Enjoyed Zelah - Jane Eyre (1983) Discussion

[–] kenzie2 18 years ago

I didn't think she suited the part at all, at times I thought she looked old enough to be Rochester's mother! Much, much preferred Sorcha Cusack in the 1973 classic adaptation.

reply

[–] candle2stan 18 years ago

I really enjoyed Zelah Clarke's performance as well. Sorcha Cusack in the 1973 version smiled way too much. Jane is a quiet and serious young woman. Sorcha seemed like she always had something hidden beneath that smile - like she was planning something strange in her head. To me, it looked dishonest.

reply

[–] sophie_amundsen 18 years ago

But doesn't Jane always have observations and opinions that she does not express verbally? Rochester says she seems to have an inward treasure, and joy. Jane speaks of how Rochester has a way of reading what she is thinking rather than what she says. This never appeared at all dishonest to me while I did feel that Zelah's expressions at times were haughty and even a little- a very little- mean spirited (when she is listening to the guest speak of governesses. She looks very much like she is imagining something very nasty happening to them all ;)

***
Bronteana Bronte Studies Blog:

http://bronteana.blogspot.com

reply

[–] candle2stan 18 years ago

Yes, I agree that Jane always has opinions that she does not often express. But from what I read in the book, it did not seem to me that Jane would smile very much, as she has lived a very harsh life. I picture her as very serious-looking, only smiling on certain occasions (which makes her smiles very special). During the scene that you mention, I think Zelah demonstrates a very good sense of what Jane should be feeling: hurt and anger. If she only felt hurt, she wouldn't be Jane Eyre.

I think Zelah's timidness in her interactions with Rochester reflect Jane's behavior very accurately. In the book she states, "I had often been unwilling to look at my master, because I feared he could not be pleased at my look." I really like how Zelah never looks completely happy until after the evening meeting in the Orchard.

I also enjoyed Sorcha's performance; she was a more vocal and assertive Jane than Zelah. However, I suppose my perception of Jane Eyre matches more closely with Zelah's performance than Sorcha's.

reply

[–] kat63 18 years ago

Appreciate what your'e saying but Zelah just played it a bit too bland for me. Didn't really feel any spirit of the character coming through as even though Jane is described as timid in the book I also think she comes across in the novel as having great strength of character and not suffering fools gladly. So I think in this respect Sorcha plays the part much much more effectively.

reply

[–] sophie_amundsen 18 years ago

I agree with nearly all of the above, but I was puzzled by the idea that Jane had to feel anger at the company. I don't recall any of them exciting her anger.

Zelah is perhaps my second favourite actress in the role, but I was quite disappointed at times with her performance, especially on the first viewing. Perhaps it was a matter of direction. For instance, there's a crisis point in the proposal where Jane becomes distraught. Instead we see her sad, but calm. Where's 'the little fire spirit'? Sorcha brings this moment across quite well, remaining shy but distressed and indignant. In all honesty, nothing about Zelah's performance particularly impressed me but she doesn't go so far astray as the others (York, Gainsbourg, Bruce, Morton).

When I see Sorcha's scenes I always think back to how Rochester narrated the scenes of their first interviews. How she looked eager and restless, and 'turned a bold eye' to answer his questions. I recall Zelah got this right at one point but she was not consistent. Being shy myself, I believe Sorcha gives a more genuine portrayal of shyness which is not cold or severe, or passive. I think this is where a few of the extra smiles come from- they seem to come from Jane's shyness. (And Rochester does refer to her 'wild, shy, provoking smiles').

In short, I greatly prefer Sorcha Cusack to Zelah Clark but I think there is still a lot of room for other actresses to have a turn. Jane Eyre could possibly be one of the most difficult of female roles, I think. I hope this autumn we will see another very fine performance from our newest Jane.

