Reviewing Hallmark’s “Lovuary with Jane Austen”

You would think Hallmark movies were made just for me, since I’m all about romance and happy endings: Hallmark’s stock and trade. So it’s hard to explain why I’m not a big fan. I think it’s the same reason I don’t much care for standard “romance” novels. The formulaic, low-budget, mass-produced nature of both tends to result in less original, lower quality fare. Makes it difficult to sink my whole heart into the story and fall in love.

So I was naturally skeptical when I heard of the Hallmark Channel’s plans for a month-long tribute to Jane Austen, dubbed Loveuary with Jane Austen. I’d been let down before by their attempts at Austen tie-ins, some of which displayed almost no resemblance to an Austen tale beyond the hijacking of her character names. Still, I couldn’t not watch either, not if I wanted to know what everybody would be talking about and contribute an opinion.

For those of you who haven’t followed along, Hallmark has presented a new original movie every Saturday night this month – four in all – all based in some way on Jane Austen and her novels. And they’ve been replaying them and prior films in this category at other times, I understand. I’ve focused only on the four new movies. My overall impressions? I was pleasantly surprised… with two of them. Here’s my breakdown, but I’ll be interested to hear if you agree.

2/3/2024 Paging Mr. Darcy: Specializing in the works of Jane Austen, Dr. Eloise Cavendish is the keynote speaker at this year’s Jane Austen League of America (JALA) conference and ball. But, as an academic through and through, she comes with preconceived ideas and a prejudice against all things frivolous, especially the fact that many attendees seem to be treating the convention like one big Regency costume party. So Eloise is dismayed to be introduced to the convention’s very own “Mr. Darcy,” complete with top hat and cravat. Sam Lee has been hired not only to provide some serious wish-fulfillment for attendees but also as Eloise’ special guest liaison to JALA, throwing them into each other’s constant company. The two get off to a rocky start. But, soon discovering they need each other for their disparate goals, they agree to a truce, which changes them both and leads to a mutual understanding.

What I liked: Will Kemp made an appealing, almost endearing Darcy, showing only the warmer side of the character. And the developing relationship between Sam and Eloise was believable and satisfying, sharing some aspects of the Lizzy/Darcy dynamic, but not forcing it beyond what would be realistic. Having been to 2 JASNA conventions, I also enjoyed seeing some similar elements in the film (although with a lot more silliness for comic effect). This movie doesn’t take itself too seriously, and I appreciate that, for the most part, the filmmakers refrained from throwing in gratuitous JA references that made no sense.

What I didn’t like: The final conflict at the end, which was a little trumped up. Also, the attempt at Regency dancing was completely laughable, when it wouldn’t have been that difficult to get it right.,

Missed opportunity: Were any of you thinking along with me? Toward the end, when Eloise thanks Sam for rescuing her sister (reminiscent of Darcy rescuing Lydia), I thoroughly expected the next words out his mouth would be, “I believe I thought only of you.” Didn’t happen.

Rating: This one pleasantly surprised me, and I would watch it again sometime. 4 stars

2/10/2024 Love & Jane: Lilly Thorpe is in a rut. She works at a job she doesn’t like. She’s become discouraged about ever realizing her dream of becoming a novelist. She’s never gotten around to taking that trip to England. And now she’s turned down the offer from her long-time boyfriend to save her from the doldrums by marrying her and taking her to Chicago. The only thing left that she really enjoys is her role as president of her local Jane Society (as in Jane Austen). Part of what Lilly loves about Jane is that she seems to have an answer for all of life’s problems. So she calls out for help, and surprisingly enough, Jane shows up. Once Jane updates her two-hundred-year-old ideas a bit, she sets out to advise Lilly on her twenty-first-century problems, which now including Trevor Fitzsimmons, the handsome but rude bookstore owner who keeps turning up in Lilly’s life. These two, while on the surface they have much in common, don’t see eye to eye on anything. Can Jane show them the way to love and happiness?

What I liked: The concept is good. Wouldn’t we all love to have Jane Austen pop in to give us wisdom and encouragement along life’s way? To quote a line, “You come when inspiration is needed.” And I liked Kendra Anderson as Jane Austen.

