Amazon.com

When Mary Rodgers, daughter of the composer Richard Rodgers, was reported as saying she never wanted to see another Oklahoma!, it was her way of paying the highest tribute to Trevor Nunn's production at the Royal National Theatre which was subsequently taken into the studio and filmed. The camera follows the playgoers into the auditorium of the Olivier where in their company we watch the show and applaud the numbers as the real thing. Nunn treats Rodgers and Hammerstein's first collaboration with the utmost seriousness, restoring the full text so that it comes across as a drama indebted to Eugene O'Neill. Although Oklahoma! unfolds at a leisurely pace, it is extraordinary how one is drawn into the drama under Nunn's direction.

There's seldom a wish for true locations as the pace picks up and we move into the claustrophobic company of Judd Fry in his riveting encounter with the cowboy Curly. The close-up camera work affords an experience the theatre can't bring and also pays handsome dividends in appreciating Susan Stroman's intricate and lively choreography. Her dancers are a fine team, notably Jimmy Johnston who is outstanding as Will Parker leading the Kansas City ensemble. Hugh Jackman (X-Men) as Curly matches him in vocal prowess and looks, and Shuler Hensley sings the tricky role of Judd Fry very well. It's harder to place Peter Polycarpou's Pedlar, a considerably larger role than in the film version, whose accent strays from London's East End to the plains of Europe. Maureen Lipman, rightly deemed the lynchpin of the musical by Nunn, is a joy to watch as Aunt Eller. Laurey (Josefina Gabrielle) and Ado Annie (Vicki Simon) are good but not special. Aside from an abrupt start to Act Two and the occasional voice off microphone, the production sounds good with a larger orchestra present than in the theatre. An Oklahoma! on an epic scale. --Adrian Edwards ... Read more

Reviews (35)

A Oklahoman says....WOW!!
I have seen many, many, many productions of "Oklahoma" over the last fifteen years. If you live in this state, it's pretty much a given that if one of your younger relatives (or a close friend's relative) has any musical talent at all, they will appear in a junior high or high school production of this musical. I've also enjoyed the summer performance at Discoveryland, which is the official "National Home" of the musical. And, of course, the 1955 film with Shirley Jones and Gordon MacRae has been an often-watched favorite on my VHS/DVD shelf for many years.

Frankly, I bought this DVD for one reason--I was curious to hear if Hugh Jackman could sing. Let's face it--he's gorgeous to watch (and my husband gets jealous every time I say that, LOL), but I had a great deal of trouble imagining him in this rough-and-tumble cowboy role. In fact, the thought of "Oklahoma" on the London stage was a concept I had trouble accepting intellectually.

Boy, was I wrong.... :)

I agree 100% with Mary Rodgers. If you only have the chance to see one performance of "Oklahoma" in your lifetime, THIS is the one to see.

Shuler Hensley is magnificent as Jud Fry, and well deserving of all the awards he received. Jimmy Johnson and Vicki Simon make a delightful pair as Will Parker and the "I can't say no" Ado Annie. Maureen Lipman provides the heart of the family with her performance as Aunt Eller.

But Jackman and Josefina Gabrielle...well, there are no words. They weren't the typical clean-and-polished Curly and Laurey that we're so used to seeing. Laurey was barefoot and wearing pants! Curly *looked* like a cowhand who had just come off the range. They were...well, real. Genuine. Laurey had doubts about marrying a cowboy; Curly had doubts about giving up his life in the saddle and settling down as a farmer. Curly was *nervous* when he stumbled through his proposal...and Laurey *still* had doubts about accepting.

Again, the only word that comes to mind...real. Human. True human emotions. And, amazingly, not a British/Australian accent anywhere to mar the perfection.

Oh, and did I mention that Hugh Jackman was gorgeous?? :)

Yes, some of the set changes are a bit confusing when they cut in the audience reactions. But I was so caught up with the presentation that the distraction was a minor inconvenience at worst.

