
Still slowly working my way through the major adaptions of one of my favorite novels to give them more full reviews than the bits and bobs we have around the site! This 2006 BBC miniseries adaption of Jane Eyre ranks high for covering a large portion of the actual book’s story onscreen, plus this is a beautifully filmed production, earning multiple Emmys and BAFTAs.
This was Ruth Wilson’s breakout role as the titular character, and as I’ve said before, she does embody the “fey” and “elf-like” pagan sprite qualities Rochester is constantly ascribing to her in the novel. Toby Stephens as Rochester is appropriately broody and byronic, but on rewatching, I find that their chemistry is lacking, especially on his side. Not the worst, but not the best.
The costume design by Andrea Galer is lovely, although it’s hard to pin down what year things are supposed to be. Helen Burn dies in 1829, per her tombstone that’s shown, and later Jane says she was at Lowood School for 8 years, so she’d have arrived at Thornton around 1835. But Jane’s dresses are very typical of the 1840s with pointed waistlines and narrow sleeves. Then Blanch Ingram and her friends arrive wearing very 1830s fashions with exaggerated big sleeves and wide necklines. At least everyone has hair styled appropriate to their outfits, with hats and caps as needed.
Jane herself is typically plain, and for most of the series, she wears the same couple modest dresses in grey/brown tones without much trimming.
Galer said she was specifically inspired by a portrait at the Brontë Parsonage Museum of the author Charlotte Brontë to create this costume:
“After I’ve done my research, I use what will move me the most and with Jane Eyre that was the J. H. Thompson portrait of Charlotte Brontë. I’m not the only person to have done it — there’s something particular about the reddish colouring of her grey dress … In recreating the grey dress that Charlotte wore in J. H. Thompson’s portrait, I felt I had to reflect her emotions and, in many ways, mine as well. I put the most time and money into this particular costume. It was made of a lightweight silk, which was then dyed with the red tone and then broken down to give it a worn look. It’s an expensive process, but my aim was to make the dress look like bombazine, which was a popular material at the time that combined silk with wool to make a heavier fabric. The lighter weight of Jane’s silk gave her costume more movement and ensured that it wouldn’t appear to be ‘just another grey dress’ … In Jane Eyre, and all the other period productions I’ve done, I’ve mainly used original trim with fabrics from today. In my opinion, it is the basis for making something look period. It’s become harder to find and buy antique pieces, which is a shame because you need a stable of old things to pull together in order to make something that really works on camera” (Bringing Portraits Alive: Catherine Paula Han Interviews Andrea Galer, the Costume Designer for Jane Eyre).

Although that portrait references one of the few contemporary images of Brontë, which was made during her lifetime in the 1850s.
Compare Jane’s dress to this late 1840s fashion plate showing a similar bodice and sleeve style:

Also similar in shape to this extant gown:

The other dress Jane wears most of the time is even more plain, with slightly puffed sleeves.
While her hair is dressed simply, it’s accurate for the period, with braids drawn up around the ears and to the back.
A more high-fashion version can be seen here:

Jane’s fanciest gown is for her interrupted wedding. The dress is still the same 1840s style, but with fine pleating and smocking at the center front and sleeve heads.
The smocking on her wedding gown is also reminiscent of extant examples, but not as elaborate, given her character’s inclinations.

Rochester’s costume are standard-issue Victorian menswear for a wealthy gentleman — dark coats, evening wear when appropriate. Interesting that in this adaption (but not in the novel itself), Rochester mentions he has £20,000 a year, which is double Mr. Darcy‘s income a few decades earlier.
The one bright spot is his riding habit. He dons this red coat and yellow check waistcoat to ride with Blanche Ingram.
OK, how about the shiny fancy ladies? Because it’s some of the side characters that get more flashy wardrobes, in particular Jane’s romantic rival, Blanche Ingram (Christina Cole). Her riding habit is brilliantly purple with trim at the collar.
Compare with this fashion plate:

Blanche’s evening gowns are very 1830s with big puffy sleeves, starting with this icy blue outfit (icy because she’s an icy bitch!).
Blanche’s gown isn’t as trimmed OTT as fashion plates, but she’s in the country, not London, so sure.

On the other evening, she wears white with lace:
Fashion plates show even more lace on these evening dresses.

Blanche always has curled ringlets that were in style from the 1830s through the 1840s.
Those curls could be accented with a tall, sometimes wacky, top knot in the back and / or more decorations, depending on the occasion. But Blanche is wearing enough frou-frou for this country house party, rather like the somewhat subdued style here:

Her extra bitchy and class-conscious mom, Lady Ingram (Francesca Annis), has similarly fancy costumes, just in darker colors, like this green evening gown.
And this brown-ish day dress, both of which continue the 1830s style for the upper-class fancy ladies.
Likewise, the other party guests, the Dent Twins (Amy and Beth Steel), who don’t get first names and dress in matchy costumes, are in 1830s styles.
Their evening gowns have that strong V neckline design of the period.

Although the twins and Blanche’s daytime outfits are oddly a bit more indeterminate of era, they almost lean 1840s.
Also at Thornfield Hall is Adèle (Cosima Littlewood), Rochester’s ward, and the reason Jane was hired as a governess. Her costumes are appropriate little-girl styles that lean a bit more towards 1830s than 1840s. I guess she’s more upper-class than Jane, even though Adèle’s mother is a French courtesan?
All of Adèle’s dresses are short and show the long ruffled pantlets / drawers she wears underneath, which is shown in fashion plates.

Adèle gets two pretty evening gowns that mimic the adult women’s 1830s styles with big sleeves and similar trim lines. Her dresses have higher necklines appropriate for a girl, and they’re also shorter and worn with pantlets.
Finally, when Jane leaves Thornfield and wanders into Moor House, she meets Rev. St John Rivers and his sisters Diana (Annabel Scholey) and Mary (Emma Lowndes), who she’ll later discover are cousins. Since the Rivers family are not posh, they dress in more 1840s styles like Jane.
I’m glad this adaption doesn’t skimp on the whole novel’s story — there’s even a sweet “Reader, I married him” type scene at the end.
How does the 2006 Jane Eyre compare to other versions in your mind?
Find this frock flick at:
Just a flag, at a couple of points the article says 1940s when I assume it should be 1840s.
That purple riding habit on Blanche Ingram is buttoned strangely?
Good adaptation though –
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.
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.
Ok, now I’m DROOLING for a Nathaniel Parker MCM!!!!
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.
Nearly in Death of Fashion territory! I think the Novel takes place during the Regency Era?
Ding ding ding, we have a winner! I noted that in my first big round-up of the book onscreen :)
https://frockflicks.com/costumes-in-jane-eyre-movie-tv-adaptions/
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.
I recall enjoying this version—lovely wedding dress—but, alas, yet another blonde-bitch Blanche. The too-short Hinds-Morton “Jane” remains my favorite.
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.
GLORIOUS PURPLE FROCKERY!
…
Ahem. I’m not sorry, but that was just a touch rambunctious and so I do beg your pardon.
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).
I believe Jane Eyre’s arrival at Thornfield is supposed to occur in 1838 or 1839. I think.
You forgot to add the Throwback Thursday tag.