What bugged me: There’s a character in the beginning whose name is Mr. Wickham (or so I thought). I couldn’t understand why he was given that name. For one thing, he’s nothing like the Wickham we know. But more importantly, if his name was really Mr. Wickham, wouldn’t all the members of the Jane Society, who met at his pub, make remarks and jokes about it? – which they did not. Come to find out, the name is really “Whitcomb,” which sounds the same. Again, why do that? There’s also a running gag about Jane advising Lilly that to be a good catch a man should own many head of cattle, as if that were a big thing in Austen’s own life or her novels, which it’s not. Land maybe, money definitely, but not cattle.

Rating: While there were some nice moments, this one fell pretty flat for me – a good concept not developed to its potential. 2 1/2 stars

2/17/2024 An American in Austen: In this one, instead of Jane Austen time travelling to the present day to assist an aspiring novelist, we have the opposite. After giving her boyfriend’s romantic proposal a cringeworthy “maybe,” Harriet Goodson, an aspiring novelist, finds herself unexpectedly transported back to Jane Austen’s day. Not only that, but she’s incorporated into the cast of Pride and Prejudice, her favorite book, where she’s welcomed with open arms by the Bennet family as their eccentric American cousin. At first, Harriet thinks it’s an elaborate gag, but then she has to accept that, somehow, it’s all real. She sets about encouraging the “right” matches, according to how she knows the story is supposed to go. But inevitably her presence and twenty-first century mentality upset the balance. In the process, Harriet discovers it’s not the Regency Mr. Darcy she wants, but the pretty incredible man she left behind in her own time.

What I liked: I enjoyed the modern-girl-transported-to-Regency-England trope, which is not surprising since I wrote one myself (Leap of Hope). This one is reminiscent of Lost in Austen in that the time traveler struggles to keep the P&P story on track while at the same time trying to decide if she loves Mr. Darcy as much as she always thought she would. I got a kick out of the bit with the rooster waking the city girl every morning. And I can’t tell you how surprised I was at the sumptuous settings and locations used (Ireland, Bulgaria). I confess, I had not expected such high-budget realism from Hallmark.

What bugged me: The standard inaccuracies and anachronisms we have come to expect (long hair down, no gloves while dancing, informal address, Bingley in Jane’s bedroom, D&E alone in a carriage). The attempt at Regency dancing was better in this one but not great.

Oddities: 1 – adding a real duchess (Sarah Ferguson) to play a duchess opening the ball. 2 – casting an actress named Eliza Bennett (named so by her parents after P&P‘s Elizabeth Bennet) to star in a P&P-based movie and NOT giving her the role of Elizabeth Bennet.

Rating: I enjoyed it and would watch it again. 4 stars

2/24/2024 Sense and Sensibility: Produced by the Hallmark’s Mahogany division, this movie, as the title implies, is a retelling of Jane Austen’s classic story of the two eldest Dashwood sisters, Elinor and Marianne, finding their different ways along the bumpy path to love. This adaptation retains the period setting and most of the original plot.

What I liked: first, I’m impressed with Hallmark for tackling something this monumental: a remake of a beloved classic novel in a period setting. This is far beyond their usual scope. And using a mixed-race cast was another bold move that adding a new and interesting aspect to this adaptation. Finally (as in An American in Austen), they filmed in impressive settings and locations to sell it. Kudos to them for not trying to get by with less.

What I didn’t like so much: Although I applaud the attempt, this adaptation fell short in several ways, in my opinion. Some really good performances were overshadowed by some really bad acting from other cast members. Screenplay writing choices left me scratching my head – John Dashwood’s awkward apology, and the Dashwood sisters stopping over at Norland (instead of Cleveland) on their travel home from London. The other thing that drew my attention (and not in a good way) was the costuming – not so much the styles but the fabric choices. The bright colors, patterns, and so much shine, instead of looking rich, as I’m sure was intended, seemed out of period. These splashy hats and gowns unfortunately tended to make the actresses wearing them look more clownish than elegant.

Comic Relief: Sir John Middleton had the best lines and made me laugh, especially when he was first introduced. That was a highlight.

Rating: Hallmark bit off more than they could successfully chew with this one. 2 1/2 stars

There you have it, folks. It’s a 50/50 split. Two thumbs up and two thumbs trending down. But that’s just my opinion. Everybody’s tastes are different, so now I want to hear from you.

What are your sentiments about Hallmark movies in general? More particularly, did you watch these 4 Jane Austen tributes? Do you agree or disagree with my evaluations? Which one(s) did you like best or dislike most, and why? A favorite moment / actor /character /event? I’ve talked enough. Now it’s your turn!