This movie gets lots of points for its attractive hero and the gorgeous dogs. It lost points for the wimpy, hyper-critical heroine. It didn't make sense that she was so wimpy when she first had problems at work and just plain snotty to a man who had given her no reason to be. In the Austen book, Elizabeth had heard Darcy make some very snide comments about her family and friends. As another reviewer said, this could have been so much better.
49 Reviews
Watchable cast but the P&P plot wears a bit thin
phd_travel2 February 2016
A school teacher meets her Mr Darcy while entering a dog in a dog show. He's a wealthy standoffish dog show judge. The cast and the animals are cute. For fans of 'Pride and Prejudice', there are enough plot elements from the classic novel wound into this story. He's standoffish but it's revealed he is good inside etc. After a while it's like enough already! Just get on with it.
Cindy Busby plays an unlikeable character in "Cedar Cove". It's nice to see her play some one likable instead. She doesn't play it too cute which can often happen in some Hallmark movies. She is quite nicely paired with Ryan Paevey as Mr Darcy. Frances Fisher plays a disapproving aunt - kind of similar to her Titanic role.
Worth one watch.
Cindy Busby plays an unlikeable character in "Cedar Cove". It's nice to see her play some one likable instead. She doesn't play it too cute which can often happen in some Hallmark movies. She is quite nicely paired with Ryan Paevey as Mr Darcy. Frances Fisher plays a disapproving aunt - kind of similar to her Titanic role.
Worth one watch.
So-so at best, could easily have been much better
judsonm24 January 2016
Warning: Spoilers
If you're a Jane Austen fan, you may not like this movie, because it deviates from the book in ways that have no purpose, and make no sense.
For example, the names. 'Donovan' Darcy? Why not 'William' Darcy? Jenna's (not Jane's? We don't have 'Jane' these days? It's the 77th most popular female name in the U.S.) love interest a 'Henry Robson', while there's a token 'Mr. Bingley' character? Why 'Scott' instead of Bennett'? I can see modernizing the names (probably not many 'Fitzwilliams' these days, at least in the U.S.). But what's the point in making them more different than necessary, or switching them to different characters? Why have a 'Mr. Bingley' at all, if he isn't to be Jenna's (Jane's) love interest?
Why Elizabeth's sudden one-scene-to-the-next turnaround about Darcy? In one scene, Darcy cleared up the problem at her school, getting her job back with a raise, for which she said "Thanks, but no thanks", then in the very next scene, she's desperately in love with Darcy, calling him again and again, even moving to New York to be close to him. No transition scene? After all, it's the pivotal point of the whole story, don't we get to see even one scene about it?
Simplifications are necessary in most book adaptations, particularly a long book like Pride and Prejudice. I have no problem with the dog shows, only two sisters, etc. But why change what isn't necessary? Do these producers and directors not 'get it' that Pride and Prejudice has survived for over 200 years for a reason, that it's the most widely read novel in the English language for a reason? Jane Austen was a legendary author, "don't 'fix' what ain't broke".
I love the book 'Pride and Prejudice'. My favorite adaptation is the 1995 BBC production, but I also love the 2005 movie, as well as the 2003 movie and the 2004 'Bride & Prejudice', both modernized adaptations that maintain the heart of the story. So I'm not a Jane Austen purist snob.
I was really looking forward to seeing 'Unleashing Mr. Darcy'. But, unfortunately, this movie is far short of what it could have been, with just a little more thought and care, and without blowing the budget.
For example, the names. 'Donovan' Darcy? Why not 'William' Darcy? Jenna's (not Jane's? We don't have 'Jane' these days? It's the 77th most popular female name in the U.S.) love interest a 'Henry Robson', while there's a token 'Mr. Bingley' character? Why 'Scott' instead of Bennett'? I can see modernizing the names (probably not many 'Fitzwilliams' these days, at least in the U.S.). But what's the point in making them more different than necessary, or switching them to different characters? Why have a 'Mr. Bingley' at all, if he isn't to be Jenna's (Jane's) love interest?