***
Bronteana Bronte Studies Blog:

http://bronteana.blogspot.com

reply

[–] lutece 18 years ago

I think that in Zelah Clarke's interpretation, the boldness was always felt under the apparent shyness. She did it in a more subtle way than Scorcha. I had sometimes the impression that Scorcha was flirting with Rochester during their first meetings! With Zelah , I felt the inner strength (the "fire spirit") under the external appearance of reserve and humility. This is exactly how I imagined the character when reading the book. I did not think she was calm during the proposal, I saw many expressions of internal turmoil. I completely agree with candle2stan when she says that Scorcha Cusack smiled too much. I am shy too, and with me, this would never be reflected in smiling more (but of course, this is personal, and surely explains our preference for one or the other performance).

http://the-inn-at-lambton.cultureforum.net/

reply

[–] sophie_amundsen 18 years ago

I always felt the 'boldness' was actually a severity in Clarke's portrayal. I viewed the series again last night and found a few more instances were she glares. This spitefulness is not consistent with the character. The 'fire spirit' aspect is quite specific. Jane becomes 'impetuous' during the proposal, and quite distraught. Zelah was very subdued. She looked upset, but not to the degree that the scene in the novel depicts. And yet, I haven't seen an adaptation which does reflect that momment as it should be.

I was thinking more about the smiling today actually and I recalled more and more instances when Rochester refers to how happy she would look when he would stop playing the master and allow himself to be kind- before the proposal.

As for why I like one or the other, I do like both. But even at first, I saw nothing particularly brilliant- as I said earlier- about Zelah. My favourite actress in the role is actually Megwynn Owen who was astonishing. I prefer Sorcha's portrayal for many reasons, not only that I find her depiction of shyness to my liking.

***
Bronteana Bronte Studies Blog:

http://bronteana.blogspot.com

reply

[–] tomassina-1 18 years ago

Have just seen the 1973 adaptation with Michael Jayston and Sorcha Cusack. Thought I liked Zelah until I saw Sorcha as Jane, what can I say except wow, Sorcha is fabulous, for me she IS Jane. Loved her performance. Where has this adaptation been hiding all these years!

reply

[–] Surfstar 18 years ago

I have not seen Sorcha Cusack in "Jane Eyre", but while I have said before that I loved Zelah's performance, I am also looking forward to the new BBC production. BBC made me into a major North and South fan, and if they somehow create similar elements in the scenes of Jane Eyre (with great music like in N+S) , I will undoubtedly be hooked.

"Music is the wine that fills the cup of silence"- Robert Fripp.

reply

[–] sophie_amundsen 18 years ago

I believe that the director from North and South is working on the new Jane Eyre. It is truly looking like it will be visually very stunning. I haven't heard anything about music yet. I do hope that like N&S they will be posting some clips from the series on the BBC's website in the next few months.

***
Bronteana Bronte Studies Blog:

http://bronteana.blogspot.com

reply

[–] eloee 17 years ago

Me, I thought Clarke looked like she was 18 yrs. old so I don't get the comments about her age at all. That said, she's a tad stockier than most would envision Eyre OR are accostumed to seeing on tv and in film but that's a different issue. But I enjoyed Zelah. Also enjoyed Timothy. Dear lord I'd never seen him before and had no idea he was so handsome!

I need to find this on dvd.

reply

[–] Danusha_Goska 17 years ago

About Zelah being stocky -- I have to wonder if that didn't have something to do with the clothes? She is very short, and it's easy to make a short woman look stocky.

I read that she studied ballet, so I'm guessing that she was probably in good shape.

reply

[–] muezzab 18 years ago

I agree with you.

I am very much astonished that readers find in Sorcha the Jane described by Charlotte Brontë. I am very much annoyed by her smiling and almost flirting with Richester with wrinks at him. Jane would never act like that.
Sorcha's Jane is too easy with him and lacks the reserve that characterizes Jae.
Because Jane shows that unmoving face, calm attitude, calm & considered answers. Rochester wants to get her off that reserve as he feels she is not her true self, she hides it as a result of Lowood's life... And that is wonderfully and very subtly played by Zehla : always the right tone in her answers, & those rare smiles as you say make them precious. She has totally understood the character. And, physically she IS Jane : sort of no age woman, little as an elf as well.
I am surprised people can find her old : she has a no age face, but she is not old (where are her wrinkles!). IMO Sorcha actually looks much older that Zelah!

reply

[–] kat63 18 years ago

I totally agree with Sophie in her earlier comment re Zelah, I too didn't like some of the boldness and attitude that came across in some of her portrayal of Jane and I don't think that IS the character that Charlotte was trying to portray in the novel, strength of character yes, but IMO that's not what Zelah portrayed, so I certainly don't think that she understood the character at all. And physcally I don't think in any way that she resembles Jane from reading the book, and I still think she looks far too old, probably my main gripe is that Zelah and Tim don't look at all well suited.

