Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #821 in DVD
• Released on: 2004-05-17
• Rating: Parental Guidance
• Format: PAL
• Original language: Spanish, English
• Number of discs: 1
• Running time: 136 minutes

Synopsis
After the death of King Henry VIII and his young son and heir Edward VI, Henry's 15-year-old great-niece, Lady Jane Grey (Helena Bonham Carter), is chosen to rule by a group of palace conspirators who vow to keep the country Protestant and out of the hands of the Church of Rome. She is crowned, against her will, and her reign lasts only nine days, until Henry's legitimate daughter Princess Mary, by first wife the Catholic Catherine of Aragon, and her supporters rally around and crown her Queen instead. Jane is imprisoned in the Tower of London and eventually beheaded, along with her husband, Guildford Dudley (Cary Elwes), for what is presumed to be their part in the conspiracy. The film chronicles, fairly accurately, Jane's growth, during her extremely short reign, from a bookish intellectual to a confident, and politically progressive young woman who refuses to conform to the religious hypocrisies of 16th Century England.

Customer Reviews

As good as I remember!!!
I first watched this film as a 13 year old girl at school and i loved it then and sitting down today i was as good now as it was then. I was amazed by the acting of a young Helena Bonham Carter. Well wotha watch if you enjoy period films!!

A watchable enough period piece that loses almost everything of interest in the true story
"You will be tried... and naturally you will be condemned to death, but, of course, I have the power of reprieve, which at present I intend to use."
"With no conditions?"
"Well, it would help if you promised not to steal my throne again!"

While such direlogue is thankfully in the minority, Lady Jane is still a film that some of its makers still seem to pretend doesn't exist: a very undistinguished debut for Helena Bonham Carter that she never talks about and enough of a financial disaster for director Trevor Nunn to later claim that his 1996 version of Twelfth Night was his screen directorial debut. Made during the British film industry's dark days of the mid-80s in a failed attempt to recapture the audience for the likes of Anne of the Thousand Days and A Man For All Seasons, it was one of only two films made by Paramount's much-hyped British production arm before they shut up shop (the Ralph Fiennes-Juliette Binoche Wuthering Heights was the other). It may have opened to even more public indifference than Elizabeth: The Golden Age but it's rather better than you might expect even if it is never quite good enough.

Lady Jane Grey's brief nine day reign as queen of England had been given a much-fictionalised screen treatment before in 1936's Tudor Rose, but this version had some (almost entirely unrealised) aspirations towards historical accuracy even if it does turn Jane and her wastrel husband Guildford Dudley (a name that sounds more like a bicycle race than a possible king) into doomed lovers when they hated each other all the way to the executioners' block. Both were very much puppets of their parents' ambitions: the dying young King Edward's protector Lord Dudley wanted to ensure the elevation of his own family from commoners to nobility to royalty under the guise of ensuring the succession of a Protestant monarch to protect the fledging Reformed Church, and the social-climbing Suffolks rather liked the idea of becoming royalty (though it was actually Jane's mother who had precedence in the line of succession) while their offspring had no say in the matter even if it was to cost them their lives. The film is at its best in showing the conflict between a young generation that had embraced the then-excitement and new ideas of a religion rejecting Rome and without arcane ritual and an older generation that had either profited handsomely from the dissolution of the monasteries or had suffered grievously and wanted to restore the old religion and with it the old status quo, although it never makes the obvious link between Jane's ferocious religious fanaticism and the unhappy, unloved childhood that appears to have driven her towards it in much the same way that the ostracised Queen Mary was drawn to her fanatical Catholicism.

Unfortunately, Nunn's direction is even more of a major problem than a watered-down script. He's fine when people are talking, even if they're walking at the same time, yet any more complicated form of action seems completely beyond him. And in this case action doesn't just apply to a pub brawl that's shot like badly blocked and under-rehearsed 50s television but scenes like Lady Jane throwing a fit in a room and knocking the silverware on the floor while supporting players very, very slowly try not to catch up with her and stop her: the camera is in the wrong place, the timing wildly misjudged, the actors' movements horribly unconvincing. They're the kind of mistakes you'd expect from an amateur movie maker's first efforts, not someone with a decent budget and a cinematographer with as much experience as Douglas Slocombe to advise him, and they make you half-glad that the modest budget didn't stretch to filming the story's offscreen battles. He also gives away his theatre background by framing many shots as if for the proscenium arch, never really embracing the possibilities and freedom of the movie camera.

Nor does he get the most out of some of the cast. Old pros like John Wood, Michael Hordern, Jane Lapatoire and Joss Ackland are fine (though most of the older actors have little, if anything, to do), as are Warren Saire as the dying young King Edward and, for the most part, Cary Elwes as young Dudley, but Bonham Carter's performance is particularly problematic. Looking even younger than her character's 16 years and nothing like the freckle-faced redhead of history, her performance is often awkward and fairly consistently unlikeable, making Jane less a tragic figure and more of a petulant Catholic-baiting little madam who got what was coming to her, a Tudor Wednesday Addams rather than a Tudor Rose. At times she looks less like a lost soul than a panicking inexperienced actress deliberately cast adrift without being told what she's supposed to do, desperately looking to the sidelines for help that's not forthcoming, all too often leaving you feeling sorry for the actress but nothing for the character. To be fair it seems to be more a problem of direction and it's not hard to guess which scenes were shot first from her awkwardness, although she visibly gains confidence as the film progresses.

Yet it's not all bad. It does show what a disastrous queen she would have made, although the film does give the impression that Jane and Guilford were a pair of hippie libertarians - indeed, with its Romeo and Juliet love story and bucolic romantic montage sequence you almost get the impression that this was intended as a Franco Zeffirelli film a la Brother Sun, Sister Moon. Bonham Carter's brief scenes with Hordern's Dr Feckenham where they pit their faiths against each other are the best in the picture and it's a pity there aren't more of them in David Edgar's screenplay, while the end is touching despite being almost as clumsily staged as the real execution (it's a tastefully bloodless affair here, though, quite unlike the reports of the real thing: one observer was moved to note that he couldn't believe so much blood could come from such a small body). Stephen Oliver's excellent score is good enough to make it a genuine shame that he never got to write any more, adding him to that list of talented British composers like Marc Wilkinson and Raymond Leppard who never got the breaks their gifts deserved. At the end of the day it's a watchable enough period piece for a Sunday afternoon, but one that probably plays better on TV than it did on the big screen.

The widescreen 1.85:1 DVD transfer is acceptable, though the stereo track impresses more. The only extra is a decent black and white stills gallery.

They lost their heads, but not their hearts!
I've not actually seen this film, but having a familial interest in the Dudleys and Greys I was intrigued by the subject matter. Reading the other reviews, however, I'm not sure I want to see it now, much that I admire Helena Bonham Carter for her other roles and acting generally. The point is, historically, there never was a romance between Lady Jane Grey and Guildford Dudley. It was John Dudley Duke of Northumberland's scheming which brought the ill-fated pair together and nothing more. If the young Jane had had her own way, Guildford Dudley would have been the last person she'd have chosen as her husband. Guildford, for his part may have been smitten with Jane, but Jane did not reciprocate... and who could blame her. Having said that, it might be worth a look just to see how well Jane's villainous father-in-law is portrayed.