If you're trying to make a choice between this version and the 1955 movie...get both. But get this one first :)

Yes...Hugh Jackman can most definitely sing. And did I mention that he's...well, you get the idea :)

Absolutely fantastic
This was a fantastic production of the musical. It definitely brought more depth of plot and character to the musical than did the movie version. The depth of character was brought out by the wondeful acting and directing, the plot via the character development and inclusion of scenes not in the movie. The singing was great; the dancing was great, although I do have to admit that I prefer the dancing in the movie, especially in the Kansas City dance.

I was floored with how well Hugh Jackman can act, sing and dance, only having seen him previously as Wolverine in X-Men & X-Men 2. I particularly liked Ado Annie and Will. They were much more interesting in this production than in the movie.

I didn't like the shots of the audience applauding in between scenes. I prefer to keep my attention on stage and not on the audience. I also thought that the accent of Ali Hakim was a little weak, but that's pretty minor.

The classic American musical gets the Trevor Nunn touch
Every time I watch a version of "Oklahoma!" there are two conclusions that I always reach. The first is that there is no greater chorus in the American musical than the title song from this show. No wonder as soon as it is finished the cast does it again and then for good measure does it at the end of the curtain calls. It always gives me chills when they do the big finish and it occurs to me that the song "Oklahoma" is our secular equivalent of "The Hallelujah Chorus." The second inevitable thought is that Shirley Jones had a truly great singing voice, perfect for musical theater. Any one who plays Laurey Williams is going to suffer in comparison when it comes to the singing (the test case remains the same: the end of the reprise of "People Will Say We're in Love."

That is not to say that this 1999 London Stage Revival of the classic Rodgers and Hammerstein musical is not impressive. Director Trevor Nunn restores the full text and you can see why Richard Rodgers and Oscar Hammerstein II were both interested in turning Lynn Riggs' play "Green Grow the Lilacs" into a musical. It might seem strange to say so, but one of the strengths of this production is that the acting is so solid. The comic relief characters like Will Parker (Jimmy Johnston), Ado Annie (Vicki Simon), and Ali Hakim (Peter Polycarpou), are given more gravity without sacrificing the humor. Of course, part of this is because the show was not really filmed before a live audience, even though there are applause and shots of the audience from the stage at the end of most of the musical numbers. So never is heard a laugh from the audience during the proceedings, which necessarily gives more weight to the characters and the action.

Hugh Jackman is the main attraction as Curly McLain, mostly because fans have problems believing this is the guy who plays Wolverine in the "X-Men" movies, although having just won the 2004 Theater Wings Best Actor in a Musical Tony Award for portraying singer Peter Allen in the Broadway version of "The Boy From Oz" should establish his bona fides in this regard. Josefina Gabrielle plays Laurey Williams as more of a tomboy, and if her singing is solid but unspectacular, her acting and dancing bring some new dimensions to the character as well. The dream ballet has the novelty of being the first major production in which Curly and Laurey do their own dancing. There are those who do not care for the sequence on principle, but having it here as the end of the first act makes for effective foreshadowing.

It is hard to think there could ever be a bad Aunt Eller, and Maureen Lipman shows how well the role can work when it is underplayed. But I think the standout performer here has to be Shuler Hensley as Jud Fry (Hensley played the Frankenstein Monster to Jackman's vampire hunter in "Van Helsing" this summer). The character is the villain and he never seems to quite work in most of the version of "Oklahoma!" I have seen. But Hensley brings a subtlety to the role that really makes it work. You get a sense of how he is dangerous without him being overtly threatening; in other words, you can understand why Laurie would consider him, even if only for a moment. Having such a strong performer in that role really elevates the show.

