Top News
WE CONTINUE TO SUPPORT MICHAEL-AN AWARD WINNING ACTOR

Congratulations to the cast and crew of "12 Years a Slave" winning an Oscar for Best Picture

Michael is currently filming "MacBeth"

Watch "12 Years A Slave" and "Frank" in theaters

Watch "The Counselor" and "12 Years A Slave" on DVD available now

Michael is set to star and produce on a film version of the video game "Assassin's Creed"

Completed projects: X-Men, Untitled Malik project

Upcoming projects Assassin's Creed, Prometheus 2, MacBeth,and more!

Header credit here

MFmultiply's Disclaimer


Order region 1 dvds-Amazon store

Order region 2-UK dvds-Amazon Shoppe

Please check the calender for films on TV, Theater, or dvd releases
August 2019
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Calendar Calendar


Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Page 3 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Thu Mar 17, 2011 7:52 pm

http://witneyman.wordpress.com/2011/03/17/jane-eyre-2011/

Jane Eyre (2011)

Film review by: Witney Seibold

Although there have been, according the The Internet Movie Database, 23 film versions of Charlotte Brontë‘s famed Jane Eyre, I have to admit that Cary Fukunaga‘s 2011 film was my first. I feel fortunate to have started here, as this was an excellent film that seemed to play the usual tropes of long-suffering romance just right. Even better than Jane Campion‘s charm-free “Bright Star” from last year, “Jane Eyre” seemed to hide its actual romance in stolen glances and distant regard. Most films that deal with chaste Victorian-era romances seem to tell the audience that the characters have a strong intelligent regard for one another, but we don’t necessarily feel it. “Jane Eyre,” with its smoky backgrounds, echoey, deep photography, and contemplative silences, allows the audience to actually be drawn into the steeltrap minds of the unspeaking characters. It is a triumph of subtle acting and stellar direction leading better than pat dialogue and sappy imagery.

The story, for those who don’t know it: Jane Eyre (Mia Wasikowska), tragically orpahaned, and hated by her sourpuss aunt (Sally Hawkins), was raised in a boarding school by a series of hateful and dour taskmasters, who regularly beat the girls. Through it all, she remained quietly obedient, and dutifully efficient, but fostered a deeply-felt sense of compassion. Upon graduation, she is hired to be the governess of a bratty French girl in the staggeringly remote mansion of Lord Rochester (Michael Fassbender), a deep-eyed man with a horribly obnoxious Byronic attitude. Jane proves herself to be just as dutiful and loyal as she was as school, and is well-approved by the biddyish housekeeper (Judi Dench). More than that, though, she finds herself oddly drawn to the intellectual prodding of Lord Rochester. He often grilled her, and her calm reserve in her answers reveals a great deal of rapport between the two. This is a film where what is not said says more than what is.

There is also a palpable and creepy cloud of fear hanging over the manor. There are mysterious fires in the night, odd thumping noises from the walls, and Lord Rochester’s enigmatic vanishings. Is the manor haunted, Jane wonders? She has grown up with the fear of ghosts misting about her, and all she can think of are supernatural horrors.

Eventually, Lord Rochester, poised to wed a shallow debutante, confesses his feeling for Jane, and the plot takes an unexpected turn. In case you haven’t read the book, I won’t tell you what happens next, suffice to say that it has something to do with the manor’s ghost.

There is also a bookend story, where we see the rain-soaked Jane found and adopted by a wealthy local (Jamie Bell), and her mysterious refusal to reveal her backstory. She does, however, manage to find a newfound place for herself in this new world.

But this is not a film about it’s big reveal, nor is it a mystery story. My guess is that Fukunaga assumed you knew the twists in the tale, and chose, instead, to focus on the relationship between Jane and Rochester. The result, then, is a relationship that we actually believe. One that’s based on real intellectual respect, and not on plot contrivances or callow romantic fantasy. It’s a romance that feels, well, romantic. What a relief to be freed of the bonds of filmmakers who take the mildly farcical Jane Austen so seriously, and released into a world of real humanity as filtered through great literature.

In their roles, Wasikowska and Fassbender are excellent, and manage to prop up most of the film. Ina story about people’s inner workings, it’s grand to have actors who can say so much with their expressions. Wasikowska, with her pale mask and frightened lips, prjects her character merely by sitting still. Fassbender seems to transform from a broody asshole into a softened lover without any noticeable shift in character.

