A&E's Jane Eyre

To copy some of the opinions from topic 30, courtesy of amy2: I'm glad we have A&E, despite the odious recent "Jane Eyre." But I'll forgive them due to the great excellence of their P&P (which was shot by the BBC, of course). (LorieS)Boy, Jane Eyre was a disappointment, wasn't it? I didn't see it until last night, but I was very disappointed in all the missing characters, scenes, etc. The only change I can approve was Mrs. Fairfax's role, which finally got to be a little more sympathetic/interesting. But some of the dialog was just horribly wrong for something called "Charlotte Bronte's Jane Eyre," wasn't it? Why not call it "A&E's Jane Eyre" if your script takes that many liberties? Particularly disappointing was the Moor House section. Why oh why do all adaptations think the fact of Jane becoming independently wealthy and finding her own people is unimportant? (amy2) Don't get me started! I've already posted my rant to the Bronte list. Here it is: Well.... Here's a harsh critique from someone in the industry -- I must say I thoroughly loathed this recent production of "Jane Eyre" & couldn't make it past the first 1/2 hour... My problems with the show: 1) Invented dialog. This reminds me of a friend who wrote a whole script for a TV show & they ended up using four of his lines. I'm sure Charlotte must feel the same way. I listened desperately for original dialogue from the book & it was scant indeed - in fact, entire scenes were invented out of whole cloth (plot was the same/dialogue had all been replaced). Was there something wrong with Charlotte's original dialogue? It struck me as a damned sight better than the dumbed-down lines we were handed last night.. 2) Poor direction. Moving the camera for no reason whatsoever. The silly Red Room intro. which played more like Halloween Haunt at Universal Studios... 3) Voiceovers. Usually the kiss of death -- they slow down the plot & remove you from the action. Here, they were used as idiot prompts: "I was very happy here." Or TOLD us about other characters instead of showing us!! 4) Truncated length. Yes, Helen was dead 10 minutes in & Jane at Thornfield 15 minutes in & seeing Bertha her first night there. So many plot omissions at Gateshead & Lowood that nothing made sense anymore... 4) Ciaran Hinds. His look was bad; his acting was over-the-top. 5) Sam Morton. She was pleasant enough, but I don't think Jane would have smiled slyly before being intro'd to Rochester. Where was the contrast bet. the prim exterior & the heart on fire? I really think that Zelah Clarke captured this much better. 6) Change of setting. WHY would Jane have been crawling around mists in a river to fell Rochester's horse? Was she a mermaid? In sum....blech. This was -not- "Charlotte Bronte's" Jane Eyre. It was somebody else's who had no respect for Charlotte or her work. I still think the BBC version with Tim Dalton is the best we have. Adaptations like the one last night will ultimately hurt the book, because those who haven't read it think that they've seen "Jane Eyre." Which they haven't. ---- Topic 31 of 40 [bronte]: Wuthering Heights video release date Response 29 of 30: Lorie Scafaro (LorieS) * Thu, Oct 23, 1997 (12:49) * 5 lines YES! Thank you for saying Cirian was over the top so that I won't be the only one being crucified by the fans over in drool. I actually read posts that said people fell for him after seeing this version of Jane Eyre!!!;-Q (That's a mouth wide in amazement with a tongue out from saying "bleech!") I d

Oops. sorry. Here's the rest of my cut-and-paste job. I'm very new to this stuff, and this is actually the first time I've managed to create a new topic Sorry for the sloppiness: I did like Cirian Hinds in Persuasion, but felt that he was overly made up, overly weird (none of Rochester's lines were from the book, were they?), and that he was always contorting his mouth in an effort to Act. Again, bleech! Oh, I had to rant a little more. Why do they even bother putting in anything about Jane's childhood when they're going to rush through it like that and not really tie any of it in? And the dialogue!!! (amy2 said) It (Bronte's original) struck me as a damned sight better than the dumbed-down lines we were handed last night.. Yes, yes, yes! What was with the prudish "I can't" when Rochester asked for her hand after the bed-burning? So often they seemed to miss the spirit of a scene and the point of it all. I read critics who felt that this Jane spoke up for herself more. It seemed to me that all she did was whine more and ask more questions, not really show any of Jane's originality. OK, enough old postings copied here. The floor is open, let's hear some defense (or more attacks!).

I just posted a response to Topic 30. Does anyone know how this thing performed in the ratings? If it was a hit, I fear we will see "Sam Taylor's" Wuthering Heights soon....