"Oklahoma!" holds up really well, provided you are open to what we would not consider to be an old-fashioned musical (anything by Rodgers & Hammerstein and/or before Stephen Sondheim and Andrew Lloyd Webber), and Nunn deserves a lot of the credit for crafting this production. The only serious complaint with the DVD is that all we have on the Bonus Disc is a 24-minute featurette on the production. While that has its moments (the Rodgers & Hammerstein people are actually puzzled as to why Nunn wants to do the show, as if the British have no understanding or respect for the classics) it is hard to believe they could not fit it on the other disc. In comparison, the "Mystic River: Bonus Disc" has 189 minutes of material.

A SNORE FESTIVAL FROM GREAT BRITIAN.
"Oklahoma!" is as close to a perfect American Musical as you're ever going to find; and all this production did was make me appreciate the 1955 film version all the more. Trevor Nunn's pacing is slow to the point of boredom and the sporadic use of a "live" audience intercut with dead-air studio footage is distracting to say the least. All this makes it very hard to listen to the participants in the "Making Of" documentary on Disc 2 wax eloquently about how this 1999 production is better than the original Broadway version! I love "Oklahoma" and was genuinely excited about buying this DVD. I really was looking forward to a fresh new version of this Great American Romp. What I got was a museum piece pressed under glass like rose petals.

Best of a beloved show
In a place where the title number is the official State song, any staging of "Oklahoma" is appreciated - but it sure better be done right! How amazing it was for me then to see a production from the other side of the Atlantic that captured the special essence of the show better than any before it. From the staging and sets, to the direction, to the casting and performances, this is the version of Oklahoma that gets it all right. By paying more attention to the subtleties of dialogue and characterizations, Trevor Nunn has brought a depth of meaning and poignancy to this "Oklahoma" that is usually missed, while retaining the fun and enthusiasm that bursts from the score like a field of Oklahoma wildflowers in spring! Thank you to Mr. Nunn for such a lovely tribute to "Oklahoma" - and the people who call the locale home.
p.s.: Come for a visit. The real place is every bit as good as the musical! ... Read more

Amazon.com

This powerful production originated on the stage of the GlyndebourneFestival. It was restaged and filmed on location for the BBC telecast preservedin this video recording. Director Trevor Nunn takes full advantage of therealism, fluidity of movement, and precision of small details that are difficultto achieve when televising a staged performance but easy and natural in a movietreatment.

Nunn's vision, conveyed by an unusually talented cast, is constantly touchingand rises to overwhelming intensity at climactic points. For example: the crapgame and fight that end in Robbins's death, the hurricane scene, Crown's captureand abuse of Bess on Kittiwah Island, Porgy's fight with Crown, the comicallysinister antics of Sportin' Life, the double-edged pathos and absurdity of thescene in which Bess gets "divorced," and the electrifying conclusion, when Porgythrows away his crutches and sets out, naively, to find Bess in New York.

Musically, Simon Rattle and all the performers find the exact style for Gershwin's marvelous score--notonly such big numbers as "Summertime," "Bess, You Is My Woman Now," "I LovesYou, Porgy," "I Got Plenty o' Nuttin'," "It Ain't Necessarily So," "I Hates YourStruttin' Style," and "O Lawd, I'm on My Way," but such smaller items as theexquisite cries of the street vendors of honey, strawberries, and crabs. Thereare no weaknesses in the cast. Willard White and Cynthia Haymon are ideal in thetitle roles, Gregg Baker is a terrifying, larger-than-life Crown, and DamonEvans is a properly slimy Sportin' Life. The white police officers aresplendidly repulsive. --Joe McLellan ... Read more

Reviews (105)

Did someone say "original" ?
I have read through the eighty-some posts here and was surprised to read over and over "I want to see the 'original' with Sidney Poitier..."

The "original" opera opened in 1935 and starred Todd Duncan and Anne Brown. Selection from this original production are available on Decca records (recently re-issued on CD). Also, on a CD entitled "Gershwin Plays Gershwin" there are excerpts from rehearsals of the original production!

In the 1950s, Porgy and Bess was mounted on Broadway as a musical as opposed to its original operatic form. All of the recitative was replaced with dialogue. So much of Gershwin's amazing score was cut. This is the form of Porgy that was used for the Preminger film. It is not the Porgy and Bess that Gershwin intended - but only a "Readers Digest" version.