Why Elizabeth's sudden one-scene-to-the-next turnaround about Darcy? In one scene, Darcy cleared up the problem at her school, getting her job back with a raise, for which she said "Thanks, but no thanks", then in the very next scene, she's desperately in love with Darcy, calling him again and again, even moving to New York to be close to him. No transition scene? After all, it's the pivotal point of the whole story, don't we get to see even one scene about it?
Simplifications are necessary in most book adaptations, particularly a long book like Pride and Prejudice. I have no problem with the dog shows, only two sisters, etc. But why change what isn't necessary? Do these producers and directors not 'get it' that Pride and Prejudice has survived for over 200 years for a reason, that it's the most widely read novel in the English language for a reason? Jane Austen was a legendary author, "don't 'fix' what ain't broke".
I love the book 'Pride and Prejudice'. My favorite adaptation is the 1995 BBC production, but I also love the 2005 movie, as well as the 2003 movie and the 2004 'Bride & Prejudice', both modernized adaptations that maintain the heart of the story. So I'm not a Jane Austen purist snob.
I was really looking forward to seeing 'Unleashing Mr. Darcy'. But, unfortunately, this movie is far short of what it could have been, with just a little more thought and care, and without blowing the budget.
charming unrealism
Kirpianuscus2 August 2019
Dogs, "Pride and prejudice", lovely predactibility, good looking lead actors, good actresses in secondary roles , air of soap opera. And the rich man versus a version of Cinderella. So, unrealism in pure form. But a charming one.
P&P
SnoopyStyle23 September 2019
Elizabeth Scott (Cindy Busby) is a beloved teacher at a prestigious private school. She gets fired and threatened with a lawsuit when she refused to accept a bribe from Grant Markham, a parent of one of her failing students. When she participates in a dog show, she is smitten and frustrated with the seemingly arrogant judge Donovan Darcy (Ryan Paevey).
This Hallmark romance is trying to adapt Pride and Prejudice into the modern world. There are themes in the classic novel that are nearly impossible to adapt into modern America. The central need for wealth and English class system are not easily transferred. In order to make wealth an issue, there needs to be an uber wealth involved which is hard to make on a Hallmark budget. The premise's difficulty needs an inventive solution which I do not have. I do like Busby's huffy annoyance. Paevey is rather stiff but that's ok for Darcy. One hopes for greater charisma but at least, he looks great. At the end of the day, I like their combative relationship and her frustration with him. I like the couple and that's enough for a pass.
This Hallmark romance is trying to adapt Pride and Prejudice into the modern world. There are themes in the classic novel that are nearly impossible to adapt into modern America. The central need for wealth and English class system are not easily transferred. In order to make wealth an issue, there needs to be an uber wealth involved which is hard to make on a Hallmark budget. The premise's difficulty needs an inventive solution which I do not have. I do like Busby's huffy annoyance. Paevey is rather stiff but that's ok for Darcy. One hopes for greater charisma but at least, he looks great. At the end of the day, I like their combative relationship and her frustration with him. I like the couple and that's enough for a pass.
Snide and Edginess
MickyG33315 April 2023
6.3 stars.
I caught the many quotes from "Pride and Prejudice", and I'm certain I missed just as many. The only thing I gained from watching this film is that Cindy Busby knows very well how to portray snide and edginess. The story is somewhat similar to the novel in a few ways. One of them is the male lead's last name is Darcy. He is the talk of the town and she is constantly being thrust in his direction so that eventually they might have a chance at being a couple. Unfortunately all she does is constantly berate him, and for what? This film is filled with nothing but awkward conversation after uncomfortable encounter between the leads over and over...and over again. After the first 4 or 5 of these "wonderful" interactions, I was spent.
If this review is confusing, it's because this movie is equally so. I will attempt to capture my thoughts in the next paragraph.
