Love & Friendship

Kate Beckinsale trades in her latex for hats and crinolines to take on Jane Austen in this moderately tongue-in-cheek adaptation of her posthumously-published novella in which pert modern misses Beckinsale & Sevigny dress up in a succession of magnificent period creations and sit about talking (and talking) about, well, love and friendship rather as Whit Stillman's characters used to do in twentieth century Manhattan.

It's all agreeable and good-looking, although the settings feel totally unlived in and everybody sounds as if they're simply reciting dialogue they've memorised in advance. Which of course they have.

I have read just about every Jane Austin novel and have seen many different versions of movies based on her books. As a guy, this makes me very unusual to say the least. But even women, who are usually the most die-hard fans of this great writer, only make up a small percentage of the population. Because of this, I feel safe in saying that a new film parody of Austin, Love & Friendship, is likely only to be seen by folks who love and appreciate her stories. For them, this film is a must-see. For everyone else...not so much. Now this is not because there's anything wrong with this new movie...on the contrary, it's very well made and was produced, surprisingly enough, by Amazon Films (yes, from amazon.com)! Quite surprising...especially for a lush period piece. But the average person simply won't understand or appreciate the very droll and dry humor. And, even if you are a fan, you really have to be into the language and pay close attention for all the nuances. Again...not a complaint...more an observation which will let you decide whether the film will be right for you.

This film, as in other Austin films, is set in the Regency period in Britain (the very early 19th century). However, the filmmakers actually chose to make the film in Ireland...and it's a nice substitute. When the film begins, Lady Susan Vernon (Kate Beckinsale) is abruptly leaving the Manwaring estate. You have no idea why but soon learn that Lady Susan is a rather poor woman and generally visits with friends and family in order to sponge off them. She also feels no particular obligation to pay her mounting debts...after all, she is Lady Susan! Her sister-in-law, Catherine Vernon (Emma Greenwell) isn't completely thrilled with the visit to her home, as Lady Susan has the reputation as a very beguiling yet vicious woman...all done with a smile. Catherine is also soon alarmed because her nice but slightly dim brother, Reginald DeCourcy (Xavier Samuel) is captivated by Lady Susan and would love to marry her. Oddly, despite Lady Susan being a horrible and conniving woman, when her daughter, Frederica (Morfydd Clark) joins them at their estate, she is nothing like her mother...and the audience hopes and prays that dopey Reginald recognizes Frederica and Susan for who they truly are. However, Susan is determined to have Reginald for herself and instead foist the incredibly boring and stupid Sir James Martin (Tom Bennett) onto Frederica. Can this master manipulator be stopped or will she soon manage to make three other people completely miserable?

This film is quite funny but the humor is nothing like the long string of brain-dead and worthless parodies of films such as Disaster Movie and Date Movie. Instead of being broad and written for the average 10 year-old, Love & Friendship is often very subtle and is filled with wit that should appeal to Austin fans. But it's also the sort of well-crafted film that just has a limited appeal to broader audiences. It's a shame, as it's very well directed, sports a clever script and has lots of wonderful supporting actors such as Steven Fry and James Fleet (who is my favorite in the supporting cast). For fans of the author it's a must-see...others might just want to wait until this comes to Netflix or DVD.

For fans, I'd give this one a 10. For all others, perhaps a 5 or 6.

Something is tonally off about "Love & Friendship," Whit Stillman's screen adaptation of a Jane Austen novella. Stillman treats the film like a satire of Jane Austen, with all of the actors moving through the film practically winking at the camera to acknowledge they're playing dress up. The problem with that approach is that Austen was already a crack satirist herself. Therefore, the film doubles the emotional distance between the audience and the characters, so we have a hard time caring much about what happens to any of them.

Another big problem is the casting. Kate Beckinsale is a lovely actress, and she does imperious and haughty well. But her character is in virtually every scene, and she's supposed to be so irresistible that she can manipulate anyone to do anything she wants. Beckinsale doesn't have that kind of allure; she's technically proficient at hitting her marks, but she doesn't have the screen presence to carry this really rather despicable character off. I'm stumped to think of a modern-day actress who could, but Vivien Leigh would have been perfect in a role like this. The poor casting extends to other members of the cast as well, most egregiously to Chloe Sevigny, who is far too contemporary an actress to be believable in a period piece. Most everyone else in the film is a drip, with the sole exception of Tom Bennett, who plays a bumbling suitor brilliantly and enlivens the picture every time he's on screen. Would that the whole film had been as funny and engaging as his performance.

With Stillman maintaining too much of an ironical distance from the action, the film turns into a talky succession of drawing rooms conversations that don't amount to much of anything save a procession of pretty period gowns.

Grade: B-

The funniest character in the film is James Martin. He steals every scene he's in and each time he was on the screen I couldn't stop laughing. Unfortunately, he isn't in a lot of the film, and the rest of the movie's humor comes in the form of pithy one liners at the end of every scene. Sometimes I'd chuckle at those, but that'd be about it. There aren't any weak links in the cast, they all do a great job with what they're given, but I wish they were given something better. The movie moves at an incredibly slow pace, and with not a lot ever going on, it often feels like I'm being read a Jane Austen novel rather than watching a movie adaptation. The movie isn't "bad" by any means but there's so little going for it that I would consider noteworthy I can't really find myself ever wanting to sit through Love & Friendship again. Maybe if you absolutely LOVE period dramas from a design standpoint or are a huge Jane Austen fan, you'll get more out of this movie than I did, but otherwise there isn't much here.

A scheming widow flees to the English countryside to settle the marriage prospects of her family.

Some superb characters and performances in a patchy production. Lady Susan has an interesting and sophisticated view of life, which is delivered in fine style by the lead actress: after furiously rebuking a gent for daring to approach her, she breezily excuses herself - "Of course I know him! I would never address a stranger in such fashion." But even more enjoyable is the unsquashable dunderhead, Sir James - the director makes great demands with extended scenes in which it must have been difficult to sustain the delicate humour, but the actor pulls it off brilliantly. Also a lovely scene with the de Courcy grandparents, as he tries to read her a letter.

On the debit side, the American exile isn't quite right - a great actress for close-ups, but here (as usual) she's just a sidekick, and can't bring the proper deviousness to her role. And the scene with her husband felt like the actors weren't sure it was working. And, in general, the camera or editing often seems misplaced in two-shots and over the shoulders.

There are big problems with the story, and about halfway through I was puzzled by a couple of scenes that seemed to refer to ghost events I didn't recall. And the resolution is frivolous, a disappointment after Lady Susan's musings on loyalty and emotion. I understand this is an early work by the great novelist, but I don't see why the story couldn't have been gussied up in the screenplay.

Another thing - clearly a great deal of compression in the writing and editing, as the opening titles hit us with a tidal wave of character intros, with the following scene an extreme example of entering late and leaving early. Fine, but the pace over the first ten minutes had me holding on by my fingernails as I tried to figure out what was happening to whom. It felt like everyone was frantic with worry over the slim running time.

The Irish locations are just right for the Georgian period. Music all chamber orchestra Baroque. Photography is fine, but doesn't balance out the threadbare direction and editing.

Overall: golden threads in a tattered rag.