Effie Gray

I thought it was excellent. Beautifully filmed, great acting and a fascinating story.

Many reviews criticize Dakota's acting but I thought she portrayed the quiet desperation of a woman trapped in a terrible marriage.

Odd to me that every silly comic book based movie gets raves and a truly great movie like this gets panned.

The movie was delayed a year to hit the screen due to the copyright issue. A biographical picture from Britain set in the late 1840. The movie revolves the story of Euphemia Gray shortly known as Effie Gray and her married life. She was from Scotland and only 19 when she married to the British art critic John Ruskin. But she was kept under certain limits of space by her laws. It makes her a lonely soul in the house, which surface a serious threat to their loveless marriage. Can it be held or not is the movie's final conclusion.

Dakota Fanning, like I saw her yesterday in teen movies, but now she's in a grown up movie. Felt kind of hard to accept, and then after a while begin to like her performance. That does not mean it was a powerful act, somehow convincible to the viewers. That is mainly because of the story. Actually it's a simple story, if it was set in the today's world. For those periods, it was a big affair to deal publicly as well as family's prestige.

The movie's settings and locations were good. As usual in a period drama the costumes are very good. It's always pleasure to learn the history through movies than the school textbooks. Other than that it was an average or just above. The thing is, it was a too slow and a little long movie, thus its not a commercial film. Many people aren't ready to pay watch it in the theatres, that is understood. So in my opinion, it should have been a television movie instead, with sliced into 3-4 episodes. Anyway, not for everyone, but for those who love slow presentations would have a good time.

6/10

It's one thing arranging all the finest acting talent in a film, and having great period detail and costume design, but it's totally another to keep you invested enough for 110 minutes of your life. Effie Gray just about manages to get over the finish line, but not with any great impact. Expect to reasonably entertained, but to stay perfectly still in your seat (with the occasional glance at your watch).

Effie is stuck in a loveless marriage... Her husband is an art critic... Completely under the thumb of his demanding parents... Who insist he stays at home e.g, forget about the newlyweds getting a place of their own. Her new partner is obsessed with his work, to the point of barely acknowledging her existence. He doesn't even show any interest in consummating their nuptials, for instance... The first night he sees her naked, he bursts into tears and runs out the room. Hmm... Can you say 'issues'?

Then, during an impromptu trip to Venice, she runs into a young painter who is everything her hubby is not... empathic, fun-loving, and deeply in love with her. Sadly, she's stuck with Mr Grump, for the simple reason that if she did split up with him, it would ruin her family name... And besides, getting a divorce back in the 19th century was SLIGHTLY more difficult than it is now. The situation is complicated further by a strange illness she has, which involves copious amounts of hair loss. Hmm... Who'd have though boredom and enforced virginity would have such a toll on your health?

With Effie Gray, you get the distinct impression that lots of the scenes which involve people pottering about in front of beautiful vistas, and staring in the distance while the music swells in the background, could have been dramatically cut... To no great loss of the plot. My theory is, some self-inflated 'important' movies such as this almost feel obligated to unnaturally expand the length beyond what the script requires, to make it FEEL more epic. This tends to not work (It certainly doesn't here) and just leaves quite a bit of dead air.

Still, as I mentioned, the cast full of stalwarts such as Julie Walters and Emma Thompson all do their part to keep things ticking over nicely, and Dakota Fanning does the uphill trajectory of her career no harm at all with an emotionally wrought performance, backed up with a dead-on English accent. In fact, there's not a lot wrong here that couldn't have been avoided with the judicious use of a metaphorical pair of scissors. About 20 minutes off the top should do it, luv.

As it stands, I was mildly interested when I should have been enthralled. Less it sometimes more, ya know? 6/10

The eponymous heroine was the only wife of John Ruskin (1819-1900), who was to art criticism and various writings on a variety of social issues as Charles Dickens was as novelist, i.e., of very high stature. Effie Gray (Dakota Fanning) was 20 years old at the time of their marriage and there's an early scene where she lets the remaning garment fall on the floor while standing in the middle of the room on her wedding night. He leaves the room, disgusted, and never gets over it. And so the story is of a neglected wife.

It seems unlikely that a young bride would exhibit that type behavior in an high-born household during Victorian times but history shows that something did actually happen on their wedding night, though exactly what is unknown. There is a clear impression that there is more going on with Ruskin's sexuality and attitudes toward women than a single incident on a wedding night (though there are no overtones of homosexuality).

Emma Thompson has a minor role but she wrote the screenplay, which may be a first with her. But I hesitate to put the blame on her for a film that I thought was at times dull. The teleplay seems lacking at the end and I don't know whether there were errors in judgement or whether it was just showing an admirable restraint. Those who like this better than me would probably see this as quietly rewarding (to coin a phrase). For me, perhaps too quiet.

Effie Gray (Dakota Fanning) is the eager teenage bride to prominent art academic John Ruskin (Greg Wise). On the other hand, he is cold to her affections. His unreasonably overprotective mother (Julie Walters) tells her to leave him alone to his work. He champions pre-Raphaelite paintings and John Everett Millais (Tom Sturridge) in particular. Sir Charles Eastlake is the president of the academy and his progressive wife (Emma Thompson) befriends Effie. Effie grows lonely in the stifling home and more attracted to Millais setting off a scandal in Victorian England.

The first half is dull like John Ruskin. There are snippets of goodness from Walters and Thompson. Fanning is captured by the costume drama. Sturridge starts to make himself known at the midpoint. The slow pacing really kills this. Society has imprisoned Effie and the narrative has imprisoned this movie. One way to empower Effie would be to make her more compelling and more capable in the artistic world. Is John Ruskin supposed to be closeted and can they make that part of the story? This movie needs something to energize it and spice it up.