Cubussoli Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Gutsycurene Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

Kirandeep Yoder The joyful confection is coated in a sparkly gloss, bright enough to gleam from the darkest, most cynical corners.

Kinley This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

s-82414 Bride and Prejudice, a roller coaster film, sparked a new fusion between two remarkably different cultures: Hollywood and Bollywood. This movie enthralled its audience by introducing a particularly unique love story among two opposites of the spectrum, a girl named Lalita Bakshi who was raised in a conservative household, and the American businessman, Will Darcy, who was always entailed in a modern lifestyle due to his upbringing. Undoubtedly, these star crossed lovers were involved in the inevitable arguments, judgements, and prejudice-as they encountered each other when the two didn't expect it. As trouble arose, it was clear to see how very different conflicts could be resolved by two types of cultures. All in all, I was indifferent about the movie. Although many types of emotions came from every direction, the film was predictable in many aspects. Furthermore, it was very easy to understand the film as a whole. The plot line was rather common but still original compared to other types of Hollywood and Bollywood movies. Compared to other traditional Bollywood films, there weren't as many scenes that didn't match the plot line. For example, in a classic Bollywood film, a girl and boy would be fighting because they wouldn't be able to get along well; five minutes later, they would be dancing and laughing together. In Bride and Prejudice, the story made sense and didn't falter in a way a classic Bollywood movie would. More specifically, when Lalita met Darcy's secret girlfriend, Anne, she was agitated and didn't speak to Darcy until he apologized for his actions. There was no dance number in between these scenes. Moreover, the acting in this film was very over-dramatized compared to Hollywood films. Though, this is very common among Bollywood films because the audience loves overacting and capturing drama which eventually make scenes more interesting. In the movie, Lalita's mother exaggerated her phrases as if she was always in a distressed state. Usually in a Hollywood movie, a background character wouldn't be as prominent as a main character in their words. Continuing on, the song/dance sequences were amazingly opposite and important for the plot line. In this film, the audience wouldn't have known Darcy and Lalita were on a date unless a song hadn't featured. Of course, Bollywood music was also very different than classic Hollywood. Various types of instruments and sounds were played (fast/slow) respectively to the mood of the scene. Bride and Prejudice was perfectly in the middle of Hollywood and Bollywood. The ending made this perfectly clear since a traditional Bollywood or Hollywood would never feature the different elements presented: a biracial wedding and resolved drama. As for cultural elements, the aspects of Indian norms were extremely distinct from the American norms. Starting out with couples, Mr. and Mrs. Bakshi most likely had an arranged marriage. They expected love to come from within after their partnership was planned. But for couples like Jaya and Balraj, they expected their love to grow and their relationship to bloom from the love they received from their family. On the other hand, Lalita and Darcy expected that their families would only learn to accept the love they wanted to cherish. Without a doubt, these three couples experienced love from three different perspectives. The director of this film, Gurinder Chahad, was most likely trying to convey that cross cultural relationships do not always have to to have something in common, reiterating the fact that, "opposites do attract."

Leigh Pomeroy Those who have read and/or have seen one or more of the umpteen bajillion screen versions of PRIDE AND PREJUDICE will find this film a hoot. It is actually an Americanized version of a Bollywood film, shorter than most the traditional Bollywood films and filled with plenty of the queen's English for any American to understand.Those who take it seriously won't get the overall humor and pure, old-style Hollywood/Bollywood musical/dancing/simplistic love story enjoyment. Anyone who just wants to have fun at a film: Watch it and be prepared to smile.WARNING: Best viewed with others who have a light-hearted, open-for-fun sense of humor.

