Why I Personally like 1995's Pride and Prejudice the best

   Historical accuracy of hair and costume

• Hair was uniformly curled or pulled back, no beach waves, long straight fringes or loose hair in public.
• Bonnets were worn out of doors as appropriate for social situations of the era accurately printed and varied fabrics, class appropriate for Bennets as they are still in the gentry class
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
•                                                      characterisation

• Lizzy is witty, has sparkling dark eyes and also sensible and refined as described in the book
• Jane is sweet and sensible and looks similar to the portrait which Austen said was what she imagined her like
• Mr Darcy is tall, proud and also uncomfortable in new social situations as described in the book
• Mr Bingley is shown to be friendly but also mature and sensible although he lets himself be led by his friend, (I particularly object to the 2005 portrayal of Mr Bingley as being talkative in a nervous fashion as it does not make sense as to how sensible, intelligent and respectable he is described in the book)
• Catherine AKA Kitty is shown as in the book as being led astray by Lydia but also being more sensitive to the censure of her parents as shown by how she gets upset in both the book and series with her parents' criticism, unlike Lydia who doesn't care a bit. This distinction is never made in 2005 as they literally decided to present them as tweedle dee and tweedle dum, twinning each other which is not how it is in the book, as in the book Austen shows us that it was only Lydia's bad influence and that when introduced to sensible society she improves greatly, as also does Mary.
• Mary is portrayed as an unhappy teen turned philosopher because it's the only thing she feels good at. This is shown through her resentment of the dancing and desperation to perform and sing, which is exactly how she is in the books, when after she's out of the shadow of her beautiful sisters, she improved.
• Mr Bennet is portrayed as witty but a bit careless of the consequences of ignoring his children's bad behaviour and his monetary matters which is the same in book.
• Mrs Bennet, here they managed to capture the shallowness of her character in the caricature-like way she is in the book
• Mr Wickham is portrayed as very charming and deceptively handsome as in book
• Georgiana is portrayed as handsome and shy and intelligent though naïve which is the same as in the book ( the 2005 Georgiana is in no way shy, she actually comes across as quite eager and bold)
• Mr and Mrs Gardener are both portrayed as the sensible and intelligent people they are in the book, I particularly admire Mrs Gardiner's sparkling eye and the way she seems to be so aware of the feeling of the people around her, more aware than the people themselves even. She holds herself with dignity and grace.
• Charlotte Lucas is an elegant and sensible friend for Lizzy, more calculated than desperate which is how she was in the books. Book Charlotte made a sensible and clever decision to add to her comfort in life, 2005 Charlotte made a desperate decision because she thought she was ugly and old.
• Mr Collin's Scraping and bowing of his self-importance is well displayed as he toadies at Lady Catherine's feet as in the book though he's not tall enough.
• Lady Catherine is portrayed as a wealthy and powerful village tyrant, used to having her way. Her dresses are actually in fashion, unlike 2005 L.C. who is 30 years out of date in dress which makes no sense for a woman of her wealth and self-importance.  She also is shown to be condescendingly kind to those who toady to her power which is how she is in the book. She does do things for people IF they do what she wants.
• Overall in this version, all the good characters are sensible and even the bad characters have reason behind their behaviours, whereas I find in the 2005 version it seems like nearly everyone is too simplified, though the aesthetics are nice and Lizzy and Jane are decent portrayals. I just personally feel there just isn't time in a movie to actually get to know the depth of Austen's characters, even when you end up cutting out characters to make room (in 2005  they cut Mrs Hurst, Mr Hurst, Maria Lucas, Sir William Lucas) and simplifying back characters to a few lines, such as happened to Mary, Kitty, Mrs and Mr Gardiner. There is still not time for a fair depth for the main characters. I would beg to say that because of cutting characters and lines, you learn less of the depth of the main characters, because the side characters aren't there to act as foils any more.