The Jane Austen Book Club Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES
You don't have to know the books to be in the club.
Six Californians start a club to discuss the works of Jane Austen, only to find their relationships — both old and new — begin to resemble 21st century versions of her novels.
| Maria Bello | Jocelyn |
| Emily Blunt | Prudie Drummond |
| Kathy Baker | Bernadette |
| Amy Brenneman | Sylvia Avila |
| Maggie Grace | Allegra Avila |
| Jimmy Smits | Daniel Avila |
| Ed Brigadier | Pastor |
| Kevin Zegers | Trey |
| Marc Blucas | Dean Drummond |
| Catherine Schreiber | Academic Woman |
| Ned Hosford | Waiter |
| Hugh Dancy | Grigg Harris |
| Messy Stench | Girl with Dog Collar |
| Chris Burket | Skydive Instructor |
| Parisa Fitz-Henley | Corinne |
| Robin Swicord |
7.30 out of 10 (657 votes)
Visitor Reviews
Delicious
posted on 15 Jul 2009I like movies with spaceships in, preferably exploding at some point. Also shooting, sword fighting and violent death. Oh, and car chases. And if I can't have the above, then can there at least be some explicit sex please? And yet I loved this movie.I loved the nerdiness, I loved the intimacy, I loved watching it unfold exactly as you know it's going to. And the chemistry between Hugh Dancy and the gorgeous Maria Bello crackles off the screen.I know, I know, you could level this movie without much effort. You wouldn't even need that big of a stick. But you find yourself not caring.This film is pure pleasure, start to finish. I gladly relinquish one of my Man cards for saying that. I'm off to watch something with guns in to compensate, though.
Very nice! Sensable AND sensitive
posted on 16 May 2009I have never read Jane Austin. Although I did have a senior Librarian at the British Library, where I am a "registered" scholar-reader, crack a funny and original joke about her to me once. The joke was slow, off-the-cuff (he made it up on the spot), and so droll in the way he told it "au naturel" and spontaneous. HE probably was chortling for the rest of the day. For him it probably was the height of hilarity. I was impressed, and charmed, even though the joke itself was pretty mild. Much like this movie.The modern day Jane Austen book club members act out love lives and turmoil (and triumphs) very much in parallel with a Jane Austin book, as I understand their plots to be (I have seen them all in movies, but never in print). This reminded me of Shakespeare in Love, where the modern writers performed a brilliant art that went beyond mere parroting or mimicry. I suspect a Jane Austen reader/fan would recognize much, and see in-jokes and intelligent references that I missed. But, I think it is saying something good about the movie to note that I learned something about Austin's books, but also followed the plot, was thoroughly entertained and interested throughout, and felt a involved with what happened. Again, I'm not part of the Austin cognoscenti, but I at least felt "in on the jokes" and in on the plot as well. I was included by the movie.Some of the plot points veered toward the girlie for a moment, but never completely went off down that road. That is, with the chatty older lady Kathy Baker's character initially showing contempt for men, and hints of a lesbian theme, at first I was ready for a rant. Or at least a put-down of males, like the last 10 minutes of "Steel Magnolias." But everybody lightened up, and basically respect and affection was shown to all, ultimately. Although, returning for a moment to the lesbian thing, I did not for one minute actually buy that the daughter, Allegra, was gay--- not that there would be anything wrong with that (note the Seinfeld reference). But as a comment on the movie, on the narrative and the portrayals, it just didn't FEEL real or true. Not even "movie true." But the actors were competent and otherwise convincing, all around, so I found myself able to dismiss that dissonant note with relative ease.If you are a guy, don't be afraid of this movie. It's pleasant, and about real-enough things that concern us, too. After all, for most of us, relationships involve men and women, so here's something that is a bit about both, but the perspective is nonetheless clearly from the distaff side, which intrigued me. I enjoyed it! BTW--- I went to a special "art series" showing at the cinema where I am visiting. I went alone. Throughout the movie, however, I could hear many female voices laughing, and seemingly chuckling with agreement when certain truths and characters' foibles were brought to light--- and never in a mean way. So maybe it rings true for the ladies as well.