At least a dozen various random encounters and odd setups and some other side plots that make no sense, then the buildup to something romantic, and the constant weirdness and lack of flow...I think Mr. Darcy is a very likable sort of rich man, and she has a chip on her shoulder the size of New Yorkie. Still confused...
I caught the many quotes from "Pride and Prejudice", and I'm certain I missed just as many. The only thing I gained from watching this film is that Cindy Busby knows very well how to portray snide and edginess. The story is somewhat similar to the novel in a few ways. One of them is the male lead's last name is Darcy. He is the talk of the town and she is constantly being thrust in his direction so that eventually they might have a chance at being a couple. Unfortunately all she does is constantly berate him, and for what? This film is filled with nothing but awkward conversation after uncomfortable encounter between the leads over and over...and over again. After the first 4 or 5 of these "wonderful" interactions, I was spent.
If this review is confusing, it's because this movie is equally so. I will attempt to capture my thoughts in the next paragraph.
At least a dozen various random encounters and odd setups and some other side plots that make no sense, then the buildup to something romantic, and the constant weirdness and lack of flow...I think Mr. Darcy is a very likable sort of rich man, and she has a chip on her shoulder the size of New Yorkie. Still confused...
A very rare Hallmark miss
ladymustang-121605 March 2018
I had heard good things about this movie, so I was looking forward to it. But this is the first Hallmark movie that I can remember where there really is nothing redeeming about it.
First off, as someone who used to show dogs, their entire depiction of dog shows was just absolutely laughable. There was nothing even remotely realistic about it. There are some dogs in the ring, but then the female lead gets called in separately by number? And then leaves again and then comes back for final review? Yeah, no, that's not how it works. The so-called judge barely touches the dog. And why are there several different types of dogs in the ring at once? And no, they don't hang the ribbons around the necks of the handlers. Oh my gosh. Just no. Completely absurd.
Now I've got that off my chest, this is a rare Hallmark movie where there is absolutely zero chemistry between the leads. And the story itself was so poorly crafted that it was impossible to believe these two were falling in love. They barely spent more than 5 minutes together at a time; they never really talked in any kind of depth to get to know each other; he was supposed to be the rude one, but he came across as being fairly polite while she was always rude, so why the heck would he fall in love with such a witch? Even the subplot with the privileged dad who got her fired was absurd. It started out okay with him getting her fired. I can believe the board taking the side of the rich patron over a teacher, but the idea that he would sue her was beyond stupid, and having him show up at the party was nonsensical. The man got what he wanted when he got her fired; the rest of it was just overkill and just lazy writing.
I generally love Hallmark movies and can forgive a lot in them because they're usually just fun, but this one was a waste of my time. I was so disappointed in it. Just nothing unfortunately to recommend it. :(
First off, as someone who used to show dogs, their entire depiction of dog shows was just absolutely laughable. There was nothing even remotely realistic about it. There are some dogs in the ring, but then the female lead gets called in separately by number? And then leaves again and then comes back for final review? Yeah, no, that's not how it works. The so-called judge barely touches the dog. And why are there several different types of dogs in the ring at once? And no, they don't hang the ribbons around the necks of the handlers. Oh my gosh. Just no. Completely absurd.
Now I've got that off my chest, this is a rare Hallmark movie where there is absolutely zero chemistry between the leads. And the story itself was so poorly crafted that it was impossible to believe these two were falling in love. They barely spent more than 5 minutes together at a time; they never really talked in any kind of depth to get to know each other; he was supposed to be the rude one, but he came across as being fairly polite while she was always rude, so why the heck would he fall in love with such a witch? Even the subplot with the privileged dad who got her fired was absurd. It started out okay with him getting her fired. I can believe the board taking the side of the rich patron over a teacher, but the idea that he would sue her was beyond stupid, and having him show up at the party was nonsensical. The man got what he wanted when he got her fired; the rest of it was just overkill and just lazy writing.
