And my taste of being lifted up by the BBC classic adaptation also has more expectations for this film. But after watching the movie, the feeling is just: mediocre. Look at other people's comments on the Internet, and the reputation is very good! ! Hehe, it's rare for me to be so out of touch with the public...
The film is based on a real first love in Austin, but the truth is limited to the man's name Tom Lefroy, his job as a lawyer, and the finale of the film. Those two subtitles: Tom Lefroy's eldest daughter's name is Jane; Jane Austen and her sister never married.
There is very little information about Tom Lefroy and his first love with Austin, so this movie is by no means a biography, but more like Shakespeare in Love ”, perhaps it would be more accurate to deepen the title to “How Pride and Prejudice was Written”.
The shadow of "Pride and Prejudice" can often be seen in the film: dance party, chat, arrogant lady, nympho lady, Austen's parents seem to be Elizabeth's parents, Tom's behind-the-scenes talk about Jane is also related to Darcy. The appearance is exactly the same. But looking at it, I think this Tom is not like Darcy, but very much like Wickham - no money, attractive, and notorious as a playboy, but fortunately he is still talented, he knows how to inspire Jane's writing, two People come and go, and feelings grow.
The reason why this marriage could not be formed is in line with the facts. Neither of them has money. Tom is completely dependent on his uncle's support. He also has a sister who needs his support. He must marry a rich wife... Love and money, yes The eternal theme of Austen's novels has also become Austen's own eternal pain.
Perhaps my biggest gripe with this movie comes from the two main characters.
When Anne Hathaway was in The Homecoming, I thought it would be out of place to have her in a Dickens work. Anne Hathaway is indeed pretty, but she has big eyes and thick lips, and she looks like a modern beauty, where is there a classical charm. However, after several years of honing her acting skills and temperament, her performance in this film is still much more pleasing to the eye than "Young Master Returns Home", but I still feel that she is not like a woman of that era. It's not her fault, it's just the choice of actors.
In comparison, the male protagonist surprised me even more. As soon as Tom came out, I recognized it, it wasn't the white man from The Last Dictatorship. This man's name is James McAvoy, a rising British star in recent years, and I have a good impression of his performance in "The Last Dictatorship". It's a pity that his performance in this film is also full of modernity, especially when he appears in the scene where he takes off his shirt and punches, I was in a trance for a while: this is the era in which Jane Austen lived. James McAvoy can't be said to be very beautiful, but he is very charming. It's a pity that this kind of charm is a modern charm, a complex and changeable charm. It may be able to fascinate the MM of the new era, but I can't stick to this kind of "Ke". Lin Firth-like "Mr. Darcy", his charm is not pure and classical, too shallow.
On the other hand, Mr. Wassley, another suitor of Jane in the film, was quite pleasing to my eyes. Although it was arrogant at first glance, it was a reasonable and reasonable style of everyone. This has the taste of a classic gentleman image. After seeing it, I actually looked forward to it. What's the matter with him and Jane...
At the end of a movie, I had to deviate from the emotional heart of the hero and heroine. Is this my stubbornness or the failure of the movie? ?
View more about Becoming Jane reviews
