Becoming Jane -- My Thoughts
Feb. 16th, 2008 01:48 pmWell, I've finally seen it. I have satisfied my curiosity. And it was about what I excpected it to be. Once again we have a major Austenian production and the studio is unable to leave unappropriate (and unecessary, IMO) references out of an otherwise clean film. I won't go into any details, but Tom Lefroy is depicted as having a skirt problem (amongst many other things!) and we have Northanger Abbey 2007 deja vu with Jane reading Tom Jones after Tom Lefroy has dared her to.
The music was lovely (and I loved hearing Hole in the Wall at the big dance, which I've loved ever since I heard it in Emma and Wives & Daughters) the scenery was picturesque, and the costumes were tolerable enough, but not historically accurate enough to tempt me. What was with the red apron worn while playing cricket? And the lack of hats and bouncing waistlines? Here we have a big to-do at LadyCatherine's er, um, Lady Gresham's estate and we have girls dressed as in costumes ranging from twenty years apart! I can understand the decision to have the working-around-the-farm dresses with old and out of date styles, but the ball gowns?
And then we have the austere-yet-loving aunt, who, strangely akin to the 1940 Pride & Prejudice's devation from the novel, is actually trying to help her nephew win his lady fair. And she is strangely clad in a dress oddly reminiscent of Judi Dench in the 2005 Pride & Prejudice -- purple 18th century attire, fuzzy grey wig and all. *shakes head*
The. Screenplay. SUCKED. Excuse my being so blunt, but it was absolutely horrendous!! I could write a better screenplay in my sleep. I'm sorry, but the dialogue was contrived, corny, and difficult to follow. Which is actually saying something, since I have no problem following any other costume dramas, so the accents weren't the problem. And speaking of which, Anne Hathaway did a better job than I expected her to do on the accent (light years better than Rene Zelweger in Miss Potter, haha) but for all Anne's wide-eyed stares and lovely pale skin, she will never be anything more than she was in The Princess Diaries or The Devil Wears Prada in my humble opinion. Forgive me if this sounds cruel, but I have yet to see any of that depth from her that I see in other actors and actresses. Perhaps it's the screenplay at fault again, perhaps not. But AH's idea of "research" for her role was to drink real, English tea! If that is what prepares one for the role of a lifetime then I am a prime candidate for the title role in the next Jane Austen movie. *snort*
I also do not know what has come over the film industry as of late, to be casting a man so short and bizarre looking as the romantic hero. Forgive me, but isn't the cliche TALL dark and handsome??? *coughcough* James McAvoy is neither the former nor the latter, but I suppose he will do in a pinch because he's dark, right? GAH!! *bangs head on desk*
Oh, and FOR THE LAST TIME! Jane Austen would never ever ever have eloped! How can anyone be so stupid as to believe that the same authoress who has such characters as Lydia Bennet and George Wickham commit the dreaded offense in her novels, would have all but done the same thing herself as a love-struck girl? I think not.
The handheld camera was highly distracting, and it sometimes made me feel like a paparazzi was running up and trying to get Jane's picture or something. And the scene with Cassandra and Jane at the seaside almost looked like they used a convex lense or something! I felt like I was looking through a fishbowl. 8-/
Someone robbed the bones of Jane Austen's novels, taking the legs of Pride & Prejudice, (I caught countless stolen elements from P&P, including Mrs. Austen aka Mrs. Bennet, and the 2005 movie's style of filming. I also was enraged to see the same train car window shot from the end of North & South !!!!! How DARE they!) the arms of Sense & Sensibility, (Jane won't marry for money but she won't marry without it, gives up the man she loves so he can go marry another woman and keep his money, ala Elinor Dashwood's offering Edward Ferrars the living at Delaford in S&S) and the head of Northanger Abbey, (Mrs. Radcliffe?!!? Reading salacious novels in bed??) but they completely forgot to add a heart. Despite all the lusty looks, situational drama, and the forbidden romance between Jane and Tom, there was nothing compelling, nothing grabbing, nothing moving. Never once did I even come close to shedding a single tear when Jane and Tom parted. They call this a love story, but there was not a single thing that I would have carried out of the theatre and looked back on with a romantic sigh.
