--- title: "Pride & Prejudice" year: 2005 kind: "film" canonical: "https://film.one/film/pride-and-prejudice-2005" fi1m_id: "pride-and-prejudice-2005" imdb_id: "tt0414387" tmdb_id: 4348 wikidata_id: "Q270385" fi1m_score: 82 critics_score: 75 critics_reviews: 10 published: "2026-09-15" updated: "2026-09-18T08:38:29.945090+00:00" region: "US" licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # Pride & Prejudice (2005) Directed by Joe Wright · 2h 08m · MPA PG · Drama, Romance ## Identity Pride & Prejudice - **Canonical:** https://film.one/film/pride-and-prejudice-2005 - **Type:** Film - **Fi1m ID:** pride-and-prejudice-2005 - **IMDb ID:** tt0414387 - **TMDB ID:** 4348 - **Wikidata ID:** Q270385 - **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0414387/, https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/4348, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q270385 **Fi1m score: 82** · Critics 75 from 10 reviews *In a sentence:* Darcy can manage the dancing; saying hello is where the trouble starts > Joe Wright’s Austen adaptation is funny, warmly acted and persuasive as a romance, with Keira Knightley giving Elizabeth Bennet a welcome impatience. We recommend it, with a caveat: the grand romantic mood sometimes overwhelms the sharper social comedy. ## Synopsis Elizabeth Bennet (Keira Knightley) encounters Mr Darcy (Matthew Macfadyen) in a society where courtship is subject to close scrutiny. She has her own ideas about how to behave, and Darcy proves difficult company. At home are her parents, played by Brenda Blethyn and Donald Sutherland, and sisters including Rosamund Pike’s Jane. Mr Bingley (Simon Woods) and Mr Collins (Tom Hollander) enter the family’s circle, with dances providing occasions to meet and misunderstand one another. Joe Wright directs this adaptation of Joe Wright’s Austen’s novel, with a screenplay by Deborah Moggach. ## Review Joe Wright’s *Pride & Prejudice* makes a persuasive case for letting Austen’s young people behave like young people. They are quick to judge, awkward in company and much less composed than their clothes might suggest. We warmly recommend it: Keira Knightley gives Elizabeth Bennet enough wit and impatience to keep the romance lively, even when Wright makes the feelings a little too grand. Deborah Moggach’s screenplay keeps the social pressures in view, though the wish to sweep us along sometimes makes the comedy broader than it needs to be. Knightley makes Elizabeth’s quick judgements enjoyable enough that we can understand why she trusts them. We laughed at the discomfort of Elizabeth’s first meeting with Darcy, because Knightley’s readiness to engage runs into Matthew Macfadyen’s determined reserve. There is a risk of making such a heroine so charming that she cannot plausibly be wrong, and Knightley occasionally comes close. Her sharpness is most useful when it has a touch of self-satisfaction, something the performance allows without asking us to dislike her. Macfadyen takes longer to justify his place in the film. His Darcy is so withdrawn that the early encounters can leave Knightley doing most of the work, and we understand the complaint that he is simply dull. Yet the stiffness makes emotional sense beside her speed: he looks like someone who cannot comfortably participate in the company he is expected to keep. The attraction becomes convincing because these two seem capable of unsettling one another, though a little more conversational ease would not have ruined him. Roman Osin’s cinematography allows the period settings to look imperfect, with lighting that makes the rooms feel inhabited rather than prepared for inspection. Sarah Greenwood’s production design gives the Bennet household the same welcome lack of tidiness. This helps the family seem accustomed to living together, with none of the cautious behaviour of actors afraid to touch the furniture. The busy country-house balls extend that sense of lives being lived around the central couple. Paul Tothill’s editing keeps the introductions and social encounters moving briskly, so the 128 minutes seldom feel crowded with obligations. Dario Marianelli’s music supplies some of the emotional openness that Macfadyen withholds, and the romance benefits from that warmth. But Wright sometimes pushes the romantic mood until the social comedy becomes secondary. The attraction is already persuasive, and some of the more emphatic treatment feels unnecessary when the actors have made small differences in temperament so interesting. Brenda Blethyn’s Mrs Bennet is the performance most exposed by the broader comedy. The fuss can become wearing, and Wright does not always leave enough space for the social worries beneath it. Rosamund Pike’s Jane offers a useful quieter presence, while Tom Hollander’s Mr Collins makes formal manners funny without requiring the whole film to stop for him. The unevenness matters because Austen’s comedy needs people whose behaviour is absurd but whose concerns remain understandable. Compared with the tidier sort of costume romance, this is pleasingly willing to let people seem uncomfortable and households look used. We would have preferred Wright to trust the humour a little more, particularly when the courtship becomes his overriding concern. Readers attached to the novel’s cooler judgement may find the romantic emphasis excessive, but there is ample pleasure in the company of these actors. Choose it for Knightley, and allow Darcy a little longer to make his case. *Fi1m score 82, published 15 September 2026.