Miss Austen Regrets (2007 TV Movie) User Reviews (20)

Biographically not fully bullet-proofed but historical events are accurate

[ursulahemard · 7/10 · 14 January 2012]

Jane Austen's (16 December 1775 – 18 July 1817) last few years, gorgeously filmed and directed, just as it would be one of her own creations, with the difference that her novels end with 'happy endings', like love and marriage, whilst Austen died at 42 unmarried and depending on her family. One does wonder why Austen, whose very witty and vibrant (though social-critical) books are about women and the necessity of marriage for a social and financial security at her time, never married!?!

This movie is apparently very closely based on the few remaining letters between Jane, her sister Cassandra and her favourite niece Fanny; an assumption of those very intimate and loving letters, a sort of a hypothesis that Jane chose not to marry of her own, by refusing several marriage proposals to be able to write and for her 'freedom'. It is a very emancipated and 21st Century feminist friendly theory. Some hard- core Austen historians still insist though, that Jane never married because, in her very youth, she refused a marriage proposal from a very rich yet ugly, old and dull man...Mr Bigg...and then she was never asked again...for her no Mr. Darcy came along.

Therefore, biographically not fully bullet-proofed but historical events are accurate.

Love the many quotes incorporated in the movie!

I've never heard of Olivia Williams but I must say she earned all my admiration and will look out for her past and future works! Great actress!

If you like BBC period dramas or even Jane Austen's novels adaptations, then you most certainly will enjoy this; a great family-movie which will inspire the interested Teenager to read Jane Austen novels...(so I hope!)

Not Much Regret

[pdwebbsite · 8/10 · 5 February 2010]

I won't bother comparing Miss Austen Regrets to Becoming Jane. I will simply say: skip the latter and turn to the former if truly interested in the life of Jane Austen and not the fictional speculation. One is BBC and the other Hollywood. Enough said.

The only possible criticism of Miss Austen Regrets is how it starts off at such a startlingly quick pace, so much so that if the credits hadn't run I would have thought I'd come in on a good third of the production already gone. Allthe speculation of Jane Austen never having been in love, or having a chance at marriage (especially an advantageous one) is dashed in the first few minutes. From there the audience is left to wonder at the title--is it a what or who she regrets?

The biopic focuses on Jane Austen's latter years, and uses her relationship with her niece Fanny as a means of exploring her past relationships. We come to see financial security was of paramount concern to her, yet that concern was not so much for her sake as it was for her family's. We also see that her freedom to write being more important to her than love. Yet, it is all speculation. It isn't really clear that she had regrets at all. She exuded a satisfaction, so the title is a bit misleading.

What this new biopic brings out is the independence Jane enjoyed, and how much she enjoyed writing. The acting is commendable, the factual details admirable, and the rendering of the time satisfactory (although Jane's outfits swung from either being rather matronly to almost brazen). An enjoyable addition to Austen offerings. Yet, maybe it's time to leave off on the conjectures and meddling in her love life and focus on the brilliance of her writing--no speculation there.

This film screwed up differently than Becoming Jane did

[mrtraska · 8/10 · 16 August 2009]

I SO wanted to absolutely love this movie. I did. Don't get me wrong -- it got a lot right. It was on Masterpiece Theater, for heaven's sake, and the script generally tried to stay closer to the few facts we have about Austen's life. It had decent direction and adept, credible Brits portraying Jane and her family. And yet, there was one huge flaw that I just couldn't ignore. Miss Austen Regrets would have us believe that Jane had several offers of marriage during her lifetime but knowingly and deliberately chose to remain single and focus on her work. This is a 20th to 21st century conceit awkwardly imposed on a 19th century situation.

The few facts we have show that Jane received only one marriage proposal during her life, and that was from someone with an irritating personality. Harris Bigg-Wither was described by Jane's niece Caroline Austen and by one of his own descendants, Reginald Bigg-Wither, as unattractive at best: he was plain, if not homely, stuttered, aggressive in conversation, and almost completely tactless. Those objectionable qualities, despite his comfortable financial position, would have put off many women, then *or* now. Had he had a more pleasing personality, Harris might have tried first for a fiancée from a more prosperous family instead of proposing to Jane.

