MovieChat Forums > Jane Eyre (1997) Discussion > I must respectfully disagree...

I must respectfully disagree...


With those that would contend that this was the "worst Jane Eyre" they'd ever seen. Well, to be appropriate about it, I will have to leave it at "you're entitled to your opinion". To me, this is one of the most passionate tellings of this story and I love it. I've seen many different versions and they all bring something to the table and can satisfy certain parts of the story. I will denigrate none of them. I just love this story. It's one of my favorites.

But the Ciaran Hinds/Samantha Morton version is my very favorite. Maybe, in part, it's the fact that the two leads are not "beautiful" people. Samantha Morton is played as rather plain, physically. The makers of this version didn't bend over backwards dolling the lead characters up to make them eye candy. I appreciate that. Maybe being rather plain myself makes me appreciate the underlying quality of a love built on something other than physical attraction.

I don't know. I just know that of all the versions of this story I've seen, this one just "scratches all my itches!" LOL!

reply

I've been very scathing of this version in the past, although I did a bit of a retraction later.

To be fair, it has several things in it's favour: One is left in no doubt of the love that Jane and Rochester share for each other. That love was rather contestable in the latest 2011 film. This version commendably manages to fit most of the story in it's two hours. And, as you say, the two leads look the part. In fact, Hinds is arguably the closest in appearance to Bronte's description.

However, there are still many things wrong with this production, in my opinion. The passion is, at times, so over-the-top as to be almost something out of Mills & Boon. The script, in it's attempt to simplify, becomes too simplistic. Samantha Morton, whilst a good Jane, is a little too defiant for my taste. Witness the scene on the stairs after the Ingrams disparage governesses - she openly berates Rochester. And Hinds becomes a bellowing bully when Jane decides to leave Thornfield after the aborted wedding.

I also have a major problem with the St John Rivers relationship. Penry-Jones certainly is a suitably handsome St John, but he totally neglects Rivers' iciness and ruthlessness.

I can see how this version could be a "guilty pleasure" (lol), but it has too many things wrong with it to be a true representation of my favourite book. In my opinion, of course.






Who knows where the time goes?

reply

I watch this version because I watch them all and I feel guilty if I leave an adaption out.
However, the main constraints I have about this film are:

Ciaran Hinds' moustache
Ciaran Hinds' noise factor.
Ciaran Hinds' acting
Ciaran Hinds' slobbering kissing.Yuk!
Ciaran Hinds' chucking her bags down the stairs

In fact if it wasn't for Ciaran Hinds I would quite like this version.
To be fair, I did like Ciaran Hinds in "Rome", he did know how to sit a horse.

By the way Janet, I'm off to Haddon Hall in April. Lovely
Pat

Who's your fat friend?

reply

Ciaran Hinds' moustache



By the way Janet, I'm off to Haddon Hall in April. Lovely

Lovely, indeed. You lucky thing. I had such a lovely weekend in Derbyshire when we visited HH back in 2011. And we stayed in a fabulous farm B&B on the Haddon Estate. Hope you have a great time.

Sorry if I haven't responded to your posts, Pat. My daughter and her family were squeezed into our tiny little house for over a year, and it took it's toll on me. Your posts came thick and fast on the 2006 board, but I couldn't find the time to reply to any of them, so ended up replying to none of them. Sorry. Things should start to improve now.



Who knows where the time goes?

reply

Keep your pecker up!
I hope circumstances are on the up for you.
I did wonder why the lack of posts from you.[I don't mean answering my stuff in particular]But in general.
The lack of responses of my posts are probably because I can be a little controversial,I am not a troll but some posters can be so serious whereas I can see humour in stuff[even when it's not meant to be there]!
I go on The Hobbit board quite a lot, mainly because it's a man thing , they most of them are trolls, but hilariously funny.

Pat



Who's your fat friend?

reply

Trolls on The Hobbit board? How appropriate

reply


Well I did say they could be funny.


Go tell the Spartans, passerby,
That here, according to their law, we lie.

reply


Hi Supergran,
I know this is the wrong board but it's so disappointing that JE73 has virtually,
if not,completely,dried up.

This adaption is rather sweet, if a trifle "elderly".I got used to the direct to Charlotte's narrative, even as we agree she did not write for the screen.
Still it does seem a shame.
Pat





Who's your fat friend?

reply

Hi Pat.

No, your posts were very interesting, although some of them didn't appear to require a response. And you are a very witty person! Lol. Sometimes I can be guilty of taking my favourite book a little too seriously at times. I need to lighten up!

It's sad that the JE boards have got so quiet. JE73 is like a graveyard with only João Pedro defending his corner! Lol. I thought 73 had a lot going for it, with a very good Rochester in Michael Jayston. At least, he brings out Rochester's wit and causticity. I wasn't so keen on Sorcha's Jane. She's a little too confident and "knowing" for my taste. The thing that really drives me bonkers in 73 is the voiceover! The actors even pause to make room for it. How absurd is that! And most of the narration just states the bleedin' obvious! Anyway, you can see my comments on the 73 board, if you care to.