I generally love Hallmark movies and can forgive a lot in them because they're usually just fun, but this one was a waste of my time. I was so disappointed in it. Just nothing unfortunately to recommend it. :(
Watch it with your family
mthomas-250204 June 2018
If you like cute puppies, you'll tolerate this movie
wekirch14 April 2020
Unleashing Mr Darcy (2016) [D: David Winning. Cindy Busby, Ryan Paevey, Elizabeth McLaughlin]. I recorded this because I'm always interested in attempts to rework Pride and Prejudice. Lizzie Scott is fired from her private school job because she insists that the basketball star (son of a Board member) should earn his marks. This plot thread later gives Mr Darcy an opportunity to help her.
She moves in with her aunt, who's a dog fancier. They show their dogs at a fancy dog show, judged by Mr Darcy, who's somewhat arrogant, very wealthy, etc. And who lives across the street. And whose dog has just delivered the cutest puppies you can imagine. And who needs someone to look after the puppies while he's away on business. And so it goes, in this lame riff on Pride and Prejudice. Biggest problem: Lizzie is supposedly 31 years old and an established professional. Yet she acts like a 15 year-old suffering her first "I don't like him, but those eyes!!!" crush. The dog shows aren't properly staged, either.
Give this one a pass, unless you like snorting at badly done cliches of romance and enjoy sussing parallels between two versions of the same material. Or want to suffer through another example of Awful Movies That You Watch Despite Yourself. *
Darcy coming out of the pool.
jrfosterwt4 March 2016
Loved the actor that played Donovan Darcy - and when he stepped from the pool in those swim shorts - all memories of the pond scene with Colin Firth's Mr. Darcy (Pride and Prejudice 1995) left my head...I didn't much care for how the leads switched places - like rotating around each other when they're interacting. I guess it was a way to show they attracted like opposite magnets that even will flip (in love) and come towards each other. Plus, I love all the dogs in the film (being a mother to 6 canines myself). And remember, with all the interpretations of Pride and Prejudice that are out there, even if you are doing it in some misguided way to show a woman how much you love her, you DO NOT list all the things wrong with her, her family, etc. before you propose to her. You love someone for themselves and IN SPITE of themselves, but list what all you think is wrong with me then act like all is well and here comes the happy ending. Expect more from yourself and the woman you're meant to be with.
What the heck did I just watch?
Anonnamus3 February 2019
How this film even made it to 6 stars is beyond my understanding. As a nod to a beloved Austen novel, this failed completely. As a romantic comedy, it did even worse. I was genuinely confused as to Darcy's aunt's animosity towards Elizabeth then finding out it's because she felt threatened by the chemistry between those two? They had three prior run-ins. All three negative and making Elizabeth come off as a harpy. Pride and Prejudice? More like Taming of the Shrew. The rest of the movie was more of the same, so when Darcy admits his love for Elizabeth it's truly baffling as to the reason why. They spent no actual real time together, just argued and bickered. Then love. No. The lead actress is not one I care to see again. The lead actor is pretty, but the constant model brooding stare made me think more Zoolander than anything else.
I don't get it. Definitely not one of Hallmark's best so the fact it was rated number 3 in the winter movie countdown is very surprising.
I don't get it. Definitely not one of Hallmark's best so the fact it was rated number 3 in the winter movie countdown is very surprising.
How was this a romance?
jenrn-0972221 March 2021
Warning: Spoilers
Mr. Darcy is the epitome of polite and refined. He falls in love with Elizabeth, an angry and bitter girl-done-wrong. No matter how kind he is to her, Elizabeth is rude, abrupt, and insulting. She snubs him at almost every turn. They have almost no scenes where she is remotely polite or receptive to his romantic overtures, even when he tells off his aunt in her defense. He appears to be beating his head against a wall in his effort to woo her until the end of the movie when she is suddenly head-over-heels in love. I also think her love confession is one of the only times we see her smile in his presence... There was potential for this to be a romantic movie, but fell a bit short due to the lack of actual romance.