Moreover, Jane had known Harris since childhood and probably knew full well what she'd be getting into if she decided to marry him. To endure Bigg-Wither every so often at social occasions was one thing, but to marry him and have to endure that personality day in and day out would have been quite another. The simplest explanation is that Austen initially agreed to his proposal in order to be less of a burden to and/or provide for her family, but she knew him too well not to immediately regret her decision the next morning -- and thus she reneged on her acceptance in less than a day, and remained single. She probably considered that the lesser of two evils.

The truth, then, is *not* that Jane Austen turned down acceptable proposals and made a conscious decision to put her writing first and stay independent, particularly given that she *never was* financially independent, but rather that no handsome, sweet-tempered, intelligent man, with or without means, ever asked her. She may have had such men as friends or acquaintances, but none of them ever proposed. If one had, remaining single would have been a much harder decision -- but that's moot, because such a man never did ask. Period. And that's a rude truth she had to suffer for all her adult life. It's not a truth that Miss Austen Regrets chose to address, however, and that is the film's greatest failing.

Now that's better . . .

[alfa-16 · 28 April 2008]

As one of the many Austen fans still smarting from the vacuously boring Becoming Jane, I was nervous about this. As if sensing this apprehension, Miss Austen Regrets set off at a gallop. One and a half minutes in and we are already over the worst hurdles. We have a talented, intelligent lead - an innovative, sparkily humorous script - tactful and assured direction. Phew!

All memory of the toxically banal Ann Hathaway as the younger Jane evaporated as the lovely Olivia Williams settled into the part - so successfully that the sideswipe the writer takes at the earlier production 20 minutes in seems inappropriately vengeful.

Without hitting the exact spot, this was very, very much better.

It played on safer ground. It portrays Austen between the publication of Mansfield Park and Emma, just starting on the first draft of Persuasion and surrounds her with characters with credible lives of their own. It does an excellent job of demonstrating just how fragile was the life of even a woman successful and famous enough to be a guest of the Prince Regent. Only by marriage rather than as a result of her work can Jane support her family in their modest style of life. Questions over her brother's estate threaten the house she lives in but can never own. This insecurity is what Miss Austen really regrets.

All the minor performances are what you'd expect from top-drawer BBC period drama and Olivia Williams and Imogen Poots are excellent in the two central roles of aunt who hasn't given up flirting and the niece about to become engaged who is still learning the ropes. The whole production portrays an interesting life, full of love, frustration, struggle and uncertainty about life's choices, and does something like justice to one of the greatest authors of literature and her most intimate concerns.

So, if you've seen neither of the two recent dramas about Jane Austen's life and you're prone to kicking the cat when angered, make absolutely certain that you see this one first.

Good, somewhat accurate

[pink_roosje · 7/10 · 1 November 2017]

This is a good movie for those who love Jane Austen (and similar movies). In the beginning i had to get used to this Jane but when i did i could get lost in the movie. A brilliant movie with a lot of accuracy about Jane's life. Of course not all of it is accurate but they are forgiven since this is a movie and not a documentary. People can't help comparing this movie with "becoming Jane" but this movie basically picks up where "becoming Jane" left of. All in all a must watch for fans of Austen and other period drama movies.

Olivia Williams Pulls It Off

[robert-temple-1 · 10/10 · 6 June 2009]