The best part of the entire film, I thought, was years after they had parted at the opera. A significantly aged and published Jane runs into Tom Lefroy decades later, only to discover that he has named his eldest daughter Jane. This sweet girl is also a huge fan of Miss Austen's novels, and Jane breaks her rule of anonymity in order to read from Pride & Prejudice to satisfy her faithful fan. The fact that Tom had named his daughter after his lost love, and that old Jane decided to oblige the young Jane that could have been her own child if she had married Tom, with a reading of her most famous novel, was very sweet, I must admit.
The music was lovely (and I loved hearing Hole in the Wall at the big dance, which I've loved ever since I heard it in Emma and Wives & Daughters) the scenery was picturesque, and the costumes were tolerable enough, but not historically accurate enough to tempt me. What was with the red apron worn while playing cricket? And the lack of hats and bouncing waistlines? Here we have a big to-do at Lady
And then we have the austere-yet-loving aunt, who, strangely akin to the 1940 Pride & Prejudice's devation from the novel, is actually trying to help her nephew win his lady fair. And she is strangely clad in a dress oddly reminiscent of Judi Dench in the 2005 Pride & Prejudice -- purple 18th century attire, fuzzy grey wig and all. *shakes head*
The. Screenplay. SUCKED. Excuse my being so blunt, but it was absolutely horrendous!! I could write a better screenplay in my sleep. I'm sorry, but the dialogue was contrived, corny, and difficult to follow. Which is actually saying something, since I have no problem following any other costume dramas, so the accents weren't the problem. And speaking of which, Anne Hathaway did a better job than I expected her to do on the accent (light years better than Rene Zelweger in Miss Potter, haha) but for all Anne's wide-eyed stares and lovely pale skin, she will never be anything more than she was in The Princess Diaries or The Devil Wears Prada in my humble opinion. Forgive me if this sounds cruel, but I have yet to see any of that depth from her that I see in other actors and actresses. Perhaps it's the screenplay at fault again, perhaps not. But AH's idea of "research" for her role was to drink real, English tea! If that is what prepares one for the role of a lifetime then I am a prime candidate for the title role in the next Jane Austen movie. *snort*
I also do not know what has come over the film industry as of late, to be casting a man so short and bizarre looking as the romantic hero. Forgive me, but isn't the cliche TALL dark and handsome??? *coughcough* James McAvoy is neither the former nor the latter, but I suppose he will do in a pinch because he's dark, right? GAH!! *bangs head on desk*
Oh, and FOR THE LAST TIME! Jane Austen would never ever ever have eloped! How can anyone be so stupid as to believe that the same authoress who has such characters as Lydia Bennet and George Wickham commit the dreaded offense in her novels, would have all but done the same thing herself as a love-struck girl? I think not.
The handheld camera was highly distracting, and it sometimes made me feel like a paparazzi was running up and trying to get Jane's picture or something. And the scene with Cassandra and Jane at the seaside almost looked like they used a convex lense or something! I felt like I was looking through a fishbowl. 8-/
Someone robbed the bones of Jane Austen's novels, taking the legs of Pride & Prejudice, (I caught countless stolen elements from P&P, including Mrs. Austen aka Mrs. Bennet, and the 2005 movie's style of filming. I also was enraged to see the same train car window shot from the end of North & South !!!!! How DARE they!) the arms of Sense & Sensibility, (Jane won't marry for money but she won't marry without it, gives up the man she loves so he can go marry another woman and keep his money, ala Elinor Dashwood's offering Edward Ferrars the living at Delaford in S&S) and the head of Northanger Abbey, (Mrs. Radcliffe?!!? Reading salacious novels in bed??) but they completely forgot to add a heart. Despite all the lusty looks, situational drama, and the forbidden romance between Jane and Tom, there was nothing compelling, nothing grabbing, nothing moving. Never once did I even come close to shedding a single tear when Jane and Tom parted. They call this a love story, but there was not a single thing that I would have carried out of the theatre and looked back on with a romantic sigh.
The best part of the entire film, I thought, was years after they had parted at the opera. A significantly aged and published Jane runs into Tom Lefroy decades later, only to discover that he has named his eldest daughter Jane. This sweet girl is also a huge fan of Miss Austen's novels, and Jane breaks her rule of anonymity in order to read from Pride & Prejudice to satisfy her faithful fan. The fact that Tom had named his daughter after his lost love, and that old Jane decided to oblige the young Jane that could have been her own child if she had married Tom, with a reading of her most famous novel, was very sweet, I must admit.
no subject
Date: 2008-02-17 01:48 am (UTC)I went with two of my friends who aren't really Austenites, but love the 2005 P&P as well as some other movie adaptations of JA novels, they were quite satisfied with it.