I love this movie!!
jeanamanda24 April 2020
I absolutely love this movie, I think it's my favorite Ryan Paevey movie. I really enjoyed the electricity between Donovan and Elizabeth, two very different backgrounds, one a rich businessman and the other a recently fired teacher because of a spoiled rich kid. The highlight are definitely seeing Ryan Paevey in a suit (who doesn't love a man dressed up?) and then watching Donovan defend Elizabeth in front of all his rich friends and pushy Aunt Violet (played by the wonderful Frances Fisher). Now if only everyone could experience that kind of romantic gesture life would be grand!
What a waste of 2 hours
pamjoypeanut3 June 2018
Just finished (barely) sitting through 2 excruciating hours of the worst Hallmark movie I have ever seen. The acting was horrible and there was zero chemistry between the main actors. The whole thing was completely unbelievable. The only redeeming factor were the dogs. They were more believable than any of the characters. Plus they were adorable.
Give it a go
tinyfeet691 May 2018
Come on people... this is Hallmark... not Masterpiece Theater. It is what it is and although based on Jane Austen's Pride & Prejudice, there should be NO comparison to the book or BBC series whatsoever. This is by far one of my more favorite Hallmark movies and I loved it. As with all Hallmark movies, the romance is a bit weak at best (need more kissing & groping - how could one keep their hands of Ryan Paevy). I hope they step it up a bit in the sequel, Marrying Mr Darcy, which will air on Hallmark Channel in June 2018. The lead character, Ryan Paevy (Donovan Darcy), is dishy and very easy on the eyes. If Hallmark did anything right with this show it is in casting a gorgeous hunk to play Mr Darcy. He is exactly who I picture now when I read Pride & Prejudice. Well done!
SYRUPY SWEET
anitalansing-40-58191520 January 2022
I really did enjoy the movie. It was so cute. However it was extremely unrealistic and totally unbelievable. Guys who are wealthy and over-the-top handsome are nowhere as sincere and compassionate as Donovan Darcy was. I am sure that a teenage girl in love would enjoy the series of the Darcy movies. Cute and adorable.
Not great in any way.
studioAT10 November 2020
I agree with a previous reviewer, this is a rare Hallmark film miss.
Trying to do a modern version of 'Pride and Prejudice' would have been enough in itself, but adding the whole dog show element into it as well completely adds to the mess that is this film.
Just using the character names isn't enough to convince us that this is a modern version of the book, hilariously the DVD box can't even spell Jane Austen's name right!
No real chemistry between the two leads (the thing that for me makes/breaks a Hallmark film) and a plethora of unappealing supporting characters.
Some people must've like it though - I believe there is at least one sequel, which I won't be rushing to watch.
Trying to do a modern version of 'Pride and Prejudice' would have been enough in itself, but adding the whole dog show element into it as well completely adds to the mess that is this film.
Just using the character names isn't enough to convince us that this is a modern version of the book, hilariously the DVD box can't even spell Jane Austen's name right!
No real chemistry between the two leads (the thing that for me makes/breaks a Hallmark film) and a plethora of unappealing supporting characters.
Some people must've like it though - I believe there is at least one sequel, which I won't be rushing to watch.
Good show. A cut above the usual.
rebekahrox27 September 2017
I am a sucker for Jane Austen re-imaginings. It may explain why I liked this movie so much even in face of the terrible reviews. There were definitely some weaknesses in plot. (Why didn't Elizabeth immediately go to the principle when the father of the failing athlete tried to bribe her?) Oooh, he was really evil! I also didn't understand the hostility of Elizabeth towards Donovan Darcy throughout most of the story. He was so adorable and nice! The main appeal of the movie for my were the two lead actors. they were both really appealing and attractive with some great chemistry. Frances Fisher, who played the Catherine de Bourgh character was very hiss-worthy, which always adds to the enjoyment. I did enjoy the secondary characters and the dogs as well.
