Critics’ reviews

Jane (2017)

11 reviews from 11 publications. Critics’ score 77: 8 positive, 3 mixed, 0 negative.

Back to our review of Jane

77
Positive
8
Mixed
3
Negative
0

The reviews lean positive: eight of eleven approve and none dislike it. Praise gathers in one place, the rediscovered footage Hugo van Lawick shot in Gombe, which most critics call vivid and immediate and several treat as the film’s whole case. Philip Glass’s score is the other frequent point of approval, credited with making Goodall’s early research feel like something happening now. Goodall herself draws warm notice for her poise, and more than one critic calls this a definitive portrait of her.

The spread is narrow and the reservations mild. Vulture finds the film captivating but is distracted by some of Morgen’s stylistic choices. Time Out, the lowest full rating, thinks the chimpanzee-watching plays as an ordinary nature documentary and suffers beside Blue Planet. The Guardian suggests Goodall is the main asset rather than the filmmaking. Two of the three mixed scores come from reviews readable only in part, so the dissent is thinner than the count implies.

IndieWire
14 September 2017 · A- · Kate Erbland
90

The critic calls the film a definitive, emotionally beautiful portrait of Jane Goodall. She particularly praises the vivid archival footage and the careful craftsmanship that makes it immersive.

Read the full review →
The Hollywood Reporter
10 September 2017 · festival review · David Rooney
90*

Rooney calls the film a wondrous, moving, and likely definitive portrait of Jane Goodall. He praises the previously unseen archival footage and Philip Glass’s enveloping score for making her discoveries and life feel immediate.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
19 October 2017 · Sheri Linden
85*

Linden gives the documentary a strongly positive verdict, calling it a stirring portrait of Jane Goodall. She singles out Hugo van Lawick’s archival footage and Philip Glass’ score for their vivid emotional force.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
26 November 2017 · Wendy Ide
80*

Ide finds the portrait of Jane Goodall fascinating and praises her enduring poise and engagement. She singles out the vivid archival footage and Philip Glass’s score, while calling Goodall the film’s main asset.

Read the full review →
Variety
18 September 2017 · festival review · Dennis Harvey
75*

Harvey finds the documentary a charming, insightful portrait of Goodall and her breakthrough research. He especially praises the engrossing, long-lost footage of the chimpanzees and Goodall’s close observations of them.

Read the full review →
Vulture
20 October 2017 · David Edelstein
70*

Edelstein finds the documentary captivating, despite several distracting stylistic choices. He especially praises the newly discovered footage of Goodall’s early years in Gombe and the intimate view of her life with chimpanzees.

Read the full review →
Screen Daily
20 November 2017 · Nikki Baughan
64*

The accessible text offers no clear overall verdict. It singles out the previously lost colour footage as a benefit to the portrait.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
18 October 2017
64*

The review text is inaccessible, so its verdict cannot be established. The available page also gives no specific praise or criticism.

Read the full review →
Time Out
20 November 2017 · ★★★ · Gail Tolley
60

The critic finds the documentary underwhelming beside Blue Planet. The review singles out its chimpanzee-focused nature-documentary approach as paling in comparison.

Read the full review →
Consequence
19 October 2017 · Sarah Kurchak
95*

Kurchak calls the documentary an exemplary work of filmmaking and finds it as inspiring and brilliant as its subject. She especially praises the newly uncovered archival footage and Morgen’s skillful, emotionally powerful storytelling.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
10 December 2017 · Anne-Katrin Titze
80*

The critic finds the documentary absorbing and says it renews the impact of Goodall’s work. She especially praises the vivid archival chimpanzee footage and its intimate glimpses of their lives.

Read the full review →

Ordered by the weight we give each publication, then by score. Scores are normalised to 100; * means inferred from an unrated review. Summaries are ours, not quotations; follow the links for the reviews themselves. How we rate