At about the same time, Lyontine Price was touring in a new production of Porgy and Bess which brought the opera back to the public and which made her a star. There is an "excepts" version of this production which is nothing less than electrifying. It is a crime that Price never recorded a complete Porgy and Bess. She was a GREAT Bess.

The next great production would come in the 70s with the Houston Opera's production, which is still considered definitive.

I have seen the Glyndebourne Opera version when it was broadcast on TV, and I thought it was beautiful. The settings are very natural and the acting is quite good. One very unfortunate cut in this production (or at least from the DVD) is Porgy's "Buzzard Song", which is one of my favorite arias from the opera.

I now finally have the DVD version, and the sound is very clear and well balanced. Using Dolby Pro-logic, there is a good separation between voice and orchestra.

Try to get the Hollywood version out of your head and enjoy Porgy and Bess the way the Gershwins and DuBose Heyward intended it. It is THE great American opera and deserves nothing less.

As I have already said on Internet Movie Database......
this is an exceptionally well-done version of the opera and in many ways vastly preferable to the 1959 movie (of which I have only seen clips;I also have the movie soundtrack on LP-it also was my introduction to this work.) The Sidney Poitier movie is strictly an "adaptation" only---about a third of the work-maybe more-has been cut and replaced with spoken dialogue. All the important numbers remain,but they have been slicked up by arranger Andre Previn---the bell tolling for Robbins' wake has been replaced by a tremendous cymbal crash,and photographed on a setting that never suggests Charleston as much as it does Hollywood's idea of Charleston. The set on THIS videocassette,while also studio-built,conveys much more of the flavorful yet shabby ambience of a place like Catfish Row. As for those seduced into wanting to rent the Sidney Poitier version because of its cast,don't let sheer "Star Power" sway you. The cast here is mostly unknown(TV fans may recognize Damon Evans ,who plays Sportin' Life,as one of the two actors who played Lionel in "The Jeffersons"),but they are all splendid and familiar with their roles,having sung them onstage many times.The original Gershwin orchestrations are used,and only about 10 minutes of his music are cut. As for the viewer who was so inspired when Porgy dropped his crutches at the end and presumably walked under his own power---being disabled myself,that was the only false and condescending touch I found in this TV version---director Trevor Nunn,though,has argued that Porgy only TRIES to walk under his own power,and that the scene fades out before he actually falls---which makes a lot more sense,if you buy his explanation. All you negative viewers and first-time readers of these comments,give this 1993 "Porgy" a chance

It' s OK to change
This version has the undoubted advantage of containing most of the original score and is more faithful to the concept of the opera held ( we suppose) by the Gershwins. However, we have been denied for some 40 years the chance to see the Goldwyn version, which contains the Sammy Davis performance of Sportin' Life, arguably the role he was born to play. The review of the performance history of this important work will of necessity be incomplete as long as the Goldwyn production remains unavailable. Previous reviewers have referred to the presence of great stars in the Goldwyn version as distracting. I would counter that stars are stars because they bring something unique to the production, simply because of who they are. In closing, I personnaly am not offended by cuts and changes to the score of a work that bridges the classical and jazz worlds. Once you have invited jazz to the party, you have opened the door to personal interpretation that goes far beyond anything permissable in classical music, and this might be the best reason for such an invitation. One of the big obstacles to a real marriage of classical and jazz music is that classical music wants to make all the rules. I have no problem with a great arranger like Andre Previn with excellent credentials in both jazz and classical music reworking arrangments.

A Beautiful Movie of Gershwin's Opera
You must disregard many of the earlier customer reviews of this DVD; apparently a lot of people thought they were going to be seeing a straight movie, or a Hollywoodization of the opera made in the 1950s. This, kind readers, is the REAL opera as its creators [George Gershwin and his brother, Ira] intended it and the Glyndebourne Opera production is beautifully opened up, as they say, for the movie camera by the eminent British director, Trevor Nunn. It's all under the direction of that nonpareil British conductor, Sir Simon Rattle, who has since moved on to the plum job of the conductorial world as music director of the Berlin Philharmonic.

