gunes bayir This movie could be better, although second half compensates. It's a little puzzling in the beginning, since there were many characters, and relations between them are not reflected enough in detail. Those scenes might have been slightly longer to grab the viewer, I think. Comparably, second half is thrilling, with less and focused characters.Lefroy (James McAvoy)'s acting is very good. He knows how to show the emotion he likes like he did in Split. For Anne Hathaway, I watched her many times, and this is not the best of her.In overall, this is a good summary of how Jane Austen came up with Pride and Prejudice.

Ole Sandbaek Joergensen I remember seeing Pride and Prejudice many years ago, it is a beautiful film and I am told that the book is even more splendid. This film about the author behind that and other books in the genre is a very rich tale of love, class, nobles and the mob :)It takes place in the country and London, but mostly far away from anything, so the scenes are very vivid and full of color and natures brisk attitude. The acting is like taking them out of an old book and especially Anne Hathaway and James McAvoy do a splendid job, but the rest of the cast and crew have worked hard to make the personalities, with quirks, errors and lovely characteristics stand out.I was entertained, having read nothing of her works and knowing little about her other then the name, well I had nothing to cloud my impression.

l_rawjalaurence I tried very hard to like this film. I thought director Jarrold's choice of locations excellent; the atmosphere of mid- to late eighteenth century England was lovingly recreated through use of light and shade; the performances on the whole were well drawn. As the action unfolded, however, I felt that BECOMING JANE lacked originality; it seemed to include every single cliché associated with the heritage film. There were scenes of coaches arriving and departing from historic buildings; panning shots of oh-so-verdant landscapes accompanied by soft violin music; Jane Austen (Anne Hathaway) took a walk in the forest accompanied by the Darcy-figure Tom Lefroy (James McAvoy); not to mention the frequent ball-scenes in which Jane flirted with Lefroy and rejected the unwelcome attentions of Wisley (Laurence Fox). Not to mention the presence of Maggie Smith and Julie Walters, part of the Great Pool of British Acting Talent, in the supporting cast. With all this visual display at his disposal, it's not surprising that Jarrold's narrative unfolds in a slow, leisurely manner. In the canon of Austen-related adaptations, BECOMING JANE is a minor entry.

jcox713 I enjoyed Anne Hathaway in DWP, but her performance here is just awful. Her English accent is horrible. Why do directors insist on always going for stunning beauty opposed to talent and ability? Anna Maxwell Martin should have been cast as Jane. She is a spectacular actress (Bleak House) who can actually speak with a genuine English accent. What an unusual concept: Make certain the actress playing a British woman can actually speak with a true British accent. Anna Maxwell Martin should also have been the choice as the real Jane was average looking - not drop dead gorgeous. What else can I say. Oh, yeah, The plot is completely inane and Jane's love interest (at least at the beginning, I didn't watch the film all the way through) is an irritating annoying little boy. No chemistry and I wanted to punch him in the throat. What I can applaud is the cinematography. Wow. Absolutely gorgeous. That is what the four stars are for.