Jane Eyre (1996)

Jane Eyer

I loved the service. I ordered it and got what I expected. It came quickly and was in perfect shape! October 24, 2008

My least favorite adaptation of the movie

I'm a huge Jane Eyre fan (both written and film/TV) so I was very excited to see this version. William Hurt is a terrific actor and I've enjoyed his other work, so I looked forward to his portrayal of Rochester.

I enjoyed the adaptation until halfway into the movie. Then everything went horribly wrong - Jane leaves right after the failed wedding to go to Gateshead? The Rivers family (minus one sister, I forget if it's Diana or Mary) live at Gateshead? She met St. John when her Aunt Reed died? Why take huge liberties with the storyline that are completely untrue to the story? I'm not a Jane Eyre purist, but the William Hurt/Charlotte Gainsbourg version was just as awful as the Ciaran Hinds/Samantha Morton version.

Bottom line:

1) If you've never read Jane Eyre, I would NOT recommend seeing this version before you read the book. Actually I wouldn't recommend this version on any level.

2) If you've never seen a film/TV adaptation of Jane Eyre, I'd recommend starting with the Timothy Dalton/Zelah Clarke version first and move on to the Toby Stephens/Ruth Wilson version afterward. The TD/ZC version is 6 hours and does a fantastic job of keeping the integrity of the novel in tact. The TS/RW is 4 hours, takes a few liberties with the novel, but the two leads' performances are absolutely electric and this version is very well done. Enjoy! October 19, 2008

The Absolute Worst Rendition of Jane Eyre on Film!

Here's a clue..the company didn't even see fit to put the two real actors on the cover of the movie! Why? Maybe the actors didn't want their faces associated with this dog.

I don't expect a film based on Jane Eyre to be totally true to the book (although, the Timothy Dalton version comes the closest) but I do expect it to at least tell, basically, the same story. This film does not even come close.

Charlotte Gainsbourg (Jane) has one expression which never changes throughout the entire movie. William Hurt is not appealing, in any way, and seems like he decides to marry Jane because he has nothing better to do! In fact, in the scene in the church, where it is discovered that Mr. Rochester already has a wife, he leaves Jane standing there and takes off for home without a backward glance. But that's ok because she doesn't seem to care either way!

There is absolutely no connection between these two supposedly "star struck" lovers. They both seem like they couldn't care less what happens. Frankly, the viewer doesn't either. I found it hard to sit through at all. I kept waiting for something to happen that would draw me in and it never did.

Most of the interesting scenes in the book were totally cut out--not even a hint. Instead of Jane discovering that she has family that she didn't know about (St. John Rivers and his sisters) they incorporated St. John into a sort of goofy parson on Jane's dead uncle's estate. Why bother with him at all?

If you have read Jane Eyre, you will be shocked that this movie even has the same name as the book. If you haven't read Jane Eyre and are looking for romantic entertainment (or any entertainment for that matter) don't buy this movie.

If you want a stunning movie with beautiful scenery, awesome music and characters who seem to be living the part, get Masterpiece Theater's version of Jane Eyre with Toby Stevens and Ruth Wilson. Jane Eyre (Masterpiece Theatre, 2006) It is the perfect balance between being very accurate to the book but also entertaining and even more romantic than the book; not beyond some humor too.

Remember, this book was originally written by a young woman for young women. It has some rather ridiculous scenes in it. The Masterpiece version has actually improved on the book in many ways; making it more real and more interesting to adults.

If you want total accuracy to the book, get the film with Timothy Dalton and Zelah Clarke. Jane Eyre (BBC, 1983)

October 12, 2008

Jane Eyre

This is by far the best Jane Eyre movie yet. I had to own this classic. My 13 year old Grandaughter was here for a visit this summer. We watched it together and now she has fallen for it too. My husband also agrees that is is very well done. Love it! July 31, 2008

Bleh

Jane Eyre is one of my most beloved classics. Everyone has different tastes and takes on Bronte's wonderful literary work, so when offering my review on this adaptation to it, its of course based upon my opinion and perception.

For me this adaptation lacks Bronte's Jane Eyre on so many levels.
The romance is tepid. The passion is lackluster. The gothic feel you get when reading the book and following Jane through the dark halls of Thornfield Hall is totally nil here. Having a dark room lit with candles doesn't constitute "goth." I don't recall a convincing scene of the budding romance either.

Mr. Rochester is a combination of so many extremes of emotion in the book. He's funny, witty, mischievious, dark, brooding, tormented and quite the rascal - sometimes all within the same scene! William Hurt is none of the above in my opinion.

Jane in the book is quiet and reserved, but her mind is racing and moving with emotion and I just didn't buy that it was happening with Charlotte Gainsbourg's portrayal. The book goes through extreme highs and lows which is why you can't put the book down once she meets Mr. Rochester. This adaptation never quite pulls that off and just flatlines for me from beginning to end.

My favorite version of Jane Eyre by far is the 1983 Timothy Dalton/Zelah Clark version. It is truly the book brought to life. After that if pushed for second choice, it would have to be the more recent Masterpiece version.

83' Dalton/Clark version:

When watching the 83' Dalton version, AT FIRST you'll want to throw something at your TV because it is broken up into 30 minute episodes the way the series ran on television and is shown almost as a stage play. But it doesn't take long to overlook the stagey feel of it because in filming it this way (whether intentional or not) you truly are transported into the dark ambience and mystery of Thornfield Hall. There are shadows at every turn and you find yourself becoming apprehensive as if you were walking those dark halls of echoing laughter along with Jane.

Also, a hearty pat on the back to the casting director of the 83' version for the absolute BRILLIANT casting of Timothy Dalton as the dark, passionate, poetic, tortured, mischievious and introspective soul that is Mr. Rochester. Charlotte Bronte would've been so proud! He is no longer a character in a book when seeing this version because Timothy Dalton IS Mr. Rochester.
At first I couldn't understand the casting of Zelah Clark but was soon won over by her reserved but sharp portrayal and unearthly appearance. She truly embodied Bronte's post-Helen Jane as she was able to assert herself without compromising her station and position the same way the book's Jane did. Her acting was incredible too because you felt her emotions as she went through stages of a wide-eyed developing crush, her attempts to supress her feelings for her superior, her fears of the mysteries of the dark hall, her pain when discovering the truth, her resolve not to rebel against her conscience, then following her heart. Other more modern day Jane portrayals have been far too impertinent for Jane's position in that time period and way more experienced than a Jane whose life's experience consisted only of Gateshead and Lowood. Bronte fans will truly appreciate and understand how this 25 year old version still stands the test of time. You can literally open the book and follow it along and believe me, that is a good thing! Bronte's beautifully written words are not at all lost in this version and Timothy Dalton's delivery is far superior to all Mr. Rochesters cast before or after him.

Masterpiece Theatre 2006

For a more overtly demonstrated "passion" that in my opinion defies the period and post Helen Jane, but is beautifully filmed is the Masterpiece Theatre version. It takes quite the liberties with Jane's moral dilemmas. In some cases dismissing them altogether which when understanding the book's Jane, knows this changes who she is completely. In this version, neither character really has to guess or question the other's feelings or motives the way you do in the book and the 83 version, thus not as suspenseful in my opinion. However, the actors (not necessarily Bronte's Jane and Mr. Rochester IMO) are still VERY good in spite of the rewritten material they were working with.

With all that said, this William Hurt version just doesn't do it for me - on any level. July 10, 2008

More reviews at Amazon.com ...