Bewildered by very disappointing movie
istara16 June 2016
I was excited to watch this after reading several other very positive reviews. I'm happy to see twists and adaptations of Jane Austen, such as "Lost in Austen" which was excellent, or "Clueless" (closely based on Emma).
This film simply had nothing to do with Austen save for a couple of names. It wasn't just that the entire plot and subplots of Pride & Prejudice were absent, but the tone was entirely wrong.
The main character "Liz" is rude and gauche and quite stupid from the outset. As an example, Mr Darcy quotes: "my good opinion once lost is lost forever" and Liz asks with genuine bewilderment "what does that mean?"
Mr Darcy just smirks and looks handsome. There's no real arrogance, just a fairly polite rich boy.
So let's put aside Austen and not judge this movie on that, since there are really no true associations between the two.
Is this a good move in itself, then, as a lighthearted romance? It's certainly not my kind of movie, even though I enjoy romance. I've seen a couple of other Hallmark movies (the one with Leanne Rimes and Eddie Cibrian springs to mind) and while they're pretty saccharine fare, they're not bad for what they are. They're watchable.
But "Unleashing Mr Darcy" is truly dire. It's pastel cutesy shiny glossy all the way, no depth, nothing funny or even plausible. There's no romantic tension or chemistry. You won't find yourself caring about any of the characters. If you enjoyed Legally Blonde but groaned with disappointment at the execrable sequel, you'll get a sense of how and why this is so awful.
The constant music is also profoundly irritating: the movie is barely allowed to breathe without the silly, frothy, jingly tunes bouncing up every few seconds.
I simply don't get what there is to enjoy here. I've been watching quite a few comedies - including "screwball" comedies - from the 1930s and 1940s recently, and they are so much funnier, sharper and overall more adult than slack lowball fare like this.
In summary: there's really nothing for Austen fans here, and there's really nothing for romance fans either. It's not even a "watch once" for me, you'll have wasted your time.
This film simply had nothing to do with Austen save for a couple of names. It wasn't just that the entire plot and subplots of Pride & Prejudice were absent, but the tone was entirely wrong.
The main character "Liz" is rude and gauche and quite stupid from the outset. As an example, Mr Darcy quotes: "my good opinion once lost is lost forever" and Liz asks with genuine bewilderment "what does that mean?"
Mr Darcy just smirks and looks handsome. There's no real arrogance, just a fairly polite rich boy.
So let's put aside Austen and not judge this movie on that, since there are really no true associations between the two.
Is this a good move in itself, then, as a lighthearted romance? It's certainly not my kind of movie, even though I enjoy romance. I've seen a couple of other Hallmark movies (the one with Leanne Rimes and Eddie Cibrian springs to mind) and while they're pretty saccharine fare, they're not bad for what they are. They're watchable.
But "Unleashing Mr Darcy" is truly dire. It's pastel cutesy shiny glossy all the way, no depth, nothing funny or even plausible. There's no romantic tension or chemistry. You won't find yourself caring about any of the characters. If you enjoyed Legally Blonde but groaned with disappointment at the execrable sequel, you'll get a sense of how and why this is so awful.
The constant music is also profoundly irritating: the movie is barely allowed to breathe without the silly, frothy, jingly tunes bouncing up every few seconds.
I simply don't get what there is to enjoy here. I've been watching quite a few comedies - including "screwball" comedies - from the 1930s and 1940s recently, and they are so much funnier, sharper and overall more adult than slack lowball fare like this.
In summary: there's really nothing for Austen fans here, and there's really nothing for romance fans either. It's not even a "watch once" for me, you'll have wasted your time.
Sweet story for staying inside on a hot afternoon
saffronrose-434212 July 2016
Having not heard of this treatment, I have no preconceptions: it followed something my MiL was watching when I walked in.
