The title of this blog is a quote from the book, "Jane Eyre" and is spoken by Mister Rochester to governess Jane Eyre, in his declaration of love for her.
Jane Eyre is and always will be one of my favorite stories of ALL time. It's timeless, romantic and Gothic- I can't ask for anything more!
Alright so there were a lot of silent film versions of Jane Eyre which I have never had the opportunity to see but I would LOVE to in the future if they are ever available!
I will first start out with the 1934 version starring Colin Clive as Rochester and Virginia Bruce as Jane. First of all, let me say that I adore black and white films. However, the essence of the story in this version lacked greatly. The film was way to short, therefore, so much of the actual story was cut out. Virginia Bruce was way to attractive to play Jane and Colin Clive- I don't know, I think I have a block regarding him. I always see him in my mind yelling manically, "It's alive- it's aliiiiiive!" He played Dr. Frankenstein in the b&w 1931 classic film, "Frankenstein" with Boris Karloff as the monster. I guess I can't see Clive as the dark, brooding Rochester....
Moving on to the 1943 version starring Orson Welles as Rochester and Joan Fontaine as Jane. I really like this version and it was the first version of Jane Eyre I had ever seen. I remember renting it from the local library when I was about ten or eleven years old. I love the b&w as it puts out a mysterious, sometimes almost supernatural feel to it. Again, Joan Fontaine is WAY too beautiful to play Jane and the young Orson Welles too handsome (and at times acts too civilized or nice) to play Edward Rochester. They do cover Jane fleeing Thornfield Hall after she is almost married to Rochester into a bigamist marriage, discovering his mentally ill wife lives in the tower of the hall. But instead of fleeing and almost starving to death, then meeting St. John Rivers and his sisters whom Jane later learns that they are all related, instead in this version she flees back to her childhood home of Reed at Gateshead Hall. So that is slightly disappointing and it is in any version when each director "tweaks" or changes facts from the book to make it their own spin on the story.
Then there is the 1970 version starring George C. Scott as Rochester and Suzannah York as Jane. Okay this time Ms. York is too old to play Jane and in my opinion Scott is too aged to play Rochester. I know there is a major age difference between the two characters but it just seemed like they were too opposite and the chemistry wasn't there. Also the footage is rough as it was a made for tv movie here in the USA while it was released in theaters in Europe. Interesting side note though: the person who scored the soundtrack to the film was none other than the famous John Williams who went on to score blockbusters such as "Jaws" and "Indiana Jones"!
The 1973 version starring Michael Jayston as Rochester and Sorcha Cusack as Jane is one I have only seen once. I own it but confess have only viewed it once and that was several years ago. I do remember Jayston having the right air of arrogance and brooding as Rochester does. Sorcha Cusack was good as Jane as well as looking the part and the right age. I will have to re-watch this version over again soon and then add to this review!
The 1983 version starring the handsome Timothy Dalton as Rochester and the tiny but at times feisty Zelah Clarke as Jane is my all time favorite version EVER! First of all, it was made for TV in a BBC series style, having been broken up and there are many episodes or parts to watch. They really stick to the book, more so than any of the other versions I've seen so far. Dalton's presence is dark/brooding/passionate/mysterious, everything I always thought Rochester should be. Many have stated that Zelah Clarke's performance as Jane was lacking and that she was much too short next to 6'3" Dalton but I disagree. Okay well, Clarke is perhaps a wee bit too short, however her courage and feminism as Jane make her larger than life! Her and Dalton's chemistry is dead on and I truly believe they are passionately in love when watching this version. I recommend the watch if you have never seen this version. You can either buy it on DVD on sites like Ebay or Amazon OR if you have Netflix, they currently have this version, the 2011, the 1996, and also 1943 versions as well! I think Netflix loves me because I'm in heaven with four versions of one of my favorite stories on there! :)
The 1996 film starring William Hurt as Rochester and Charlotte Gainsbourg as Jane was stunning in its cinematography. Of course it would be with Italian film director Franco Zeffirelli who also directed the 1960's classic "Romeo and Juliet" as well. Gainsbourg is perfect in age and looks but not in height- waaay too tall for the character of Jane. I was very disappointed with Hurt's take on Rochester- way way way way too nice. Way too nice, I can't say that enough. Too soft spoken, when he speaks it's without passion or conviction. It's just not there. So the film score is sweeping and beautiful, Zeffirelli's direction regarding cinematography is stunning BUT perhaps his direction for the lead actors--not so much. I did love Canadian actress Anna Paquin as young Jane. She was perfect. A wonderful child actress who was also in the incredible film ,"The Piano" which I love.
The 1997 version starring Ciaran Hinds as Rochester and Samantha Morton as Jane is one of my favorites actually. I love Ciaran Hinds and think that he did a good job as the dark, somber Rochester. I wasn't familiar with Samantha Morton's acting, however, after seeing her as Jane, I love her. She was poised, passionate, but also could be quiet and soft spoken when need be. I will confess, I haven't read "Jane Eyre" in awhile and am just now in the process of rereading it. I do remember Jane as passionate but also "quaker-like" at times. So this version originally aired on A&E I still love and will watch it over and over.
My second favorite alongside the 1983 version, is the 2006 version starring Toby Stephens as Rochester and Ruth Wilson as Jane. Actually, I personally think Stephens is too handsome to be Rochester but he makes up for it in his presence and how he masters the character. Wilson's portrayal as Jane is very concise and I think she did a lovely job. But just like Charlotte Gainsbourg, Wilson is a bit too tall. However, when it comes to her features and gestures, she is all Jane Eyre in my opinion. Stephens is actually a bit funnier as Rochester at times but he doesn't overplay the comedy too much so I feel as though that can be excused and I found myself chuckling a couple times. It was actually refreshing to have some points of humor between him and Jane when all you have for most of the film is this backdrop of Gothic drama and mystery. It's like watching a horror movie and there's a funny part right before something scary happens- it breaks up the monotony a bit which is nice. Just like the '83 version, this too was made by BBC and a part of the celebrated "Masterpiece Theater" that I grew up with and loved. :)
Finally there's the 2011 version with Michael Fassbender as Rochester and Mia Wasikowska as Jane. Mia is perfect, simple in beauty and her physical form is true to Jane. Fassbender as Rochester actually is a bit young for the character but that can be overlooked. I confess that I have only seen this version once as well even though I own it on blu ray. Once I watch it over I will add to this review!
Well I believe I've covered all the versions I have seen so far. Like I said, there are many that I haven't seen. I downloaded the 1949 version starring Charlton Heston as Rochester and Mary Sinclair as Jane but have yet to watch it. I have seen reviews for this version and they weren't good at all. So I guess I won't expect too much from this one!
All other versions either made for TV or theatrical release are listed here as well as prequels and sequels too:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptations_of_Jane_Eyre