Jane Austen in California
posted on 08 May 2009The Jane Austen Book Club (2007) was directed by Robin Swicord, who also wrote the screenplay. Thanks to movie adaptations--some great, some so-so--Jane Austen has found a wider audience than she could ever have guessed. Now, second-generation books and films are being made about Austen and her novels. "The Jane Austen Book Club" is one of these.The premise of the film is simple but irresistible. Six Californians decide to get together once a month to discuss each one of Austen's six novels in turn. The group has some cohesiveness--most of the people are friends, and the group includes a mother and her daughter. However, there is a newcomer--a young man--who is not familiar with Austen, but is charming enough, and eager enough, to be accepted because the group lacks a sixth member.All of the women are in a lesser or greater crisis at some point in the movie, and the film intertwines their problems with the problems faced by Austen's heroines. The parallel is apt enough--the women, like Austen's heroines, are attractive and reasonably comfortable financially. Most of their problems center around love, or lack of love, which, again, follows Austen's plots.There's a problem with the movie--every one of the main characters is extremely attractive. Surely, there must be some average-appearing women and men in the Sacramento area. One of the actors--Emily Blunt-- is so beautiful that it's hard to believe she's real. It's also hard to believe that she would have married--and would stay with--her insensitive lout of a husband. (I've never seen Blunt in a film before. When I checked her images in Google, she just looked like one more very attractive young actor. In this movie, she's other-worldly.) I would have liked the movie more if some of the characters had the appearance of people you meet in the real world.The film will work better if you know Jane Austen's novels and characters. However, even if you don't, "The Jane Austen Book Club" is still worth seeing. Incidentally, it's not a chick-flick. I don't see why men would like the movie any less then women. It's a good film for anyone who likes to read and likes to think.
A Hollywood Treatment of a very British Theme
posted on 08 May 2009***very minor spoilers*** But a guilty pleasure too. Even though all the well worn and tired clichés were there. But the cast were great, the discussion of the books was interesting. The Jane-droppings were many. I would have loved to have seen it in more sophisticated hands, even though it probably would have made far less money. The intelligent movie dilemma.There is one man in the bookclub of six, a hunky gorgeous Hugh Dancey. Who happens to be wealthy, unattached, environmentally aware and not gay who becomes entranced with an older woman played by Maria Bello.Emily Blunt, a Euro-wannabe, is in hots with one of her students.An amazing Kathy Baker, is the matriarch of the group, tough belligerent and talky.Jimmy Smits is the wandering husband with the lesbian daughter and two missing sons who never appear on film.Everything comes together so perfectly in the end but I found an enormous sense of letdown.All those little plot twists later and the men all convert to bookloving, dancing, contrite partners? Tongue in cheek Austen, yeah I get it. And this was hollywoodized, yeah, I get that too. Not in any life I know. Too, too sweet by half. 7 out of 10.
Everything Works In Spite of Itself
posted on 02 May 2009If you think Austen is all about mere story, there's still something to talk about. In the end, things work out despite the structural imperfections of the world which work against happy endings. If that's your take, if it is all about story for you, this is a perfect movie. Because it works. And it works in spite of some horrible missteps, some absolutely bad decisions that should cripple it. There are a surplus here, enough to have killed a similar movie. And yet it works. Yes, everyone finds romance at the end, but what I mean is also that we fall in love with the movie.Why? Three reasons.The actresses really are centered, the key ones. The characters aren't Austenian in manner, but they are as abstract and dramatic as hers are. Because these actresses don't have to play real, nuanced people, they get to pour all their skills into the three or so characteristics each is supposed to have. The funny thing is that the chords they strike as a group seem to be acceptable. Its not a play about life, but a play about a fictional world of romance that itself relates to life, or so we accept. So the actresses work. Emily Blunt is a power, and I am committed to follow her. She makes good choices.There are some truly endearing sequences. Its fewer than half, and they are interwoven with some real mistakes. But they are powerful enough to allow us to skim over the badness in the movie. I believe that in part this is because the nature of the story and the being of the characters is to do that. So the two tractors of continuance in the face of incompetence make the incompetence irrelevant. And then there's the big idea, what I call the fold. We have the movie. We have the books. We have the people in the movie reading the books and comparing themselves to what they read. We have us "reading" the movie and doing likewise, but slightly differently. We have us reading what the writer of the script did in terms of overlapping the four of these, and us wondering whether we will follow 21st or 19th century conventions (and being pleased to progressively find the latter). Its a simple fold but interesting because it is so overt. Its even underscored by the appearance of that usual folding device: a school play about love where the actor gets to relate to his love off-stage and tell her he loves her.You may be wondering about the sequences that are missteps. Austen depicts a world that is profoundly broken, but instead of pounding us with it, she presents the breaks through humor, humorous characters mostly, who present attitudes that collectively circumnavigate the world. Austen called this "irony," though the definition has changed twice since then. This writer-director tries this in a way, by introducing situations we might know from old TeeVee sitcoms. There's the computer geek's house that is set up with scary gismos. There's the same geek comparing Austen to Star Wars. And yet this same geek is the fulcrum of many of the most powerful presentations of tentative commitment.There's a moment when Blunt's character is making a tough choice and literally sees a blinking sign wondering "what would Jane do?" This is bad in so many ways. There are a dozen such spots where you wonder what they were thinking.This reminds me of some successful people I know. They are deeply inadequate in fundamental ways, but they know how to use their strengths to comb over the thin spots.Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.
