When the first photos of the cast of Netflix’s new adaptation of Jane Austen’s classic Pride and Prejudice dropped (yes, another one), literature fans were not impressed. The most common reaction? “Why do we need another version when the old ones are already perfect?”
As a huge fan of the 2005 version, my main thought after seeing the trailer for the six-part series was: why isn’t Netflix making space for new writers and original ideas? Instead, it seems to be making questionable casting choices for much-loved stories, and for profit.
THE WICKHAM PROBLEM
To give credit where it’s due, Olivia Colman as Mrs Bennet is an excellent choice. I can’t say the same for the rest of the casting, and my main issue is Mr Wickham.
When Louis Partridge was announced as Wickham, the hope I had for a faithful adaptation faded. This is nothing against him as an actor or a person (and I loved the new Olivia Rodrigo album, for the record), but Wickham is the man with a deep history with Mr Darcy, and having a 23-year-old play him just doesn’t make sense to me.
A big emotional moment in the 2005 film is the reveal that Wickham preyed on Darcy’s younger sister and then on Lydia Bennet, because it’s what brings Elizabeth and Darcy closer. How does that land when he looks the same age as Lydia?
It feels as though Netflix cast one of its well-known actors to draw in younger audiences and quick views, without understanding the emotional beats and plot points that make the 2005 film so loved.
the netflix problem
Netflix adaptations tend to be either great successes or forgettable misses. Bridgerton and The Queen’s Gambit are exceptions, but there are countless others that went under people’s radar completely, thanks to the sheer amount of content the platform produces. Netflix tried Persuasion in 2022, which didn’t go down well with fans or critics, and now it’s Pride and Prejudice‘s turn.
There’s also been plenty of discourse about Netflix’s habit of using flat, dull, modern lighting. Its adaptations end up looking very similar and uninspired. The 2005 version is full of bright, vivid landscapes, and the new trailer felt like a muted, disappointing version of that.
I can’t help thinking that the money spent on this unoriginal idea could have gone towards finding new talent and new screenwriters. Look at 2026’s Obsession: a film built around completely new actors and an original story, and one of the biggest surprise hits of the year. That’s no coincidence.
let masterpieces live!
The main point of this piece is not only to remind everyone to watch the 2005 version, but to say that turning this iconic novel about womanhood into another bleak Netflix adaptation risks minimising the story itself. Viewers could end up thinking it’s a generic romance, rather than a story about sisterhood, being open to love, and owning that love. The 2005 version perfected those elements, along with Jane Austen’s wit and humour.
I hope the new adaptation proves me, and many other literature fans, wrong, and that it does the novel justice. But instead of feeding Netflix more profit and the chance to do the same disservice to other great novels, I think we should just rewatch Darcy’s hand flex scene instead.