After a bleak childhood, Jane Eyre (Mia Wasikowska) goes out into the world to become a governess. As she lives happily in her new position at Thornfield Hall, she meets the dark, cold, and abrupt master of the house, Mr. Edward Rochester (Michael Fassbender). Jane and her employer grow close in friendship and she soon finds herself falling in love with him. Happiness seems to have found Jane at last, but could Mr. Rochester's terrible secret be about to destroy it forever?Written by
Mel Bellis in the U.K.
Director Cary Joji Fukunaga chose not to film any footage of Thornfield Hall burning down because he wanted this movie to feel like the novel, which is entirely first-person from Jane's perspective. In the book, Jane is not present for the fire, and Fukunaga didn't feel there was a way to include it organically in the movie. See more »
During the first meeting between Mrs Fairfax, Mr Rochester and Jane Eyre; Mrs Fairfax serves tea and then sits down with her cup. The cup she is holding is clearly empty. See more »
As an avid fan of the novel, I was very excited to see this preview and I have waited anxiously for the film. I finally saw it today at the threatre and it was wonderful! Excellent. This is the best film version of "Jane Eyre" yet (and I've seen most of them.) This is hands-down the best CASTING for "Jane Eyre" yet. I have never seen a more perfect Jane Eyre, Edward Rochester, or Mrs. Fairfax. Period. Jane brought tears to my eyes so many, many times in this film. She was simply perfect. Small, soft-spoken, young, composed, graceful, dignified, and lovely in her uniquely plain way. And Edward Rochester? Wow --what a ruggedly handsome man! He was certainly not "pretty-boy handsome"; but rugged, masculine, with sharp features, a deep voice, and a sometimes abrupt and harsh manner. He was exactly as described in "Jane Eyre!" BRAVO to you both, Michael Fassbender and Mia Wasikowska!
In my opinion, Fassbender and Wasikowska have finally given us perfect embodiments of all we adored in them.... Jane Eyre and Edward Rochester--two of the most beloved fictional characters of all time. Brilliant performances, really. I am truly delighted.
The sets, costumes, lighting, art, mood, cinematography, and score were all excellent. I hope the Academy Award is awake and paying attention!
Loving the novel as I do, I found a few flaws I must mention: I didn't think Blanche was nearly pretty enough; Bertha was not frightening enough; Rochester's kindnesses to Jane were not displayed here (an audience member might wonder why she loved him as she did); St. John Rivers was a much harsher character here --not gentle and lovable as he was in the book; and lastly, the film was less than two hours long and therefore too much was left out of the story. I fervently wish it could have been 20 or 30 minutes longer. Another 20 or 30 minutes might have helped the audience understand even better Jane's desolate past, her fierce love for Rochester, and her bright future.
That may sound like a lot of criticism, but you must consider what a masterpiece the novel "Jane Eyre" is. The novel is often considered ahead of its time due to its masterful portrayal of the development of a thinking and passionate young woman who is individualistic, desiring for a full life, while also highly moral.
Overall, I highly recommend the film. It was artfully told. I cried; I gasped; I laughed; I flinched; and I cried some more. I know I'll enjoy watching it again and again.
THANK YOU to the actors, director, and everyone involved in bringing this film to its fruition. Hopefully, it will prompt new generations of fans to read the novel and fall in love with Jane Eyre, as so many of us have since it was published in 1847.
This film is beautiful, romantic, frightening, sometimes funny, and ultimately very moving. See it on the big screen at the theatre. I think you'll love it!
112 of 150 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this