* ## What the critics say Most critics welcome Joe Wright’s Pride & Prejudice as a lively, earthy adaptation, with praise clustering around Keira Knightley’s spirited Elizabeth Bennet. The reviews repeatedly pick out her wit, confidence and warmth, alongside period detail that makes the Bennet household feel lived in rather than preserved for inspection. Wright’s youthful pace and the central romance also find broad support, though critics differ over how much Austen’s social satire survives the emphasis on feeling. The spread is wide despite the positive lean, and even less enthusiastic reviews tend to admire Knightley. Darcy is a dividing point: The New York Times welcomes Matthew Macfadyen’s more human portrayal, while Eye for Film finds him dull and unappealing. The New Yorker objects to melodramatic imagery pushing Austen towards Brontë. Slant Magazine offers a broader dissent, finding the adaptation familiar and its casting uneven despite the efforts at realism. ## Straight answers **Is Pride & Prejudice worth watching?** *Pride & Prejudice* is worth watching for anyone who wants a warm, funny Austen romance, and we scored it 82. Keira Knightley gives Elizabeth Bennet a welcome impatience, and Matthew Macfadyen's stiff Darcy comes to make sense beside her. Readers attached to the novel's cooler judgement may find Joe Wright pushes the romantic mood too hard. **How long is Pride & Prejudice, and what is it rated?** *Pride & Prejudice* runs 2h 08m and is rated PG by the MPA in the US. It is a drama and romance film. **Where can I watch Pride & Prejudice in the US?** *Pride & Prejudice* is available to rent from Amazon Prime Video and Apple TV from $3.99. Availability is checked daily; the links above go straight to each service. **How does Pride & Prejudice compare to Sense and Sensibility?** *Pride & Prejudice* is the more openly romantic of the two, while [*Sense and Sensibility*](https://film.one/film/sense-and-sensibility) keeps a firmer hold on its comedy and its money worries. Both are funny and warmly acted, and we recommend both. Choose Joe Wright's film for Knightley's quick, sharp Elizabeth; choose Ang Lee's for Emma Thompson and Kate Winslet and a steadier balance of feeling and humour. **Is Pride & Prejudice based on a true story or a book?** *Pride & Prejudice* is based on Jane Austen's novel of the same name, adapted for the screen by Deborah Moggach. It is not a true story. Knowing the book is not necessary to enjoy it, but readers who love the novel's cooler, more judging tone may find the film's grand romantic emphasis excessive. **What should I watch after Pride & Prejudice?** After *Pride & Prejudice*, try [*Sense and Sensibility*](https://film.one/film/sense-and-sensibility) (1995, Fi1m 85): For another Austen family whose financial worries sharpen the romantic comedy. Then [*The Age of Innocence*](https://film.one/film/the-age-of-innocence) (1993, Fi1m 86): For another romance in which good manners make honest conversation almost impossible; and [*The Lunchbox*](https://film.one/film/the-lunchbox) (2013, Fi1m 75): For a gentler courtship conducted through small gestures and patient attention. ### Reviews we read (12) - **RogerEbert.com**, Roger Ebert (4/4): The critic praises the film as one of the most delightful adaptations of Austen, highlighting Keira Knightley's spirited and fierce performance as Elizabeth Bennet. He singles out the robust, earthy period detail and the emotional payoff of the central romance for particular praise. [Read](https://rogerebert.com/reviews/pride-and-prejudice-2005) - **Total Film** (85/100, inferred): The critic applauds first-time director Joe Wright for injecting youthful energy and visual flair into the adaptation, with Keira Knightley delivering a captivating Elizabeth. Minor issues with Matthew MacFadyen's Darcy and Brenda Blethyn's Mrs Bennet are noted, but overall it reveals new strengths in Austen's story. [Read](https://www.gamesradar.com/pride-and-prejudice-review/) - **Radio Times**, Sloan Freer (4/5): Joe Wright's debut delivers a gutsy, less idealised take on Austen's novel, focusing on wit and intellect with a strong lead performance from Keira Knightley as a spirited Elizabeth Bennet. [Read](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-8wrfbh/pride-prejudice/) - **The Guardian**, Peter Bradshaw (80/100, inferred): The critic calls it a clever, elegant rendering of Austen that satisfies traditional period conventions while benefiting from strong performances. Keira Knightley's outstanding, witty turn as Lizzy Bennet lifts the whole film and is singled out for particular praise. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2005/sep/16/2) - **The New York Times**, Stephen Holden (80/100, inferred): The review finds the adaptation satisfyingly rich in romance, historical detail and social satire, with Knightley's radiant presence shifting the emphasis toward a more glamorous Elizabeth. It notes Matthew Macfadyen's humanized Darcy as a strength while acknowledging the film's brisk, crowd-pleasing liberties with the novel. [Read](https://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/11/movies/marrying-off-those-bennet-sisters-again-but-this-time-elizabeth-is-a.html) - **Evening Standard**, Derek Malcom (75/100, inferred): The critic finds Joe Wright's version an enjoyable, grittier take on Austen's novel with a strong Elizabeth from Keira Knightley and a shrewd look at the era's social constraints. Some casting veers toward caricature, but strong performances and entertainment value prevail. [Read](https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/film/muddying-of-miss-elizabeth-7385776.html) - **The Times**, Wendy Ide (75/100, inferred): The critic finds this the second big-screen adaptation in decades a strong contender that captures the story's playfulness and youthfulness without over-prettifying it. Knightley's age-appropriate Lizzy and the incendiary chemistry with MacFadyen's Darcy are highlighted as key strengths. [Read](https://www.thetimes.com/culture/tv-radio/article/pride-and-prejudice-7jzr57tvt2t) - **The New Yorker**, Anthony Lane (70/100, inferred): The critic notes the film plays fast and loose with Austen in a welcome way, delivering brisk storytelling and strong performances, especially Knightley's crisp Elizabeth. He complains that the adaptation Brontë-fies the material with melodramatic visuals and mood, turning it into something more romantic and less ironic than the novel. [Read](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/11/14/parent-traps) - **Slant Magazine**, Jason Clark (40/100, inferred): The critic finds the film overly familiar despite attempts at realism in lighting and dialogue. Knightley delivers a strong lead performance, but miscasting and a dull Darcy undermine the adaptation. [Read](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/pride-and-prejudice/) - **Screen Daily**: The film is a commercial, accessible chick-flick romance with faithful period details and strong supporting turns, though it may feel too obvious for purists and lurches into pastiche by the end. [Read](https://www.screendaily.com/pride-and-prejudice/4024282.article) - **Sight and Sound**: The critic praises the film's fine casting, especially Keira Knightley's warm and confident performance as Lizzy Bennet, and its evocative cinematography and production design that bring a lively, gritty energy to the story. [Read](https://www.bfi.org.uk/sight-and-sound/reviews/marital-arts-pride-prejudice-reviewed-2005) - **Eye for Film**, Angus Wolfe Murray (65/100, inferred): The critic praises Keira Knightley's lively, expressive performance as Elizabeth and the fresh, lived-in energy of the Bennet household and country house balls. He criticizes Matthew Macfadyen's portrayal of Darcy as an unlikeable, brooding bore who lacks appeal. [Read](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/pride-prejudice-film-review-by-angus-wolfe-murray) ## Details - **Director:** Joe Wright - **Director:** Joe Wright - **Screenplay:** Deborah Moggach - **Novel:** Jane Austen - **Cinematography:** Roman Osin - **Editor:** Paul Tothill - **Music:** Dario Marianelli - **Production design:** Sarah Greenwood - **Costume design:** Jacqueline Durran - **Producer:** Tim Bevan, Eric Fellner, Paul Webster - **Cast:** Keira Knightley as Elizabeth Bennet; Matthew Macfadyen as Mr. Darcy; Brenda Blethyn as Mrs. Bennet; Rosamund Pike as Jane Bennet; Carey Mulligan as Kitty Bennet; Jena Malone as Lydia Bennet; Talulah Riley as Mary Bennet; Donald Sutherland as Mr. Bennet - **Runtime:** 2h 08m - **Certificate (MPA):** PG - **Release (the US):** 23 November 2005 - **Genres:** Drama, Romance - **Also in:** [Golden Globe Best Musical or Comedy winners](https://film.one/collections/golden-globe-comedy.md) (Nominee, 2005) - **Budget:** $28 million - **Box office:** $125 million - **Trailer:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbW-pmLT5UU ## Where to watch in the US - Amazon Prime Video: rent $3.99, uhd - Apple TV: rent $3.99, hd - Amazon Prime Video: buy $14.99, uhd - Apple TV: buy $14.99, hd *Checked 2026-09-15.* Also available in: AR, AT, AU, BE, BG, BR, CA, CH, CL, CO, CZ, DE, DK, EE, ES, FI, FR, GB, GR, HK, HR, HU, IE, IL, IN, IT, JP, KR, LT, MX, MY, NL, NO, NZ, PA, PH, PL, PT, RO, SE, SG, TH, US, VN, ZA. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country. ## Awards - Academy Awards 2006: Best Actress (nominated); Best Costume Design (nominated); Best Original Score (nominated); Best Production Design (nominated) - European Film Award for Best Cinematographer 2006: European Film Award for Best Cinematographer (nominated) - European Film Award for Best Composer 2006: European Film Award for Best Composer (nominated) - European Film Award – People's Choice Award for Best European Film 2006: European Film Award – People's Choice Award for Best European Film (nominated) ## If you liked this - *Sense and Sensibility* (1995), Fi1m 85: For another Austen family whose financial worries sharpen the romantic comedy — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/sense-and-sensibility.md) - *A Room with a View* (1985): For young desire struggling against relatives with firm opinions about everything - *The Age of Innocence* (1993), Fi1m 86: For another romance in which good manners make honest conversation almost impossible — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-age-of-innocence.md) - *The Lunchbox* (2013), Fi1m 75: For a gentler courtship conducted through small gestures and patient attention — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-lunchbox.md) - *The Earrings of Madame de…* (1953), Fi1m 87: For social comedy that gradually makes its romantic consequences hurt — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-earrings-of-madame-de.md) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/pride-and-prejudice-2005