In This Section
|
« Masterpiece Theatre
January 21, 2007: Jane Eyre, Part 1
Charlotte Brontë’s famous governess comes to Masterpiece in this beautifully shaded, true-to-the-book, emotional powerhouse of an adaptation. Jane is a moneyless orphan who’s been taken in by her cruel Aunt Reed (Tara Fitzgerald), who had promised Jane’s dying uncle that she’d care for Jane to adulthood. Bitchy old Aunt Reed’s idea of caring, however, seems to mean pitting her three bratty children against young Jane, then blaming everything on Jane and calling her a liar. But Jane’s a fighter: Even at age 8, she has a resolute sense of right and wrong and a barrel full of self-possession and self-respect. Aunt Reed reacts by seeing Jane as the very spawn of Satan, and sends her off to a strict, regimented school for orphaned girls, never to be reunited again. Young Jane is perfectly, proudly portrayed by Georgie Henley, who you may recognize as Lucy from The Chronicles of Narnia. Her casting choice is perfect, because she’s a dead ringer for the grown-up Jane, played by newcomer Ruth Wilson.
The grown-up Jane comes into her own only when she is out of school and takes a job as a governess at Thornfield Hall, working for the oft-talked-about but rarely seen Mr. Rochester (Toby Stephens). Thornfield Hall becomes Jane’s first home, the only place she ever felt loved, happy and accepted. She is adored by her pupil, the little Adele, and gets a warm welcome from the plump and maternal Mrs. Fairfax, the housekeeper at the estate. And as for Jane and the moody and bossy Mr. Rochester: fire! The heat and chemistry between these two could set celluloid aflame. Despite their nearly 20-year gap in age, these two are equals from the start: The wit, sarcasm and verbal sparring is palpable, and they exude a sense of peerhood, teamwork and mutual understanding from the get-go. She is amused by his snarky, “changeable” self-hatred, and he instantly expects her to hold her own in conversation, always confiding in her and asking her advice. Theirs is a romance for the ages.
But there are obstacles, naturally, and some strange, mysterious goings-on to boot. Like what’s the deal with that nutto Grace Poole? Why’s she living up in the attic, hanging scarves out the window and setting people’s beds on fire? And why is Rochester flirting so heavily with Jane (like, hello, that fortune-telling scene!) yet still pursuing that snitty, shallow Blanche Ingram? His heartless games of the heart, mixed with his rough exterior, his childlike vulnerability and his constant need for Jane’s counsel are adorable but infuriating, and not a little cruel. And what’s going on with Aunt Reed, whose deathbed wish is to see Jane once more? Has that evil old meanie softened at all with age? While it pains me to see Jane and Rochester parted, we’re all dying to know what’s up in the Reed house, and whether Rochester will be engaged by the time Jane gets back from her trip to see Aunt Reed. By the way, how adorable was that parting scene between Jane and Rochester, debating how much money he owed her? That Jane drives a hard bargain, and Rochester loves it. Eat your heart out, Blanche Ingram.
|
TVGuide Links:
|
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2007 8:24 AM
|
|
Very well done, as expected. But why do these shows on PBS always look so washed out? The colors are barely evident unless there's a patch of red on the screen. I've checked with friends, and they report the same problem. Or perhaps the problem is confined to my state (Arkansas). All in all, it's a fine production, and an excellent way to become reacquainted with Bronte's characters.
|
|
Jan 22, 2007 9:42 AM
|
I would suspect that the art direction (with the washed out colors) is quite deliberate. At the school it's all a very bleak gray. Once she comes into Rochester's world, there is more color -- we have some actual green (though it is rare), and, after Rochester gives the story about the gray bird who has a bit of red beneath its wing that grows and becomes a firebird, we see Jane add a touch of red (and her shawl has even wine-read in it). I would bet that by the end of the story, we'll see far more rich colors (And if you look at the BBC production of Elizabeth: The Virgin Queen, she was usually shown in saturated color).
As a totally different comment, I recognized the actress playing Blanch Ingram from the UK Series Hex (plays on BBC America). It made me laugh during "supernatural" scenes as she played the Witch Cassie who had an affair with the fallen angel Azazel and gave birth to the anti-Christ. Way to pick an alternative partner, Mr. Rochester!
|
|
Jan 22, 2007 11:25 AM
|
|
I would just like to say that this is one of the best gothic mini-series that I've seen. That moment between Jane and Rochester in his when he wrapped the robe around her... WOW! It still makes me flushed thinking about it.
|
|
Jan 22, 2007 12:52 PM
|
|
Yes, but I've noticed the washed-out colors before, most recently on the series "To the Ends of the Earth." Sometimes it seems appropriate, other times not. I've also noticed that when I see the same show on the BBC in England, or when I buy the DVD of the show, its colors are generally much more vibrant.
|
|
Jan 22, 2007 2:21 PM
|
Jane Eyre is my favorite book of all time, followed by Little Women and Sense and Sensibility. So I've seen all 600 hundred versions of this story. I had trepidations, but I found myself really wrapped into the mini, and looking forward to part two, even though I know this story like the back of my hand.
