Description of BECOMING JANE trailer at IMDB
Poster “hungryburger” at the IMDB forum for BECOMING JANE posted a description of the trailer for BECOMING JANE that he saw prior to MISS POTTER. Here’s an excerpt:
Jane Austen is poor and wants to write, doesn’t want to get married. Laurence Fox is playing a rich suitor who proposes to her (and it shows another guy proposing too). And then James McAvoy is introduced and they sort of seem to have a sort of bickering relationship at the start (like all good romances…). They also show him boxing topless- don;t when that would come in in the film!
Possibly right after he saves England from being destroyed by Napoleon’s fleet and is decorated for bravery by the king.
Hey, if you’re gonna make stuff up, go for it.
There’s lots of ball scenes and a really cute bit where Anne Hathaway and James McAvoy secretly touch hands so no one can see.
As for the other actors… there was a little bit with Julie Walters as her Mum, just telling her she should marry Laurence Fox’s character and a Maggie Smith had a line that the whole cinema laughed at: jane is sitting with a notebook and Maggie Smith says ‘what is she doing’ laurence fox replies ‘writing’ and she says ‘well can;t something be done about it?’
We believe Laurence Fox’s character, as well as Maggie Smith’s, were invented characters for the purposes of the film and have no relation to an actual person who lived at that time.
January 4th, 2007 at 9:20 pm
anne hathaway bothers me. i just would never picture her as jane.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:55 pm
Please don’t tell me that he is back for more…
Anyway, hungryburger’s syntax does not seem to be any better than the other fanboy’s.
I’m sure that all of us here are eager to see the trailer. But keep in mind that it will have very little bearing on how good (or bad) the actual film will turn out. After all, the trailer for Pride and Prejudice was also good. So good, in fact, that, until the I saw the movie, I didn’t think that I would hate it as much as I did. (My apologies to the P&P4 lovers.)
January 5th, 2007 at 9:59 pm
That’s true, sometimes trailers do make movies look a lot better than they really are. I’m trying not to get my hopes up, so I won’t be dissapointed. But who knows, I might be pleasantly surprised. Regardless, I’m soooo excited for this movie to come out!!! Hope to see the trailer soon, I’m yearning to know everything!
January 5th, 2007 at 11:02 pm
Is it a rule that one must write poorly in order to message on IMDB? If I see one more hehe I will cry. Oh, very well, I will not be a snob. Heaven knows someone will find something to laugh at me about soon enough. And so they should. Not to be laughed at! I dearly love a laugh.
“and it shows another guy proposing too”
Correct me if I am wrong, but we know ( a little) of Harris Bigg-Wither, who did propose in 1802 (long after the movie’s time) and the mysterious man by the sea, who did not propose as far as we know, but may have intended to propose. So who are all these guys proposing? They are creating a non-existent story!!!! I am afraid of some non-existent monster.
January 6th, 2007 at 1:59 am
I wrote about Edward Bridges on another thread. He was the brother of Elizabeth Bridges Austen (wife of Edward Austen). He proposed to Jane during the summer of 1808, almost six years after the Bigg-Wither “incident.” Jane refused him, and a few months later he tried his luck with Cassandra. He subsequently married Harriet Foote. Some scholars believe for him to be the inspiration for Captain Benwick.
If the timeline leads us to an earlier period, another candidate could be Samuel Blackall, although there was no explicit mention of a proposal (but easy enough for the filmmakers to twist around, yes?). He was introduced to Jane by her friend, Anna Lefroy, aunt of Tom. The story goes that Anna felt partly responsible for breaking up the Jane-Tom romance that she, Anna, tried to make up for it by playing match-maker for Jane. But the fellow turned out to be such an obnoxious character that he could not have possibly gained Jane’s favor. Some scholers believe for him to be the inspiration for Mr. Collins. (Not likely though, because this was 1798, a year after First Impressions was submitted to Cadell for publication. But the character of Mr. Collins could have been “polished” between then and its final publication as Pride and Prejudice in 1813.)
There is a third candidate, and the “affair” took place by the sea, in Devonshire. The mystery here has to do with the fact that there was no written evidence to corroborate what actually took place. (Cassandra, however, was known to have destroyed some of the letters between her and Jane. Furthermore, if they were together, then no letters would have been exchanged between them.) All that is known had come from hearsay exchanged within the Austen family circles.
Anyway, the story goes that the Austens met a certain physician in Devonshire and his brother, a clergyman. This was the summer of 1801. The latter gentleman and Jane were said to have fallen in love and the match was said to have been favorable to all concerned. There was a plan in place for them to meet again the next year, with the expectation of a marriage proposal. Sadly, before it had a chance to take place, the Austens received word from the brother that the clergyman had died.
Some scholars believe for him to be the inspiration for Mr. Howard in The Watsons, a clergyman, whom Jane depicted as the only decent male character in the story.
The Watsons, by the way, IMHO, is possibly the greatest Jane Austen novel that never was. But that’s altogether another story.
