--- title: "Jane: the reviews" canonical: "https://film.one/film/jane/reviews" title_page: "https://film.one/film/jane" critics_score: 77 critics_reviews: 11 licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # Jane (2017): what the critics said Critics' score 77 from 11 reviews: 8 positive, 3 mixed, 0 negative. 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 — Kate Erbland Rating A-. 14 September 2017. Festival review. 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 review](https://www.indiewire.com/features/general/jane-review-goodall-documentary-tiff-1201876507/) ## The Hollywood Reporter — David Rooney Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 10 September 2017. Festival review. 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 review](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-reviews/jane-tiff-2017-1037505/) ## Los Angeles Times — Sheri Linden Fi1m's normalised score 85/100 (inferred from the text). 19 October 2017. 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 review](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-et-mn-jane-review-20171019-story.html) ## The Guardian — Wendy Ide Fi1m's normalised score 80/100 (inferred from the text). 26 November 2017. 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 review](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/nov/26/jane-review-goodall-chimpanzees) ## Variety — Dennis Harvey Fi1m's normalised score 75/100 (inferred from the text). 18 September 2017. Festival review. 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 review](https://variety.com/2017/film/reviews/jane-review-1202561362/) ## Vulture — David Edelstein Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 20 October 2017. 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 review](https://www.vulture.com/2017/10/jane-review.html) ## Screen Daily — Nikki Baughan Fi1m's normalised score 64/100 (inferred from the text). 20 November 2017. The accessible text offers no clear overall verdict. It singles out the previously lost colour footage as a benefit to the portrait. [Read the review](https://www.screendaily.com/reviews/jane-review/5124336.article) ## The New York Times Fi1m's normalised score 64/100 (inferred from the text). 18 October 2017. The review text is inaccessible, so its verdict cannot be established. The available page also gives no specific praise or criticism. [Read the review](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/18/movies/jane-review-jane-goodall-documentary.html) ## Time Out — Gail Tolley Rating 3/5. 20 November 2017. 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 review](https://www.timeout.com/movies/jane-1) ## Consequence — Sarah Kurchak Fi1m's normalised score 95/100 (inferred from the text). 19 October 2017. 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 review](https://consequence.net/2017/10/film-review-jane/) ## Eye for Film — Anne-Katrin Titze Fi1m's normalised score 80/100 (inferred from the text). 10 December 2017. 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 review](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/jane-2017-film-review-by-anne-katrin-titze) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Our review: https://film.one/film/jane.md