The Jane Austen Book Club

:

Critics' Reviews

Metascore
®
61
Generally favorable reviews
out of 100
'Book Club' an Engrossing Ensemble Drama
By Dennis Harvey, Variety.com

One character in "The Jane Austen Book Club" describes the author's novels as chick-lit that most men would enjoy if they gave it a chance; similarly, the film is a "chick flick" guys might well grok if they could be roped in. Sure, it lacks CGI and explosions, but it's hard not to become engrossed in the seriocomic relationship tangles writer-director Robin Swicord deftly adapts from Karen Joy Fowler's best-selling 2004 novel. Lacking major drawing-card actors, this polished charmer could become a sleeper hit if allowed to slowly build word of mouth and screen count. Swicord, a veteran scenarist best known for prior lit adaptations ("Little Women," "Matilda," "Memoirs of a Geisha"), makes her directorial debut here. ... More on Variety.com

Copyright 2007 Variety, Inc. All rights reserved.

One character in "The Jane Austen Book Club" describes the author's novels as chick-lit that most men would enjoy if they gave it a chance; similarly, the film is a "chick flick" guys might well grok if they could be roped in. Sure, it lacks CGI and explosions, but it's hard not to become engrossed in the seriocomic relationship tangles writer-director Robin Swicord deftly adapts from Karen Joy Fowler's best-selling 2004 novel. Lacking major drawing-card actors, this polished charmer could become a sleeper hit if allowed to slowly build word of mouth and screen count. Swicord, a veteran scenarist best known for prior lit adaptations ("Little Women," "Matilda," "Memoirs of a Geisha"), makes her directorial debut here. ... More on Variety.com

Copyright 2007 Variety, Inc. All rights reserved.

88
CHICAGO SUN-TIMES: Roger Ebert
Chick Flick indeed! Guys, take your best buddy to see this movie. Tell him, "It's really cool, dude, even though there aren't any eviscerations."Read Full Review »
75
USA Today: Claudia Puig
This is Austen lite, but pleasantly so. You can hardly fault a movie that fashions itself around a consummate writer whose keen sense of humor and gift for fully realized characters have resulted in countless screen adaptations.Read Full Review »
75
ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: Lisa Schwarzbaum
For a visual bonus, Hugh Dancy appears in bike shorts as the lone male Jane-ite.Read Full Review »
70
The New York Times: Stephen Holden
Such a well-acted, literate adaptation of Karen Joy Fowler’s 2004 best seller that your impulse is to forgive it for being the formulaic, feel-good chick flick that it is.Read Full Review »
70
LOS ANGELES TIMES: Carina Chocano
Swicord has a playful sense of humor and a good ear for dialogue, and the movie pleasantly accomplishes what it set out to accomplish.Read Full Review »
70
Washington Post: Ann Hornaday
Everyone is given their due and dignity in this funny, sexy, humanist film that, if it is a chick flick, gives the genre a good name.Read Full Review »
63
ReelViews: James Berardinelli
The film comes across like a soap opera and there are too many characters and storylines for any one of them to grab the heart and imagination. The film isn't painful but it is disappointing.Read Full Review »
63
Philadelphia Inquirer: Carrie Rickey
Those who know Austen novels will recognize how much each character resembles a figure in one of them. Those who do not will enjoy the amusing types. Men, this means you.Read Full Review »
60
Village Voice: Ella Taylor
Perfectly pleasant, perfectly undistinguished adaptation of a market-driven novel about six Sacramento lovelies trying to mend their stalled or broken lives while massaging each other's feet.Read Full Review »
50
Boston Globe: Wesley Morris
It's a lot like a pumpkin spice frappuccino with extra sugar and extra cream. You'll laugh. You'll cry. You'll leave with foam on your nose. So cute. As a friend said on the way out: At least no books were harmed in the making of this movie. And he's right. But that's only because no one really tried.Read Full Review »
See all The Jane Austen Book Club reviews at metacritic.com »