I also agree with you on James McAvoy. Couldn't understand why any woman would find him attractive. The whole Tom Lefoy character annoyed me. The goading of Jane and the fact that he's such a playboy. Especially since JA wrote so badly about such men.
I feel a bit sorry for AH, as she's obviously trying to get her big role, but there's no way she could have with this movie.
I also have to disagree with you about the ending. Maybe I was too annoyed with the rest of the film to take that part seriously. I thought it was too sweet.
no subject
Date: 2008-02-17 05:19 am (UTC)JA wouldn't have fallen for a "bad boy" like Tom. If she had then why would she villainize them in her novels?
I was relieved to find something even remotely original, so perhaps that's why I liked the ending? *shrug*
no subject
Date: 2008-02-17 02:42 am (UTC)Guess I'll have to break down and buy a separate dvd player. Mine is part of the TV, and I can't part with my TV for a repair shop!
I enjoyed your review. If and when I get to watch it, I'm just going to watch for entertainment's sake, and not as an Austen story.
no subject
Date: 2008-02-17 05:17 am (UTC)Keep an aspirin handy, for when you heart attack after noticing the costumes. *headdesk*
no subject
Date: 2008-02-17 04:12 am (UTC)Okay, well, I haven't seen it since I read NA (I think) or saw N&S (oh! I remember the shot you mentioned now! haha!). But anyway. I have to say that I was not pleased at all after the first viewing, and rather forced myself to be pleased for the friend I saw it with. By the second time I saw it, I was prepared, and enjoyed it fair enough. (I am remarkably good at cutting out what I don't like in movies, I will admit, so that I can forget/look the other way when I don't like things, and it doesn't impact me as strongly as others. Books, on the other hand, I want to burn if they do something I don't like.)
I really loved (in a morbid way) the scene when Jane's sister finds out her betrothed is dead. I got the closest to crying then, with that very sad simple piano music. (Did you notice she's Bessy from N&S?)
I liked when Tom fell asleep while Jane was reading. It was completely stupid of her to run up and burn all her stuff, though. I mean, authors are sensitive, but also very protective of their work, which is what makes them howl in pain at criticism.
Um. Oh, I love the music when they meet each other in the woods, and he's all muddy and stuff. You'd probably have to listen to the soundtrack, but it's funny. Or, I find it funny anyway. They each are the same tune, but his is short and frustrated and hers is flowy and feminine.
I liked the conversation about being ironic.
I liked the dad and mom, except for the very unexpected random and provoking little something at the beginning of the movie. But I really like the actor for the dad (also in Babe and The Queen), so I'm partial.
I noticed Lady Catherine's Reappearing dress too!
Okay. One thing I found very funny was when Jane and Tom are dancing, and they're about eye level, and they're both like half as short as Mr. Jealous Suitor Onlooker Man.
Didn't like the French lady AT ALL. Ew. I liked her brother whenever he wasn't around the French lady, which means he would have been a tolerable character if he wasn't around her all the time. Also, did all her other six brothers die off suddenly? ...
The Bouncing Waists I noticed in my first viewing. I thought it was my mistake, but apparently the costume designer figured Jane needed an empire waist the whole time, or just had too much to drink while designing.
I really liked the letter to her sister that was all cut up. It was actually funny, because as she's going, "He's the most bad, mean, naughty, provoking, etc.etc. man ever!" my friend leaned over and said, "Too many adjectives." And then Jane goes half a second later, "Too many adjectives."
Um. What else? Jane did not write half of P&P in a night. Actually, they were periodicals, so I'm not even certain the books were published as a whole in her lifetime.
Tom almost shooting his Young Stalker was funny.
I think I'm done. *exits*
no subject
Date: 2008-02-17 05:15 am (UTC)Yes, the carriage shot that they stole from the N&S train shot!!!! Grrrrrr.........
