jacqueestorozynski As someone steeped in Pre-raphaelite history and having read many books re the Effie Gray/Ruskin marriage I was interested in seeing this film. At first I was ready to dislike it based on inaccuracies like the fact that Millais paintings shown at the beginning, where Effie was the model. were on display when the artist hadn't met her yet. I also disliked Julie Walters who was back doing Mrs Overall. However, after a while I began to warm to it and although it was slow I enjoyed watching it. My only criticism would be that the build up to a climax (more than Effie got) was wasted as there should have been much more about the court case annulment and Effie's marriage to Millais. The masturbation scene was completely unnecessary and did not add to the film. I did wonder why Celestia Fox who was responsible for the casting, made Millais look like everyone's idea of Rossetti and nothing like the baby faced golden haired artist of fact. Greg Wise seems to be cornering the market in cold, austere characters witness the reason TV production Outcast, but he plays them well. I wasn't sure about Emma Thompson, she has mannerisms that can be irritating. When the film ended I was left feeling that we were left hanging and anyone who knew nothing of the story would have wondered what the point of the film was.

Rich Wright It's one thing arranging all the finest acting talent in a film, and having great period detail and costume design, but it's totally another to keep you invested enough for 110 minutes of your life. Effie Gray just about manages to get over the finish line, but not with any great impact. Expect to reasonably entertained, but to stay perfectly still in your seat (with the occasional glance at your watch).Effie is stuck in a loveless marriage... Her husband is an art critic... Completely under the thumb of his demanding parents... Who insist he stays at home e.g, forget about the newlyweds getting a place of their own. Her new partner is obsessed with his work, to the point of barely acknowledging her existence. He doesn't even show any interest in consummating their nuptials, for instance... The first night he sees her naked, he bursts into tears and runs out the room. Hmm... Can you say 'issues'?Then, during an impromptu trip to Venice, she runs into a young painter who is everything her hubby is not... empathic, fun-loving, and deeply in love with her. Sadly, she's stuck with Mr Grump, for the simple reason that if she did split up with him, it would ruin her family name... And besides, getting a divorce back in the 19th century was SLIGHTLY more difficult than it is now. The situation is complicated further by a strange illness she has, which involves copious amounts of hair loss. Hmm... Who'd have though boredom and enforced virginity would have such a toll on your health?With Effie Gray, you get the distinct impression that lots of the scenes which involve people pottering about in front of beautiful vistas, and staring in the distance while the music swells in the background, could have been dramatically cut... To no great loss of the plot. My theory is, some self-inflated 'important' movies such as this almost feel obligated to unnaturally expand the length beyond what the script requires, to make it FEEL more epic. This tends to not work (It certainly doesn't here) and just leaves quite a bit of dead air.Still, as I mentioned, the cast full of stalwarts such as Julie Walters and Emma Thompson all do their part to keep things ticking over nicely, and Dakota Fanning does the uphill trajectory of her career no harm at all with an emotionally wrought performance, backed up with a dead-on English accent. In fact, there's not a lot wrong here that couldn't have been avoided with the judicious use of a metaphorical pair of scissors. About 20 minutes off the top should do it, luv.As it stands, I was mildly interested when I should have been enthralled. Less it sometimes more, ya know? 6/10

Turfseer The controversy over "Effie Gray" may have been more interesting than the film itself. Screenwriter Emma Thompson was accused of plagiarism by writers of two earlier versions of the Gray saga but fortunately for her, the plaintiffs were unsuccessful. Nonetheless, as a result of the litigation, Ms. Thompson engaged in no publicity junkets to publicize her film."Effie Gray" is based on the true 19th century story of the young Scottish girl's marriage to the noted British art critic, John Ruskin. Effie was 19 at the time and Ruskin, 29. However, Ruskin, played by Greg Wise, is currently 48, which might give some viewers unfamiliar with the history the wrong impression that Ruskin was robbing the cradle.Thompson ably depicts what happened between Gray and Ruskin. As a naive, inexperienced girl, Effie's dreams of wedded bliss are shattered when she comes to live with Ruskin and his parents at their London estate. Ruskin's mother is particularly critical of Effie and they both are way over protective of their son. It soon becomes clear that Ruskin has no interest in sex and actually tells his new bride that she repulses him.Effie finds an ally in Lady Elizabeth Eastlake (played by Thompson), wife of the head of the Royal Academy of Arts, who is distressed by the repressive situation Effie faces at the Ruskin household. A trip to Venice does nothing to help the couples' floundering union, and Effie is further distressed by Ruskin's lack of attention, especially when a randy Italian, Rafael, attempts to seduce her.The rest of this saga focuses on Effie's burgeoning melancholia and a trip up to Scotland, where Ruskin commissions a young painter, Everett Millais, to paint his portrait. Sure enough Effie falls for Millais but nothing gets consummated until Effie returns to London and is encouraged by Lady Elizabeth to sue for the annulment of the marriage on the grounds of her husband's impotence.That's basically it folks! The story is unusual in that the villain of the piece is hardly guilty of what one might call a "serious infraction." But that's mainly the problem: the stakes are so low that one can hardly get excited about the goings-on here. The actors, screenwriter and cinematographer have acquitted themselves well here as this is a fine film to look at. Nonetheless, it's also a listless affair which I'm not sure was really worth telling.

subxerogravity I did like the story.She was a little girl being courted by an old man who married her once she became of age but would rather pleasure himself than touch his wife who he married for the purpose of cultural stature it seems. She needs a way out which was quite difficult in the Victorian-era of England. I love movies set in the Victorian age. The costumes the art direction. The set design did stand out in this pic. It reflected how cold and distant the family this little girl married into was.Also like how it was set up to be very stage like in the movement of certain people in and out of the scene.Dakota Fanning did a fine job. Give her an A for always choosing challenging roles vs the easy ones girls her age usually take. I don't see this role doing anything for her career but I could be wrong.Impress that Emma Thompson wrote it.But overall the movie was too slow and the plot could have been summed up in a smaller amount of time. It seemed that a lot of the movie was to set up the frustration the little girl had with not being able to perform any "wifely" duties and to make her husband and in-laws hated. I found them strange yes, but the film never quite explains the strangeness, which makes it fall short.It's based on a real story and It's probably better to hear that than to watch the movie. That'll waste less time and get to the point faster.