#1980 pride and prejudice

[mrdarcysdadbod]

Found out the 1980 bbc pride and prejudice is on one of the free channels on my tv so since I'm still sick I'll be watching that for the next few days. Exciting!

[leche-flandom]

When I first read this scene I also cringed hard but then as I got older I started to appreciate the comedy of it. Also, I loved how smug David Rintoul looks in the 1980 version when he's clearly patting himself on his bespoke back for landing that Scottish Reel line so smoothly:

Then when he sees that the line crashes and burns:

(the way Charles is on the edge of his seat watching his bff fumble the bag 👀)

There's a scene in Pride and Prejudice that I'm relieved rarely makes it to adaptation because my secondhand embarrassment can't take it – it's where Elizabeth is staying at Netherfield to look after Jane and Mr Darcy randomly asks if she wants to dance a reel, but she doesn't reply so he asks again, and she's just like "no I heard you the first time, I just thought you were taking the piss" 💀

[dandelionsandderivatives]

I never really thought about it before, but why does Mr. Darcy still keep a picture of Mr. Wickham in his house?

Does he want to avoid stirring up gossip by removing it? Or is it simply that he and Georgiana haven't spent enough time at Pemberly since The Incident to think about taking it down?

[fictionadventurer]

1980 Pride and Prejudice Episode 1 Thoughts

I'm kind of digging the low-budget 1980s artificiality. Feels comfortable.

Love Mr. and Mrs. Bennet, and the way the script highlights the sitcom vibes of the story, especially in their scenes.

This Lizzie is amazing. She's lively, witty, mischievous, but without feeling like a modern girl in Regency dress. I think I started to fall a little bit in love with her.

Not too fond of Jane so far. Maybe I'm too influenced by other adaptations' takes on her, but she just doesn't act like Jane. I didn't even know which sister was Jane until after the first ball.

This Bingley's a touch too much on the buffoonish side. Though the scenes of banter with Darcy and Lizzie were well-done.

(I'm a bit disappointed they cut out a lot of banter in the letter-writing scene. Now "if Darcy were not such a great tall fellow" seems to come out of nowhere, because we don't get Bingley's witty rejoinder about "comparative heights and sizes").

I'm surprised by how much focus there is on Mary, though disappointed that they portray her piano-playing as "she's terrible" and not "she's better than Lizzie but too stiff and artificial".

Also a lot of Kitty and Lydia! Excellent! (We get the coughing scene!)

Sir William Lucas and Charlotte are both very good.

Everything I've ever heard about this adaptation has focused on how robotic this Darcy is. I guess that skewed my expectations, because I found him shockingly expressive. He's reserved, haughty, and wears his good breeding like a mask, but he's not inhuman. There are plenty of moments where he loosens up a bit, or where we can see the humanity behind the iron control. Like the letter-writing scene--Darcy goes after Bingley for boasting about his poor handwriting, and it might seem like he's just being a pedantic stick-in-the-mud, but he was so straight-faced about it that it was clear to me that he was joking around with a friend.

That first scene with Darcy did feel more like these people were telling us how proud Darcy was before he had a chance to show them.

That first moment with Elizabeth made me realize that the worst thing Darcy says is not "not handsome enough to tempt me" but "I am in no humor to give consequence to young ladies who are slighted by other men." Ouch.

Fascinated by how much of the narration is put into dialogue (and how well it usually works).

There were several points where the dialogue seemed too stilted and artificial, but it's almost word-for-word from the book, so I can't really complain.

I did find myself wondering how well this works for people who don't know the book. Sure, it's almost word-for-word (if abridged and rearranged in places), but is it engaging on its own merits, or just a satisfying watch for the book-loving pedants who can tell it's word-for-word? Because the style of this feels like something that most people wouldn't find engaging if they didn't already know the story.

[firthbetterorfirthworse]

1980 Pride & Prejudice

Elizabeth Garvie is a delightful Elizabeth. David Rintoul is the haughtiest Darcy. I loved them both. Sabina Franklyn was a very pretty Jane, and Osmund Bullock really highlighted just how young Bingley really is. Mr. and Mrs. Bennet were very much highlighted as being shitty to their kids (especially Mary - poor Mary!). There was a surprising amount of Elizabeth voice-over to share her internal thoughts, but it worked? And of course, the proposal scene was just the WORST one so far, the most insulting, still delivered with a languidly haughty voice and this face:

[thatscarletflycatcher]

Okay you got me. Tell me about PP 1980

Okay, so XD

Imagine you had a BBC adaptation of Pride and Prejudice that was 5 hours long, faithful to the book, and yet having a different perspective/understanding/interpretation of the characters and the story? That's P&P 1980 in a nutshell, and I think it is worth watching just for that. But here are some other concrete things it has going for it, specially in relation to other adaptations:

The casting is closer in age than 95, and on one specific important case, closer than 05 too: Lady Catherine de Bourgh is played by an actress in her mid 40s, and she nails the absolute Opinionated Facebook AuntTM thing that the character has going in the novel.

