Instant Favorite.

An absolute waste of money

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

a delicate form of propaganda . for literature. and for the transformation of life under its influence. because it is a beautiful film about people. women, as source of change. men as students. or pieces of change. and, sure, all present, Jane Austen. and her novels. I admit, for me it is one of the most inspired , source of inspiration itself, film about Jane Austen universe. not only as homage. but as wise example of translation of the Austen - mania.

I read the book of this before seeing the film (AND when I had read some, but not all, all of Jane Austen's novels). This can work to the detriment of a film, but it doesn't in this case. Both book and film are highly enjoyable.There are a number of reasons for this. The film is, for one thing, well cast. Each part is acted well and convincingly.In addition, despite some adjustments, the film sticks to the broad outline of the book. In it, a group of six people – one man and five women – meet over a period of six months to discuss Jane Austen's novels. They find that their lives are mirroring certain aspects of the novels' events in ways both surprising and interesting.I thought this worked best in the dynamic between the affected French teacher Prudie and her rather bovine husband Dean. Their marriage is in trouble and Prudie is in serious danger of doing something she shouldn't with one of her male pupils. Luckily, Austen's "Persuasion" comes galloping to the rescue.The film's last scene, set a year after the main events of the film, does wrap things up well, but is maybe a bit too packaged. Would Dean, for example, really take to reading Austen so easily?So a nice story, excellent acting, good camera work and music. They all make for good, undemanding entertainment. Rating: 7/10

This is the story of 6 people, all connected to each other and Jane Austen in different ways. Each of them starts in a bad place of some sort, and through Jane and each other, they each learn lessons about life and love. Sappy? Not really. I did not have high hopes for this movie, but I loved it by the end. This movie made me want to read more Jane Austen. Like right away. I have read only two of her books and I know that after I read the rest this movie will be doubly pleasing. However, I still immensely enjoyed the movie. It is endearing, funny and enjoyable. In the beginning I had a hard time keeping the characters straight, however by the end I was smiling way to much at how everything turned out. All in all, a very lovely chick flick. :)

Chick flick about five women in California (and one guy) who get together once a month to discuss a Jane Austen book they all read. The events in the books begin to mirror their lives--and offer them solutions. Sylvia's (Amy Brenneman) husband (Jimmy Smits) has just left her. She also has a daughter (Maggie Grace) who is a lesbian and is having troubles with her girlfriend. Jocelyn (Maria Bello) has never had a relationship. She meets cute young Grigg (Hugh Dancy) and tries to hook him up with Sylvia--but Grigg is attracted to her. Prudie (Emily Blunt) has a husband (Marc Blucas) who doesn't understand her--or try to. Bernadette (Kathy Baker) is (sort of0 the head of the group.OK--I HATE Jane Austen's books. I had to read most of them in college and find them far too mannered and slow (except for "Northanger Abbey"). I avoided this when it was up the theatre for that reason. I caught it on cable just last night and, while it was no masterpiece, it actually wasn't too bad. I can't comment on how they mirror Austen's novels--I haven't read her in years (and have no desire to try them again). The stories and resolutions were laughably predictable but it has a good script and a very talented cast that push it through. No one stands out but no one was bad. I was surprised at how easily Dancy and Blunt fake their American accents (although Dancy's slips a few times). Lynn Redgrave appears very briefly in a small pointless role. No great shakes but enjoyable. I found it VERY interesting that when Dancy is in a skin tight biking uniform that the camera makes it a point to travel up (and down) his body! It's not often you see a guy's body objectified in a Hollywood film. I give it an 8.