If you’ve not seen any “Jane Eyre” films in the past, I encourage you to start with this one.

on March 17, 2011 at 2:48 pm Leave a Comment
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Thu Mar 17, 2011 7:54 pm

http://www.kulturblog.com/2011/03/movie-review-jane-eyre/

Movie review: Jane Eyre
by Supergenius

Readers, take note: JANE EYRE might be a chick flick, but I highly enjoyed it despite my predisposition against all period pieces. The acting is superior, the dialogue is terrific, the cinematography and direction are stellar. Honestly it’s the best Bronte adaptation by far. Is it worth your precious time?

The 2-volume Bronte work is not for the faint of heart; it is a long book, in my opinion not a terribly interesting book and definitely a daunting book for anyone considering a screen adaptation. Poor Jane, an orphan, finds cruel treatment first at the hands of her deceitful aunt then in the draconian straits of Lowood School. She then is placed as a governess at mysterious Thornfield Hall, owned by the brooding, capricious Edward Rochester (Michael Fassbender). What will become of young Jane, who searches for love and purpose? What secrets lurk in the dark attics of Thornfield Hall?

The adaptation here is not linear; it jumps forward and backwards in time in ways that work well to keep the viewer engaged, as Jane’s reactions are gradually informed by her past and her ongoing struggle to be herself. Jane is humiliated and beaten, and yet she retains her hope, her candor and her liveliness. So this bildungsroman is told first from the point of view of the very nearly finished story, then flashing back to Jane as a work-in-progress. It’s effective and helps us retain interest. The pacing is tight and the dialogue has a tremendous sense of momentum, even during fireside chats. Cary Fukunaga, whose previous film Sin Nombre had similar crispness, is a master of giving commonplace social engagements a sense of importancy and urgency. Some might complain that the romance seems too abrupt, too jarring, but I felt this was the perfect way to convey the level of surprise and class strife that fills the book.

The casting also works extremely well. Mia Wasikowska, previously seen in Alice In Wonderland, is an effortless actress; indeed for much of JANE EYRE she appears to not be acting much at all, instead serving as a blank canvas for the anguish and beauty of the moors around her. An yet her Jane is not altogether passive – she speaks frankly and boldly with Mr. Rochester and others, and while she lets the tragedies of her life wash over her she nonetheless does not let them determine her character; as she insists to Mr. Rochester, “I have no tale of woe.” Michael Fassbender for his part is an effective Byronic character, injecting a sense of humor behind the romantic broodings of the role. Judi Dench is also on hand in a minor role as a housekeeper, a role she plays out to the full extent of its possibility.

The film itself is beautiful; flooded with natural light, the moors look gorgeous and are the perfect backgroup to the romanticism of the story. There were two scenes of jogging camera that didn’t work, but otherwise the film reflects an eye for natural sensibility and striking visuals.

Anyways, I walked into the film expecting to hate it. Instead I highly enjoyed JANE EYRE and recommend it.
March 17, 2011 i
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Thu Mar 17, 2011 7:55 pm

http://lgbtweekly.com/2011/03/17/jane-may-be-plain-but-jane-eyre-is-extraordinary/

Jane may be plain, but ‘Jane Eyre’ is extraordinary
Posted by LGBT Weekly Latest Issue, Movie Review Thursday, March 17th, 2011

By Ted Gideonse, San Diego LGBT Weekly

Directed by Cary Fukunaga

Written by Moira Buffini

Starring Mia Wasikowska, Michael Fassbender, and Judi Dench

Rated PG-13

At Landmark Hillcrest

In the last 100 years, there have been 19 films based on Charlotte Bronte’s classic 1847 novel Jane Eyre. Yes, 19. The director of the most recent, Cary Fukunaga, joked in The New York Times last week that a new version has to be made every five years.

I must admit, however, that despite the number of film versions, some of which are considered classics, I’ve never seen any of them until I saw Fukunaga’s. And, worse, I haven’t read the novel. So, this either means I’m a philistine or it means that I actually have a fresh eye with which to critique this new Jane Eyre. I think it’s wonderful: a gorgeous and moving love story.

A number of the plot points in Jane Eyre are now classic tropes of modern love stories. Jane (Mia Wasikowska) is an orphan taken in, and then hated by her wealthy, cruel aunt. She is sent to a horrible, brutal boarding school, where she grows up and learns, against her will, to be subservient.