I have to pay credit to the actors, they were excellent. I was so surprised by Toby Stephens, great actor, but when I first read he was cast as Rochester, I had my doubts. But to me, he seems to have captured his spirit.
I wish they had spent more time on Jane's childhood though. There is such rich story in her childhood years. They seemed to have rushed threw that. The relationship with Helen Burns was to short on screen. I was disappointed that they didn't show the vanity scene where their hair is cut, that's such a stand out moment. But, I realize that almost all the previous movies or minis have played out this scene one way or the other, and this mini has to stand out in it's on way. It has been almost ten years since the last version of this story was made for television and the screen, you have to make it fresh for the viewer who knows this story, who's scene all the rest, who still loves the black and white version with Joan Fontaine, for a viewer like me and many others.
I would recommend this mini to anyone who wants to give it a try. Also, if people haven't read this book yet, please do, you won't regret it. It is an absolute excellent read, even after all the years it's still speaks volumes. Nothing is more exciting than that first encounter of Rochester and Jane. Thank heavens for the British, they keep this costume drama whore so happy.
|
|
Jan 22, 2007 9:54 PM
|
This is a novel that I re-read every couple of years to the point that my edition is absolutely battered. I have been looking forward to this production of "Jane Eyre" for a couple of months and it did not disappoint. I think that I have seen every television and film adaptation and this is definitely in the top two. IMHO, the series featuring Timothy Dalton as Rochester was the best, most faithful adapation but this version compares well, particularly since the production values are superior. I am really enjoying the sexual chemistry portrayed by the actors, which is something not usually brought out in the other versions (but you should check out the bedroom scene in the Timothy Dalton version as well.) My one issue is that I know the novel so well that it is a little distracting because I can identify when there is a departure from the book's scenes and dialogue but I understand that every director and/or actor wants to put his/her own spin on the adaptation.
LadyoftheLake, I agree that I would have liked to have seen a few more minutes spent on Jane's childhood. Jane kept making the point that she had no friends and that she was almost starved at Lowood but it was brought out in the book and other film versions that after Helen's death, the living situation improved for the students and Jane had a gentle friend and mentor in Miss Temple. BTW, we have nearly identical tastes in literature but I would pick "Pride and Prejudice" over "Sense and Sensibility". 
|
|
Jan 23, 2007 8:54 AM
|
I adore the book Jane Eyre and always have been frustrated by movie/tv adaptations that have presented Jane without much of a sense of humor, etc. The dancing humor in her eyes as well as the subtle amused smirks really draws a more rounded character portrayal. Her bouncing on her bed all a flutter after the brief hand caress after the 'curtain fire' incident again speaks of that inner passion. I won't give away spoilers for those few of you who haven't read the book, but those sort of hints to the passionate side of Jane makes the rest of the story make a heck of a lot more sense.
Well done! I mean, in the A&E production of a few years back, poor Jane was so utterly dull and flat that Rochester would have been considered mad himself for being so passionate about her. It was no fault of the actrees playing that role in the A&E production, I believe it was the directors fault.
On another note, I agree Georgie was a perfect casting choice for young Jane. I have a feeling we'll be seeing a lot of this young actress as time goes on It's refreshing to see a younger version of an adult character actually LOOK like their adult version for a change as well
I definitely am looking forward to the second part and heck I might even donate a few bucks to PBS.
|
|
Jan 23, 2007 1:25 PM
|
BlueeyedSara, I've had many a debate with myself about 'Pride and Prejudice' and 'Sense and Sensibility'. For years it was a tie, but since 'Sense and Sensibility' introduced me to the world of Jane Austin, it has a special place in my heart.
I also agree with you on the Timothy Dalton version of Jane Eyre. It's definitely a product of it's time, the production values are not the best, but I believe the actors, script and director can make a paper train good if they really care about it.
|
|
Jan 23, 2007 7:05 PM
|
For the first time in forever maybe I stopped watching a Masterpiece Theatre after 15 minutes -- they left out the scene where Helen is forced to walk in circles in the ice cold rain, how she gets sick, why she dies, what makes Jane so very very set on getting out of the miserable orphanage her aunt sends her to. I was in shock. It's been a while since I read the book but I'm pretty certain Bronte wrote that scene.
Helen, her beautiful hair, her death scene -- that was Elizabeth Taylor's very first role.
Oh well. Next week: how will PBS ruin a good Philip Pullman novel.
Maybe when the Democrats reclaim the White House, public broadcasting will stop censoring and truncating literary masterpiece.
|
|
Jan 28, 2007 10:50 AM
|
Well, I'm ashamed to say that I was completely wrong -- I was blinded by the silver scrren Joan Fontaine/Orson Welles version of Bronte's book. The hair cutting episode in the book has nothing to do with Helen; it's Julia's beautiful red curls that cause the trouble; Helen has to wear a sign round her neck, but it's not Mr. Brocklehurst who punishes her. And she doesn't have to march round the courtyard in the freezing rain. She dies not of typhoid but of consumption (TB).
My apolgies to everyone. I will watch the entire series when it repeats.
|
|
Jan 29, 2007 12:07 PM
|
|
|