The cast is superb. Willard White owns the role of Porgy and his acting is superb as the cripple whose heart is broken. Cynthia Haymon sounds wonderful and looks terrific as Bess. Gregg Baker not only has the huge, sonorous bass that Crown requires, but he looks the part better than anyone I've ever seen in this opera-- and I've seen at least five productions, going back to Leontyne Price and William Warfield at the old New York City Opera. Damon Evans is a suitably oily Sportin' Life. Marietta Simpson, the eminent Mahlerian contralto, sings an absolutely riveting (and hilarious) Maria. Serena, Jake's widow, is ably taken by Cynthia Carey. Some of the 'minor' roles are portrayed by an actor while the singing is done by a trained singer; there is absolutely no problem with the lip-synching--indeed I didn't know until I saw the credits. Clara, the character who sings 'Summertime,' is acted by a beautiful young woman named Paula Ingram, and sung by the delectable Harolyn Blackwell. The ill-fated Jake is acted by Gordon Hawkins, and sung by the talented Bruce Hubbard.

Visually the production is as detailed and realistic as any I've seen. The videography is fluid and unobtrusive. The denizens of Catfish Row are sung superbly and their movements intricately, and realistically, choreographed.

I don't imagine I'll be wanting any other DVDs of this, one of my favorites operas (and certainly my favorite American opera) for a long time to come.

Scott Morrison

Portier and Sammy
I remember seeing this movie with Sidney Portier and Sammy Davis Jr. I enjoyed it very much and all my children were rocked to sleep to 'Summertime'. It ain't necessarily so, was probably sung no where else in town except in my house. I'd like to be able to get THAT movie. ... Read more

Description

Towering screen and stage legend Ian McKellen (The Lord of the Rings, X-Men) stars in this ferocious, deeply human and timeless production of William Shakespeare's classic tragedy from legendary director Trevor Nunn (Les Miserables) and the Royal Shakespeare Company. Noble Moroccan Othello finds his life with beautiful, fiercely loyal Desdemona thrown tragically out of balance when secretly jealous, scheming confidante Iago begins an insidious campaign of lies and treachery. Featuring agracious and dignified performance from celebrated operatic bass Willard White and a superb Imogen Stubbs as the tragic couple, this award-winning presentation is one of the controversial tale's most acclaimed and powerful interpretations to date. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The often volatile character of Shylock, a Jewish moneylender, ispowerfully realized in Trevor Nunn's stylish film of Shakespeare's TheMerchant of Venice, which uses theatrical sets but is shot as a movie.Shylock (played with fierce commitment by Henry Goodman) loans money to aman he despises, the merchant Antonio (David Bramber), only if a pound ofAntonio's flesh will be due upon default. Antonio borrows the money sothat his friend Bessanio (Alexander Hanson) can travel to woo the woman heloves, Portia (Derbhle Crotty), whose freedom to marry is bound up in afairy-tale decree of her father's. The play's mixture of tragedy andcomedy often baffles contemporary audiences; Nunn attempts to solve thisproblem by treating almost everything as seriously as possible. While hisapproach serves Shylock well, the play's conclusion--in which Portia testsher husband's commitment--could use a lighter touch. --Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

