Open thread discussion for Becoming Jane

4 Responses to “Open thread discussion for Becoming Jane”

1. Lisa Says:
   September 12th, 2007 at 12:06 pm

   I finally managed to see it, and it is a perfectly charming popcorn movie. Not a masterpiece, but not total garbage either.

   I would imagine that no-one seriously assumes it to actually be faithful to real Jane Austen’s character - at least no more than Frida was faithful to Frida Kahlo, Fur was to Diane Arbus, Sylvia to Sylvia Plath or Sissi to Empress Elisabeth. In a film like this, people always reflect their own expectations on the subject, just like we reflect any book adaptation to the picture we have of the original work in our heads. Jane Austen in this film aspires to be her own person and to be allowed the same things men are allowed - earning her own living, playing the odd game of crickets (oh the horror of mother Austen in there), being taken seriously. Quite a few bioflicks concentrate on the life and loves of their subject rather than on their creative processes - on the other hand, I write myself and know no-one would watch someone doing that for two hours.

   The cinematography and art direction are superb; I love the fact that nothing is too shiny - or too shabby - and the picture the film gives of the period at least looks realistic. The dresses are nice, especially those on Anne Hathaway (also good hair there). The setting reminds me actually of the 1995 Persuasion, which was simple and understated too.

   Actually, many things in this film remind of something I have already seen before. It is fresh in its own way, but still it is easy to recognise the inspiration behind many scenes - surely I’m not the only one who thought of Sissi when Maggie Smith took Jane aside in the ball…?

   The music is good, and the cast does good job in their roles. The weak part is the script; the film begins well but the ending is slightly lame. I would have preferred to either stay with the young Jane or to build a proper story arch from the excitement and expectations of the youth to the quiet peace of her last years.

   Three stars out of five.

2. Karenlee Says:
   September 14th, 2007 at 4:01 pm

   Finally saw Becoming Jane a couple weekends ago with the added pleasure of doing so together with Geri and Derk who also frequent AustenBlog. Before the film started, someone who worked at the cinema gave a short introduction, mentioning there’d been some controversy as to whether or not this was a biographical film. She clearly explained what the only hard-core Lefroy evidence was: a few teasingly enigmatic mentions in a couple letters that indicated she liked him, and said that Jon (‘Becoming Jane Austen’) Spence also proposed vaguely circumstantial evidence that she might have briefly been a guest in Cork Street. But anything beyond that was – for the audience’s information – a MADE UP STORY. Even though there were only something like 30 other people there, it comforted me to know there were 30 less in the world who would think this was what REALLY HAPPENED.

   And what Lisa above says pretty much goes for me. A charming enough popcorn movie. From the very opening - the interspersions of the ticking clock, her scratching pen, her tapping it on the table as she struggled to find the exact words she was looking for - I was pleasantly hooked. All the shoehorning in of the P&P elements amused me more than they irritated me. And I was snivelling a bit now and then. I can well imagine that Jane may well have known her way around a cricket bat. She was, as they mentioned in the movie, brought up with (by?) not only her brothers, but also all the other students who Mr Austen taught, and Catherine Moreland in Northanger Abbey also MUCH preferred cricket and rolling down the hill at the back of the lawn to more obvious young female activities such as watering a rosebush or nursing a dormmouse.

   I found the attraction between Jane and Tom relatively believable too (I gloss over the fact that apparently the main thing she needed to set her writing ‘free’ was to read some ‘hot’ literature - she’d already read Tom Jones when she met him, and the book was apparently a point of discussion between them judging by the references she makes in her letters). The ONLY thing I wish would have rung more true - and it was a pretty big thing for me - is that her razor-sharp wit, humour and earthy aplomb would have been more clearly delineated. Instead, in the few scenes where her mental abilities were (apparently) supposed to be made evident, her dialogue was more like philosophical ramblings that went over everyone else’s head.

   The Jane on the screen wasn’t quite the one who once wrote: “At the bottom of Kinsdown Hill we met a Gentleman in a Buggy, who on minute examination turned out to be Dr Hall—& Dr Hall in such very deep mourning that either his Mother, his Wife, or himself must be dead”, or “I will not say that your mulberry-trees are dead, but I am afraid they are not alive” or “You deserve a longer letter than this; but it is my unhappy fate seldom to treat people so well as they deserve.”

   I would have liked to have seen that airily flippant edge to Hathaway’s Jane. It would have given even more credence to why such a man-of-the-world roustabout (as Lefroy is portrayed in the film) ended up falling for her. She was just a wee bit too uncertain and passive.

3. Tamara Says:
   September 19th, 2007 at 8:37 pm

   If you want to take a quiz on the truthfulness of the movie go to http://www.janeausten.co.uk/quiz/index.ihtml

4. Dayla Says:
   September 29th, 2007 at 2:11 pm

   I just finished reading the book and was looking for more about Jane when I found this site.

   I strongly feel that the Jane in Becoming Jane wasn’t all that great. I mean to say, she had to have spirit and guts to diss that Lady Catherine. She was all for feminine strength- somehow, I didn’t see much of that spunk in Anne Hathaway