Snoozing with Jane Austen
posted on 30 Apr 2009One of the male characters in this movie thinks an Austen is a car, quite remarkable really as Austins (deeply mediocre cars once made in England) have not been sold in the US for thirty years. Nevertheless Jane Austen, who published her last book about 180 years ago, is still read even in California.The Jane Austen Book Club comes about through the efforts of much-married Bernadette (Kathy Baker) to console her kennel-owning friend Jocelyn (Maria Bello) who has lost a favorite dog. Other members are Sylvia (Amy Brenneman), whose lawyer husband (Jimmy Smits) has gone off with a co-worker, her lesbian daughter Allegra, teacher Prudie (Emily Blunt) who is neglected by her husband and fancies one of her students Trey (Kevin Zegers), and one male, Grigg (Hugh Dancy with a good American accent), a successful businessman and science fiction fan who Jocelyn is trying to get interested in Sylvia but who actually fancies control freak Jocelyn herself.The group plow through all six Austen novels, which come to be seen by them as lessons in manners. In one surreal scene Prudie is about to cross a road to join her possible teenage paramour who is waiting outside a motel for her. The traffic light, instead of "Walk" reads "What would Jane do". Naturally "Don't Walk" follows.With eight or nine main characters, including Sylvia's aging hippie mother and nightmare house guest (Lynn Redgrave), it is a tight fit in 105 minutes to get all their stories in, but in adapting Karen Fowler's book first time director Robin Swicord covers the ground quite efficiently. The film is not so much about the novels as about the group of friends; after all we know what happens to the Austen heroines, but the fates of the club members is up in the air.Channel 4 in Scotland did something similar in their 2002-03 series "The Book Group" (with a lonely American in Glasgow starting the group), but this film does not match the hilarity of that series. It is pleasant to watch and you don't need to know much about the novels to understand what's happening, but it's a bit of a snooze, and I'm afraid I don't buy Jane Austen as a marriage counsellor. After all, she never got to the altar herself. As for Jimmy Smits becoming a latter day Austen fan – I can't suspend my disbelief that far.
Book club members' delight
posted on 26 Apr 2009Those familiar with Jane Austen's six novels will get more (but not necessarily much more) out of this movie, but it's people who have experienced book clubs that will really get a kick out of it. To audience that is neither, this is still an enjoyable (I hate to use the term but cannot think of a better one) chick flick.As the title suggests, the story evolves around the book club meetings but this is really one of those familiar ensemble pieces. But first the book club: six members are needed to cover all six of Austen's novels, each taking primary responsibility for one, to be discussed in six consecutive monthly meetings at various venues (one of which ended up being a hospital ward!). There are 4 initial members who know each other while the remaining two are drafted through chances encounters.BERNADETTE the founder is a sophisticated woman who has married six time and has purportedly seen it all. Her two Austen enthusiast friends are JOCELYN, a woman of independent spirit and a dog breeder by profession and SYLVIA who on the surface has a happy family but is in fact on the verge of a separation with a husband who is looking for a new relationship after 30 years of happy married life. ALLEGRA is Sylvia's daughter, a lesbian. As these four set out to look for two more members, Bernadette has an encounter with PRUDIE, another Austen enthusiast with a husband who has just disappointed her by canceling out a business trip to Paris (on which she can accompany him) because he has to travel with the boss to watch a basketball game. Finally, GRIGG, the only male member and an "Austen virgin", encounters Jocelyn in a bar, in a certain amount of mutual attraction. With Grigg being a computer geek and Sci-Fi fan, he agrees to read Austen's "girlie books" in the hope that Jocelyn will give Ursula K. LeGuin's "The left hand of darkness" a try.There is no point for me to go into details. The audience will have a pretty good idea of what they expect to see. The six members have their own predicaments and situations and they are all projected through the Austen stories and characters during the discussions. Within the six of them, we see relationships and interactions from simply conflicting opinions about the novels to much more personal involvements. Outside these six book club members, there is more than another half dozen characters playing out various situation life dramas with them. The movie is light, easy flowing and very funny at times. In the end, everything is nicely resolved because there is no problem in life and relationships that cannot be set right by a well written letter, as any deserving Jane Austen fan can tell you. By the end of the movie, you would have enjoyed it so much that you wouldn't mind that it has not gone any deeper.The actings are all competent and effective. Playing Jocelyn is Mario Bello who is comfortable with both mainstream (World Trade Centre) and not-so-mainstream (A history of violence) material. Playing the woman outwardly fully in control but has a lot of feeling bottled up is not a big challenge for her. Kathy Baker, whose sensuous persona in "Edward scissorhands" I still remember, has an easy time with Bernadette, a facilitator role in both the book club and the movie. Emily Blunt, who served notice with "The Devil wears Prada", is good as Prudie, a troubled wife who feels being neglected and is at a crossroad. Hugh Dancy, whom I remember most as Galahad in "King Arthur" (2004), is the brightest spot in the movie as Grigg, not necessarily because he is the sole male member of the club, but more to do with his sunshine persona. Amy Brenneman shines as Sylvia, giving a little more to the role of the betrayed wife. Maggie Grace makes an effective contribution to the ensemble cast with her role of pretty young thing Allegra.As I said, there are more than another half a dozen characters but the one that must be mentioned is Prudie's mother whose mere presence spells trouble. This is just a cameo role but when this is played by Lynn Redgrave, you get more than your money's worth.