Eventually, she is hired to be the governess for a French girl who is the ward of Edward Rochester (Michael Fassbender), a rich and quite cranky man who only occasionally visits the massive and very, very creepy estate where Jane and the girl live. (In fact, Fukunaga’s Jane Eyre is scarier than Red Riding Hood.)

But when Rochester does visit, he notices that Jane is more than a mousey governess. While haughty and suspicious, she’s also kind, talented, and, when prompted, can match him wit for wit. They fall in love. And then major complications ensue, and Jane and Rochester are kept apart.

A classic heterosexual love story, it is also a proto-feminist one, and Jane Eyre speaks to anyone who has been unfairly kept from who they love because of status, manners, propriety and old-fashioned expectations of how men and women must behave.

While the book, like many epic British novels of the Victorian era, is quite long and intricately plotted, Fukunaga’s Jane Eyre is smartly taut, with Moira Buffini’s screenplay restructuring the telling of the plot without losing any of its themes or power. Fukunaga also retains the beauty of Bronte’s prose, not by using voice-over but by shooting the movie with literary precision: exquisitely detailed costumes, moody cinematography and scenes as rhythmically paced as any great novel.

But a movie like Jane Eyre is going to succeed or fail with its Jane and its Rochester. Wasikowska, who was the eponymous Alice in Wonderland and the daughter in The Kids Are All Right, is pale and plain but still radiates a quiet beauty. Like a great actress of much more experience, she communicates with the subtlest of movements a storm of emotions behind her carefully constrained facial expressions. But when Rochester brings her out of her shell, she is, to use a very modern term, quite snarky.

This charms Rochester, played by Michael Fassbender, who most people in the United States know only from playing a dapper, doomed British officer in Inglourious Basterds. While Rochester is in some ways an ass – angry, arrogant and bitter – he is also dutiful, mostly honorable and capable of all sorts of aristocratic charm. Fassbender easily shifts back and forth between all of these qualities while also being as sexy as any Victorian man on screen since Jeremy Northam in the 1996 version of Emma.

Posted by LGBT Weekly on Mar 17 2011.
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Thu Mar 17, 2011 7:57 pm

http://arts.nationalpost.com/2011/03/17/film-review-jane-eyre-3-stars/

Film Review: Jane Eyre (3 stars)

Alliance

Now, if Michael Fassbender’s Rochester was just a smidgeon better- or worse-looking, this totally wouldn’t work. But because he isn’t, the chemistry with Mia Wasikowska’s Jane Eyre is swoon-worthy.

Nathalie Atkinson Mar 17, 2011 – 6:45 PM ET | Last Updated: Mar 17, 2011 6:10 PM ET

It is a truth universally acknowledged, that — oops sorry, wrong novel.

I meant to quote Charlotte Brontë’s beloved classic (a bestseller since 1847), but “reader, I married him” felt like too much of a spoiler. And despite the many film and television adaptations (this latest makes it 29), even the most famous bits of Jane Eyre aren’t as endlessly quotable as that other chick-lit Jane Austen.

Brontë’s pithy passages may be fewer but hers is among the most widely read novel in English, with enduring appeal: it’s been prequeled by Jean Rhys (Wide Sargasso Sea), spoofed by SCTV (Andrea Martin as Jane Eyrehead) and Sesame Street, parodied by Jasper Fforde (his bestselling The Eyre Affair), even spawned intertextual reworkings, also known as paraliterature, such as Mrs. Rochester, Jane Rochester or Kay Woodward’s teen novel Jane Airhead (to say nothing of the torrid fan-fic).

“I will show you a heroine as plain and as small as myself,” Brontë told her writerly sister at the time of writing, and nearly 150 years later, Mia Wasikowska (Alice in Wonderland) has finally shown us Brontë’s perfect heroine. As the exceedingly plain Jane, Wasikowska is, quite simply, sublime. A revelation. She manages to be simultaneously mousy and luminous, offering a well-timed smirk and a terse riposte to Rochester’s interrogations that balances respect with subtle insolence.

I often find the leads in these unevenly matched, but thanks to Cary Fukunaga (Sin Nombre), my inner incurable romantic can now die happy. The hipster director, 33, manages to move convincingly from the Gothic things that go bump in the night to “you transfix me, quite.”