I think the dogs and the world of dog shows were either the center of this story, or the excuse for it, which are not bad things. King Charles Spaniels were the royal Corgis of their day, and they are just soooo cute. The puppies used were more young dogs--at least 2 months old, as they were just too large and well-coated for newborns.
I don't believe the rest of this paragraph has any spoilers. The characters you are supposed to dislike were played excellently--wanted to smack them each upside the head. Pared from this twist on P&P are the obnoxious curate cousin, Mr. Wickham, the three younger sisters, and Mr. Bennet--and they were not missed. Departures from the original: 'Mrs Bennet' owns a bridal shop, 'Lizzy' is a teacher, 'Darcy' judges dog shows, 'Georgiana Darcy' lives with her brother, 'Lady Catherine de Bourgh' seems to live there as well. 'Lady Anne de Bourgh' is not retiring at all, as views Darcy as her unofficial fiancé. 'Aunt Gardiner' invites 'Lizzy' to show her dog as well, instead of taking her travelling, and there is no Mr. Gardiner.
Some have said that there was little comedy here, but I disagree. The story IS after all a comedy of manners, and this delivered that. Lots of "wish I hadn't said that" to go around. You were given backstory for why Elizabeth tends to be prejudiced and Darcy to be reserved and stand-offish. There is definitely spark between them, and they both have their share of apologies to deliver.
I agree with another reviewer that having a 'Mr. Bingley' be a mere placeholder was wrong. The only "problem" I had while watching is wondering why Ryan Paevey (Darcy--all Darcys should be eye candy!)) resembled a younger Karl Urban (the current Star Trek movies' Dr. McCoy). A still photo tells you nothing, because it is while speaking and while moving that they resemble each other.
I thought the twists were well balanced in making a satisfying, if not excellent, rendition. I don't expect remakes of stories in modern settings to adhere more than about 75% to the original: I want a good story with good character development and interactions. Somewhere on the main page for this entry it claims that this is a remake, or the like, of Bride and Prejudice. Not so at all.
I think the dogs and the world of dog shows were either the center of this story, or the excuse for it, which are not bad things. King Charles Spaniels were the royal Corgis of their day, and they are just soooo cute. The puppies used were more young dogs--at least 2 months old, as they were just too large and well-coated for newborns.
I don't believe the rest of this paragraph has any spoilers. The characters you are supposed to dislike were played excellently--wanted to smack them each upside the head. Pared from this twist on P&P are the obnoxious curate cousin, Mr. Wickham, the three younger sisters, and Mr. Bennet--and they were not missed. Departures from the original: 'Mrs Bennet' owns a bridal shop, 'Lizzy' is a teacher, 'Darcy' judges dog shows, 'Georgiana Darcy' lives with her brother, 'Lady Catherine de Bourgh' seems to live there as well. 'Lady Anne de Bourgh' is not retiring at all, as views Darcy as her unofficial fiancé. 'Aunt Gardiner' invites 'Lizzy' to show her dog as well, instead of taking her travelling, and there is no Mr. Gardiner.
Some have said that there was little comedy here, but I disagree. The story IS after all a comedy of manners, and this delivered that. Lots of "wish I hadn't said that" to go around. You were given backstory for why Elizabeth tends to be prejudiced and Darcy to be reserved and stand-offish. There is definitely spark between them, and they both have their share of apologies to deliver.
I agree with another reviewer that having a 'Mr. Bingley' be a mere placeholder was wrong. The only "problem" I had while watching is wondering why Ryan Paevey (Darcy--all Darcys should be eye candy!)) resembled a younger Karl Urban (the current Star Trek movies' Dr. McCoy). A still photo tells you nothing, because it is while speaking and while moving that they resemble each other.
I thought the twists were well balanced in making a satisfying, if not excellent, rendition. I don't expect remakes of stories in modern settings to adhere more than about 75% to the original: I want a good story with good character development and interactions. Somewhere on the main page for this entry it claims that this is a remake, or the like, of Bride and Prejudice. Not so at all.