January 6th, 2007 at 2:20 am
Tony, excellent contribution, did you chance to read Helen A.’s comments at the end of the “hyperbole” section where we were discussing proposals and income before? She had a good summary:
http://www.austenblog.com/archives/2007/01/03/oh-please-be-hyperbole/#comments
Sadly, I think the powers that be are not really investigating this with the same attention to detail (dare I say obessesion) that we care for…hence as Mags says the movie proposals are probably all from made up people like this Laurence Fox scoundrel. Aaarrgh and double aaarrgh.
January 6th, 2007 at 7:28 am
Here’s a link to 3 stills from ‘Becoming Jane’ I had not seen before: http://annie-hathaway.com/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=104
January 6th, 2007 at 7:40 am
Thanks Franka!
January 6th, 2007 at 9:49 am
Oh look, there’s the halter dress again. And A GENTLEMAN’S DAUGHTER OUTSIDE SANS CHAPEAU!!!!
Argh.
Note to filmmakers: Yes, bonnets are a cliche in Jane Austen-related films. THEY ARE A CLICHE BECAUSE EVERYONE BLOODY WELL WORE THEM. Thank you.
January 6th, 2007 at 1:48 pm
Thanks for posting the link Franka. And thank you Mags for expressing my sentiments…I’m trying really hard to remain the least bit positive about this movie, but I’m not having much success.
January 6th, 2007 at 2:38 pm
Bloody right, Mags. But I’m in a forbearing mood today. Seeing the stills of “Jane,” if they are representative of her look throughout the picture, I am glad that she was not primped too much, unlike her other roles. Sometimes I can’t help but feel pity on Ms. Hathaway for bearing the brunt of the hostility towards the (probable) dire outcome of this movie. If she only refrained from saying such stupid things…
It’s not possible for the filmmakers to cater directly to the innermost circle of fans. A case in point is V for Vendetta. Fan(atic)s of the graphic novel hated the movie—well, I didn’t care for it much, either. But not with the same passion as these guys. I think Natalie Portman is a good actress, but the accent…! (Tone à la Caroline Bingley.)
The director, Julian Jarrold, has some good credentials under his belt, but it difficult to say the same for the screenwriters. A good director can make even bad actors do well in front of the camera—let us hope the diction coach(es) did an effective job. But looking at the list of characters, who the hell is Lucy Lefroy (Jessica Ashworth)? The only historical character I can find is Jemima Lucy Lefroy, but she was a toddler at the time of Jane’s death. Is this another fabrication?
Jessica, I did see Helen’s comments, and it’s probably true that the mystery Mr. H.E. was William Evelyn—thank you, Helen. But he does not seem a likely candidate for the mysterious man by the sea. The fling with William Evelyn was in Bath, nowhere near the sea. The only other seaside setting I can think of is the time when they visited Lyme Regis in Dorset (Jane taking notes for Persuasion, “Hmm… where’s a good place for a young lady to take a fall?”). There was no proposal of marriage here… the vacation was cut short by the sudden illness of Mrs. Lefroy.
So, kindred spirits, let us practice some forbearance, shall we? As they say, expect the worst, hope for the best. Hope… (Who the hell is Lucy Lefroy?)
January 6th, 2007 at 2:50 pm
Okay question. This is probably really stupid, but he said,
“There’s lots of ball scenes…”
Okay, is he talking about sex or what? Because I didn’t get the memo about there being any sex scenes in Becoming Jane. I mean, the rating said there was “brief nudity”, but I just can’t imagine that they would try to make some scene with Jane and Tom gettin it on. Could somebody please clarify for me?
January 6th, 2007 at 4:24 pm
Glenys, you’re kidding, right? Of course you’re kidding. You know very well that the ball scenes were actually written into the script because of the generous gesture by the Harlem Globetrotters to make a cameo appearance in the movie. I have it on good authority that the brief nudity happened when one of the Globetrotters was doing a layup shot and his guard pulled down his shorts. The movie did not get an R-rating because he was wearing briefs… ergo, brief nudity.
The other “bone” of contention with the MPAA was the issue of language. Heather was correct when she accurately quoted a line from the script. It went thusly:
In one scene, Jane was reading one of her books to Tom, The History of England, and reciting the part about Edward the 4th,
“One of Edward’s Mistresses was Jane Shore, who had a play written about her, but it is a tragedy & therefore not worth reading. Having performed all these noble actions, his Majesty died, & was succeeded by his son.”
She goes on to Edward the 5th,
“This unfortunate Prince lived so little a while that nobody had time to draw his picture. He was murdered by his Uncle’s Contrivance, whose name was Richard the 3d.”
After hearing this last part, Tom scratched his ba**s [censored by the MPAA] and blurted: “Jane, you ignorant slut!” The MPAA has not decided whether to bleep that last epithet.
