Jane Eyre (BBC)
|
List Price: Our Price: $15.19 You Save: $24.80 (62%) Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours Buy Used: from $10.90 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of Jane Eyre (BBC)
Movie Review: Firey Jane
Summary: 5 Stars
I think that others have criticized this series in three broad areas.
(1) Sorcha's portrayal of Jane is dislikeable and her monologues are bad... I think she's a fire spirit, full of life. Looks like hiring an Irish actress was a good move. Zelah Clarke lacked these characteristics. Sorcha's coyness is part of the cat-and-mouse with Rochester and is a treat. Her monologues suggest an introspective soul who strives to understand her own feelings honestly. There may be some technical errors in getting her face to match the monologue, but I was enjoying the program so much I didn't notice.
It's possible that monologues are now dated, they used to be much more common in movies. For comparison, there were some monologues in the movie LA Story (1991) that enhanced the story. Or you don't agree?
(2) Characters speaking verbatim from the book are unbelievable... As a matter of fact, reading aloud was a popular pastime before television. For such intimate audiences, I argue that believability is trumped by the pleasure of hearing the language. I certainly wouldn't want the language of Jane Eyre translated into some "believable" contemporary dialect, unless for a damn good joke. Despite television's emphasis on "realism", there are a significant number of people who still memorize poetry and plays because of the beauty of the language. Because they aren't considered the mainstream, TV producers don't bother to cater to them. This version of Jane Eyre is a valuable treasure from the earlier days of American public television and the BBC when such audiences were better catered to.
(3) The level of passion doesn't score high enough on the scale... Though most reviews have said the leads do a good job, some people expect something like the excesses of the BBC/A&E Pride and Prejudice (1995).
The kissing evidently doesn't convince some people, but others are convinced, so I don't know where the problem lies. Based on what the two actors have done leading up to the proposal scene, even an awkward-looking kiss has got to have some fire behind it.
Maybe it's the economical settings, which were nowhere near as lavish as current TV, but suggest the intimacy of really good theatre.
Maybe the music isn't right? The title music was composed by Edward Elgar. Elgar used to be considered very passionate. However, maybe because he was British and composed "Pomp and Circumstance" people find him stodgy and unpassionate, and they forget the "Enigma Variations" and "Cello Concerto." Or maybe the problem is that there is no background music? I think it's better to hear the dialog clearly and understand the emotions in the scene through that alone, but maybe I'm just picky about music. I'm glad they didn't use music to manipulate the audience in every scene. The performances stand on their own.
My opinion: with a few exceptions, I prefer series like this to what's turned out today.
Movie Review: my second favorite version of the novel on film
Summary: 5 Stars
I never thought I would enjoy another version of Jane Eyre as much as I have for years the Timothy Dalton/Zelah Clarke version; and while that one remains for me the most loved, I have to admit that after buying this one on a whim with birthday money recently, I am amazed at how well it was done. I disagree with those who 'diss' Michael Jayston and Sorcha Cusack in comparison to Zelah Clarke and Tim Dalton - I think that while the comments by one reviewer that perhaps Cusack is a bit tall for Jane are justified, other than THAT I thought both of their performances, while more 'lighthearted' and more subdued than the Clarke/Dalton one(which, assuredly, went more for the melodramatic and heavier gothic feeling of the novel) were excellent. Cusack's Jane very much captures Rochester's comments on her piquant and pixie-esque qualities, and I do think they had some real chemistry - in fact comments I found online by Jayston said there was real attraction between the two of them during filming and I think it shows. I think Jayston's performance is brilliant - he chooses to bring a Beethoven-esque type performance to Rochester which I believe is certainly a valid way to go with his characterization, but shows his great sensitivity and pathos with incredible artistry. I liked Cusack's portrayal of Jane's quiet humor, and she chose to portray Jane with more serenity in her reserve rather than other actresses who have played her have chosen to interpret that word. The only thing I think that is perhaps lacking is a clearer representation of Jane's hunger for human love, having been so starved of it in her growing up years, which is certainly the main reason why the temptation is so huge for her to overcome and why Helen's words about not putting too much stock in human love come back to her when Rochester proposes to her to be his mistress. For me the Clarke/Dalton portrayal of that scene, taken almost verbatim out of the novel, remains the most pathetic and heart wrenching of all versions, but still I think Jayston's torment, while less melodramatic than Dalton's, was still very effective and touching. There is also much less here of Jane's time in deprivation and with her cousins, though what is left out isn't offensively left out, and unlike the recent Wilson/Stephens BBC JE, the dialogue here, while somewhat 'fleshed out' in Jane's private thoughts and at times changed slightly from the novel, still retains the 'flavor' of Bronte's writing, while the recent one to me does not at all.
The gypsy scene is here too which pleased me greatly since that is one of my favorite ones, though I still love Dalton's portrayal of that best. But for now Jayston and Cusack are my second favorite and I will love watching this one in alternation with the other Clarke/Dalton one in the years to come. It makes me sad to think that they were never paired again in another romantic pairing since I believe they did have real chemistry as a screen pair.