Bless their hearts, they tried
kz917-14 June 2017
Underwhelming at best. This remake of Pride and Prejudice goes to the dogs. Quite literally, the plot revolves around upper crust dog shows. The majority of the characters are just downright now likable. The highlight of the movie may very well be when the Darcy character exits the pool. Eye candy at best not so much a compelling movie. Skip it.
Lots of flaws
Jackbv1235 June 2018
1-Ridiculous accusations against teacher carried to ridiculous extremes
2-Ridiculous flaunting of conflicts of interest
3-Terrible acting by several, most notably by Courtney Richter. Cindy Busy wasn't that good either.
4-Lack of chemistry between the leads combined with too little screen time together, especially lack of positive screen time..
5-Overexagerated rudeness by Elizabeth to Darcy and Violet to Elizabeth
6-Unattractive wimpiness by Elizabeth
7-Even the final confrontation lacked conviction
8-A letter??? (you'll know what I mean when you see it)
Good Film
danxo26 March 2016
Warning: Spoilers
This was an entertaining film. We especially liked Ryan Paevey (currently starring in North American Serial "General Hospital") for his role as Donovan Darcy.
We can understand why the the character of Elizabeth Scott is not very "friendly" with people of great wealth as she has been fired by those that control the private school she taught at (Weston High School)..
But it is obvious she has interest in Donovan Darcy, but not his mannerisms..and his great wealth.
We especially gave this film a high rating, because, even though this world is not anything close to the sugar and spice we would like to be, at least we can entertain ourselves with never hearing profanities, obscenities, and other degrading words that are not needed to send a message of love, or dislike..(but then, of course, this IS a HALLMARK FILM)...
We can understand why the the character of Elizabeth Scott is not very "friendly" with people of great wealth as she has been fired by those that control the private school she taught at (Weston High School)..
But it is obvious she has interest in Donovan Darcy, but not his mannerisms..and his great wealth.
We especially gave this film a high rating, because, even though this world is not anything close to the sugar and spice we would like to be, at least we can entertain ourselves with never hearing profanities, obscenities, and other degrading words that are not needed to send a message of love, or dislike..(but then, of course, this IS a HALLMARK FILM)...
Elizabeth disappointed me so I quit the movie
archiecm4 February 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Elizabeth's heart must not have been in teaching but they had a roundabout way of saying that. She gets fired for not letting a student buy a passing grade from her. The students parents lie to the board and the board mysteriously doesn't even give her a chance to state her side. That's almost unbelievable. But her attitude after an hour of regret is to completely forget about teaching and focus on handling her dog in dog shows. That's where she is going to eventually succumb to Darcy's charms and visa versa. Stupid me. I was outraged by the way they treated her at the University and that the "bad guys" got away with murder. She had a law suit ready made and also a duty to warn the public what was going on at that school. But Elizabeth didn't give it another thought. That being so I didn't like her any more and I stopped caring if she ever landed Mr. Darcy or any other dog judge. Forget about Darcy, she deserved Mr.Farcy.
I loved the Movie and the Actors
whbischoff24 June 2016
Having read some of the reviews I felt that as a person that enjoys the simple things in life, I could add a comment or two. Perhaps I am not familiar with all of the literature re Pride and Prejudice, but I loved the movie and have watched it so many times I cannot give an accurate count. Of course Ryan Paevey is a humble and interesting person ... I would love to share his thoughts as in real life he loves the natural beauty of the earth, photography, and my hope is that he meets and marries a young lady like Cindy Busby. Cindy came across as a principled person who was did not run after "Donovan" but waited for him to see her inner beauty. I would love to have the opportunity to visit with Ryan and Cindy to form a true to life opinion. I feel that the parts they played in Unleashing Mr. Darcy gave an insight into who they are and the kind of people they are in real life. Ryan obviously loves children and puppies ... Cindy was very comfortable with her role as a sister and her love for animals was obvious. I am eager to purchase the disc for my TV.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