Messrs. Heathcliff, Rochester and Darcy are the holy trinity of 19th-century romantic heroes. For diehard fans, the novels themselves can’t be improved on, so the success of any adaptation hinges on the casting of the immortal lovers. Austenites and Eyreaholics alike play with these cast lists like a fantasy baseball team, remixing personal favourites to hypothetical perfection: aligning spunky Keira Knightley Eliza with the debonair Colin Firth Darcy, say, or arguing that Greer Garson plus Matthew Macfadyen would make for the perfect P&P, and so on. Of these Byronic heroes, however, Rochester is my favourite — neither as tortured and cruel as Heathcliff nor as capricious as Darcy. Long-suffering and mercurial, but also gallant and tender.

The key is that Rochester not be particularly handsome, but he’s not hideous, either. He’s charismatic, but can’t have too much Byronic swagger. Toby Stephens, in the most recent Eyre BBC miniseries, was too dashing a matinee idol Rochester (think Hugh Grant, distractingly crossed with Hugh Jackman) and let’s not even talk about George C. Scott’s ridiculous 1970 attempt to woo Susannah York.

Enter Michael Fassbender (Centurion, Hunger), who registers a 9.8 on the Rochester swooniness scale. He smolders convincingly, and matter-of-factly enough. “You rare unearthly thing — I must have you for my own.” And left unsatisfied, Fassbender’s hollow cries for Jane are as feral as Brando’s Stanley howling after Stella.

You know the story, right? Here are the Coles Notes: orphaned heroine Jane endures a Dickensian childhood — loveless and harshly bullied at a religious school, her crown of braids might as well be thorns. She grows up to be a plucky but ordinary governess, befriends housekeeper Mrs. Fairfax (Judi Dench), and eventually wins the heart of one Mr. Edward Rochester, the master of the house. The wind gusts, the moors are damp and the first Mrs. Rochester rattles around in the attic of dank, drafty Thornfield Hall.

There’s only so much wiggle room from the source material (it’s often scene-for-scene of previous screen Eyres) but thanks to fine chemistry between the leads, familiar passages and scenes feel fresh and ring truest. Interpreting the poetry of Brontë’s prose, cinematographer Adriano Goldman makes the most of natural light — the muted cold shades and flat light of the exteriors contrast with warm chiaroscuro interiors. These are often moodily bathed in the Rembrandt-like amber of flickering candlelight or flames. About that recurring erotic imagery of flames: Jane rescues Rochester in the middle of the night by putting out a fire in his bedchamber *cough* and returning to her own room, sleeplessly burns with desire until dawn. With strategic pauses and meaningful silences, that scene manages to be more sexually charged than if they embraced.

“You that I love as my own flesh, when we have parted, when you leave me, I believe that bond will snap, and I will bleed inwardly.”

Swoon.
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Thu Mar 17, 2011 8:17 pm

http://newcityfilm.com/2011/03/16/review-jane-eyre/

Mar 16
Review: Jane Eyre
RECOMMENDED

Screenwriter Moira Buffini (“Tamara Drewe”) adapts Charlotte Brontë’s 1847 novel for a nuanced saga of a resolute orphan who survives a sadistic cousin, a cruel aunt and an abusive headmaster. About a decade later, this young woman (Mia Wasikowska, “Alice in Wonderland,” “The Kids Are All Right”) secures a position as the governess in a drafty estate. She can deal with gothic lore about a female vampire haunting the premises, but her tormented master Rochester (Michael Fassbender, “Hunger,” “Fish Tank”) presents her with romantic as well as Human Resources challenges. She looks plain, talks smart and stands fast. Despite a few flashback pathways and Gothic manifestations that fizzle, this “Jane Eyre” excels. Dialogue sounds closer to Brontë’s prose than what’s typically heard in BBC period imports on PBS. (In a minor instance, the novel’s “automaton” is reworded as “machine.”) Cary Joji Fukunaga (“Sin Nombre”) directs with attention to the text and respect for the characters. Cinematographer Adriano Goldman composes daytime shots of estate interiors with a keen eye. Buffini’s screenplay, though, scarcely cues twenty-first century viewers to “the backlash against the novel as a… burning testament of impermissible rage which breathed the revolutionary fire of Chartism and the European revolutions of the late 1840′s” that Welsh novelist Stevie Davies reports. This author of “Unbridled Spirits: Women of the English Revolution 1640-1660″ adds: “`Jane Eyre’ is a radical, secular and feminist modern revision of ‘The Pilgrim’s Progress.’” Even without footnotes, this screen version passes with honor. With Judi Dench, Jamie Bell, Sally Hawkins, Simon McBurney, Imogen Poots. 120m. (Bill Stamets)