It's not the only case of closer accuracy to the book in characters: Mr Collins is a young, tall, big guy, whose main issue is being very small minded, petty, and obsequent, instead of recurring to "he's greasy or slimy" as other adaptations do.

If you agree/like the "Darcy has autism" headcanon, this is the adaptation that leans the most heavily into it (it does overdo it, in my opinion, but there's a very interesting contrast between the flat affect of his facial expression, and the richness of inflexion in his voice)

Elizabeth Garvie's Lizzy is just... extraordinary. This adaptation circumvents the Jane-as-prettier-than-Lizzy issue by casting as Lizzy an actress with big, dark, very expressive eyes, small features and a very lively, sharp countenance and manners, whereas Jane's actress is tall and graceful and has a general air of kindness and sweetness, but in a very youthful way.

Speaking of Jane, this adaptation focuses much more on the sisters as sisters, and gives special emphasis to Lizzy's love for Jane, which I appreciate a lot.

Also speaking of Jane, Jane and Bingley are the cutest in this. They are given time, and he's kind and sociable and sweet without being an idiot. This adaptation includes that great line of his about how he wouldn't mind Darcy so much if he wasn't so tall, and the following comment about how Darcy can be fastidious of a Sunday evening.

That way, this adaptation includes several fan favorite scenes/lines that don't usually make it to adaptation, such as Darcy asking Lizzy to dance a reel, Lizzy playing and singing at a party in Meryton, Caroline teasing Darcy about putting uncle and aunt Phillips on the Pemberley portrait gallery, and the "I cannot fix the hour or the spot..." line. EDIT: also, the coffee pot scene!! and the rivalry between Mrs Bennet and Lady Lucas!

I also think it balances well how awful, in different ways, both Mr and Mrs Bennet (EDIT: and she's not insufferably shrill!!!!) are as parents (unlike how 95 and 05 "pick sides"); it emphasizes how self centered her efforts are, and how lazy and callous he can be in his mockery and indolence.

The opening sequence of each episode is a roll of a hand-drawn summary of the events of the episode and that's such a lovely detail.

Mind you, the adaptation is not without its faults. The production values are not what we are accustomed to nowadays. Some acting and lines are stilted and/or awkward. It has the odd choice here and there that is involuntarily funny. But I don't think people need discouragement from seeing it. I don't even think most of the general Austen fandom is aware of its existence. For my part, it has become my favorite adaptation of P&P (that I have watched so far; I haven't gotten yet to either 1967 or the Italian one).

[kwillow]

A perfect scoundrel.

[mametupa]

[quenbyolson]

Me, trumpeting the 1980 version of Pride and Prejudice while everyone else is busy fighting over 1995 and 2005. (I mean, 1980 had a Lady Catherine who was the right age! The amazing Judy Parfitt! Go off with your fights, I'll be over here with my old DVD collection.)

[mrdarcysdadbod]

FINALLY someone understands the absolute blancmange of sexual tension btwn Mary and Mr. Collins. Thick enough to cut with a knife but completely bland and tepid. The 1980 is really nailing these underappreciated character dynamics

[adaptations-polls]

Which version of this do you prefer?

[daenystheedreamer]

I would love to hear why you hate regency Media!!

so first and foremost whatever makes people happy is beautiful and wonderful. if british guys in stiff collars gets you hot, all power to you. fluff fiction is fine, comfortable fiction is fine. im not gonna kill you from rubbing one out to a bodice ripper called like Seduced By The Duke. THAT BEING SAID

good fucking god none of you know what the regency period was like beyond austen and heyer 😭 SLAVERY WAS STILL LEGAL!! all the wealth was built off slavery and imperialism... girl where do you think the sugar was coming from!!! and where'd they get the tea from!! east india company INVENTED CAPITALISM and destroyed a continent 😭 oh they abolished slavery THEY COMPENSATED SLAVE OWNERS!!!

also landed gentry.... girl its in the name!! LANDLORDS!! you arent just lady of a manor. you are lady of a manor on the estate being leased to tenant (cough cough indentured) farmers.

i think so much regency media disregards the actual material reality of the british empire, not only abroad but within. even when the lower classes (eg serving staff) is mentioned its often treated as window dressing or worse as part of the package. dont get me started on cinderella shit AHHHH oh he fell in love with the maid the governess 🥺 ough we're analysing class and gender in england 🥺 NO YOU ARENT!!! AHHHH!!!

also regency media obfusscates how ugly the clothing was. it's very anachronistic. and much of the aesthetics are also based on neoclassicism and God Damn this post is too long already. SCREAM

there's fun stuff in the regency that gets ignored in favour of romanticising it... i LOVE beau brummel. special little fancy lad in his special clothing. calls the prince fat. gets exiled from high society. dies of syphilis in a french debt prison. THATS sexier to me than bridgerton. also pride and prejudice is like top 10 favourite novels OAT please no one yell at me 🥹

[anghraine]

What are your opinions on Pride and Prejudice 1980 overall?

