I haven't posted here before ...
...and I am delighted to have found this site!
I have read Jane Eyre around 30 times: I was younger than Jane the first time, and now I'm older than Rochester (but not as old as Mrs Fairfax).
My very favourite adaptation so far is the Dalton/Clark one - delighted I'm finally able to toss out my wonky old 1980s tapes from the ABC here in Australia, now I have a bright shiny new DVD copy! I also own the Hinds/Morton version and the 1970 movie with Susannah York.
And I vaguely remember the 1973 version on television! I was a child when I saw it but I am sure that there was a scene with Jane wearing the watch chain and the blue dress right at the end. Am I right?
I would dearly love to see it again ...
Amanda
Mum to Declan (6/95), Charlotte (3/98) and Will (8/02)
Welcome! Glad to have newcomers.
I really love the 73'...I was a a big fan of the Dalton version until I got a chance to see this one. It surpasses it in my opinion, mostly because Jayston is such a wonderful Rochester.
hmm...I don't recall that scene. Though perhaps it was cut from the version I saw? I would be nice to see it though.
Hello!
Greetings! It's great to have another JE fan.
Of course Jane Eyre '73 is the one for me, but I don't have that scene in my version. Perhaps that is from another even lesser known version! I would love to see all the versions of Jane Eyre ever made. But Michael Jayston would probably still be the best Rochester to me.
Re: I haven't posted here before ...
Hi, Amanda - welcome!
The first 'Jane Eyre' I remember is the York/Scott version as well. I'm thinking of buying it for sentimental reasons as much as anything. After all, no one would ever accuse George C. Scott of being handsome, so for me, he was a very good Rochester.
I have seen the Crawford/Welles, York/Scott, Morton/Hinds and Clarke/Dalton versions, and am thinking of renting the Gainsborough [?]/Hurt version, even though I can't *imagine* William Hurt as Rochester - too BLONDE!
I liked the Clarke/Dalton adaptation the best, but my favorite *look* of Jane was embodied by Samantha Morton --- she is the most "childish [and] slender" of the actresses.
If I can entice/beg/bribe someone to make me a copy of the Cusack/Jayston version, I hope to see it, too. Reading these boards just whets one's appetite!
Re: I haven't posted here before ...
I thought Samantha was a lovely Jane Eyre..she's just a good actress in general. I am not a big Ciaran Hinds fan though, he was to blustery at times for me.
I didn't like William Hurt in that verson either..he did a wonderful sad/depressed Rochester but caught little else about him. They cinematography and music is stunning in that version (though the script is not to my taste) though.
My two favorites are Dalton and Jayston Hey for those looking for a copy check out my post today. I got official confirmation about it's release. It's hard to believe it's true...but it seems to be so!
re: all of the above ;)
Welcome to the board, Amanda! My version doesn't have that part of the ending. I really do love that scene at the end when she is wearing his watch. To my knowledge it has never appeared on film- but I would be glad to be proven wrong on this occasion.
I now own all of the available versions of Jane Eyre films. The first one that I saw was the Gainsbourg/Hurt version, and I saw it before I read the novel. It is the reason that I bought the novel from a library discard sale- and so I have a sentimental attachment to it. However, I can see why it is a poor adaptation. For the most part, I blame the script. I have a sense that, if Hurt had been given more of Rochester's more engaging scenes he might have done well. I like how he plays out Rochester's melancholy- which is seldom highlighted... but that's about all.
As for his being blond etc. I believe that it is far more important for actors to strive to capture the character accurately, rather than happen to have been born resembling them. I believe Ciaran Hinds is the closest in resemblance but I found his portrayal to be all wrong- terribly wrong. Yet I do find something to appreciate about just about each version. My only exception is with George C. Scott who failed to capture anything about the character.
I do believe that Jayston and Dalton come the closest of all (descpite Dalton's very obviously NOT being 'hideous' ever- even when he's shaggy and blind! ) to the spirit of the role. All I can say is 'well done!' because it must be extremely difficult!
Re: re: all of the above ;)
Thanks for those thoughts Sophie.
The reason I disliked William Hurt in the role was that I felt he played Rochester as depressed - and to me the character is not depressed, but moody and melancholy, which is different from depression. And I didn't really get that he was in love with her.
There are things I like about Ciaran Hinds too. I liked his slight edge of naughtiness and I got how much he loved Jane, but he shouted too much. A shame, because I really like him as an actor, and usually puts in a much more subtle performance.
George C Scott was far too old for the role ... I didn't get enough of Rochester's verve and energy from his performance.
I love Dalton's performance ... by far the best blend of Rochester I've seen so far. Humour, anger, passion, keeping secrets, seriousness. And yes - he is eye candy!
Re: re: all of the above ;)
The Rochesters I have seen:
Colin Clive (1934) -- intensely forgettable
Orson Welles (1944) -- wooden & dull. It was as if he'd simply memorized his lines and then recited them back without much thought or feeling, much less acting.
George C. Scott (1970) -- though slightly old for the role (48, while in the book, I believe, Rochester is said to be 35), I think his is the best Rochester other than Michael Jayston. Now, his co-star really was not fitted for her role--York was 29 & looked far too old to play Jane Eyre.
Michael Jayston (1973) -- far & away the best Rochester! Though a bit too handsome for the role, his acting was superb and he had no problems with the dialogue, which by today's standards is verbose & a bit flowery--Jayston made it sound perfectly natural to a modern audience.