"I foresee a glittering future for your daughter," the conspiratorial Duke of Northumberland insidiously whispers to the mother of Lady Jane Grey, the woman who would be England's queen, albeit for only nine days. The same could be said for Helena Bonham Carter, who, in her screen debut, carries this historical drama with aplomb. Jane, a principled and precocious 15-year-old (she reads Plato in Greek) was a pawn in a plot to maintain Protestant rule in the wake of young King Edward's death. A dashing Cary Elwes, anticipating his swashbuckling role in The Princess Bride, costars as Northumberland's feckless, wastrel son, Guilford, whose arranged marriage to Jane unexpectedly blossoms into love and rebellion. Anglophiles will bask in this impeccably mounted production (featuring Patrick Stewart as Jane's bullying father), but swooning teens, too, may embrace these young lovers as did the youths who made Franco Zeffirelli's 1968 Romeo & Juliet a box-office smash in its day. --Donald Liebenson ... Read more

Reviews (72)

Helena Bonham Carter is amazing in her film debut
As is noted elsewhere, there is some artistic license taken with the actual story of Lady Jane Grey. Most notably, Lady Jane and Guildford Dudley were not in love by any documents of the era, which renders the whole "love story" of this film invalid.

But as a simple period piece I really love this movie, and here's why:
1. Helena Bonham Carter gives a truly astonishing performance in her first movie. This film began a string of "period costume drama" performances for the actress that have since been surplanted with modern roles such as "Fight Club" and "Planet of the Apes". Her language - both spoken and simple gestures - are so expressive and she portrays a young woman who is well educated and full of passion.
2. The central conflict at the end of the film comes in her unwillingness to give up her religious beliefs. She is a protestant and her cousin, Queen Mary, is a staunch Catholic. Mary wants to make up for a lifetime of slights and abuses given to her Mother, Catherine of Aragon, whom Henry VIII divorced when Mary was unable to bear a male heir to Henry. The real Lady Jane was not only a protestant, but carried on correspondence with the great protestant minds of her day including John Calvin. It is not often that any popular form of entertainment is made depicting a person willing to die for their religious beliefs. I am not advocating protestantism, per se, only admiring this film's willingness to demonstrate a strong faith which doesn't involve religious fanaticism.
3. The real Guildford Dudley wasn't the love of Lady Jane, but Cary Elwes' performance here stands up well next to Bonham Carter's superlative one. I suspect this role may have led to his being cast in "The Princess Bride".

Pretty much no extras on this DVD, but this is a truly fine film (albeit historically misleading), and it's not one of those $30 DVD's either.

Fine movie about a very tragic young life
Helena Bonham Carter does a superb job portraying one of the most tragic characters in history, Lady Jane Grey, otherwise known as "the Nine Days Queen". Her soft innocence and vulnerability are convincing and heart rendering. You also get to see a very very young Cary Elwes providing a fine supporting role as her doomed husband and Patrick Stewart (way before his Star Trek days) giving an equally fine performance as her scheming father.

The story itself would make for a great Shakesparean tragedy if history hadn't written it first. I was quite moved at the cruel twists of fate that were handed out to this young girl. It is also a testament to the cruelty of parents to their children in sixteenth century England. This was commonplace at these times, even if one was of royal blood as Jane was.

The moving and historically accurate execution scene, in which the blindfolded Jane cannot find the block to rest her neck is quite heart wrenching. You want her to survive the circumstances that her family placed her in, and the wretchedness of her miserable upbringing. However, life is not a fairy tale, even for princesses; this is a profound example of the misery that many Tudor woman, including Elizabeth I, went through. I subtract one star for some of the historical inaccuracies, but overall it is a wonderful and moving film. It also makes you grateful that you did not live in those precarious times.

A historical tragedy turned into more of a fictional romance
One of the most interesting instances of genetic and gender in the history of Western Civilization is found with the death of King Edward VI of England at the age of 15 in 1553. Too young to leave heirs, his older half-sisters Mary and Elizabeth Tudor were both considered illegitimate because of the martial history of their father Henry VIII. Going through the Tudor family the only other potential claimants, Mary of Scotland and Lady Jane Grey, were also female. It seemed that God that determined that a woman would sit on the throne of England and the political question was who that woman would be. The one with the best claim was Mary Tudor, but she was a devout Catholic and the creation of the Anglican Church had created a religious schism in England that would turn ugly with her on the throne.