I won't be watching it a second time because it was too boring. I suppose I may be comitting the mortal sin of "First Impressions" but there it is. ;-)
I remembered your saying that about Cassandra aka Bessie Higgins and Esther Somerson from Bleak House. (and yes I noticed!! Even my mom recognized her.) I thought they could have made the scene a little more gut-wrentching than they did, and the presence of the mother was a bit of a mood damper for me. I wanted to see Jane cuddle Cassandra as she sobbed, not just wheezing whilst walking. :-/
I thought it was silly that she burned her writings so soon after she met him, as if she cared for his opinion so soon? The real Jane would have gotten extra sarcastic and snarky revenge on him later, not running off to pout like a thirteen year old.
I didn't notice the wood music.
I did not like the parents because a) that beginning scene was horribly disgusting, b) because Farmer Hoggit just does not work as Reverend Austen, and c) I kept seeing them as Mr. and Mrs. Bennet.
I wouldn't be surprised if it WAS the same dress!! *trots off to see if she can figure it out*
Haha, yes. I actually thought Mr. Jealous Suitor Onlooker Man was rather creepy!!
I won't say what I thought of the Eliza Fuilli-whatzername.
What was with the cut letter?? I couldn't figure that one out. I wondered if the censors had gotten a hold of it, haha. You know, loose ships might sink Napoleonic ships, too. ;-P
Young Stalker? *snort* She was like a combo of Mary (bad singing) and Lydia (flirting) Bennet. Tom's face during her serenade was rather funny. ;-)
no subject
Date: 2008-02-17 09:30 pm (UTC)I wasn't going to watch it the second time, but my mom was going with an Jane fanatic (who was decently moved and liked it at first, but later decided she hated it when she thought it over) and I wanted to see what she thought. I took a loonnng bathroom break during the library/reading scene.
I think the scene would have been better if they went just a little longer, or hopped to later in the night when Mom and Evil French Lady had left, so that C. is starting to get over the shock and starts crying and Jane holds her. But I did like the way she wandered around like she was lost and all. She's a good actress.
Agreed. I didn't mind that she stormed up to her room, but it was silly of her to go angsty.
I didn't either till I listened to the soundtrack. There's also another track I really loved...I don't know what scene it was from, but it's wonderful for rolling down your windows and turning on full blast as you go down the road. (I like doing that with classical music. ;D)
I thought they were a bit more serious that the Bennetts. The mom, of course, had some Mrs. Bennett personality things, but I saw that in Austen Regrets too. I thought it was a funny when the dad is talking about how she shouldn't marry Tall Man and then later when she quotes what he said and he's like, "He should grow out of that."
Reminds me of P&P and the new S&S.
I didn't think he was creepy. And I liked the scene when he gets out of the carriage and walks with her. But I didn't understand why she went, "Ugh! You ruined my chances with Tom! I'll marry you!"
Disturbing.
Well, she cut out all the extra parts, like hitting a backspace button. :) I thought it was funny.
Yes. Tom wasn't all bad, I didn't think. Though he had a bit of Split Personality.
no subject
Date: 2008-02-19 05:38 am (UTC)Long bathroom break, lol!!!
I agree, she's a very good actress. And it's refreshing to see someone who isn't overly beautiful get large roles for a change! I really liked her in Bleak House.
I might have to buy the Hole in the Wall from iTunes, because I've always loved and wanted that song, and BJ might be the best version available. (and I like blasting certain songs, too, which is a habit I picked up from my brother! I crank up Siuil a Run usually...lovelovelove that song...)
I haven't seen the new S&S!! *despairs*
I got the impression that he was some sort of online heart-throb. Whatever for?? (the nephew, not Tom, but the same goes double for him, haha)
no subject
Date: 2008-02-19 03:31 pm (UTC)Yes. Very long. It actually came out perfectly. But did you know the bad book she's reading is Udolpho, which is also what Catherine reads in (the book) NA? I didn't know that. My friend is taking Brit. Lit. and right now is reading those books. She said it's quite scandalous for the day (nothing much now, of course). Anyway, I thought that was interesting. I always imagined Catherine was just reading a completely harmless horror flick.
I haven't seen Bleak House.