Who knows where the time goes?

reply

Moustache and SIDEBURNS. Yikes, is it just me, or does the facial hair appear to be peeling off after Jane douses Rochester with water when his bed is on fire?

reply

Morton's Jane is the only Jane Eyre who is remotely like the character in the book. Jane is a character who, while possessing a friendly, warm side, also has incredible impatience at times, and a really sharp tongue. You can also at times see what she is thinking, unless she is intentionally concealing her thoughts. She is immediately at ease with Rochester because he is so brusque, she's not self-conscious. And, as he says, she sticks that needle in. The only reason she's able to one up him and put him in his place is because she immediately trusts him. He's not the sort of man who will fly off the handle at the idea of someone being impertinent and not knowing her place. He likes her sharp side. In their first meeting at Thornfield, she contradicts him, she implies he's not particularly philanthropic. As Morton plays Jane is as Jane is written in Jane Eyre - particularly if we read what Rochester says to her in the book about how she sticks the knife in and twists it. He enjoys it, she knows he's comfortable, so she's at ease.

One of the reasons Jane, I think, becomes so attached to Thornfield is she can breathe there. Prior to Thornfield she's often punished for being so quick, so observant, so curious. At Thornfield she can ask questions, give her opinion, etc. She's a very self-sufficient, independent person, who, at Thornfield, is relieved to be in a situation that's a bit unconventional, where she's more free to be herself.

One way this version differs from the book is both Jane and Rochester are a whole lot warmer to Adele than either are in the book, really. The book Jane is good to Adele, but also describes what she considers her faults to us very frequently, and she judges her.

So anyway, most of the Jane Eyre's I have seen present her as quiet, modest, somewhat shy and meek. Where the hell they ever get that from after reading the Jane in the book, I have no idea. She is one of the most self-asserting characters ever put to paper, when given the opportunity. She has no compunction about seeking information or giving her opinion, if the occasion calls for it.

She WILL conceal herself from people she has no respect for, but where there is no issue like that, she asserts herself. She also doesn't put herself down. The only time her self-esteem flags is when she realizes she's in love with Rochester, and then believes he's interested in Blanche Ingram. She naturally believes that if he's attracted to Blanche, he can't be attracted to her, and that's painful.

There's also a whole section in the book where Rochester looks at Jane's sketches, which are extremely gothic and dramatic.

Finally, when I re-read the book, Thornfield is very different than often portrayed. It's not gothic. It's a conventional manor house, a home of a gentleman. It's very warm inside and bright, except for a part of the upstairs hall that is a little desolate. And Rochester is not some Jane Austen or Noel Coward type guy - he is voluble. He never shuts up. He's extremely emotional.

reply

What a great response, Supergran! Thank you so much for such a well-thought and honest opinion! I tire so of those who just blast you for daring to disagree with them! LOL!

Anyway, one point that you mentioned, I have some insight for. Well, I think. You said the passion was at times, over the top. I can see how you might feel that way. But I think the reason I don't have a hard time with it is that I sort of put myself, intellectually, in the place of this young woman who, by virtue of her upbringing and what I have to imagine her expectations of life might have been, finding someone that loves her and I think that that passion would come like a giant tidal wave for lack of practice! LOL! In a sense, that she had never been "taught" how to be in love. Does that make sense? I know what I mean in my head, but feel I'm being awfully inadequate in expressing it.

Anyway, I just love this version and have a copy (DVD) of it that I pull out when I'm needing a "getaway"! LOL!

Thanks again for your input! :)

reply

You're welcome, Auntneice. Thank you.

I think Jane Eyre is an extraordinarily passionate book, and I'm all for that passion being transferred to the screen. I just think it was rather laid on with a trowel in this version, but that's just my opinion of course. Anyway, I'm glad you enjoy it. There's a Jane Eyre adaptation out there for everyone. Lol.

Cheers.




Who knows where the time goes?

reply


I think Jane Eyre is an extraordinarily passionate book,
.........................................................
Unfortunately the passion is dying on the boards.
The day of the dodo has happened.
Shame, I enjoyed these boards.

I re-read them in case I have missed something original and/or special.
You must have had a field day at the beginning of IMDb and the Jane Eyres.
I feel , because I came into it very late, as though I have missed out!


Pat


Who's your fat friend?

reply

Each JE brings with it some charm. So I rarely characterize them as the worst or the best. There are things about this version I like. As other have pointed out and I've said elsewhere, I don't enjoy Hind's portrayal. Even if he was spot on with how Bronte described Rochester, I'd not care. I don't prefer this portrayal.

And maybe it's because I like RPJ as Capt Wentworth so much it's just hard to see him as cold and icy as I think St John HAS to come across so folks don't, en masse, lead a revolt and conclude Jane should've married St John. I'll have to watch this 'un again.

But of course, I am being aggressively naive!

reply