Movie Review: first skeptical but now a believer
Summary: 5 Stars
i must admit at first i was not convinced that this adaptation would find its way into my heart.
please forgive me for using this analogy, but i would like to compare this adaptation to an old rickety wooden roller coaster. it starts off slowly. you chuckle to yourself that this is no 'real' roller coaster. you roll your eyes at the imperfections of the track, contemplate that it is outdated and lame, that there will certainly be no thrills, and you wonder why you're wasting your time. then, slowly, as you near the end of part two, you feel the beginnings of that steady pull that grows stronger and stronger and you realize your knuckles are getting white as you hang on for dear life! wow!!
the child actors are fine, but as i said, towards the end of part 2 is when it really starts cooking. when she saves mr rochester from the fiery bed, there are more than burning curtains that are sending off sparks. sure, its subtle - after all this is a story from the 19th century, but if you're a hopeless romantic like me, you can feel the respect and love blossoming between jane and rochester. the chase is on.
i own the 1983 dalton/clarke version, which i enjoy despite its faults (i commend dalton's performance especially). i own the 1997 hinds/morton version, which though terribly condensed, features two excellent actors and has its enjoyable moments. i have seen the hurt/gainsburgh one as well, which is quite lavish in comparison to all these others, but passes the palate much too quickly for a serious jane eyre-lover to savor.
that being said, i believe that this 1973 version has the most going for it. it includes the most detail and conversation from the book, it is of excellent length. jayston is a superb rochester. he is truly magnetic. his voice is wonderful (i can see why he has done so much narrating for audio books). cusack - after i got past her initially annoying coy expressions, often-raised eyebrows and the fact that there is no way she could pass for an 18 yr old, (and yes her inner monologue was feeling a bit silly early on), i became more impressed with her as the movie progressed. indeed i think she was a great jane eyre. (fyi, samantha morton is my personal favorite.)
i feel this is the best jane eyre in movie form now available to us and well worth the purchase.
Movie Review: If you are a Jane Eyre fan - a must see
Summary: 5 Stars
I'm a huge fan of the recent BBC production of Jane Eyre with Ruth Wilson and Toby Stephens. However, a friend who is involved with the Bronte Society here in the UK advised I have a look at this one. I enjoyed it very much and here are a few comments.
We all know the story of Jane Eyre. It's something deeply embedded in our collective literary psyche. Each film production is a little different and is, of course, someone's interpretation of this seminal novel. In this version, I thought Rochester was exceptionally well done by Michael Jayston. He is both tormented and light hearted as he falls deeper and deeper in love with Jane and because this version adheres pretty close to the book, we get large tranches of dialogue lifted straight from the author's pen. One tends to forget how erudite and clever Rochester is and how sparkling and teasing his conversations with Jane are. My husband, who watched this version with me, actually laughed out loud at some of Rochester's cracks to Jane.
I was not so keen on Sorcha Cusack although she does very well in this. I think I have been seduced by the more sexualised (in the nicest possible way!) version with Wilson and Stephens. Sometimes in this version the passion simmers a little too far below the surface.
One thing that annoyed was that in this version the physical acting was awkward and stilted - for example when Jane and Rochester kiss, it's abrupt and not very romantic - small complaint - but comparing it with the recent BBC version, you see how unnatural it is. However, the great dialogue, Jayston in particular, makes up for it.
I thought as I watched this that I could have listened to the whole thing as an audio book or radio play and perhaps this would have overcome the very bad hair-dos and the stiffness of some of the scenes.
I recommend this one. It's certainly number 2 on my list now after the recent BBC production and I have seen most of them. An oldie but goodie and worth the effort to watch.
Movie Review: The best version of Jane Eyre ever made.
Summary: 5 Stars
I believe I have every movie/TV version of Jane Eyre ever made, except for a version done for TV in the 50's starring Kevin McCarthy. I have watched my Jane Eyre movies numerous times but have never had a definitive favorite until now, after watching this version of Jane Eyre I can announce to the world that this is my favorite version. Sorcha Cusack is perfect as Jane Eyre (better than Zelah Clarke)she portrays the sensitivity and strength of Jane Eyre to perfection. Michael Jayston portrays Mr. Rochester excellently he is only the second actor (the first being Orson Welles, who is my favorite Mr. Rochester)that can deliver gorgeous lines straight from Charlotte Bronte's book fluently with the ryhthm, emphasis and emotion intended by the author, particularly the line in regards to the "...cord of communion being broken..." The screenplay was written excellently. In regards to the cinematic look of this version it must be noted that this is a version made for TV and it looks just as good as the version made in the 80's by the BBC. The fact that is was filmed in 1973 does not take away from the telling of the story at all and should not distract new viewers.
I did not know that this version existed until a few weeks ago, I would like to thank Amazon.com for making this most important addition to my Jane Eyre movie collection available.