top of page

Here we go again

  • Writer: Deborah Yaffe
    Deborah Yaffe
  • Apr 24
  • 2 min read

Updated: Apr 25

The first still-extant screen adaptation of Pride and Prejudice, the MGM movie starring Greer Garson and Laurence Olivier as Elizabeth and Darcy, came our way in 1940, just two years after a never-recorded BBC TV version with Curigwen Lewis and Andrew Osborn.


Over the next twenty-nine years, the BBC made three more TV P&Ps--now-unavailable versions in 1952 (Daphne Slater and Peter Cushing) and 1958 (Jane Downs and Alan Badel), and an available-on-YouTube edition in 1967 (Celia Bannerman and Lewis Fiander). Then thirteen years passed before the next one, the 1980 BBC TV miniseries with Elizabeth Garvie and David Rintoul.

 

Fifteen years separated that version from the BBC’s next P&P, the beloved 1995 edition featuring Jennifer Ehle as Elizabeth, Colin Firth as Darcy, and a white shirt (wet) in a crucial supporting role. A mere decade passed before we got yet another P&P, the swoony 2005 feature film with Keira Knightley, Matthew Macfadyen, and yet another revealing white shirt (dry).


By this metric--a new screen adaptation of Pride and Prejudice every nine and a half years, on average, between 1938 and 2005--we’re well overdue for the next one, which may explain why earlier this month Netflix unveiled plans for a six-part adaptation of Jane Austen’s most popular novel.


Netflix clearly has high hopes for this project. It has hired a buzzy young screenwriter, Dolly Alderton, a British novelist and journalist whose 2018 memoir was a National Book Award finalist. It has chosen a director, Euros Lyn, who headed up the much-loved romance series Heartstopper. It has cast prominent actors: Emma Corrin, best known for playing Princess Diana in The Crown, as Elizabeth; Jack Lowden, a star of the spy thriller Slow Horses, as Darcy; and the great Olivia Colman--an Oscar winner, no less--as Mrs. Bennet.


Netflix's press release is replete with references to the allegedly epochal nature of the project, imagined as "introducing a new generation to Austen." (Umm. . . can't the new generation just read the book?) "Once in a generation, a group of people get to retell this wonderful story," says Alderton. "I can’t wait for a new generation to fall in love with this story all over again," agrees Corrin. 

 

I’m always up for another Austen adaptation, but I can’t help remembering back to the last time Netflix mapped a hot director, a buzzy screenwriting team, and a starry cast onto a beloved Jane Austen novel. Yes, I’m thinking of the 2022 Dakota Johnson Persuasion—something I try not to do more often than I must.

 

That anachronistic mess came in the wake of a Netflix press release heralding a “modern, witty approach to a beloved story.” Perhaps that’s why this time around the press release promises “a period-faithful adaptation” that “will hew closely to the original text.”

 

How closely? We’ll have to wait and see: Production starts later this year, meaning the series likely won't air until 2026.

Meanwhile, with tongue planted firmly in cheek, Deadline is awaiting further developments: “Sources close to production reveal that casting is underway for the perfect flowy white button-down shirt that looks great both wet and dry.”

8 Comments


allison.1775.thompson
Apr 24

OMG....what I find increasingly annoying/depressing with these movie adaptations is that the people involved do not appear to actually go back to the source material (the books); they simply look at some of the memes and tropes of prior movies. So, yes, it would not surprise me to find another stupid wet shirt (maybe Lizzie will wear it?) hearkening to 1995, or a hand flex, harkening to the Joe Wright version, or the walk through the morning mist, per the latter, or a bow and arrow scene, harkening back to the Garson/Olivier version. Whoever is cast for Lizzie will make a Big Deal about taking Great Care not to read the book, so as not to "contaminate" her performance (I…


Like
Deborah Yaffe
Deborah Yaffe
Apr 25
Replying to

LOL -- I hear you! It's astonishing how thoroughly the screen versions have colonized memories of the novel.

Like

harriet
Apr 24

There were actually quite a few adaptations between 1940 and 1980, but sadly most of them are now lost.


Although a couple of years back, someone found the 1967 BBC version and put it on YouTube! It's at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnqQ4BJ2MwI&list=PL8V8LCeiCij468CdBQdCgAHDPNPvKMFk6 - the first few seconds of episode 1 are without sound, and it's a very fuzzy transfer, but it's all there. It is very much Of Its Time, but I ended up enjoying it more than I expected - I think it does improve as it goes on (or maybe I just got used to the stagey, declamatory way of speaking). There are some interesting aspects of (Australian actor!) Lewis Fiander's Darcy - in my paper on screen Darcys I called…


Like
Deborah Yaffe
Deborah Yaffe
Apr 25
Replying to

Excellent point -- I had forgotten about those mid-20th-century BBC adaptations! I'm revising my post accordingly!

Like

Tram Chamberlain
Tram Chamberlain
Apr 24

i'm still laughing about the reviewer who thought everyone involved with the netflix adaptation of "persuasion" should be incarcerated: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/everyone-involved-should-be-in-prison-netflixs-persuasion-reviewed/

Like
Deborah Yaffe
Deborah Yaffe
Apr 24
Replying to

LOL! The article is paywalled, but I do like the headlines. . .

Like

amsprayberry
Apr 24

I didn't get Netflix for The Crown; I didn't get Netflix for the 2022 Persuasion; and I'm damned well not going to get it for this P&P. Money and time saved.

Like
Deborah Yaffe
Deborah Yaffe
Apr 24
Replying to

LOL! You're an example to us all, Marie. I am not made of such stern stuff, myself.

Like
bottom of page