TJABC Clips and Review Roundup: We Wub Geeks Edition
We saw The Jane Austen Book Club tonight and really loved it! Even more than we had hoped! Hugh Dancy is the most adorable geek ever and we want to give him many long hugs and show him our handbag full of cool geek gadgets like Enrico the Treo over there, and maybe even read some Ursula K. LeGuin. Full review to come, possibly by the weekend. In the meantime, there are two clips left…and a bonus!
In which Grigg compares and contrasts Mansfield Park with The Empire Strikes Back, earning our eternal geek wub. (AND he has R2D2 on his ring tone!!!!)
Prudie has a breakdown at the library dinner
Those are the last of our clips, but Alert Janeite Robyn found two more!
Speaking of the delightful Mr. Dancy, the Boston Herald talks to him about the film:
There’s something else uncommon about the film: “It is a kind of advertisement for reading, which is something that you don’t often see in a movie. I appreciate that as a fairly avid reader.”
Lovely! And pray note the caption of the photo. Tee-hee! Bet he gets that a lot.
James Berardinelli doesn’t think the film properly reflects Jane Austen’s work.
The Jane Austen Book Club is an example of how a movie can follow the general plot of a book yet fail to capture the spirit. The problem is a simple one to identify: much of the enjoyment derived from Karen Joy Fowler’s novel comes from the way in which it is written, and the manner in which she interweaves subtle references and asides to Austen.
They’re still there, but admittedly the film is not as rich in these references as the novel, but in some cases new ones have been brought in–for instance, when “Mr. Knightley” gives “Emma” a stern talking-to.
Lexi Feinberg at Big Picture Big Sound liked it.
You don’t have to be an Austen junkie or even a woman to enjoy this endlessly charming film about six people launching a book club to discuss Jane’s six novels in six different locations.
We would think Dorothy might be moonlighting at afterellen.com except for the candle she lights daily in front of her Richard Armitage shrine–but really, Dorothy Snarker would be the perfect nom de plume, n’est-ce pas? (Sorry, channeling Prudie for a minute there)
For a woman with such a blandly generic first name, Jane Austen has had a uniquely enduring impact on popular culture. Nearly 200 years after her last work was published posthumously, Austen continues to influence art, literature and, increasingly, film.
Definitely not our Dorothy.
Edward Douglas at comingsoon.net misses the point:
Even so, the film’s insistent claim that Jane Austen can bring dysfunctional couples together and cure all their woes is so incredible that it’s hard not to smirk through most of the last act.
It’s not Jane Austen who does the curing and the togethering: it’s the members of the book club themselves, perhaps influenced by the novels, or at least using them as an emotional touchstone as they go through their own travails. Because the movie that did claim such a thing would suck, yes.
And we’re a little astonished to see that Maria Bello doesn’t like Jane Austen’s novels! She sure faked it well enough. We hope she tries them again after making this film.
