15 thoughts on “TBT: Jane Eyre (2006)

  1. Trystan, Like you Jane Eyre is one of my favorite books. As a result I’ve watched most of the films based on it. Hands down my favorite is the 1983 version with Timothy and Zelah. Their chemistry is spot on. My second favorite is with Orson Wells and Joan Fontaine. While other versions present good Jane’s they are sadly lacking relatable Rochesters. William Hurt is too depressed, Toby Stephens is too disengaged, Ciaran Hinds(whom I love) came off too emotional, and Michael Fassbender? He just doesn’t seem to fit. There is also the George C. Scott version but both he and Susanna York seem too old for the parts. As for the costumes? I’m a minor player in the costume world so I must bow to your superior knowledge regarding costuming and I love what you bring to the world of movie/TV apparel. Keep up the good work. Thanks.

  2. I remember watching this early on and liking it, although after reading “the wide Sargasso Sea” a few months ago I doubt I’ll be able to see Jane Eyre in the same way again.

  3. My favorite Jane Eyre movie!
    Here Jane is just sweet and like an elf (fairy), as she was in the book. Her dresses are more fashionable than Blanche’s, based on the timeline, but look simpler and poorer than Blanche’s puffy puff sleeves. I think that’s why the designer decided to dress the heroines this way.
    Rochester is very hot and moderately sarcastic. I like all his dialogue with Jane.
    Funny scene when Adele first sings to Jane and the housekeeper.
    Francesca Annis plays the same selfish bitch mother as in Wives and Daughters.

  4. Nearly in Death of Fashion territory! I think the Novel takes place during the Regency Era?

  5. Not to nitpick too much, but it’s Thornfield Hall… Jane Eyre has to be one of my favorite 19th century novels. Sometimes I think it’s meant to be didactic, as far as warning young ladies of the perils of unworthy men, whether or not they’re an aspiring missionary. It’s funny that Rochester is the character that is redeemed. It’s generally the fallen women who get killed off in 18th/19th century literature, although I suppose John Reed fulfills that function here. Quite frankly, I prefer the 1983 BBC version with Timothy Dalton and Zelah Clark. I don’t think it’s been bettered, although if there was a way to salvage the typical Beeb use of video for interiors and film for exteriors, it might make the series look less dated in terms of technique. I don’t care for the 1840s narrow bodices and sleeves – I find them bland. I did get a kick out of the white dress worn by the Honourable Blanche Ingram. It reminds me so much of 1980s wedding dresses – could well have been picked up at a defunct chain called Westminster Lace if the sleeves had been shrunken by a third. I think Toby Stevens riding coat is the only cheery thing as far as the wardrobe goes. I don’t think I saw this until it was streaming online; I just remember thinking, “oh, it’s crazy Alice from ‘Luther.'” Honestly haven’t cared for any of the adaptations in this century. The version with Orson Wells and Joan Fontaine was ok – I do believe that was the first one I saw, and aside from the Dalton version, I have seen all the newer versions, but I’m ready to give up. All the decision makers seem fixated on setting the costumes in the 1840s. I know 1830s might seem problematic for some, but I happen to love that era. “Wives and Daughters” goes into bonkers period correct detail with the upscale hairstyles and I love it. I feel like the spaniel curls in this particular version are just too big – they look funny to my eyes, but at least they’re not as bad as the crunchy little curls in the latest “Emma.” Oh well – I like what I like.

  6. I recall enjoying this version—lovely wedding dress—but, alas, yet another blonde-bitch Blanche. The too-short Hinds-Morton “Jane” remains my favorite.

  7. This is the only film adaptation where the main characters match their book age. They are both young and innocent. Although Rochester cannot be called innocent in the full sense of the word, I still always considered him innocent and unprepared for real life. And he is pure in soul, did not kill his first wife, regretted sending her into cold distant exile and tried to save her to the end.

    Zelah Clarke and Dalton are too old and boring, there is zero chemistry between them, no spark in their eyes. And the costumes there are pale and uninteresting, which is quite in the spirit of BBC films of the 70-80s.

  8. GLORIOUS PURPLE FROCKERY!

    Ahem. I’m not sorry, but that was just a touch rambunctious and so I do beg your pardon.

  9. For me, this is like the 1995 Pride and Prejudice adaption. It’s not 100% faithful to the book (as the 1980 P&P or the 1983 JE are) but all the important things are there and it really captures the spirit of the book. Perfectly cast, wonderful soundtrack, great pace.
    The 1980s P&P and JE adaptation always felt so dour to me. It was the complete story, but the spark was lacking.
    It also helps that I found the fortune teller scene absolutely ridiculous in the book. This version includes it, but makes it slightly less silly (I still could have done without it, but then, I like, don’t love Jane Eyre).

Feel the love

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.