(10-27-2015: As a note, this movie has now become one of my guilty pleasures. It's really quite fun. I'm afraid to read below to remember what my first impression was! I remember being quite mad the first time I saw this movie.)
Rating: 3 out of 5 Stars
(As of 9-24-2013 I've bumped it up to 3.5 out of 5 stars, simply because I've seen it in the theater 4 times to date.)
It is a truth universally acknowledge that a good book is in need of a good script, if it is to become a movie, and that any potential good script is in need of a great director and producer. When this truth is acknowledged amazing entertainment is wrought, but if it is not acknowledged this entertainment is rot.
That was my initial reaction after viewing the film Labor Day weekend.
I took a deep breath and decided to hold off reviewing Austenland, based on the Shannon Hale book of the same name, which I originally gave a 2 out of 5 star rating.
Two main reasons for my original outrage was thus: My brothers, who actually love Jane Austen and romantic comedies, were with me and I could feel their discomfort, and secondly, though I know there's a difference between movies and books, which I'm typically fine with this, I hated the Hollywood sexified aspect that was placed in the movie, but wasn't in the books. PG-13!!!!?? The book, if faithfully represented, would have been PG. The PG-13 was earned, and headed up by Mormon LDS women to boot. (Thanks for that, BTW -_-;; )
So before continuing the original review I choose to reread the book and then re-watch the movie.
In the beginning of the book Mrs. Wattlesbrook, played by the amazing Jane Seymour, is quoted as saying: "For the sake of the experience, we must be proper." The Austenland in the book is perfect Regency Era proper. England 1816 proper full of etiquette, rules and manners. All electronics (minus flushing toilets and some electric lights) are forbidden and kept out of sight. Mrs. Wattlesbrook would never, NEVER, announce classes and activities over a loud speaker. And the scene where Lady Heartwright "plays" the piano via cassette tape wouldn't be tolerated as well.
Instead the movie's Austenland has about as much class as a cheap Las Vegas wedding chapel. Instead of beautiful gardens and regency grace, we're treated by bright colors and gaudy statues.
And then there's all those cheap shots of Men's crotches, taking off shirts, a light porn cheap soap opera scene, statues with well places leaves, drawing attention instead of simply being beautiful, and sexual innuendos.
I do love Jane Seymour, but her Wattlesbrook, who's supposed to be full of fierce respect and dignity, was made silly holding a fake lamb and posing in posters advertizing her business. James Callis as Andrews was nothing like the book, though he's amazing in Battlestar Galactica. I was expecting a more Lost in Austen Tom Mison. And the portrayal of Lady Heartwright, Georgia King, was all wrong, though that's more of how the part was written then played, because I don't fault the actress in this. She performed what was given, but it would have been so much better for the movie if her role remained sophisticated then becoming trashy and dumb.
There were tweaks to the lead characters as well, that I didn't mind. Instead of Keri Russell's Jane inheriting the trip from her deceased Aunt, she spends her own life's savings, making her seem more desperate and pathetic. It does work, though it works better in the book. Martin, played by Bret McKenzie, works with animals instead of gardening, and this change makes a lot of sense for the movie, and leads to some honestly good movie only scenes (pheasant shooting/getting stranded on horseback).
It's Mr. Nobley, played by JJ Feild, who saves the film. He's better then Colin Firth, and the changes made to his character (which I won't reveal for spoiler reasons) only endears him more. My Mom wanted to see the movie again because of him, and I agreed with the sentiment.
Apparently the showing right after the one I attended on Saturday was attended by the authoress Shannen Hale. I know this because one of my friends was there. Shannon had a Q & A afterword, and someone actually asked about the added sexual material. Shannon Hale said she had little control on set. Jerusha Hess (who co-wrote and directed) and Stephenie Meyer (producer) should have had some say on set, and if they could have "cleaned it up," having both attended my alma mater Brigham Young University, they should have. And if not, why not? To prove what, exactly? How grown up they are being "Hollywood?" Rebelling in their own "Miley Cyrus" way? Not cool.
If the movie stayed closer to the book (though I do love the apartment scene towards the end) the movie would have been amazing. We watch Jane Austen flicks because we love the gallantry, the manners, the class, of which this movie contains none.
MPAA: Rated PG-13 for some suggestive content and innuendo.
No comments:
Post a Comment