Book to Movie: Jane Eyre (2006 Mini-series)

While I truly loved Focus Films' adaptation of Jane Eyre, I was sad about a few things that were left out and decided that I wanted to see a more comprehensive production (and, by the way, have you noticed there are approximately 387 productions of Jane Eyre? There is even a musical). So to my beloved Provo Library I went, and I was not disappointed.

Instead of going into in-depth analysis about the quality of the film and the cinematic elements (subjects I know nothing about, other than what pleases my eye and what doesn't), I am going to make for you a lovely little list of things I enjoyed about this movie. It is tied in my affections with the 2011 version, because they are both appealing for different reasons.

1. Lucy Pevensie plays the young Jane Eyre. (Okay, her real name is Georgie Henley). I hadn't seen her in anything but the Narnia films and I think she is adorable. It was nice to see her acting in a new type of role.

2. The gypsy scene is (somewhat) intact. It doesn't follow precisely with the book (AVERT THINE EYES IF YOU WANT TO AVOID SPOILERS) - Mr. Rochester isn't dressed up as the gypsy; he has simply employed her. (SPOILERS END) Although the scene wasn't perfectly faithful to the novel, I do think it is important enough to be included.

3. For frivolity's sake -- I simply can't decide which Mr. Rochester I like better. I was completely taken with the portrayal in the 2011 film by Michael Fassbender, but I think that Toby Stephens may have beaten him out in this film. His emotions are brought wildly to the surface, and we see a bit of the madness that threatens him due to the burden of his wife, although it isn't allowed to take hold. Compare and decide for yourselves, oh readers.

Toby Stephens

Michael Fassbender

4. The veil scene happened, albeit quickly and still not as freakily as I would have hoped.

5. The end scene between Jane and Mr. Rochester was more powerful, I thought, in the 2006 version than in the 2011 version. I was more emotionally moved - I felt that their emotions were stronger and more present. It was honestly one of the more touching scenes I think I've seen in a movie ever.

Granted, there are also aspects of the Focus Films production I preferred. I loved the portrayal of St. John Rivers (although deplored the exclusion of Rosamund) and his sisters. The landscapes were breathtaking. The music was beautiful. And Jane herself was played very well by Mia Wasikowska.

Both films have something to offer is my point I suppose. The 2006 production of Jane Eyre is more thorough and certain scenes have more power, but the new 2011 adaptation is certainly not a film to miss.

Quotables: On Marriage

(I originally meant to post this last week on my 1st anniversary, August 17th. I ended up running out of time to schedule posts, but couldn't put it on the back burner, so here it is for you a week later).

I have now been married ten years.

I know what it is to live entirely for and with what I love best on earth.

I hold myself supremely blest - blest beyond what language can express; because I am my husband's life as fully as he is mine.

No woman was ever nearer to her mate than I am: ever more absolutely bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh.

I know no weariness of my [husband's] society: he knows none of mine, any more than we each do of the pulsation of the heart that beats in our separate bosoms; consequently, we are ever together.

To be together is for us to be at once as free as in solitude, as gay as in company.

We talk, I believe, all day long: to talk to each other is but a more animated and an audible thinking.

All my confidence is bestowed on him, all his confidence is devoted to me;

we are perfectly suited in character -

perfect concord is the result.

Charlotte Bronte, Jane Eyre

Book to Movie: Jane Eyre (2011)

I'm always a little worried when I go to a movie made from one of my favorite books, especially when it is a book I have finished recently. If I've put a bit of a time buffer, I am usually not quite so sensitive to the differences as long as they are not too noticeable. However, when they are too close together, I am forced to make comparisons.

Fortunately, with this film version of Jane Eyre, the comparisons were mainly favorable. The film was done by Focus Films, which also did the adaptation of Pride and Prejudice starring Keira Knightley. I know a lot of peopl

e did not enjoy that adaptation because "it left so many things out," but I thought it was exceptionally well done. I think one thing all readers forget when a beloved book comes to the screen is that what makes a good book does not always make a good movie. A director's challenge is to make adjustments so the translation will fit accessibly in a 2 hour time frame. Anyway, like the Focus version of P & P, the scenery and music were hauntingly beautiful. The atmosphere was spooky, giving a very Victorian feel to the film.

I also thought all the acting was excellent. Jane was plain but feisty, and it was delightful to see her as a character instead of just reading her thoughts. I also really enjoyed Jamie Bell as St. John Rivers - his intensity and arrogance were perfect for the character. And oh my goodness, Mr. Rochester... isn't he supposed to not be handsome? I am extremely partial to Mr. Rochester as a character anyway, and by the end of the movie I was obsessed.

There were two significant things left out of the film that made me sad, especially because I thought they were elements that could have transferred very well to film, although they would have made the movie longer, of course. These are spoilers for the film and book, so if you want it to be a surprise, don't read the rest of the paragraph. The gypsy scene, in which Mr. Rochester dresses up like a gypsy and questions all the females of his house, including Blanche Ingram and Jane, was missing. I thought this was the funniest part of the book and really shows Rochester's bizarre personality at its best, so I was very disappointed in missing that one. The other thing they left out was Bertha sneaking into Jane's room and ripping her veil in half. That had the potential to be so spooky, and according to my friend Erin it was a great scene in an earlier film adaptation. I was looking forward to that moment throughout the whole film, and was pretty disappointed when it didn't happen.