Where oh where is it?
posted on 20 Apr 2009I sat down on a late, dark Saturday night to watch this with my daughter, fully expecting to enjoy it as she had already told me she liked it. We don't share a common like of all movies, but we do when it comes to romantic type films.I did like the film in general, but felt it could have been better. The grouping of people was not the best and I didn't care for the not-so-subtle male bashing. Not all men fall into the knuckle-dragging cretin category; including yours truly. A great many masculine men can and do enjoy not only films such as this, but actually read a lot of books as well, and not comic books either. Having said that ...One of the things that rankled me was in pretending to set the film in Sacramento when it clearly wasn't. There are a lot of great - and one could even say unique - settings in Sacramento and those possibilities were completely ignored in favor of the more generic, and tiresome, Southern California locations. Better still would have been filming in the fall and winter in Sacramento when it more resembles the climate in Jane Austen's England. That would have been wonderful. You know, that's one great advantage of the old Hollywood sound stages, they created far more poetic scenes where the settings and weather at least seemed congruent with the stories they were telling... wonderful fantasy lost for the sake of a buck I guess.The film also left me wondering how they managed to collect some cooler days for the filming, or did they just swath the actors/actresses in many layers of clothing regardless of the weather... probably the latter. I mention this item as I have heard a LOT of women - and not a few men - raving about the sweater worn by the Jocelyn character, Maria Bello, through much of the film. It looks so inviting, so comforting, that a lot of people would buy it were the source known. Funny how Hollywood, who like to try and squeeze the life out of action figure marketing, completely misses about 90% of the other possibilities.The rest of the film did hit a few other unsettling notes, such as the emotional infidelity of Emily Blunt's character; an affair made doubly worse by who it involves her with. That just left a bad taste in my mouth. I may have also been somewhat prejudiced by her as the choice for this character. I would much rather have seen an actual American young woman in the part. Although she is a superb actress, I just didn't buy her in this part of the reactionary hippie-love-child. However, giving her full credit where due, I have to say her changing-clothes-in-the-street scene was terrific.The above aside, it was an enjoyable movie for the most part. I liked most of the characters, a few too like people I've known. A couple of characters just irritated, like the Blunt and Maggie Grace character. It left me feeling that I'd rather see both these actresses in better roles. To my disappointment, the Hugh Dancy character, Grigg, got on my nerves. Is it even possible for what is supposed to be an above-average-intelligence, educated guy to be so clueless? Well, I know in real life it is but do I want to watch that on the screen? I guess the answer this time was "no". The whole excuse his stupidity because he's male thing is very over done.Overall, I liked it more than not. So, ladies, by all means, see this with the men in your life, but don't be surprised if they're not thrilled with it.
Not Just for Jane Austen Fans
posted on 12 Apr 2009I'm not a Jane Austen fan. I have not read any of the books and I have only seen two movies based on the books. However, I liked "The Jane Austen Book Club" more than either of those movies.While it is not particularly realistic, the characters are interesting and likable, the acting is good, and it is not filled with violence and vulgarity, something that seems to be hard to find in the movie theater right now.All the actors are good but Emily Blunt really stands out. She could end up being a big star. And who knew that Maggie Grace was a real actress and not just the bimbo she played on "Lost." "The Jane Austen Fan Club" is not a masterpiece and you can probably wait for it to show up on video, but with the poor variety currently available in the theaters, it is the best thing out right now.
Modern Austen movie with Austen characters
posted on 05 Mar 2009This is very clever made. Some women, in different ages and with different experiences, get together in a club for studying Jane novels. What they don't know, but becomes clear for us after a couple of minutes, is that they're really living these novels and many of their characters. There also are some men in the back- and foreground. Catalysators of course.It's a nice movie about withheld passions or passions which are not allowed to get out. Just like in Austen's stories. It's also a funny movie about people who are real. Just like in Austen's stories.What could be recommended is anyway that you have read these stories before you see this. You'll probably understand much more.
