Anne Hathaway makes a fine Jane Austen.
Tools:
Recommend review to a friend »
It's almost inconceivable that a female British novelist born a year before the American Revolution would be such a hot ticket more than 230 years later, but Jane Austen has become as much a darling of cinema as she has literature. All four of the novels she had published during her lifetime--Sense and Sensibility (1811), Pride and Prejudice (1813), Mansfield Park (1814), and Emma (1815)--have been made into very successful films.
In 2007 attention turned to the author herself, with Robin Swicord directing "The Jane Austen Book Club" about six Californians whose lives parallel Austen's characters, and Julian Jarrold giving us "Becoming Jane."
The latter does for Austen what "Finding Neverland" did for J.M. Barrie and "Shakespeare in Love" did for The Bard--exploring a period in the author's life that was pivotal in shaping the direction his/her fiction would take. And while "Becoming Jane" doesn't quite have the spark or magical feeling that we get from those other biographical movies--or even the best adaptations of the author's novels, for that matter--Anne Hathaway makes a fine Jane Austen, and "Becoming Jane" is still a solid period film.
Shot on location in Ireland rather than Austen's Bath, Southampton, and Chawton in southern England, "Becoming Jane" nonetheless conveys a sense what the author's world was like. Director of photography Eigil Bryld takes full advantage of the scenery, apparently knowing that it's as important as character in a film like this. Bryld's use of a stationary camera is particularly impressive, where, for example, we'll see a gorgeous seascape into which two small figures walk and pass across. Other times it's a reliance on interestingly cropped closed frames that convey a sense of containment. Moments like these build to a cumulative dramatic effect which superbly matches the external drama going on in Austen's life and the internal struggle that's hinted at.
So when did Austen "become Jane"? According to scholar Jon Spence, whose speculative, New Historical biography became the basis for the screenplay, it begins in 1795 when a 20-year-old Austen feels torn between prevailing social mores and customs and her own strong will. Women at this time can't be formally educated and aren't supposed to be outspoken, but Austen finds herself gauging when to bite her tongue and when to unleash it with all the power of a wise orator. Novelists at this time are mostly considered dabblers and amusing dalliance purveyors for and by women, but Austen believes the novel can and should document the real lives of people and boldly (bawdily, if necessary) speak the truth--something that's all but confirmed when she's given a copy of Henry Fielding's Tom Jones by a friend of her brother's. And at a time when an entire family's security is dependent upon marring "up" the social ladder, Austen has the audacity to believe that it's better to marry for love and be poor than to marry a wealthy man for security.
As Tom Lefroy, a rakish gentleman caught up in much the same socio-economic dilemma, James McAvoy ("The Last King of Scotland") appropriately evokes not only Mr. Darcy and all of Austen's dashing-but-slightly-roguish leading men but also the rascally character from the novel he gives Jane. By juxtaposing him against the bland and awkward Mr. Wiseley (Laurence Fox), Spence provides the same kind of subtle critique on class and wealth that we find in Austen's novels. The smartest, most dashing, and most ambitious people are not the ones whose stations are high and respected. It's these types of depictions that have prompted critics through the ages to praise Austen for her unflinching social commentary and the wry wit and irony that informs her prose and dialogue. Her characters fight the same battles as we see Austen fighting here, with mixed results.
It's a nice parallel to have Mr. Lefroy in virtually the same predicament as the woman he declares his love for, and it's that shared problem (and entreaties from others to get them to use their "heads") that mostly drives the narrative. That, and the wonderful countryside and depiction of rural peasant life that brings the late 1700s to life.
The supporting cast is wonderful, with Julie Walters and James Cromwell playing Austen's parents and Maggie Smith the wealthy aunt who tries to force Mr. Wiseley on poor Jane. If there's a downside here, it's that with so many brothers and a close relationship to sister Cassandra (Anna Maxwell Martin), you almost wish for more domestic scenes and sibling interaction to distract (and deepen) an otherwise straightforward narrative.
Average user rating (1-5):
Not yet rated.
Not yet rated.
[release]22616[/release]