My only problem with Sorcha, which someone mentioned before, was that sometimes I thought she actually looked too pretty for the part of Jane, but other than that I thought she played the part wonderfully.

reply

[–] Dogma_wb 18 years ago

I find Zelah's version the best. Her Jane is shy as she should be...moreover, when feeling involved and you are not secure about your looks you tend to get even more insecure... as Jane did .. remember she said she doubted that anyone else would find her beautiful as Rochester did.

And I guess it was a hard task for Zelah to overplay Dalton who is sex on legs.

How would you feel next to sexiest Rochester ever ? :o)

reply

[–] kay_down 18 years ago

Of all the romantic couples ever filmed, the difference in their height has to be the maximum number of inches, ever. Kudos to the BBC for keeping Zelah in flat heeled shoes, but she looks sooo much shorter than him it's almost an odd distraction, at least for me as an American viewer.

reply

[–] booksroc8420 18 years ago

I have just finished reading Jane Eyre today. While I was reading it, I kept thinking about the 1983 production, and how it was extremely faithful to the book. I loved Ms. Clarke's performance. People have said that she was too old to play her. I think that she looked plain, like the character. They also complain about her performance being too bland. I thought that her Jane was very subtle and soft-spoken, yet deeply felt. Although I had enjoyed Sorcha Cusack in the role, I also felt that she smiled too much. Tim Dalton was great too. His good looks are the characteristics of a fiery and rough-edged Byronic hero, rather than a Hollywood superstar. The chemistry between Clarke and Dalton was actually passionate. I get chills everytime I watch this production. For some reason, I felt that they had got it right. I notice this every time I sit down and watch this adaptation.

reply

[–] booksroc8420 18 years ago

Sorry about the heading. I didn't see it when I was writing my review. I'm trying to say that I liked Zelah Clarke's performance the best

reply

[–] minesawhiskyplease 18 years ago

I've got the oppposite opninion from you on this version. I think Zelah was just too plain and dull in character in the part of Jane and Tim Dalton was too obviously handsome and young in the part of Rochester, so I didn't really feel any credibility in them as a couple or much chemistry between them and this is probably why this is overall, my least favourite production. I much, much preferred Sorcha, although I agree, she probably did look slightly too confident with Rochester at some points, but she had real spirit about her in the part and a sort of fiery determination which I loved.

reply

[–] Lozcat2 18 years ago

i didnt really enjoy Zelah's performance. i found her quite annoying and twee. i enjoyed Daltons performance though, but i agree with previous posts that Sorcha Cusacks performance was better than Zelahs.

reply

[–] overseer-3 17 years ago

>People have said that she was too old to play her.

Since she was about 25 that's still reasonable enough to play an 18 year old. Remember that a typical female lifespan back in Charlotte Bronte's day was a lot shorter, so an 18 year old, esp. if she had lived a rough life, as Jane had at Lowood Institution, could have looked older than her years from stress.

One thing I noticed in close ups was that Zelah at times had pimples on her chin, covered by makeup. If she was still young enough to get pimples she was young enough to play a teenager! :)

reply

[–] Dogma_wb 18 years ago

I think Zelah fits description of Jane. She is short ad this is exactly how she should be according to the book.. plain and short. In 2006 version, I could not believe Ruth.. you know the line.. "Do you think that if I am plain and short and"... blah blah... I could not believe they left this line.. At times Ruth looks way taller...

reply

[–] lollyluvuk 18 years ago

Your right although Ruth does look jane like in some ways, she is too tall as well as too serious...charlotte Bronte give the book a lot of humour which i think Zelah did very well and opposite the exceptional timothy Dalton making the 1983 version my favourite.

I found the new version disapointing and lacking in atmosphere as well losing some of the best scenes in the book and adding some unneeded ones, with dumbed down language ewwww why why why? Oh well after watching the new one, I promptly bought the 1983 DVD version with zelah and timothy said to have lots of extra material inside it that was cut from the VHS tapes, to comfort myself, I recommend you guys do the same :)

reply

[–] square-peg 18 years ago

Oh how I chuckled at the Janeites when Joe Wright's Pride and prejudive came out! What a flap they got themselves into over his liberties with the text. But now I'm the one with ruffled feathers - the new version, which I am nonetheless enjoying, hacks about with the text in a quite reckless fashion. The 1983 version, which is not shorter than this, maintains the text far better and in Zelah Clarke I have 'my' Jane. There is a scene when Rochester's demanding conversation from her - you can see her downcast eyes and a little, very little tightening of the jaw. Rochester, though, sees that she is 'annoyed' and is much amused by it. It's a subtle performance - but truer to the book. The point being that NO-ONE can read Jane except Rochester, no-one has bothered to look beneath the supposedly submissive exterior.