Would you say that it is a faithful adaptation? Would you recommend it to a P&P fan?

I'm very partial to it and I would rate it over the 1995. I know most people adore the 1995 version, though.

I love it!

I was just talking about my two favorite adaptational takes on P&P here, and the 1980 P&P is one of them.

It definitely has flaws, both as a work in its own right and as an adaptation. You were asking about how it functions as adaptation, so I'm going to focus on that, but the overall aesthetic is extremely 1979 on a limited budget. Some of the visual/narrative choices are very staid adaptationally (like showing Elizabeth reading Darcy's letter by ... literally showing Elizabeth reading the letter).

On the flip side, there are a few improbable divergences, most notably the rushed and peculiar presentation of the second proposal (though getting a glimpse of post-proposal Darcy and Elizabeth's happiness counts for a lot for me!). There's also stuff added that doesn't really change anything, but is arguably not faithful per se. And this is not always acknowledged by the fans it does still have. Personally, I love the weird instrumentation that follows Mr Collins around and Mr Hurst's anti-mountain agenda, but people's mileage may vary.

Beyond that, I love it as an adaptation that veers away from tapping into accessible (or caricatured) stereotypes the way the 1995 does. The 1980 P&P's characters really do feel to me like very specific and usually more nuanced interpretations of the original characters compared to basically every other version of P&P—not necessarily my interpretations, but I always feel like I can see where the interpretation is coming from, beyond appeals to contemporary audience sensibilities.

Elizabeth Garvie's Elizabeth is the jewel of the production for me—charming, lively, witty, vain, with a distinct tinge of sweetness that I think adaptations often lose sight of. It's honestly difficult to even say much about her because she is simply perfect to me.

David Rintoul's Darcy is probably my favorite Darcy, too. His demeanor isn't exactly what I personally imagine, to be sure (he's not as somberly brooding as Colin Firth's Darcy, but the spirited, smiling cleverness Darcy shares with Elizabeth isn't quite there for me). But I truly respect the choice to retain the general stiffness and formality of his character rather than reducing him to a more palatable love interest/sex object. He's allowed to be odd and to make us uncomfortable in a way I don't think other adaptations are willing to risk with him.

As for the others, Bingley, Jane, and Georgiana all give the impression of more substance to them than they usually get IMO. Mrs Bennet and Caroline are obnoxious but not particularly caricatured (without the adaptation seeming apologetic towards them, either). I love the stylish, younger Mrs Gardiner and Lady Catherine, and the relatively subtle versions of their personalities. Probably the only character choice that doesn't work adaptationally for me is the very harsh Mr Bennet, who lacks much of the endearing wit of the original—though even there, I can appreciate how unwilling the adaptation is to give him a pass (by stark contrast with the much cuddlier Mr Bennets of most other productions).

Would I call it faithful? Not universally, but it is the most engaged with the novel IMO. I don't think anything is so faithful that an adaptation can be a perfect interpretation that shouldn't ever be tried again and done better, but it is the most faithful P&P out there for me, still.

Would I recommend it to a P&P fan? That's a bit harder. It's aesthetically/cinematically dated and in some ways, it's better as interpretation than as television. For people who aren't used to that staid late 70s BBC approach ... idk, it can be a tough sell. I wouldn't casually recommend it, I guess, just because the contrast with the polish of the 1995 and the beauty of the 2005 is so stark. But for people who can look past that 70s BBC period drama baggage, there's a lot that's really interesting and engaging about it.

I certainly prefer it to the 1995, but since I intensely dislike the 1995, that's not saying a whole lot. It's probably more useful on my end to say that I just really love the 1980 P&P, despite having criticisms of it. I don't even know how many times I've watched it. For me, it's a joy.

[thatscarletflycatcher]

Heads-up for folk in the US, that Pride and Prejudice (1980) is available on Tubi if you'd like to give it a watch.

[austenreusedcostumes]

This Brown Spencer is worn on Elizabeth Garvie as Elizabeth Bennet in Pride and Prejudice (1980) and many years later worn on Beth Angus as Meg Dashwood in Sense & Sensibility (2024)