Timothy Dalton (1983) -- One of my least favorite Rochesters. Not only was he so tall as to be stork-like, but he smiled too much. He just didn't fit the role.
William Hurt (1996) -- was just too "blah" , IMO, and did no justice to the role. The whole production was a disappointment.
Ciaran Hinds (1997) -- ye gods, no! horrible production and worse casting.
Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
A very long post!
Now I'll have a go! I'll include a few extra items:
Colin Clive: Nothing at all like Mr Rochester, even though he apparently liked roles of 'brooding sensitivity'. He seemed to be capable of tremendous expression yet the whole tone of the film was cheerful- it was the Depression after all. [One thing to note about this version- which most people write off- is that it is the only version of JE on film where Mr Rochester does NOT help Jane put the fire out in his room].
Orson Welles: He did a fair job, but nothing really stands out about his portrayal, in my mind. It was more of an artistic expression of the role, rather than a nuanced attempt to bring this particular character to life. He might have been any Byronic hero at times.
George C. Scott: His is by far my least favourite performance. If there is one thing Mr Rochester is not, he is no stoic. But he is extremely so in this film. I can never tell how much of this is written into the script- I suspect that it is. It bothers me that St.John is more passionate that Scott's portrayal of Rochester- that he spends most of the film staring at the ceiling, and that he doesn't really care when Jane returns to him at Ferndean. I'm going to try watching it again, but at this point, I find him painful to watch.
Michael Jayston: Well, all I can really say is that he has done what I didn't think was possible, and I am still amazed. His was the last version that I saw, and I had grown to be very critical by that time- yet I have not one word of criticism. Only admiration for an example of true artistry.
Timothy Dalton: Poor guy. His was my favourite portrayal until Michael Jayston dethroned him ^_^. I find it hard to watch this version now, which is unfortunate, because it's so very good. Compared with the others, his was a nuanced performance, showing sensitivity to a few facets of the role, rather than taking one and running with it. The smiling was distracting, I agree. And I found him too stiff most of the time- until the wedding sequence. There are some scenes which arrest my attention and are excellently played. I'd say he got it mostly right.
William Hurt: I know that the problems with his portrayal come from the script. When the scene of Jane's leaving is cut down one line, you know that there's a plan to make the film as low-key as possible. I enjoy his performance, for it brings out some of the character's more supressed facets- however, these facets are not supposed to be so dominant. [There is one thing that I despise about this film- even though I can only see it with bias, since it introduced me to the story. I hate how they twisted the line: 'Say "Edward"- give me my name- Edward- Say "Edward, I will marry you". and made it: 'Say: "Edward, give me my name".]
Ciaran Hinds: Again, the direction might be at fault but this character is not Mr Rochester. There are a few moments in the novel when he looses his temper, he is not abusive- this portrayal makes him an abusive, brutish man who lacks any real concern for Jane (telling her that it's all her fault that he lied to her because he knew she cared about being married- for example, and also that he would have gone to jail for bigamy as a result- implying again that it would have been her fault). This is in the script, though- so I cannot criticise his performance on those grounds. There's very little left once you take that away, though. He broods well, and kisses terribly (I had to stop the film- it was just too awful, and I wasn't prepared for that). Especially having lived with domestic violence, I cannot see what is romantic or 'exciting' about an angry man throwing things and dragging women around.
I'm interested to hear him play Mr Rochester again on BBC 7- it's on this week. I'd like to see what he does with a second attempt.
Anthony Crivello (the Musical- Toronto Cast): I've only heard his performance (available for download here: www.currerwells.net/janee...ntocd.html ). I am a classical singer- when you perform in this style where you are discouraged from using your body to express emotion, it is so that all of your expression is concentrated in the voice. This is what Crivello's performance seems to me. I often feel a charge go through me at certain points in the music, where the emotion is very real. He is an actor who sings- not a singer who acts. The singing is very powerful, but not clean- he sacrifices an unbroken line of music in favour of showing real emotion. In his voice, I hear Rochester's melancholy, his playful sarcasm (he gets to sing as the Gypsy, and there is also a lovely bit of banter before the proposal scene- called 'Second Self'), anger, desperation, his passion. I do wish I could have seen him act as well, but I don't think this is possible now. And so, I still don't know how far to say that I believe he got it right.
James Barbour (the Musical): I believe I put a link up for the Amazon page for this CD- it's still available for purchase. It is a different version of the Toronto show, made for Broadway so it is worth having both). I did not like his performance on the CD. His voice is lower, much more powerful, but far less stirring. It seemed flat and devoid of emotion most of the time. Then someone sent me a video of one of his actual performances. Emotionless he was NOT. It was very enjoyable, but the dominate impression I got was that Rochester was a minx. Seriously! He begins by lounging on a rock, rubbing his chest, all through the Hay Lane scene, and doesn't stop flirting until around the end of the proposal, I'd say . But aside from that, he carried the role well enough.
) to the spirit of the role. All I can say is 'well done!' because it must be extremely difficult!
Seriously! He begins by lounging on a rock, rubbing his chest, all through the Hay Lane scene, and doesn't stop flirting until around the end of the proposal, I'd say 
. But aside from that, he carried the role well enough.
Email This To a Friend
Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies 
Click to stop receiving email notification of replies