The Brontes vs. Jane Austen in new film

Before the new Pride and Prejudice movie came out, I had not read any of the
Brontës works, only seen one movie (Jane Eyre, which I liked very much) and read a summary (Wuthering
Heights). There was a lot of discussion going around, then, about how the
new P&P was "Brontified", a term I didn't understand at the time. From what
I had seen, though, "Brontified" must mean obsession with stormy weather,
wild heroes, and strange passions.

I've now read Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights, and am in the middle of
Villette. I've also seen the new P&P twice, and am very confused with this
accusation of "Brontification".

I love Jane Austen, and I like the Brontës, but I can see only differences
between them.

Jane Austen's books are orderly, neat, tidy, and sharp with sarcasm and wit.
You cannot find anything more dangerous than a bad cold, or a twisted ankle.
Realists may frown at her beatified world, but it would not work any other
way. She could not write of doom and despair, because she did not know it,
and it was not her way. There is a down-to-earth quality, too, so that we
know that there will be nothing shocking. French soldiers will not suddenly
appear in Mansfield, nor Edward Ferrars turn out to have a dark past. Her
books are always happily-ever-afters, but with reason behind them. Despite
the "tidied up" end of, say, Pride and Prejudice, we are certain that Darcy
and Elizabeth will live happily.

The Brontës write very differently. Their world is not ordered, and is often
filled with impending doom. People die young, go blind, become involved in
intrigues, and are victims of plots. The world is dreamlike in the strange
and beautiful landscapes portrayed and the wild characters therein. We
rarely meet people like Lady Catherine de Bourgh, but she is obviously based
on real life. Mr. Rochester is a strange being, virtually unknown in the
real world. After finishing a Brontë book, I wonder how it could ever have
been made into a movie. Some parts would seem unreal, yet fit in the world
of the novel nearly seamlessly. There is a passionate sensibility throughout
the whole, that leads both to extreme beauty and extreme ugliness. No biting
wit, no wry humor, only love and hatred, kindness and cruelty.

The new Pride and Prejudice movie is not Brontified. It focuses more on
drama and emotion, but it never feels like anything but Jane Austen. The
dialogue still bears her wit, though softened and more realistic, and the
characters are all her own. Even Mr. Darcy, who several reviewers compared
to Heathcliff (a most unfounded claim!), is still proud and devoted, not
wild or passionate. True, the weather is more inclement than Austen allows,
but England is known for having wet weather. The use of landscapes (instead
of interiors is also marked), but they are tame English meadows, or Greek
temples, not the uncivilized moors.

Both Austen and the Brontës are very good writers, but their styles are so
dissimilar as to make it nearly impossible for them to be compared. P&P
would have to be incredibly different for it to be Brontified.