Helen-Bonham Carter and Cary Elwes give fine performances in the lead roles. Also I think the portrayal of Mary I in this film was good. But despite some of the good performances, I found this movie not very pleasing.
Having read several books on the historical Jane Grey, it is hard to honestly find good in this film despite its historic inaccuracies. But putting aside, when looking at this at a cinematic standpoint alone, I still find much about it I don't enjoy.
The romance between the two leads, makes for what one would call a good "chick flick". However, I think most audience, regardless of gender, would find this display of the romance heavily mawkish. It is hard for me to relate to, and I am someone who usually enjoys romance in film.
Outside of the two leads, the rest of the characters come off as very cardboard-like. And they seem to fit into two different camps: a) plotters/schemers (which no doubt, that kind of thing definitely went on in the Tudor court) and b) honorable people (but are kept at surface level).
For as much cinematic liberties as this took. Some of these character (though usually historic) should've just been molded into one character to save on time for casting, and because it seemed excessive to have as many historic portrayals as they did all in one movie.
I tried to find much good in this film, and I just couldn't. I'd recommend Tudor Rose (1936) aka. Nine Days a Queen, as the superior of these two films in presenting the story as well. Tudor Rose was an incredibly moving picture,and concise (unlike the needlessly lengthy runtime of Lady Jane) but with great performances all around by a solid 30's British cast. It wasn't as historically accurate either. But from a cinematic standpoint, I found Tudor Rose better than this film in terms of Jane Grey movies.
Having read several books on the historical Jane Grey, it is hard to honestly find good in this film despite its historic inaccuracies. But putting aside, when looking at this at a cinematic standpoint alone, I still find much about it I don't enjoy.
The romance between the two leads, makes for what one would call a good "chick flick". However, I think most audience, regardless of gender, would find this display of the romance heavily mawkish. It is hard for me to relate to, and I am someone who usually enjoys romance in film.
Outside of the two leads, the rest of the characters come off as very cardboard-like. And they seem to fit into two different camps: a) plotters/schemers (which no doubt, that kind of thing definitely went on in the Tudor court) and b) honorable people (but are kept at surface level).
For as much cinematic liberties as this took. Some of these character (though usually historic) should've just been molded into one character to save on time for casting, and because it seemed excessive to have as many historic portrayals as they did all in one movie.
I tried to find much good in this film, and I just couldn't. I'd recommend Tudor Rose (1936) aka. Nine Days a Queen, as the superior of these two films in presenting the story as well. Tudor Rose was an incredibly moving picture,and concise (unlike the needlessly lengthy runtime of Lady Jane) but with great performances all around by a solid 30's British cast. It wasn't as historically accurate either. But from a cinematic standpoint, I found Tudor Rose better than this film in terms of Jane Grey movies.