Half of a good movie
posted on 27 Dec 2008Jane Austin Book Club is half of a good movie. I like Jane Austen and I wanted to like this movie. It had good acting. It had more character development than you see in most movies. And I personally like movies with a lot of talking. The problem is that out of the six members of the book club, three were unlikable. Allegra is a hedonistic, self-centered woman who has trouble maintaining long term relationships. Bernadette is a supercilious know-it-all. And Prudie, the most problematic member of the club, is so neurotic and so clueless that you wince every time she opens her mouth. If you're going to put a neurotic main character in a movie, he or she needs to at least be charming and attractive enough to offset the mental issues (OK, she IS really cute, but it's not enough). In an ensemble cast, it simply doesn't work to have so many unlikable characters. Another big problem I had with the movie is that the ending is right out of female fantasy land. No way this is gonna happen in the real world...am I right?? Still, most Jane Austen fans will probably like the film and I would recommend it to them because of the many references to her novels.
The rare case where the movie is better than the book
posted on 23 Dec 2008I had read the book last year, and didn't care for it very much. But it's always exciting and interesting to me to see how a book is portrayed on the silver screen. Perhaps I had low expectations going into this one, but I thought the movie was good, and much better than the book.For those of you who have read the book, the movie and book are similar in terms of broad brush strokes, but that's about it. Much of the sub-plots and stories are completely different from the book. I think the movie works better primarily because the characters are much more likable, and because the many upsetting stories in the book (particularly Grigg's adventure with his Dad) are omitted. I also thought the romance between Grigg and Jocelyn in the movie was especially sweet, and very "Emma-esque."If you didn't like the book, I'd say still give the movie a chance. I did, and I'm very happy I saw it!
Good movie, the story and characters parallel what Jane Austen might have written.
posted on 09 Nov 2008Things happen and the characters have issues. One of them suggests that they read Jane Austen's 6 major books and meet monthly to discuss them. Each person would have responsibility for a different book, and each person would be responsible for the location of the meeting.I am not necessarily a Jane Austen fan, and I have not read any of her books. In fact, I don't know how many books she wrote, maybe it was only 6. However I did recently see the excellent 'Becoming Jane' with Anne Hathaway as Jane Austen, so I feel like a know a bit about her.While the characters in the movie are discussing Austen, they also behave as characters in Jane Austen's books might. There is a nice single lady (Maria Bello) who raises dogs, and who tries to fix up others, but doesn't allow herself to get close to others. She seems like an Emma type.Of the 6 who meet to discuss Austen, one is a young man invited on a whim, who looks like a mistake, but actually turns out very well.All in all an entertaining movie.
Strong Cast Enlivens a Superficial Female Fantasy Layering Modern-Day Soap Opera Elements Upon Austen's Works
posted on 18 Oct 2008It really isn't the singularly ultra-feminine orientation that alienates me from this 2007 hodgepodge tribute to the power of Jane Austen's prose as much as the cursory, heavy-handed way that director/screenwriter Robin Swicord has approached her adaptation of Karen Joy Fowler's 2004 novel. Austen's enduring popularity has inspired several recently filmed productions of her early 19th century works, and Fowler cleverly interweaves the author's six novels by incorporating her pertinent themes into a contemporary story of manners. Unfortunately, with a running time of 105 minutes, Swicord barely has time to tap into the themes of each novel as Fowler could, and the result feels rushed and misshapen by the machinations of the modern-day stories toward a too-perfect resolution. Despite the presence of a sterling ensemble of proved actors, there's just something ultimately patronizing to viewers of either gender when a filmmaker needs to wrap up the numerous loose threads of the omnibus plot into a neatly tied bow at the end.The multi-decked story is a pure Harlequin romance fantasy bringing together a group of five women and one man into a monthly book club in, of all places, Sacramento (though it was filmed in LA). The den mother is Bernadette, a fiftyish, six-times-married free spirit who decides to start the book club to cheer up longtime friend Sylvia, facing the breakup of her twenty-plus year marriage, and new acquaintance Prudie, a young high school French teacher with an insensitive husband. Joining the clutch is Bernadette and Sylvia's good friend Jocelyn, a dog breeder who has already given up on having possible long-term relationships (just like Austen's "Emma"); Sylvia's daredevil lesbian daughter Allegra, who treats love and sports in the same risk-taking manner; and Grigg, a software whiz and science-fiction geek who has never read Austen before. Their lives outside the club intertwine, in particular, Jocelyn's repeated