This film is so much better than 'Becoming Jane' (which deals with Jane Austen's earlier life), that it is really in another category altogether. Olivia Williams as Jane Austen in this film is scintillatingly brilliant, she truly becomes the character, and although she had already shown in 'The Heart of Me' (see my review) what a sensational actress she is, here she transcends herself. Rarely can an actress have so thoroughly 'become' a historical character as in this film. Olivia Williams has now proved that she is one of the finest actresses in Britain today. She is not vain, and is not afraid to look rough when necessary for the story, whereas Hollywood actresses do not ever want to be seen from the wrong angle, so that they become artificial. Olivia Williams really does seem to suffer with her character every step of the way. She also effervesces and bubbles with uncontrollable mischief and naughtiness, rebelling against the intolerable restrictions of life for a woman in those days. The pathos of Austen's solitary state, when women who were unmarried could not carry on any other relationships either, is vividly portrayed. Greta Scacchi is marvellous as the silent sister Cassandra, though it is hard for me to come to terms with her no longer being the dazzling starlet she was when younger, as I still envisage her as that. Imogen Poots is a mixture of charm and jealousy, feather-brained idiocy, and beaming smiles, even a touch of innate wisdom, in other words, just as full of contradictions as a real person. She pulls it all off, and we believe every aspect of her changing nature as it varies from circumstance to circumstance, laughing with her one minute and at her the next. Her versatility and instinct will doubtless bring her a fine career. Phyllida Law is marvellous as Mrs. Austen, the mother worn out by it all. Adrian Edmondson does a wonderful job as brother Henry, charming but hopeless, devoted brother and failed banker. The director, Jeremy Lovering, has never directed anything other than television material, but here he shows himself as a superb feature film director, albeit this was a film made for television. Let's hope he can now break out of the box. He is announced as director for 'The Wedding Party', and maybe that is for a larger screen. He has proved that he knows how to tease the best results out of his actors and actresses. This film is a genuine triumph, and everyone connected with it should be thrilled at the result, which could hardly be bettered. It is an instant classic, and long may it live its life as a DVD, avidly watched by anyone with an ounce of taste. And above all, what will the amazing Olivia Williams do next? Will she get all the plum roles she deserves? If there be any justice in the world at all, we will see no end of her from now every which way we turn.

Her own story beats her novels!

[DevikaSethi · 9/10 · 31 July 2010]

The Austen Industry ensures that almost every year there is a new production of either one of her books, or of films about how us moderns are affected by her work (The Jane Austen Book Club, Lost in Austen)almost two centuries after she lived. This film turns the spotlight away from her characters to the author herself, and does it wonderfully well: we see her as sister, daughter,and aunt, a creature of flesh and blood who is not beyond the occasional infatuation in middle age. Well cast, well acted and all that one expects from a satisfying period drama. For an hour and a half I was transported from monsoonal India to nineteenth century England -- what more can one ask for!

A must watch for Austen fans

[deepanjali-sarkar · 9/10 · 25 September 2014]

If you've read her novels and love the world she creates, you will understand them so much better after seeing this BBC production. Beautifully directed and acted, it captures the person she was, witty, sensitive, a romantic at heart and yet ever so practical - even cynical in realising a good marriage is the only way a woman could lead a comfortable life. But never, not once, does the movie seem staid, or boring. It is effervescent, delicately handled and poignant. Fans of Jane Austen will love the unobtrusive inclusion of quotations from her books, the references to her most loved characters and the irony of her never finding a Mr Darcy in her own life. It moved me deeply.

Unimaginative & altogether not credible

[emg_5 · 1/10 · 15 February 2019]

This tiresome, repetitive, poorly researched film with a unimaginative, irksome dialogue attempts to portray the older Jane Austen as a bitter, jealous, sneering character who thinks of almost nothing expect money - a scenario that likely reflects the dim witted scriptwriter and producers, keen only to make a quick buck from the popularity of the long dead author.

While some of the acting is very fine, especially Imogen Poots and Hugh Bonneville - Olivia Williams is entirely unconvincing as the "protagonist". The costumes, sets and scenery are beautiful, but they fail to save this miserable movie from itself. For a far more enjoyable and more accurate depiction of Jane Austen, including her later life, it's worth checking out the widely available documentary by the excellent British Historian Lucy Worsely.

What "Becoming Jane" wanted to be

[prncsbtrcp · 9/10 · 24 February 2008]

This was quite good. All the acting was wonderful, especially Olivia Williams. She brought all the intelligence and wit and feeling to Jane that one would expect. The last scene between Jane and Cassandra was absolutely incredible, so beautifully done. It made me wish this had been made for theatrical release instead of "Becoming Jane." The dialogue was very well written - witty where appropriate, cutting when needed, and always intelligent and natural. My only quibble is the need to show JA regretting anything. I like to imagine that she and Cassandra and their mother (and friend who lived with them in real life) all lived happily together and had even less stress and regret than was shown in the film, although I realize that wouldn't be a very long movie. Don't know why all these bio-pics feel the need to have JA's mother trying to talk her into marrying for money, I don't think there is any basis for that. However, that aside, it was very well done.

I don't understand why, in the 2007/8 BBC JA fest, this and Northanger Abbey were so good, and Persuasion and Mansfield Park we so very, very bad. Couldn't they have gotten some of the people who did such a great job on these (script, camera, production) and put them on the rest? I don't have much hope for the Sense & Sensibility, but we'll see.