I've other Janes and confess myself unimpressed by Joan Fontaine (a reprise of her role in 'Rebecca') and unmoved by Charlotte Gainsbourg. Susannah Yorke was too pretty and tall (although I did love the film). The current Jane - Ruth Wilson is adorable but not nearly prickly enough for me. We'll see how she handles the last episode.

reply

[–] etsis 17 years ago

I also like Zelah Clark's Jane the best and yes she is very subtle & reserved.
all other Janes are either too "forward" or too timid, or they just whine too much.

bye now

reply

[–] jane_bront 17 years ago

I have only seen Ruth Wilson, Joan Fontaine and Zelah Clarke as 'Jane.' I thought Zelah did an exellent job and she mastered the whole demur-subtlety-blanketing-deep-feelings-and-bold-thoughts thing. She and T. Dalton had impressive chemistry even though I too thought the difference in their heights was a little jarring. But in a way I liked that because it was an unconventional coupling that worked. I haven't seen any pairing like it since. Zelah was pretty much the Jane I remember reading in the book.

reply

[–] overseer-3 17 years ago

When I picture Jane in my mind's eye I picture Zelah. She was so pixie-ish yet quiet, thoughtful, and could be funny too. Her eyes twinkled at certain things Rochester would say. She understood him and it pleased her that she did. Ruth Wilson was ok, but she wasn't given the privilege of using Charlotte Bronte's original language in her version's script. It was watered down and modernized. Ruth would have been so much better if she could have been given Zelah's script. It was much more faithful to the original novel.

reply

[–] jane_bront 17 years ago

If anyone is interested, I just found a short article about what happened to Zelah Clarke after Jane Eyre in her own words. Perhaps this is old news to most but here it is:

http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Film/7518/Zelah/Zelah.htm

reply

[–] Danusha_Goska 17 years ago

Jane Brontay, thank you for that.

I'm watching this series for the first time and I'm very positively impressed by it and by Zelah Clarke.

I was curious to learn what happened to her and the link you posted was very informative.

reply

[–] overseer-3 17 years ago

She sounds very wise.

reply

[–] purplish-1 9 years ago

She looked too old for the part and her lines were much too stilted. It seemed to me that she only read the screenplay, not the book. I think if this version had the 1996 or 1997 Jane it would have been magnetic.

reply

[–] jinx_malone 8 years ago

I like Zelah quite a lot, actually! She is my favorite Jane of all, and I'm very judgemental, so believe me, I've put some thought into this! Zelah has a very tiny frame, especially so when stood next to Timothy Dalton, so physically they're a pleasing match to the eye. Though she's older, most Janes are older than Jane is supposed to be, so that doesn't bother me much either. There's a dreaminess to her expression which I think is very Janian in nature.

She has a quiet yet mischievous nature to her that we see in tiny glimpses--I particularly like her acting in the scene where she is asking Rochester for her money so that she can visit her Aunt Reed. We see that she's got a temper when she's roused, and does a wonderful job with the proposal. The only scene where I think she doesn't do as well is the fire scene, but that's always been more of an important 'Rochester' scene for me, if that makes sense?

I like the transformation we see in her after she accepts Rochester; she goes from a serious demeanor to smiles and shy grins. I think she plays Jane's pain and loneliness well, the only actress who I think does this aspect of her character better is probably Mia Wasikowska, who I think is very good at portraying Jane's inner struggle and her heartbreak.

I wish I liked Sorcha Cusack more, but her expression, which borders on a sort of permanent smirk has always been off-putting to me.

In order I think I liked the Janes as follows:

Zelah
Mia
Ruth
Charlotte
Sorcha

If I haven't listed the Jane, it's not because I haven't seen the version (I've seen all but for a few early or Asian remakes which I haven't been able to track down!) but more that I didn't care for the actress playing Jane.

It's a real shame that Ruth Wilson was stuck in the '06 version of Jane as I quite liked her portrayal but the screenplay for that was so wretched that she really had nothing to work with. I can only dream of what might have been if the script had been better! :)

-------------------------
"It's better not to know so much about what things mean." David Lynch

reply