Hey, maybe you have spoken on this somewhere, and I just missed it, so if so my apologies, but I would love to know why exactly you dont like 1995 p and p, my family and I have always loved it

I've talked about it many times over the years, but only a little lately, which may be how you missed it since I can be fairly tedious on this point. There are so many different things I dislike about it that it can be difficult to summarize (though I particularly dislike its approach to Darcy).

To attempt it, though:

Taken on its own terms, the 1995 P&P is quite good TV and a good period drama. Taken as an adaptation of Austen's P&P, I think it combines a superficial appearance of fidelity with variously caricatured, over-simplified, or simply bad interpretations of the characters and relationships. This is so consistent across the entire production with the exception of Jennifer Ehle's Elizabeth—who I don't love as Elizabeth but who doesn't seem treated with quite so heavy a hand—that I don't see this as an acting issue, but more of the vision of the creators which is executed quite well by the actors, but which I dislike.

For instance, Benjamin Whitrow's Mr Bennet is well-acted in terms of what I think they wanted him to be, it's a good performance, but also, a lot of the bite of Austen's approach to him is minimized (all the more by contrast to the very OTT Mrs Bennet).

So when I say that I hate Colin Firth's Darcy in particular, it's not that I think CF does a bad job as an actor (though I do think he was miscast for other reasons), it's that I think the production's fundamental approach to the character is ill-conceived and that carries over into writing, direction, framing, all kinds of things. Even when I first watched it as a teenager and liked a lot of it, the presentation of Darcy always bugged me. I don't like the treatment of the Darcy-Elizabeth dynamic at Netherfield, I don't like how they handle his letter, I don't like the wet shirt scene, I don't like the general humorless oversexualized brooding.

On top of that, the fact that its very specific interpretations are often regarded so completely uncritically makes it difficult to be impartial. You get things like Elizabeth's lines about marrying for love and joking about ending up a spinster—a moment invented by the 1995 P&P and not necessarily true of Austen's character, but re-created over and over in subsequent adaptations because of the 1995's enormous influence on perception of what P&P is. As a consequence, it can be intensely frustrating for those of us who disagree with its interpretations and dislike the P&P 1995-inflected fanon that permeates Austen fandom, because we can't get away from it.

I got into Austen fandom just a couple of years before the 2005 came out and so many 1995 fans were so offended that anyone would ever make another version of P&P because most of the fandom took it as an article of faith that Austen's vision had been perfectly distilled and represented in the 1995, and that everyone agreed with them. Even before the 2005, that utterly uncritical perspective on the 1995 was so inescapable that it was deeply aggravating for me as a fan of the book who didn't much like Andrew Davies's whole deal and would only dislike it more with time.

So I'm not pretending to be unbiased, but I truly believe it is very flawed as an adaptation of the novel, that its portrayal of Darcy is especially flawed, and that the issues in Davies's approach to Austen, which would become more glaring in his later Austen adaptations, are already present in the 1995 P&P and it's far from the one true version of P&P that so many of its fans present it as.