attempts to match the now-separated Sylvia with Grigg. I imagine familiarity with Austen's novels would be helpful since many of the literary references occur in rapid-fire succession, but it isn't mandatory since Swicord primarily focuses on the characters' predicaments in a more predictable soap opera fashion.A strong cast helps, but more often, their portrayals feel like chess pieces in a timer-dictated game. Channeling a lot of Frances McDormand's innate pragmatism, the ever-dependable Maria Bello ("A History of Violence", "World Trade Center") is sharp as always as Jocelyn. Kathy Baker is earthy goodness as Bernadette, though her character feels more like a plot device to allow the others a sounding board. More familiar for her TV work, Amy Brenneman gets to experience the most drastic transformation as Sylvia, moving stepwise from dispensable wife to emancipated woman, while Maggie Grace brings the requisite looseness to daughter Allegra. With her severe haircut, repressed wardrobe, and pretentious manner, Emily Blunt ("The Devil Wears Prada", "Dan in Real Life") continues to sharpen her versatility as the insecure Prudie. As put-upon Grigg, Hugh Dancy ("Evening") does what he can with a relatively thankless part. Smaller parts are played by Jimmy Smits as Sylvia's male-menopausal husband, and surrounding Prudie, Kevin Zegers ("Transamerica") as her hormonally charged student, Marc Blucas as her lunk-headed husband, and Lynn Redgrave as her pothead hippie mother.There are quite a few extras on the 2008 DVD with the obligatory commentary track probably the most informative feature with light-hearted remarks provided by Swicord, editor Maryann Brandon, co-producer Julie Lynn, and actors Dancy, Grace and Blucas. Four featurettes are provided - a standard eighteen-minute behind-the-scenes segment with the cast and crew interviewed in brief snippets; a 22-minute overview of Austen's life as narrated by her devotees; a twelve-minute short - interesting but somewhat contrived - on how Swicord adapted each of the principal characters in Fowler's book to a literary counterpart in an Austen novel; and a throwaway segment from the premiere in LA (it had a short theatrical run before going to video). There are also seven deleted scenes, including the last one where they tried repeatedly to have a ridgeback dog sniff at Dancy's crotch. Austen devotees may enjoy the constant references to her works, but I wonder if they will appreciate the conventional storyline upon which they precariously hang.
Book a showing of this very worthy film, you will not be disappointed
posted on 12 Oct 2008Sylvia (Amy Brenneman) and her husband, Daniel (Jimmy Smits) have been married for a little over 20 years. But, one day, Daniel drops the big bombshells that he is seeing another woman and that he wants a divorce. Sylvia is heartbroken, so much so that her young, beautiful, lesbian daughter Allegra moves back home to keep an eye on her. Close friend, Jocelyn (Maria Bello) is also hovering over Sylvia and decides to create a book club so that the jilted lady will be surrounded by friends, conversation, and hope. Joining the club is a six-time divorcée (Kathy Baker), an uptight young French teacher, Prudie (Emily Blunt), and Allegra herself. But, because they decide the club will be devoted to Jane Austen and her six books, they need one more member to put someone in charge of each, distinct book discussion. Therefore, Jocelyn invites Grigg (Hugh Dancy), an attractive young man she met at a hotel bar, to join them. In truth, he has eyes for Jocelyn and, although a science fiction fan, would read almost anything to get to know her better. Thus, the discussions start, but the repartee is, at times, only a brief breather from the continuing problems of the club members. These troubles include death, near-infidelity, sky-diving crashes, crazy mothers, and more. Will the club work to the benefit of its members? This is a lovely film about the friends and relationships that make human existence bearable. As the bosom buddies, the movie's fine cast members are all quite wonderful, with Blunt, especially, still managing to make her flawed, confused character, endearing. The California setting is beautiful, naturally, and so are the costumes. Then, too, the script is lively and refined, echoing Austen's great books. Indeed, there is enough of Jane's novels worked into the film's content to satisfy the fans of her highly esteemed works. In short, book yourself a showing of this film and invited your friends to join you at the viewing. Forgive me, but you will "club yourself" if you don't!
Never got into Austen, but the film still read well.
posted on 24 Sep 2008This harmoniously concocted movie features as many 'novel' film making devices as it does Jane Austen novels. Although I have yet to read one Jane Austen novel -feeling like the odd one out during last night's Gala presentation at Cinefest- I very much enjoyed this movie. I think it will serve as a great conversation piece for not only movie goers, but also film and literature classes. However, it is nowhere near the likes of "Shakesphere In Love"... The acting in this film was overall good, but not great. Feist offers a nice track near the end of the movie, which was a nice surprise. Robin Swicord does a wonderful job directing her own screenplay.
