, Warner Home Video had 20% marketshare for overall home entertainment WHV also had the library with “Harry Potter Complete 8-Film Collection” and the television franchise with “Game of Thrones.”
Reviews with images
Enjoyable for its own sake, not as an adaptation
(The following contains very slight spoilers)Those films which were based on novels during Hollywood's golden age typically made huge changes from the original texts, very often with little of the original story remaining. And this picture is par for the course; oh, it's still recognisable as Jane Austen's story, but it can't be said to be a faithful adaptation in any way. (In fact, this script isn't actually based on the book itself; it's an adaptation of a stage play that was based on the book.) As an example of the changes made----the story was updated to the early Victorian era and the bulk of the plot has been pared to the bone or scrapped entirely to fit the tale into a two-hour running time. While the story is moderately faithful to the source material at the beginning (though simplified for time constraints), it runs off the rails about fifty minutes in and from there goes its own way, culminating with the surprising revelation, at the end, that Lady Catherine is secretly nice! (Shocking, I tell you!)Still, taken on its own terms as a cinematic experience, the film is enjoyable enough. The question is, why doesn't it bother me that such liberties were taken with the story in this 1940 version, when I was utterly disgusted and repulsed by the 2005 version for similar liberties? Well, perhaps it's because that, given the time period in which this film was made, I wasn't expecting a faithful adaptation in the first place. Also, this film does at least contain some of the comedy and wit of the novel; elements that are totally lacking in the 2005 version.So, don't look to this film for an faithful adaptation of the original story; it's more to be enjoyed for the cast of well-known golden age Hollywood actors who populate the major and minor roles. And so I'll give it a moderate recommendation for those who enjoy classic cinema.A couple addenda: MGM in-house composer Herbert Stothart wrote the music for this film. He was well-known for borrowing bits of classical music for use in his film scores (perhaps sometimes to excess), and here he used a piece from Modest Mussorgsky's "Pictures at an Exhibition" in the score. It's called "Ballad of the Unhatched Chicks," and it's used as Mrs Bennet's theme song---this is actually rather amusing and a good fit for the character!The early Victorian-era costumes in this film are quite lavish and opulent---though of course completely different in appearance from the Regency clothing that would have been appropriate if the film's time period hadn't been changed. It simply isn't true, however, that costumes from "Gone with the Wind" were re-used in this picture (as has often been reported). Apart from the fact that the gowns make use of the crinoline, the style of the dresses in these two films is completely different .... (Though, it should be added, that the men's clothes don't quite match the women's in regards to time period; there really was no attempt made to perfectly recreate a very specific era.)This is a difficult one to rate---three stars seems a bit low, but I honestly didn't like it enough to give it four stars.
Top reviews from other countries
David Welford
Excellent Dutch Release of Pride & Prejudice
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on May 30, 2018