Just an addendum: In a 30's film of MIDSUMMER NIGHT'S DREAM, the famous credits read: "By William Shakespeare Additional Dialog by Sam Taylor" --

That's great! In another topic, people are discussing their favorite lines from Jane Eyre, and re-reading some of those, it seems like such a crime to have mediocre writers re-craft a story that is so powerful. After all, if a book has lived this long on its own merits, do we need to have it re-written? I don't mind new interpretations or new film versions. For example, the A&E JE did have one scene that most of the other versions skip, namely Jane's "homecoming" to Thornfield after being with Aunt Reed for her death. I was so happy to see that included -- but then so put out with the "new" dialog that I could have cried. They seemed to understand the spirit of the scene--both characters happy to meet again after such a long time, Jane with fears that Rochester's marriage must be impending. For that matter, I was reminded how Rochester always referred to her as "sprite" and "malicious elf." Why oh why were these terms deemed unsuitable for tv audiences?

Seems everybody is pretty down on "Jane Eyre" these days... ;-) I find it kinda funny actually to hear people�s outraged comments on the adaptation. For my part, even though I read the book (more than once), consider it one of my favourite novels ever and find it a shame that no adaptation renders it full justice, I must confess that I didn`t find this particular adaptation all that bad. For one thing, it had a perfect actress for the role of Jane: Samantha Morton, who I had already loved as Harriet, in Emma3, and who I thought did a fine job of making Jane come alive in a vibrant, warm fashion. I thought she was perfectly clever in her acting and qui e sufficiently emtional and varied in her expressions. Then, Ciaran Hinds. I have never been a fan of his and his Rochester hasn`t made me change my mind, but he put a lot of anger and pain into his acting and I really liked that part (sth that most people hated). I think Mr Rochester is an angry, bitter man. And no amount of subtlety should cover up that fact. Besides that, he shared a rare kind of chemistry with Sam Morton and their love scenes are the best thing in the series (the kisses, especially :) Mrs Fairfax was perfect and much more believable than the one in the Dalton/Clarke version. I hated that cartoon of a housekeeper that they decided would make a good Mrs Fairfax. This one (Gemma Jones?) was much, much better and more emotional too. Adele was better too, IMHO. The other one looked like a doll and moved like one as well. In the end what lacked was the script: all those lovely lines that we so love were left out, all those endearing names that Rochester uses to call Jane mysteriously disappeared and many important scenes too. St John was OK, I guess, but not particularly good. Jane`s childhood is almost completely ignored and that is my main complaint. Gateshead and Lowood were mistreated. Too bad. With what they used from the book, they did a fine job, IMO. And no amount of bashing will make me change my mind, now that I�ve seen it two or three times. No adaptation has been "IT", for me, though, and I don`t think there`ll ever be a perfect one. It`s actually even absurd to think in those terms... Sorry about this being too long. Getting carried away is a habit with me.

That's OK, Luisa! It's refreshing to hear another P.O.V. I see that some on the Austen board liked this version as well. I think what's ultimately great about JE is READING the book, & hearing Charlotte's poetic language. No film can capture this quality, & that's why the novel will always be superior to any film version, IMHO.

Yep indeed, Amy! ;-)

I thought Ciaran Hinds made a perfect Mr. Rochester. I even liked him better than Orson Welles ( I never thought I'd say that about anyone). I have seen some hideous adaptations of the book (William Hurt? What were they thinking! What a waste of time!) When he proposed to her by the tree, when he wouldn't just let her leave, oh! and the reunion at the end. Call me shallow, but this is the most romantic thing I have seen in a very long time. Personally, and I have read the book, I think Ciaran Hinds' int rpretation of Mr. Rochester may have been what Charlotte Bronte had in mind when she wrote the book. Even if I'm wrong, I still love A&E's version best of all. C'est Magnifique!! There's my $0.02.

Hi Eva, & thanks for joining us! I thought Ciaran was wonderful as Bois-Guibert in IVANHOE, though I had my problems with the recent JE. I taped it though & should probably give it another chance by re-watching.

Hi again. Yes, I'll admit I've heard lots of people saying a second (or third) viewing is necessary to appreciate Cirian as Rochester. I suppose I should try to get the video (or hope A&E shows it again soon). Admittedly, it took a while for me to like him as Captain Wentworth in Persuasion. In that film, during my first viewing I thought he was too unemotional and poker-faced. So maybe, having grown accustomed to that version of the man, I just couldn't handle him being so very emotional. My biggest wish is that we could have a true to the book version (full length! with all my favorites from all the different versions. I'd love to see a young Orson Wells in the Dalton BBC version, for example. Anyone else want to play time travel games?

I actually loved Ciaran as Wentworth from the first get-go! Saw the film twice and just really enjoyed it! And he was marvelous in IVANHOE -- as we've discusssed on the Austen Board, he -was- the whole show! I did have a hard time with his Rochester, though -- it struck me as a bit over the top. Of course, I'm prejudiced because I loved Tim Dalton so much in the Beeb version. As far as ideal casting. . .how about a young Olivier as Rochester? Or a young Oliver Reed? Here's an off-the-wall one: Peter O'Tool! He seemed to have the requisite fire.