Monday, 8 February 2016

Jane Eyre (2011)

I've been wanting to watch Jane Eyre ever since it came out, and since I recently finished reading the book, I thought it a good time to watch it.


And it was a good movie, very beautifully made, but it didn't quite live up to my expectations.

But let me start with the things I like, such as the casting:

I was a little apprehensive about the casting of Jane, for in the book she is very plain and Hollywood have a habit of ignoring that and casting beautiful actresses anyway. But they actually did a great job with Mia Wasikowska, making her appear really simple and plain.
And her acting was also really good. I think a challenge in adapting book-Jane is that she thinks a lot but doesn't say very much, so the actress really have to convey a lot without words. But I think she caught the gist of it, and the important scenes were spot on.


Now, for Mr Rochester. Let me get my major peeve about him out at once: Michael Fassbender is way too handsome to play Mr Rochester!
That being said, he does a great job of the character. He certainly masters the piercing gazes and intense emotions. I'm just sad they cut out a lot of his and Jane's interactions, it didn't leave enough scenes to really get a feel of his character.


Judi Dench playing Mrs Fairfax was a delightful surprise (and my one squeeing moment of the movie, was when she appeared). She wasn't exactly like I imagined Mrs Fairfax in my head, but she made a great performance.


The casting of St John Rivers was just perfect, in my opinion. In my head I'd imagined him more like Rupert Perry-Jones, but Jamie Bell was an excellent alternative. My only regret is that due to time, large parts of his character is cut out, so he seems rather one-dimensional in the movie.


With all this praise of the acting, you might think, then why was I disappointed in the movie?

The main reason is that the plot is way too rushed! Some of the time it feels like they are giving you a summary of the story with a number of short scenes. Then at other times they cut out huge plot points and dialogue, and I feel like you miss a lot of information.
I know I can't expect a 2 hour movie to be completely faithful to a 600 pages book, but they could easily have made it perhaps 20 minutes longer and gotten a lot more of the plot in there. At least in my opinion.


However, I think my strong reaction is due to the fact that I just finished the book and was anxious to see it acted out on screen. I think I would have loved it unconditionally if I hadn't read the book.
And therefore I will in no way discourage anyone from seeing it, for it is a wonderful story.


Content wise there is barely any. There is a few kissing scenes and you once see the characters in their sleep wear, but nothing inappropriate.

You know, I couldn't possibly review a period drama without commenting on the costumes.
I love them!
Jane's dresses are very simply cut, but I think that is what I like about them. These are the sort of dresses I wouldn't mind wearing myself.

This one is my favourite! I love the pattern and the little collar.

It was difficult getting a decent picture of this one, but here you can see the lovely little bows at the front.

Now, as we draw near the end I think my final conclusion is: It's a beautiful movie with lots of good acting, and a timeless story that most will enjoy.
But if you've read the book, expect that a lot of scenes will be missing.                                                              


  1. Great review! I really like this version, but I agree that it's lacking in some parts. I gotta say, I do love Michael Fassbender's Rochester: the scene after Jane finds out about Bertha is just so doggone INTENSE and REAL and GOOD. Gahh. And then I love the way he screams her name at different parts (because I'm a sap like that) ;D

    Have you seen the 2006 miniseries? I think that's my favorite. It has a leetle bit of content (Bertha is shown being…seductive, shall we say, and there are a couple other slightly inappropriate parts), but it's long enough to do justice to the scope of the book, and it's really excellently casted (in my opinion). I think you'd enjoy it! Oh, and the ending is similar to the book's ending, and it's PERFECT :)

    1. Thanks, Olivia.
      Yes, that scene!!!!! It was my favourite part of the movie, and the point were I was convinced that Michael Fassbender really WAS Mr Rochester.

      I'm planning on watching the 2006 miniseries. I figured it would have a lot more of the plot included.

  2. You should watch the 1985 Jane Eyre. It's the only one I've ever seen so I'm probably biased, but in my opinion it's really good. And it definitely follows the book. :)

    1. I've heard good things of the 85 series, so I was considering watching it.
      But now i definitely will!

  3. The 1983 BBC version with Timothy Dalton and Zelah Clarke is my favorite, but this one has its good points too. I'd like to see it again some time.

    1. I can't really picture Timothy Dalton as Mr Rochester, but I might be surprised:)
      I'll watch it anyway, for I've heard so many say it's their favourite

  4. Great review, the Toby Stephens version is my favourite (as this one is a bit more serious) but I did like Jane in this, and St John especially :)


You might also like

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...