Pleasant; Characters and Resolution Did Not Convince, Engage or Arouse Feeling
posted on 14 Sep 2008"The Jane Austen Book Club" was a pleasant movie, one I didn't mind watching once but would not want to watch again. There were a couple of very good lines, and the actors are all, without exception, fine. Production values are high.The characters and resolution didn't convince or engage me, though. I just did not believe, at any point, that these were real people. I especially did not believe the final scene. "He ended up with her? I don't think so," was what I kept thinking. I didn't believe the final couplings, and I did not care.I had the same problem with this movie that I had with the book on which it was based. Both book and movie felt like writerly exercises to me. I felt as if the writer, Karen Joy Fowler, got this neato schematic idea in her writing class, "Aha! A book club of bourgeois people who read Jane Austen and fall in love!" and went about filling in the pieces of that puzzle without ever investing any of the characters with real human warmth.One characterization stands out, though. Emily Blunt as a depressive woman with a bad mother, a mediocre marriage, and a temptation to do very bad things, creates a moody air all by herself. It's as if she came in from the set of a daring indy movie. I hope she's given chances in the future to live up to the promise she shows here.
Old Fashioned Storytelling Rules!
posted on 08 Sep 2008Even though this film came out weeks after "Dan in Real Life", there are many ways in which they resemble each other, and I'm glad I did see "Club" second so I can understand how "Dan" didn't quite achieve its goals, and "Club" soars above many of its contemporary counterparts. Both of them are ensemble pictures, the same kind Hollywood used to release by the dozen week after week. "Club" uses as its inspiration the stories written by Jane Austen, one of literature's most interesting societal observers, her own personal life becoming secondary to her analysis of what was the main components of her contemporary society.In this film, Maria Bello and Emily Blunt manage to shine a bit brighter than the rest of a very inspired cast. Emily Blunt validating the point that her turn in last year's "Prada" was no fluke shows she can handle an apparently infinite number of emotions. Her lovely French teacher faces a very tough choice, as her own marriage undergoes critical times. There are other personal issues causing friction in her personal life, and this one is one the film doesn't explore as much as it could have, her relationship with her mother. Still, since the film is probably supposed to come in under two hours in order to meet the industry's time restrictions, we only get so much, and what we get is lovely and satisfying.Maria Bello also has her own comedy of errors to deal with, she is unable to recognize the restrictions and masks others learn to live with in order to cope, and the message soon becomes clear: it's time to live and take chances. She is a lovely woman, with classical features and very expressive eyes, eyes that are able to communicate love, frustration, jealousy, passion, and sadness within seconds of each other. Her scenes are probably the most intense in the movie, yet not necessarily the best. The best involve the entire cast as they discuss Jane Austen's lessons and texts, and soon we understand how our society is not very different from that of Austen's. The costumes and settings have changed, but the emotions are still somehow, the same.Giving another joyous and remarkable performance is Kathy Baker, who embraces her role as the mother figure with gusto and much conviction. She is a lively creation and one that is not as overbearing as it the heavy hand of another director and performer would have created. Baker somehow is a metaphorical captain that leads her crew to safer water and watches, teaches and learns without really interfering. It's a masterful job by this seasoned actress, and it recalls the work of Rosalind Russell and other classic performers who knew what to do with a very good part and a great script.There is much more to discuss in this film, and let it suffice that Smitts also does some of his best work ever, as does the rest of this fantastic cast. "The Jane Austen Book Club" is a charming, light film that manages to find its center and embraces literature, life, and the many emotions that are common to people throughout time. It is a film that makes us think, feel, and laugh at our trivial and deep conflicts, that serves as a blueprint and a source of inspiration to filmmakers who might want to try giving the written word a bigger role in the production of films. An outline is not enough, a well developed script will provide the performers with material that will satisfy both their professional drives and the needs of desperate audiences around the world."The Book Club" is a remarkable achievement, an oasis in a Hollywood landscape that has forgotten how important creativity and talent must work together to produce quality work. Thank the Gods for these moments, when the silver screen still manages to shine golden.