Oh, the dance tracks are very nice. The one where they see the gypsies is rather like The Devil Went Down To Georgia... Which, in case you haven't heard, is about the Devil having a fiddling duel with the best fiddler in GA. So it has really really good, hard music in it. (Has a bad word though, if you get the wrong edition--I didn't know that one of the two optional songs had the bad word and I happened to get that one by accident. *headpalm*)
Well I haven't either! But they have a new preview on the Masterpiece site--I really do have high hopes for it. Though when Elinor (I think I'm spelling that wrong) goes over the hill, she looks like Kiera Knightly on the cliff--she even has a jacket that looks the same! And her sister has that dress that looks a lot like Kiera's brown one. (I don't really care. I just think it's a little funny.)
Oh, I don't know (for the nephew). I thought he made a pretty good character, though silent. Not enough to join the boyfriend list, however. Tom, I think, has been a heartthrob for a while now--people went nuts about him in Chronicles of Narnia, which is...odd. I mean, he was a fawn.(Lots of slash about him and Lucy that was...disturbing.) Anyway. I think that he has pretty eyes, and is at least decently attractive. I don't really mind that he's short...I mean, I'm short, so... :) He looks cute in Penelope. (
GASP! IT'S OUT! *MUST SEE*Never mind. the person on YouTube lied.)(erm, here's the trailer, if you're interested: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iq6Lq5p9Fck)
no subject
Date: 2008-02-19 10:11 pm (UTC)I don't think so. The movie showed the title page of the book, and it was Tom Jones, A Foundling, remember? And I don't think Udolpho has any of that naughty stuff in it. If it did, then why would JA have both her heroine and her hero read it? I respectfully submit that your friend must be mistaken.
My family hates Bleak House. I liked it, even though I've only seen about 90% of it. ;-)
I watched the preview, I think, unless they've put up a second now? I can't keep track of all this. Arrr..... Oh, and Marianne *IS* wearing Lizzy's brown velvet Pemberley dress. ;-D http://www.costumersguide.com/reused_regency.shtml
I still don't get why James McAvoy is a heart-throb! Although I'll admit he looks like a nice guy in Penelope, which looks like it like a "feel good" happy ending movie. ;-)
no subject
Date: 2008-02-19 11:00 pm (UTC)Oh--I see what it is. We were talking about NA and BJ, and she mixed up the titles. I just double checked the summaries on Wikapedia. That makes me feel much better.
Heh. That's funny.
It was a preview I hadn't seen--with like half scenes, one that was
Evil Mr. DarcyCapt....NameEscapesMe and Willoughby and one that was a conversation between the sisters. And at the end Eleanor (?) walks on a hill with a jacket that looks just like one in P&P, which I didn't see noted one site. Here (http://s3.photobucket.com/albums/y89/Midenian/?action=view¤t=Pridebm2380.jpg) and here. (http://s3.photobucket.com/albums/y89/Midenian/?action=view¤t=sense.jpg)Well, I don't think he's a heartthrob for me, but to each his own. *shrug* I so want to see Penelope. It looks good.
no subject
Date: 2008-02-19 11:08 pm (UTC):-) For a second you really had me worried there!! I just bought The Italian at the library shop, lol.
Yeah. I use BH as a sort of ultimate threat of torture. "Be nice or I'll make you watch Bleak House!!!" *chorus of groans*
Colonel Brandon? The creepy crazy guy from Our Mutual Friend. (and yes, your previous spelling of Elinor was correct. Eleanor is Henry Tilney's sister in NA) I guess we're getting rather blatant here, copying cliffs and coats, and velvet gowns. ;-D Oh well.
I agree completely. Penelope looks a little "touchy-feely" but it might just be the preview. Dear Frankie was touchy feely but I really liked that one. GUTWRENCHING.
no subject
Date: 2008-02-20 12:06 am (UTC)haha! Sounds like P&P to my family.
Yes, him. Anyway, it seems that the funding is down for costumes, or the designers aren't to be had. Very odd. Not that I particularly care...it's just a bit strange. Do you think that in my P&P they modified the height of the waist to make it more flattering and less pregnant? On my regency dress that Laura made me, the waist is super high (almost, almost too high for my sort of bust...I need one of those lacy things you put over it) and compared to P&P, their waist is very low.
Really? I didn't notice anything touchy-feely in the preview... But yeah. I think my family watched Dear Frankie once. I wasn't there. I was probably on the computer. *angel face*
no subject
Date: 2008-02-20 03:00 am (UTC)Now my family likes my 1995 P&P. ;-D They like N&S, too, but Spencer's the only one who enjoys W&D. (I'd tell you why but I wouldn't want to spoil it for you.)
