sweedie71

I fail to see why everybody's making such a big song and dance of this Bond film. OK, I agree that Daniel Craig is a better Bond than Pierce Brosnan and Timothy Dalton. And it's better than the last film. And I'm even willing to give them some credit for trying to reinvent the genre and trying to build the Bond character from scratch again by starting all over. But did none of the people involved in the production watch the film from beginning to end? It's totally disjointed and incredibly difficult to believe. I'm not trying to say that Bond films should be realistic, but it would be nice if we were able to believe that a spy could actually figure something in particular out from the clues that have been given. I just spent the entire film waiting for all the threads to be wrapped up and tied together. And then it was just over. I'm assuming that the questions left open will be answered in the next film, but that doesn't really work for me. It's a Bond film, we're expecting him to wrap things up nice and neatly and walk off into the sunset.

All that said, I will definitely go see the next one and hopefully Daniel Craig will be a little more comfortable in the role then and able to stamp his own personality on it.

This must be one of the worst possible versions of P&P that could possibly be conceived. While I realise the difficulties in fitting such a rich story into a 2-hour film, the time constraints are no excuse for the absolutely appalling acting. I couldn't imagine a worse Lizzy Bennett. Keira Knightley seems to possess only two facial expressions and she turns a witty and intelligent young woman into a silly and insipid character. Mr Darcy too has none of the charm or mystery expected by those of us who love the book, hardly displaying any personality. The writers of the screenplay seem to have entirely missed the relationships and undercurrents within the Bennett household as well as the customs of the day when the story was written. The only saving grace of this film is the performance of Dame Judi Dench as Lady Catherine de Burgh, but one does wonder why she would wish to associate herself with this otherwise very poor production.

Anyone who wishes to acquaint themselves with the magic that is Pride and Prejudice should get hold of a copy of the 1995 BBC miniseries, which is much more true to the original story and characters. And as for an example of how to turn one of Jane Austen's masterpieces into a 2-hour Hollywood performance, I would highly recommend the mid-90s Sense and Sensibility with Emma Thomson and Kate Winslet who show that there is indeed a way of portraying 19th century women as something other than giggling fools.

This is a feelgood comedy about ordinary people living extraordinary lives. It centres around a woman who is living her lifelong ambition and how it affects her and those who are close to her. Some parts can be seen as sickly sweet, but there are several dark undertones about how certain "different" people are perceived and treated in society today. Definitely worth watching.