However, other than these two missing scenes that I was disappointed in not seeing, I thought Jane Eyre was very well done and a movie I would like to watch again. I also want to track down the other adaptation with the creepy veil scene, because I feel cheated of it in this adaptation. I'm going to close with a picture of Mr. Rochester. You're welcome.

Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte

Title: Jane Eyre

Author: Charlotte Bronte

Genre: Classic

Published: Originally in 1847 by Smith, Elder & Co.

Source: Personal copy

Most are familiar with the story of Jane Eyre, but for those who are not: A poor orphan girl despised by her immediate relations, Jane spends the early part of her life being tortured by her cousins and displeasing her aunt. Jane's aunt finally decides to send her away to boarding school, where Jane has the opportunity to become more independent. After eight years at Lowood, she decides to strike out on her own as a governess, and is hired at Thornfield. As she gets to know the owner of the mansion, Mr. Rochester, sympathy and friendship develop between them, but Thornfield Hall holds some shocking secrets.

This is my third read of Jane Eyre, and honestly each time I read it I enjoy it more. My first reading was in high school, where I remember liking the story and subsequently forgetting it. Because I forgot it, when I came across the book again in college, I decided to read it again. I enjoyed it even more, but still forgot most of the plot, so when I read it this time around, there were many aspects that seemed new to me. I'm not sure why this particular book doesn't stay in my memory very well, because I do really enjoy it. I am just happy that my book club chose the book for this month's selection so I could have the chance to revisit it yet again.

Jane Eyre is somewhat slow-paced and meditative. The story is told in the first person, something I personally haven't seen much in classic literature, although I have barely scratched the surface of classics and am by no means an authority on the subject. We really are admitted into her thoughts and ruminations on every subject, a process that can be lengthy, but is always interesting. Right now I am reading a book called AfterWord where several authors write imaginary conversations with deceased authors. I would have liked to talk with Charlotte Bronte and find out if she is similar in personality and temperament to Jane, because I don't know how else Jane's voice could seem so real. Jane is very developed - she has her quirks and idiosyncrasies, her likes and dislikes. Her voice is very distinct and full of personality. I loved the descriptions of Jane's fanciful paintings - I think those more than anything showed her personality. I wish I could see them. Aspiring artists - do you think maybe you could reproduce them and have an exhibit of "imagined paintings of Jane Eyre" or something like that? Because that would be awesome.

I also adored Mr. Rochester. He is not your typical Prince Charming - described as ugly, known to have committed some appalling acts (I won't reveal them for those who are not familiar with the story), yet passionate, tender, and delightfully devious. (I think the gypsy scene in the book is absolutely brilliant). I could gush about him, but instead I will refer you to my last blog hop post, where I waxed fan-girly on the subject.

As I participate in the Victorian Literature Challenge, I am starting to gain an appreciation of what Victorian lit really is. I've read a fair amount of it, but I've never studied or really identified it before. This book was fantastically spooky with harrowing descriptions of maniacal laughter and images of frightening scenes, such as bed drapes alight in flame. The genre is appealing to me more and more, and I can't wait to read more of it.

I think Jane Eyre is one of those must-read classics. The writing and characterization is fantastic, and the plot is mysterious and enticing, despite its slow pace.

4 stars

Book Blogger Hop: Characters with Character

It's been quite a while since I participated in a blog hop, but I really like the prompt for this hop. It is:

Pick a character from the book you are reading or have just finished and tell us about him/her.

This is an easy choice for me. I am currently reading Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte, and am continually impressed by Mr. Rochester. I have read the book twice before, once in high school and once in my freshman year of college, but I feel like I am much better able to appreciate the characters this time around. I also think I have more perspective on his character since reading Wide Sargasso Sea by Jean Rhys, a prequel to Jane Eyre describing Mr. Rochester's courtship and early marriage to Bertha Antoinette Mason.

One thing I have noticed this time around is Mr. Rochester's quirky personality and way of speaking. His mannerisms and quirks ooze around his words, giving me a strong sense of his presence. He speaks in an elaborate, energetic, and lordly way. Two of my favorite excerpts, one kind of self-serving and arrogant, the other romantic and penetrating:

"Justly thought; rightly said, Miss Eyre; and at this moment,k I am paving hell with energy. [...] I am laying down good intentions, which I believe durable as flint."

"Because," he said, "I sometimes have a queer feeling with regard to you - especially when you are near me, as now: it is as if I had a string somewhere under my left ribs, tightly and inextricably knotted to a similar string situated in the corresponding quarter of your little frame. And if that boisterous Channel, and two hundred miles or so of land came broad between us, I am afraid that cord of communion will be snapt; and then I've a nervous notion I should take to bleeding inwardly."

He is passionate in his love for Jane, yet calculating in his means of attaining it, by *SPOILER* dressing up as a fortune teller and demanding the presence of all the women in the house to ascertain Jane's affection and Miss Ingram's mercenary character. *END SPOILER* He indulges in convoluted moral contemplations and then almost commits bigamy. He is complicated; dark and tempestuous, yet loving and tender. I appreciate him for not being the Prince Charming of so many different books, for having a dark past but the capability to enjoy a better future. I love that I can find new things every time I read this book.

Have you read about any interesting characters lately?