One half the world does not understand the pleasures of the other....
posted on 19 Aug 2008Let's get one thing out of the way, first. This IS largely a chick-flick, although many men who go to see it are likely to get caught up in at least one of the subplots. The litmus test is Love, Actually--if you enjoyed that movie, and are a man, I imagine you'll like this one as well. There are several attractive females, some lesbian domestic affection scenes handled with remarkable matter-of-factness, and the film (and novel) handles the male characters gently and with love.But it is a movie that with primary appeal to two groups--chicks and Jane Austen devotees, including the male ones. Are there enough of these to make a movie a success? Yes, there are.Jane Austen's work stays current because she wrote about timeless themes--how do you choose the best person to marry? Is love enough, or even required for lifelong contentment? How do you deal with difficult or embarrassing family members? How best to handle a family crisis? How do you learn to tell true friends and quality persons from those who are perhaps flashy and amusing, but will end up betraying your friendship and trust or, heaven forfend, tempting you to abandon your own principles? Whether you live in the age of Blackberries and Hybrid SUV's, or the age of sealing wax and barouches, every person comes smack up against many or most of these vexing problems throughout their lives.The conceit of this movie and the book it is based upon is that a shared love and appreciation of the works of Jane Austen can provide the currency through the exchange of which modern women (and a few selected men) can confront, share, and come to better understand their personal challenges and in the process, form bonds of friendship or even romance. The strength of this movie is that even if you have a tough time with that conceit, you will still enjoy the humor of it, and the strong performances. It's pleasant to watch, like curling up with a favorite book and a frothy cup of chocolate. It is true to Jane—no explosions, the villains aren't completely evil, the primary problems of the characters stem from incomplete or willfully-faulty understanding of themselves and those around them, there is no melodrama or Gothic touches except of the parody sort, and the lone death happens off screen.I have this weird little theory about why P&P is the MOST beloved of all of Austen's books. Sure, Darcy is a smoldering hunk of tightly-controlled passion and Lizzie is as spirited and intelligent a heroine as ever nanced through a foot of mud to get to the bedside of an ailing sister, but that's not it.In all the other Austen pairings, you had a sense that they were pairings which would truly happen in real life because deep down we know nothing has really changed from Austen's day--women's beauty and youth and social standing is factored into a certain equation which determines how handsome, wealthy, charming, accomplished, or respected a man she is able to aspire to. In no case, other than P&P, does this basic equation get violated. Lady Catherine De Bourg had it right. A shocking match, indeed! The Lizzie/Darcy romance, therefore, is the lone Cinderella story, and don't give me Edmund and Fanny, as Edmund was a younger son most in need of a virtuous wife who wouldn't ever embarrass him and was never laid out as a man of wildly attractive appearance while virtuous Fanny's looks were improved enough to attract the flirtatious Henry Crawford.So, we women, all of us, are madly in love with P&P precisely because it is the ultimate fantasy of this amazing guy who will love us JUST FOR OUR QUICK WIT, GOOD HEART, and FINE EYES. There are no Mr. Darcy's, just like there are no characters of the sort commonly played by John Cusack, so get over it, already. There is possibly a Mr. Rochester, but remember, he had a crazy wife locked in the attic, a creepy housekeeper, an insipid ward, a bit of a sarcastic streak, and was once played on screen by a pudgy Orson Wells. In other words, a lot of baggage. And he still wasn't able to be brought up to scratch by Plain Jane Eyre until his fine big house had been burned down, his eyes put out, and his arm messed up. Now THAT is reality.It is true in real life that single dog breeders can, and do, meet nice men and fall in love and maybe even get married. It is also true that nice, handsome, heterosexual men join book clubs*.But this movie serves up impossibly cute Hugh Dancy in the role of an implausibly unattached, adorably geeky Grigg Harris who loves reading, older women, and can dance gracefully despite being too clumsy to artfully sip a cocktail. The statistical probability of such an attractive and unspoiled man (one who admits he is willing to be "directed") like this joining your book club and then actually wanting to develop a romantic relationship with an unattached woman older than himself is approximately the same as seeing one of the Dragonriders of Pern barnstorming over an Iowa cornfield.In the RL JABC, Grigg would be gay and Allegra would be straight and Bernadette would be queuing up for the Early Bird Special at Cracker Barrel. And your cheating ex-spouse, Jimmy Smits, ain't never coming back, and if he did, it would be after a series of weepy drunken whiny pathetic phone calls at 3am. There will be no "letter". This movie is a little bit cruel to imply otherwise.But that's OK. The world would be a very unkind place without at least the notion of dragons and rocketships, Darcys and Griggs. And that is why we loved it.*with wife.
- 1
- 2
Better than expected!
posted on 10 Aug 2009We wanted to give you our views on this movie, because we have a personal interest in the making of same. We had no preconception of it's content. However, we have read and/or seen other Jane Austen books or adapted movies. This was a special occasion for us. This movie really brought together, all of the intricacies of couple relationships. Our granddaughter was chosen as an extra for the movie-"Jane Austen Book Club". She spent 8 hours being filmed for the (climbing/birthday) scene. We went to see the movie, not so much for the story, but to see her. We didn't catch our granddaughter's segment-maybe it was cut or we'll catch it on DVD. Nevertheless,to our surprise,we found the movie to be very entertaining,provocative and funny. A must see for couples! Joe & Theresa