Colin Clive and Virginia Bruce
Happy Jane!
If you have ever felt that Jane Eyre could be improved if it was just a bit more cheerful and upbeat, this is the version for you! All is sweetness and light in this film version, which has next to nothing to do with the actual text of the book. A blonde Jane!!! That tells you all you need to know.
Joan Fontaine and Orson Welles
Broody Jane!
This version certainly relies on the novel's gothic tone. Welles plays a very broody and intense Rochester, but I didn't think Fontaine added much with her portrayal of Jane as sort of a wishy-washy damsel in distress. It adheres to the text of the novel pretty closely and is a decent, if limited, adaptation.
Mary Sinclair and Charlton Heston
Yankee Jane!
Nothing special to be found in this blase treatment of the book produced as part of the otherwise excellent Studio One television series. The lack of British accents let one experience the book from a Yank's perspective.
George C. Scott and Susannah York
Elderly Jane!
While I enjoyed the look and feel of this version and the acting was solid, both of the main characters were played by actors far too old for the roles. Nothing terrible about this version, but certainly nothing special either.
Jane Eyre - 1973
Sorcha Cusack and Michael Jayston
Steady Jane!
A very good BBC production that adheres closely to the text of the book and features excellent performances by both leads. Nothing brilliant about the look of this production, but if you want a version that remains true to the book and doesn't screw with any of the major elements, then this may be the best one for you.
Zelah Clarke and Timothy Dalton
Completely Jane!
Another BBC production which features all of the positives of the 1973 production with just a smidge more intensity. This is, in my opinion, the most complete and well-rounded adaptation of JE to be found. The script is faithful to the text of the novel, the performances are nuanced and Dalton's Rochester is just the right level of intense and passionate without being obnoxious. If Zelah Clarke is unable to match Dalton fully, she does a very credible job of portraying Jane's straightforward and innocent nature. My only gripe? Typically cheap BBC sets. The interior shots look like the sets of a high school theater department production. Still, for the Bronte loving purists, this is a treasure!
Charlotte Gainsbourg and William Hurt
Whimpy Jane!
The only reason to see this version is to enjoy the excellent cinematography and the gorgeous look of the film. Neither Gainsbourg nor Hurt brought much energy or passion to their roles. They both float through the film with a sort of resigned sadness and it just doesn't serve the story at all.
Samantha Morton and Ciaran Hinds
Angry Jane!
Anyone who knows me knows how much I adore Irish actor Ciaran Hinds, however his Yelly McYellerson approach to Rochester was not a highpoint of his career. Hinds chooses to emphasize Rochester's anger and we don't see much more than that. The production is fine, but the script is rather weak and I recommend this version only for the joy of watching Ciaran Hinds look excellent in period costume. Oh, this version did feature an excellent Pilot!
Ruth Wilson and Toby Stephens
Sexy Jane!
Certainly the hottest version of Jane Eyre so far, this BBC production was really well-done. Beautifully shot, with a strong musical score and an excellent script, this version featured a more modern interpretation of the classic tale. Toby Stephens brings a boatload of sex-appeal, humor and charm to the the role of Rochester, although he never loses the character's intensity. Ruth Wilson is wonderfully subtle as a smart, strong, forthright and loving Jane. This is likely the version that readers of historical romances will most enjoy. So there you have it Eyre heads! Hopefully this quick overview will help you to pick and choose your fave film version of one of the best books ever! I'd love to hear which Jane you liked best and I would really love to hear a review of any of the zillions of versions that I missed...
Hee. I'm not a huge Jane Eyre fan (the madwoman in the attic is where it jumped the shark for me -- spoiler? heh.), but I did enjoy the Toby Stephens adaptation...
ReplyDeleteHave you ever seen "The Wide Sargasso Sea", the faux-prequel with the Rochester/MadwomanInAttic pre-story? Yeah, no. Skip.
ReplyDeleteI still like my Ciaran Hinds, but the Toby Stephens version would make the most converts.
I have to admit that for me Bronte>Austen. I love JA, but Charlotte Bronte nailed all of my interests with this book. DIdn't care for the WIde Sargasso Sea. Interesting idea, but sort of blah. Gin, you know I adore Ciaran, but he really was Yelly in that film. Toby was way too sexy as Rochester, but I was willing to overlook that:) That's how I roll. The best Rochester in terms of the lining up with the book really is Dalton. He nailed it.
ReplyDeleteNow do Wuthering Heights! :)
ReplyDeleteI don't think I've seen any of these movies, although I'm pretty sure I NEED to see Happy Jane! because it sounds HILARIOUS.
Ha! I'll have to consider a Wuthering heights post. There have been some pretty interesting versions. And kin, I'm sure you meant to say that you NEED to see all of them. Right;)
ReplyDeleteI just watched the Ruth Wilson (as feminist as JE is, it feels wrong to define the movies in terms of who plays Rochester! haha) /Toby Stephens adaptation on youtube. I started watching it at 9 the other night, and stayed up until 2 last night finishing it. I'm also re-reading WH (for the first time; I was scared to re-read it in case I didn't love it as much when I wasn't fifteen years old anymore). I always preferred WH to JE, but watching this movie adaptation really made me 'get' the story. I don't know that I'm a convert--I feel like a fraud, liking a book because of a movie but I understand why people love it so much now, which I just missed somehow when I read it. Anyway, the whole time I was watching it, I was thinking, "I have to tell Vicki! (And B and G.)" :)
ReplyDeleteI'm so happy that you have gained the proper perspective! :) I do think that version is the one that offers the most romantic and accessible version of the story while still remaining true to the original. Plus, Toby Stephens is super hot!
ReplyDeleteHave you tried reading the book again? Sometimes having really strong mental images can increase your enjoyment of a book.
As to WH, I loved it when I first read it at 13, but later readings have convinced me that it might not have been intended to be seen as romantic. The obsessive nature of the two main characters was so destructive, I wonder if it might have been offered as more of a cautionary tale and we, with our need for passion, have turned it into a romance. Just a thought...