PL1981 Creating a modern-day Bollywood version of "Pride and Prejudice" was a novel idea and was always going to be a challenging enterprise and director Gurinda Chandha deserves great credit for attempting to try to do so. What she produces is a worthwhile product with some great flaws The movie is to be credited for seeking to introduce western audiences to Bollywood entertainment and I like that that the film incorporates most of the traditional aspects of Bollywood productions -singing, dancing, guest appearances unrelated to the movie's plot and so on. It also provides us with an interesting and colorful, if I suspect somewhat superficial, overview of some aspects of Indian lifestyle and culture. The singing and dancing is well choreographed and fun even if the lyrics appeared slightly clichéd. I have a feeling Chandha was having a good-natured dig at Bollywood tradition at some parts The plot flows nicely with most of the similarities to the Jane Austen novel plainly evident.The casting was mostly good. Most of the Bakshi family closely matched their equivalents in the Bennett family and gave excellent performances in their respective roles. Martin Henderson was good as Will Darcy, Naveen Andrews was great as Balraj and the very talented Indira Varma was great as Kiran, the equivalent to Caroline Bingley. Daniel Gillies was good -if slightly forgettable as Johnny Wickham and Nitin Ganatra was hilarious as the irrepressible Mr Kohli.I could think of no better actress to play the Lady Catherine De Bourgh-like character Catherine Darcy than the very talented Marsha Mason.The one disappointment (other than what I'm going to get to in the next paragraph) was Alexis Bledel as Georgiana Darcy. Georgiana Darcy is one of my favorite characters in "Pride and Prejudice" but this version of Georgiana Darcy comes across as flat and unlikeable But what really spoiled the movie for me was Aishwarya Rai in the main role of Lalita Bakshi, although in all fairness she was given some very sloppy character development and dialogue to work with by Chandha. She's such an irritating, annoying actress and her performance -at least in this movie -was horrible and her being the main character definitely destroyed the charm of this movie was for me. Rai has been quoted in interviews as saying that she didn't read "Pride and Prejudice" before appearing in this movie. Well, perhaps she should have. Lizzie Bennett is definitely opinionated and headstrong but she's also a very sympathetic character and the reader can passionately identify with where she's coming from. Even when we see the flaws in Lizzie's character, they are still portrayed in a sympathetic way in relation to her overall personality. Rai and Chandha make Lalita's character arrogant, rude and pretentious to the point where I was cheering on Darcy when he was being obnoxious to her. That shouldn't be how it is in a "Pride and Prejudice" adaptation Perhaps this is a reflection of the overall script and character development in this movie, though. Many of the characters could have done with more depth, dimension and substance and there was a huge potential for greater fulfillment of the premise of this movie.The dialogue also fell flat at certain parts.I think this movie has an interesting premise and the casting, the insights into some aspects of Indian life and the singing and dancing make this worthwhile viewing. However, the sloppy script, dialogue, character development and the casting of Aishwarya Rai in the role of Lalita detract from what otherwise could have been a great movie

[email protected] This strange movie tracks, more or less accurately, the plot of Jane Austen's great novel. It has its Elizabeth Bennet in Lalita Bakshi (portrayed by the incomparably beautiful Aishwarya Rai), a wealthy American Darcy (Martin Henderson), Mrs. Bennet, Mr. Bennet, the Bennet sisters and stand-ins for all of the novel's other principal characters and subplots. And, of course, Lalita and Darcy are destined for one another despite her initial revulsion, just as Elizabeth and the wealthy English Darcy were. But this is Bollywood, and in addition to "Pride and Prejudice," we have an exuberant musical with elaborate choreography and gorgeous costuming that moves somewhat confusingly between a city in India, London and Beverly Hills. If you don't know the Austen novel, some of the plot twists may be difficult to follow because this movie substitutes spectacle for subtlety, and it's an uneasy mixture. Ms. Rai is astoundingly beautiful and Mr. Henderson is very handsome, and some of the musical scenes are amusing if not exactly appropriate to the story. Mr. and Mrs. Bennet (i.e., Mr and Mrs Bakshi) come closest to the originals and actually have a few lines penned by Miss Austen herself. But otherwise the movie is a mishmash of conflicting elements. (Elephants in the final wedding scene certainly reflect Indian tradition and spectacle but one can't helped wondering what Jane Austen would have done if elephants were required in her novel.) Ms. Rai and Mr. Henderson might have been served better by a movie that hewed closer to the original. They actually appear to be pretty good actors as well as a handsome couple.