Movieweb.com has some more videos with various cast members of The Jane Austen Book Club. They are kind of hilarious because the (male) reviewer is so astonished that he liked the movie, and keeps asking the cast members how to convince his audience to see it, other than the fact that Princess Leia’s stepfather is in it. (That would be Jimmy Smits, who played Senator Bail Organa in Star Wars Episodes II and III, which was pretty much the only thing that kept us from opening our jugular vein with a dull spork while watching those films; that, and a sick fascination with how many elaborate outfits Padme managed to extract from her tiny suitcase after she eloped with Anakin.) Really, is Jane Austen that scary?
Then this review, which is rather lukewarm anyway, has a strange misperception about Janeites.
There are some people who are so crazy about Jane Austen that they know everything about the English novelist’s life (like, how she only wrote six novels or that she never married).
These are not the people who should see “The Jane Austen Book Club,” a super oozy chick flick.
It’s the ones who like Austen-inspired movies including “Emma” or even “Clueless” who will enjoy this tale of Sacramento readers who create a book club in which they read only Austen.
Why in the world would they think those two groups are mutually exclusive? Janeites who really know Jane generally love Clueless, because it really gets Jane. Same with TJABC. It’s not intensive Jane Austen content for Janeite geeks, but it’s infused with her work nonetheless. Why wouldn’t the fanatics love that, as long as it’s done well? Which, of course, is the point: it must be done well. It’s not a matter of modern or period work, it’s a matter of quality.