Less Austen than life story

[barbara-czarniawska · 8/10 · 27 March 2010]

I have watched this movie because I love Jane Austen's books, and because I have seen "Becoming Jane", and because I have read a TLS review of it. But, somewhat to my surprise, it is not Austen's biographical details – true or false – that were my main attraction. The point is, the movie tells an important truth (apart from delivering a series of trite statements on men-women relationships, which are all trite because they are so true…) about life stories, or the ways people think – and talk – about their lives. They oscillate – at least Jane did, as many of us do – between regrets (in spite of the title, the movie is NOT about regrets) and the idea that one could have made a "better" decision, and the feeling that the decision was absolutely right ("I have won my freedom"), and yet another feeling, that there was no decision at all, just a coincidence, which (Freud would have said) expressed the true longings and desires, or (some other people would have said), ended up as it did ("things turn out for the best", the movie says). I would hate to think that people see that movie as "just about Jane Austen" – much as I admire her, it is about all of us, and importantly so...

Beautifully done!

[saltlakefun74 · 9/10 · 15 February 2008]

I really loved this movie. I have read a biography or two about Jane Austen and this movie seemed to me much more accurate than Becoming Jane. Olivia Williams gave a brilliant performance as Jane. I also liked Imogen Poots as Fanny. The actors who were her brothers Edward and Henry were good too. I really liked the guy who played Mr. Haden too.

I have enjoyed this much more than the new adaptations of her novels on Masterpiece Theatre except for Northanger Abbey. Mansfield Park and Persuasion were OK but not great and I don't know how good Sense and Sensibility is going to be.

serious work

[Vincentiu · 12 December 2012]

film about a legend, it is a serious work. her life is more than a picture. her work is more than portrait of a world. because the heart of pages, existence is the sacrifice. it is answer to many ordinaries questions. and beginning to a trip in essence of a society not more different by ours. basic virtue - excellent performance. the second - air of a time - mixture between honey and ash. so, if it is not accurate image about Jane Austen, it is realistic. seductive. and a real show of nuances. the regrets - only flowers of a way to understand life. a kind of lesson , idealistic, of course, but very important as subject of reflection. it is a necessary film in the middle of Jane Austen adaptations. because makes her human been more than a character writing about others characters.

Lovely to Look At...But That's All, Folks

[orinocowomble · 3/10 · 2 October 2012]

This "film" reminded me very much of the many films and series based around Agatha Christie's works, in the sense that it's one of the many British period pieces that you *look at* rather than watch. The houses, the gardens, the clothes, the lovely crystallised manners are lovingly presented, every detail just right. Plot? Not so important--and in this case it's a good thing. True, Miss Austen wrote prolifically and well for the reason many authors do--because their own lives aren't like that. Re-writing (or redirecting) reality is what the movie and novel industries are all about; controlling events, making it happen the way you want it to happen, not the way it so often does in real life. And so often, the director and writers' personal agenda gets pride of place; they wanted to show Austen as an embittered woman who "lost out" because she rejected woman's traditional role of wife and mother. If that were not the case, there would have been less emphasis on the many (apocryphal) refused proposals and they wouldn't have chosen the title "Miss Austen Regrets." I think Jane certainly regretted being poor, and being unable to be the captain of her own fate to the degree she would have liked to, but that can be said of many people today, as well. Life is what it is, and you do what you can with what you have.

I watched this film in company with my own gentleman admirer, and his reaction led me to come in to IMDb and look for more information. He said, "I get the feeling someone had rented the costumes and locations for yet another period piece, finished before the deadline, and told the director, "Go ahead and use our stuff to make your film, we've got a few days left on the sheet." I was amused when reading IMDb's "Trivia" section to discover that indeed many of the costumes, interiors (and of course the actors) have appeared in other Regency romance films. It's almost as much fun as playing "spot the blue motor" and counting how many times per episode Hastings exclaims "Good Lord!"when watching the Granada series of Poirot--but not quite.

One of the best stories about Jane Austen!

[katslzoo · 10/10 · 29 January 2020]

I have watched this movie over and over and each time I love it more!! Such great acting and the actors draw you into her story of love and lack there of. Just love love this movie!!

What does Miss Austen regret?

