Waste of time

Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

If you like to be scared, if you like to laugh, and if you like to learn a thing or two at the movies, this absolutely cannot be missed.

This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

This movie had the tinker done to it in the worst way. They all four times the stuff of another several movies rolled into the wildest one was not know because it was just too weird to give that information. She did not have the Aussie thing to do in half of the film? What gives? It had none of that. Would somebody please tell me why. I did not understand a bit of what they were trying to say. God, why can they make sense?

WARNING MAY BE A SPOILER!I thought it was great but i was i bit annoyed that Hestor never got what was coming 2 her by anyone or Meg. i wonder if at the ending when it was an older Joey at her grave if he knew the truth because he was friends with Mary Simpson and he wouldn't really of remembered her but he touched her gravestone affectionately. Also it was so sad that Billy died i knew from the moment Jessica was pregnant that Jack Thomas was the father as if she'd let Billy sleep with her. All in all i thought it was brilliant very emotional. i have a new-found respect for mini-series.

The book on which this film is based is an extraordinary read. I had fairly expectations for this small screen adaptation and sadly, it's left quite a bitter taste in my mouth. Disappointing to say the least.This film falls apart thanks to its woeful cast, with wooden dialog and unconvincing characterizations abound. Perhaps the only faces you will recognize belong to seasoned actors Sam Neil and John Howard, who each give fairly solid performances in their supporting roles (emphasis on the word SUPPORTING). The main cast? The people whose shoulders the entire film rests upon? Newcomer Leeanna Walsman in the title role of Jessica, tries to bring the ballsy young woman to life but for the most part crashes and burns in an explosion of poor acting. Lisa Harrow and Megan Dorman play the evil, manipulative Hester and Meg Bergman, but both highly incapable of eliciting any such belief in their roles. Oliver Ackland as Jack Thomas, the object of Jessica and Meg's affections, is simply a pretty face with very little substance and/or depth, hardly worth mentioning.So what is left? Visually, Jessica contains some slick cinematography that brings the era to life perfectly. But pretty pictures doth not a good movie make. Aurally, the soundtrack becomes very repetitive, containing little variation from the sombre piano riff and a moping, depressive violin.I know, 9 times out of 10 a film adaptation is never going to exceed the written material. But with such great material as its basis this film could have been something wonderful. That and the addition of a much better cast and a new music man... Bad, bad, bad.

Though I only had an extra part I can highly recommend this film as a superb drama. A true story set in colonial Australia in the early 1900's. A very good adaptation of Bryce Courtenay's book "Jessica" (well worth the read) to the screen. Leanna Walsman gives a powerful performance in the title role and Sam Neill as the rummy solicitor gives a fine portrayal, while you'll love to hate Lisa Harrow's character of Jessica's mother, Hester. The realism brought to this film by the excellent cast makes for some very unnerving scenes, especially in the insane asylum. Filmed on locations in and around New South Wales and Sydney.HIGHLY RECOMMENDED! ! !