January 6th, 2007 at 5:23 pm
Watch out, Karim! You’re number 13, you see? Portentous indeed… (Twilight Zone theme playing in background.) Just be wary, and look both ways before crossing the street. If you get the feeling that somehow there is hostility directed at you here, that’s because they are in awe of you; you wield such power, and in your own words, “i swear to god I am goona ruin this blog for you,” that the other members don’t know how to respond.
It’s a shame because a Jane Austen fan, as well as Shakspeer in Love, you have as much right as everybody else to participate in these intelligent discussions. But first you need to show them that you are, indeed, a true Janeite. To that end, let me ask you a Jane Austen-related question. In fairness, so as not to make it too difficult, the question is about what I would guess is your favorite novel by JA, prife and prejudice. Am I not right? Okay, here goes:
What is the full name of Elizabeth Bennet’s oldest brother?
Okay, if that’s too tough, this next one is a bit easier,
What is the first name of Lizzy’s youngest sister Lydia?
Better? [Hint: If you don’t have your copy of prife and prejudice handy, any one of the five film adaptations of p&p will have the answer. You have all five in your collection, yes?]
Good luck. Don’t let me down.
January 6th, 2007 at 5:25 pm
Well, thank you Tony for that explanation; most enlightening and truly a fine piece of snark. I look forward now to Becoming Jane; the basket-’ball’ will definitely be a highlight.
To address your comments in your earlier post regarding the mystery man ‘Mr.H.E.’ I could not quite feel satisfied with my answer from yesterday and being in possession of a bit of OCD myself I have continued the quest to identify this individual. I think now that I was mistaken, the Mr. H.E. in question might really have been a man named Mr. Henry Edridge. Caroline Austen (Jane’s niece) recounts in JEAL’s Memoir meeting with this man in 1828 when her aunt Cassandra was visiting with her in Newtown. Obviously then, Jane did not know this gentleman, but from Caroline’s recollection there was something about him that reminded Cassandra of the mysterious man by the sea. Apparently the likeness was enough to cause Cassandra to finally reveal some of the details of the story of Jane’s short lived romance with him. Caroline however doesn’t mention his name, only that she thinks they met in Devonshire. Oddly enough, this Mr. Edridge died suddenly, just like Jane’s mysterious suitor, shortly after Cassandra and Caroline had met him.
I think I shall put my books away now before I find someone else who could possibly be this mystery man…
January 7th, 2007 at 3:29 pm
The unwritten gothic novel is Mysteries of Steventon Rectory where suitors suddenly die after meeting the seductive Austen sisters in various vacation spots. Poisoned by pen ink, or just smitten by their wit? It would be about as accurate as Becoming Jane.
In these on set pics,
http://annie-hathaway.com/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=lastup&cat=11
at least Anne H’s ballroom dress is not a discredit to Jane. McAvoy looks promising in his features. But the one of them close to eachother alone on the lane looks suspiciously risky to me. At least Jane is avec chapeau.
Sadly, Tony, Lucy Lefroy is yet another Made Up character in this fanatsy flick very Lucily based on Jane’s life. The real Mrs. Lefroy is my one heroines. Love her poetry.
January 7th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
Ah Tony! You snark so well! I am in awe. You will tell us when your book comes out, won’t you?
January 8th, 2007 at 2:01 am
Lucy Lefroy IS NOT a made-up character, Jessica Irene!
January 8th, 2007 at 1:28 pm
Anon, can you tell us which book contains information on Lucy Lefroy? I have a number of biographical books on JA and I cannot find Lucy Lefroy in any one of them, except for Jemima Lucy Lefroy, who was the daughter of one of Jane’s nieces, I think. Of course, some of my JA books are in storage, but I will gladly take trouble to get it if your source happens to be among them.
Googling “Lucy Lefroy” did not help either, except for hitting Becoming Jane articles themselves.
Ina, I am deeply flattered. The book sometimes feels like an elusive dream. But if it never became reality, I would have my favorite author to quote, “But then I have always supposed it to be my own fault—because I would not take the trouble of practising.”
Jessica, tell me more about Mysteries of Steventon Rectory. First time I heard of it, but it sounds like a lot more fun than Becoming Jane.
January 8th, 2007 at 3:16 pm
Tony, you are correct, it is Jemima-Lucy Lefroy (1779-1862) daughter of Rev. Issac Peter George Lefroy and Anne Brydges (she is the lady whom JA referred to as Madame Lefroy).
Jemima-Lucy was a cousin to Tom Lefroy and their grandmother was Elizabeth Langlois. Subsequently, their uncle, Benjamin Langlois was the one who paid for Tom Lefroy’s education and from what I know it may have been he who played a role in separating Tom Lefroy from a match with JA.
January 9th, 2007 at 7:12 pm
Tony, you might try Deirdre Le Faye’s ‘A Family Record’ or her edition of JA’s letters. In both, the index will refer you to Rice–Lucy’s married name. The ‘Biographical Index’ of the Letters gives her dates as 1779-1862.–You confused Jemima Lucy with her niece Lucy Jemima!