Phil Turner

I watched Becoming Jane over the weekend and thought it was first class. I had reservations beforehand because of the speculative storyline and the controversy surrounding Anne Hathaway's casting in the lead role. I needn't have worried. In my opinion, this was a fine costume drama, which stands comparison with some of the better films in the genre in recent years.

Without giving too much away, the story centres on the romance between a young Jane Austen (Anne Hathaway) and Tom Lefroy (James McAvoy), and how their relationship may have influenced her writing in later years. The plot emphasises the rigid social conventions of the time and, while no one knows the truth, there were enough twists and turns to keep things interesting and moving along at a fair pace.

The two leads were fine and, although their accents wavered occasionally, that's only nit-picking. Anne Hathaway was pretty, charming and spirited as Jane Austen and fitted the character perfectly. The real fun though came in watching the supporting cast which included Julie Walters, Maggie Smith and the late Ian Richardson in small but eye-catching roles. Also, Anna Maxwell Martin (Bleak House) and Laurence Fox (Lewis) did well amongst the younger cast members.

The look of the film also ticked all the right boxes; with candlelit interiors, picture postcard settings and lovely costumes all creating a perfect sense of period.

I saw this film on a Friday night, and noticed a really good mix of people in the cinema with lots of older couples in the audience. This was clever, tasteful and entertaining with an appeal to people of all ages.

Regards
Phil Turner

Jim

So, they CAN make films without sex, violence and foul language? Wonders will never cease!

Good morning boys.

silverwhistle

I think I'd rather jump off the bridge than watch this... Did you read Hathaway's comment in the Radio Times puff-piece?

"I don't trust people that read Jane Austen and don't fall in love with her. It's like people who don't like dogs. It's like 'What are you thinking? Who are you? Why are you evil?'"

Fine. I'm "evil".

I suffered Austen under duress at school. Twice. Books I would never have touched with a barge-pole under any other circumstances. There is this strange assumption that, being female, you are somehow hard-wired to like that kind of up-market Mills&Boon-y twee drivel. No. I prefer Hardy, Poe, Mann, Hugo, Dostoevskii, Bulgakov...

But I do like dogs.

penfold

You do surprise me Doc.....I always read Jane Austen and enjoyed her....an analogy would be with ACT, you have to look through the plot to what is really going on; a really witty social commentary. Think of her as Thomas Hardy but writing from a different viewpoint; either side of the glass ceiling that Hardy's autobiographic characters, howerever artisitic, talented or meritorious, fail to rise through; Austen is (class-wise) above it, but is similarly limited; her autobiographic characters have the talent and merit, but no way to express them within her society, and are usually skint too.... I know what you mean though; school put me off Dickens for decades.

Bit of a Bay Window, what??