Lady Jane first became connected with the English crown as a potential mate for young Edward, who was more interested in Mary of Scotland or another foreign princess. Jane was supposedly betrothed to the duke of Somerset's son, Lord Hertford, but was then informed by her parents that she was to wed Guildford Dudley, the youngest son of the duke of Northumberland. Handsome and only one year her senior, Jane did not like him and refused the marriage until her mother literally beat her into submission. The couple were married in May of 1553 and lived apart, although the marriage was consummated the following month at the expressed command of Northumberland. Jane was then informed that she had been named Edward's heir three days before the king's death. Northumberland kept Edward's death a secret in order to stop Mary Tudor from claiming the crown and made a speech announcing Jane was the new queen. Forced to accept the title, Jane dismissed the idea that her husband would be made king. When Northumberland went forth with his army to meet that of Mary, who was marching on London, the royal council declared Mary queen and Jane's own father signed the declaration. On November 13 Jane and Guildford we tried, convicted, and sentenced to death. Jane believed the Queen would pardon her, but the revolt against Mary by Sir Thomas Wyatt in February 1554 hardened her heart against her enemies. Within days Guildford was executed, with Jane being beheaded on February 11th.

None of this historical information consistutes a spoiler because anyone familiar with the kings and queens of England knows that there was never a Queen Jane and even those unfamiliar with the specifics of English history will be aware early on that this is going to be a tragic tale. Even so, the 1986 film "Lady Jane" from director Trevor Nunn would more properly be considered a historical romance, with the emphasis more on the romance than the history as the marriage between Jane (Helena Bonham Carter) and Guilford (Cary Elwes) is turned into a tragic love story. Jane is presented as an intellectual (you would like to see her and Elizabeth Tudor have a conversation), and given a sense of nobility in that she and her husband apparently intend to rule in their own names, not only because it will thwart the plans of John Dudley, Duke of Northumberland (John Wood), but also because it is the right thing to do. In bed they tend to talk about their idealistic plans, such as not branding men or sending them into slavery because they are starving.

This new version of Lady Jane's marriage and her new found political ambitions work to add to the tragedy of her execution at the hands of Bloody Mary, even though her being an unwilling pawn in the machinations of some one else's power games makes her enough of a tragic figure. You have to appreciate the irony that these two privileged children of the British class system were idealistic friends of the common folk. The cast features the standard collection of British character actors, with Michael Hordern as Doctor Feckenham, Mary's teacher, Jane Lapotaire as Princess Mary, Joss Ackland as Sir John Bridges, and Sara Kestleman as Frances Grey, Duchess of Suffolk and Jane's mother. For me the low moment in the film is when Jane is betrayed by her father, especially since Patrick Stewart plays Henry Grey, Duke of Suffolk. Of course, both Bonham Carter and Elwes have gone on to much better films, although I was surprised that she made this after "A Room With a View," one of those much better films. "Lady Jane" runs a bit long, especially given that Jane's "reign" only lasted nine days, and while the fictional romance has its moments I would hope that one day the bleak reality of what happened to this young girl becomes the subject of another film.

Undelivered
While Helena Carter is terrific in her role as Lady Jane (Queen Jane for 9 days), the movie as a whole falls short because it doesn't present the sequence of events convincingly. The build-up to Lady Jane's crowning moment is rather lame and a little confusing, and the nine days of her "reign" are not documented well. There's also too much of a love story, with her persistence in her faith more like a sideshow or afterthought. Overall it's still an enjoyable experience, if it does frustrate the viewer a little.

"Blue Lagoon" goes Renaissance
It's a shame that the interesting and relatively untapped story of Lady Jane got this sugary sweet treatment. It alternates between nubile pulp romance and engrossing costume drama. So when it's good, it's very good...and when it's corny, it's ridiculous (even the score is over the top). Excellent supporting cast. DVD offers no compelling special features...it would have been nice to have some extra Tudor treat in there! ... Read more