[Red-125 · 8/10 · 19 December 2022]

Miss Austen Regrets (2007 TV Movie) was directed by Jeremy Lovering. It reconstructs Jane Austen's life when she was older, and just beginning to notice her serious illness.

Olivia Williams portrays Jane Austen, and she is excellent. Greta Scacchi portray's Jane's sister, Cassandra Austen. Imogen Poots plays Fanny Austen-Knight, Jane's niece.

The plot revolves around Jane's decision, as a young woman, to turn down a suitor who had proposed to her. Her niece Fanny has a similar decision to make, and she looks to her aunt for advice.

The film has BBC production values, so it's a pleasure to watch. Miss Austen regrets has a modest IMDb rating of 7.1. I thought that it was better than that, and rated it 8.

Preposterous and non-essential

[ThatDoesntMatter · 11 May 2010]

I did not care for this film at all.

I found it boring and hollow.

I refuse to imagine Jane Austen having been this unpleasant, sarcastic and resentful.

I have read some of her letters and all of her books and just have a totally different opinion regarding her tone and character. I imagine her more friendly and cheerful, but hey, what do I know - then again, what do the filmmakers know...

I'm quite angry actually, mostly for having wasted 90 minutes of my life on such dull drab without any consequence whatsoever.

I'm always open to interpretations, but this is just - bad. Gee, I would have to feel sorry for her indeed if this bears any resemblance to her actual life. So I just refuse it. Unhappy she may have been at times, worried about money, even had her moments of regret as we all do, but sensible people just carry on with their lives, and she had her sense of humour for comfort (for humour creates distance, thus making everything easier). I just hear a completely different voice when I read her words, be it novels or letters.

Dreadful interpretation. So all good acting and nice dresses and scenery is lost on me for the story leaves me cold - no, actually repulses me.

One point for the quotes from the books ;-)

I REGRET watching this!

[sanna-febin · 2/10 · 19 December 2015]

I don't like overly negative reviews, but I stayed up late to write this because I was so let down. I read the reviews and selected this extremely carefully. I'm a fan of period movies, a good story line, drama and clean, cute romances.

What a disappointment!! The whole story was just about some immature, cheeky blond girl that is overly eager to marry any fellow that comes along. She and her aunt Austen, worry about being burdens to their families. Every time a guy comes along the movie doesn't spend any significant time on them, and suddenly disappears. Then some new guy comes along but then he's gone too. ??? They are all weird, eccentric or just plain jerks. The rest of the movie consists of Jane moping because she can't find the ideal husband.

The only reason I gave it a 2 out of 10 is because I liked the costumes and pretty horses and estates. Nicely filmed, but most period movies are.

If you enjoy cute romances like "Emma" or "Pride and Prejudice" or even the "Lost in Austen" series - you will really hate this movie. I don't know anything about Jane Austen's real life, but some even complained it wasn't wholly accurate. So I can't say this is for Jane Austen fans or anyone for that matter.

There was no eye candy, no romance, and not even an interesting story. I suffered through the entire movie because I was hoping to redeem the precious time I had already wasted, by at least having a good ending. The ending is really abrupt and completely unsatisfying. Like the film makers just threw their hands up and gave up! Even though I'm an advocate of "clean" movies, this is not worth watching even once...

Nothing but eye candy

[sjanders-86430 · 1/10 · 29 November 2020]

Miss Austen Regrets is not worth your time. It is a ridiculous portrayal of 40 year old Jane Austen. The script is pathetic dialogue for such a brilliant author. The focus on men is just historically incorrect are the money concerns. People should stick to facts and do documentaries on authors and make films only of their books.

50/50 Justice to Miss Austine

[senaratney · 5/10 · 27 August 2012]

In my opinion, the direction only brings out 25%-30% of miss Austin's real life where the rest is not justified for her of being the 'Best Cook' of the recipe of 'Love'. Definitely there should have been a point in her life that she regretted of not getting married, though It's not a factor for her struggle of bringing out romance in an era, where wealth became a factor. The way Jane Austin brought up 'Pride and prejudice', 'Sense and Sensibility', The persuasion' etc. give us a broader view on how a young woman should look for a partner apart from wealth. In her case, she was not in a situation but her effort on describing it was magnificent. Isolating her lengthy character, and by only focusing as a single movie apart from 'Becoming Jane', I think this is worth watch.