Ain’t It Cool News has a review of the P&P3 test screening by an individual rejoicing in the handle Sonic Death Monkey. (Unladylike/Ungentlemanlike Language Warning at link–in the comments, not the review itself)

Pride and Prejudice is a chick flick, and based on a Jane Austen novel, so going in it had 2 strikes already. Once the film started, it was from a video not film projector so the whole thing looked like and old episode of Dark Shadows. That was three strikes…luckily for me though, I still gave it a chance and was rewarded with one of the most fulfilling and enjoyable theater going experienced I’ve had since I saw Sideways last November.

Praise indeed!

Plus, it does the impossible, it makes Jane Austen not only not seem dry, but also made me want to go and read her books!

Mmmkay.

Many scenes of elaborate and complex dialogue take place in one shot. I believe there was even scene were a single shot pans back and forth while the characters hit some 2 dozen different marks and recite old English witticisms. Very Fincher or Kubrick-esque Several scenes take place during balls where we are taken right up into the middle of the dances with some very elegant steady cam use, you can barely tell isn’t a camera on tracks.

See PERSUASION, Mr. Death Monkey, immediately. Pay particular attention to: the scene where Mr. Elliot makes his first appearance; the concert scene; the card party scene at the end.

I’ve never read the book and if you are in the same boat as me I can tell you, you will be surprised by some of the plot turns. Character arcs are perfect here, and the reveals had some audience members gasping aloud. I usually figure things out very early on, but here I was caught off guard by where the plot went. Sure, you know the main plots ending going in, but, several sub plots go in extremely surprising directions.

Gee, Jane Austen was a good writer! Whodathunkit?

(via KeiraWeb.com)

The reviews are still coming in, and the reviewers on this side of the pond apparently don’t want to be behind their British and Indian counterparts in panning the film. We are unsure how much it has to do with a distaste for Jane Austen’s stories in general.

For instance, Bob Strauss of U Film says that the movie is a pretty good adaptation of Jane Austen, that is, if you like that sort of thing.

Manohla Dargis of the New York Times is scathing. We’d guess, not a Jane fan.

David Germain of the Associated Press (via CNN) isn’t thrilled with this Darcy.

Palo Alto Online doesn’t really get it.

Anhoni Patel of SF Station is lukewarm in his praise, thinking the story lightweight. (No AustenBlog brownie points for you!)

David Thomas of Filmcritic.com likes the humor but thinks the film misses the mark as either a romantic comedy or a sharp political commentary.

Carla Meyer of the San Francisco Chronicle likes it, but she is obviously a Janeite (huzzah!).

Tom Long of the Detroit News says, “Relax and have a good time!” Huzzah! But he loses brownie points for the “worn strictures of Austen’s novel” comment. Grrrrr.

Carrie Rickey of the Philadelphia Inquirer (who we understand from mutual acquaintances is fond of Jane) says that B&P isn’t as funny as CLUELESS or as wry as PERSUASION (and we would agree with her) but it’s pretty good on its own merits.

Incidentally, reading the many reviewers who found no chemistry between Lalita and Darcy, we really feel we must state that, as we spent half the movie muttering between clenched teeth, “Kiss her, dammit!” it is fairly obvious that we disagree. Just saying.