Ah, yes the infamous waistlines in P&P3. *cracks knuckles, preparing for a lecture* As I understand it Joe Wright disliked the high empire waists of the Regency period, and that is why he chose to set the film in c.1795 when the book was written, instead of published in the 1810s. But he neglected to observe that by that period waistlines had already bounced up as high as they could go -- and IIRC, they were much higher than in 1810 onward. So basically, the waistlines are inaccurate, although one could argue that the movie depicts the Bennet family as a little more "rural" and behind fashion-wise (think Mrs. Bennet's 1770s fashions here, and Lady Catherine's 1780s hair) it could technically be said that they are just out of date. Further credence to this theory is lent by the fact that the family's ball gowns are more period correct than their "everyday" clothes. [/fashion history know-it-all] *smiles sweetly* Does that help? :-)
Well I meant that it was kind of "it's-who-you-are-inside-that-counts" type of stuff. BTW, is it just me or does the title image of "Penelope" remind you of Pushing Daisies, and the clothes, too? Quirky and colorful?
no subject
Date: 2008-02-20 03:05 am (UTC)I know one man who likes P&P. I think his wife has trained it into him. :)
Yes, it does! I admit I like the waists in my P&P much better than the ubber-high ones... Both cause they're a little more flattering and because they're much easier pulling off. (I particularly love the ones like Lizzy's striped Pemberly dress and Jane's pink ball dress--the ones that cross in the front.)
Ooooooooooh. Okay. Lol. Right. And yes, it does remind me a lot of Pushing Daisies.
no subject
Date: 2008-02-20 04:39 am (UTC)They have Udolpho but not The Italian. :-( Sowwy.
8-o
Yeah, but I've gotten accustomed to them. They're unflattering, but at the same time they hide a multitude of flaws. ;-) I love Lizzy's stripey dress, too!
The font and colors reminded me of it. I guess that "look" is the new trend? *shrug*
no subject
Date: 2008-02-20 04:28 pm (UTC)*sulks* Well, I couldn't read a really good classic book on the internet anyway. It spoils the bookie-ness.
^-^ I like them a lot sometimes--sometimes they're very pretty, and a lot of the clothing we have now that's empire waist is very nice. My dad, however, thinks everyone who wears a high waist is pregnant.
Or it's just an accident, since they were probably in production at the same time.
no subject
Date: 2008-02-20 10:08 pm (UTC)I like the empire waists, but I worry about looking pregnant, too. *lol*
Good point!! Maybe they used the same graphic designer/title guy? *shrug*
no subject
Date: 2008-02-20 10:11 pm (UTC)Me: Oh, I like that lady's shirt. Mom: I was thinking the same thing! Dad: Yeah, it's a nice pregnancy shirt. She isn't far along. Me: DAD! She isn't pregnant!!!! Dad: *surprised (genuinely)* Really? Are you sure? Me: YES! MOoooooom!
Could be. *shrug too*
That icon of Thornton reminds me of a zombie. *snickers*
no subject
Date: 2008-02-20 10:24 pm (UTC)ROTFLOL!!! I sure hope that poor lady didn't overhear!
Whatev.
A ZOMBIE!?!?!?? Oh, gee THANKS. Now the truth of how you feel about my graphic abilities comes out! (what does yours^ look like???)
no subject
Date: 2008-02-20 10:46 pm (UTC)No, thankfully. We were in the car.
sorry! It's not your fault--it's the overhead lighting. And I just thought it was so funny you'd like it. :) Mine looks like a face merging out of darkness...kinda like a thoughtful nightmare.
no subject
Date: 2008-02-20 11:18 pm (UTC)Oh good.
I'm just giving you a hard time, lol. ;-P And you needn't disparage your own masterpiece in order to make me feel better!
no subject
Date: 2008-02-20 11:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-02-20 11:41 pm (UTC)I also like your new NA one! Cute.
no subject
Date: 2008-02-17 10:30 am (UTC)You are right about the screenplay. It was appauling. i dont understand how these hollywood mogals think about things.. *argh*
James McAvoy.. didnt offend me as much i admit. lol. i find him handsome enough. I suppose the offense for me was in casting AH as the wrong Jane to match James who would b playing Tom.
Either way, i agree wholeheartedly. A story with possibility wasted with this movie.