“Jane Eyre” opens Friday at Landmark Century.
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Thu Mar 17, 2011 8:25 pm

http://www.dentonrc.com/sharedcontent/dws/drc/entertainment/movies/stories/DRC_dt_Jane_Eyre_0317.1f4301477.html

Girl, reinterpreted

‘Jane Eyre’ strays just a touch from chapter and verse

06:51 PM CDT on Thursday, March 17, 2011

By Boo Allen / Film Critic

On its own, the new Jane Eyre is a good, well-crafted, thoughtful translation of Charlotte Bronte’s revered 1847 novel. But it is impossible for any version of Jane Eyre to simply stand on its own.

Mia Wasikowska stars as the title character of the romantic drama Jane Eyre, directed by Cary Fukunaga.

Around 20 other versions of Jane Eyre have already appeared, from TV miniseries to simple transference of plot (Wide Sargasso Sea). So, any upstart director faces two challenges in confronting Jane Eyre: Give the latest version some sort of fresh twist either in character, cinematic technique, or in the narrative — something guaranteed to upset the novel’s purists — or, simply film it faithfully and hope its rewards overshadow the redundancy.

This new version from director Cary Fukunaga (Sin Nombre) with script from Moira Buffini, uses both approaches. Fukunaga dutifully hits the high points of the familiar narrative: Jane’s penurious childhood (with Amelia Clarkson as young Jane) with a severe aunt (Sally Hawkins); her time at boarding school and her time spent with St. John Rivers (Jamie Bell) and his sisters. Finally, Fukunaga settles on her time as governess (with Mia Wasikowska as adult Jane) at the ancestral home of Edward Fairfax Rochester (Michael Fassbender).

Only after Jane’s arrival at the mysterious castle does the story kick in. As Jane and Rochester spend more time together, their mutual but unspoken affection grows, obvious to both even if he looks like her father and treats her that way as well.

The plot’s well-known main twist threatens the possibility of their union. But, without giving anything away, the longevity of this romantic novel obviously suggests eventually happier days and an ending guaranteed to please.

The story needs only a few rural settings, none of them as elaborate as those found in the pomp and dress balls of Pride and Prejudice. The film stays in a sort of sepia-toned haze, as if color would ruin the mood. Even when spring sports green grasses and blooming trees, the color remains dull and hardly noticeable.

Wasikowska is a fine young actress, and she makes a plausible Jane, although she might not fit some people’s idea of what Jane would look like. But who could? As Rochester, Fassbender, whatever his age, adequately conveys the sense of mystery and despair that his character demands.

MOVIE RATING

Jane Eyre

***

Rated PG-13, 115 minutes. Opens Friday at the Angelika Dallas.
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Thu Mar 17, 2011 8:26 pm

http://thetfs.ca/2011/03/17/review-jane-eyre-2/

Review: Jane Eyre
By Dasha Kotova · March 17, 2011
Reviews · Tagged: Cary Fukunaga, Charlotte Bronte, Jamie Bell, Jane Eyre, Judi Dench, Mia Wasikowska, Michael Fassbender
Jane Eyre 2011 (7)

Film adaptations of well-known, highly acclaimed books are risky endeavours because it is impossible to capture everything within the novel and live up to every reader’s perception of it. It can be difficult to perceive the movie as its own thing without reverting to comparisons with the work that inspired it. Since Jane Eyre was a teenage fixation of mine, I couldn’t really avoid letting it have an effect on how I took in Cary Fukunaga’s adaptation. I found that this version represents the essence of the novel’s character extremely well, but the overall structure of the film lacked consistency and determination. It was generally enjoyable, though it catered to the modern audience in ways that didn’t serve the story.

Based on the novel by Charlotte Bronte, Jane Eyre tells the story of a young governess (Mia Wasilkowska) whose reserved demeanour conceals a complex, imaginative and passionate personality. When her wealthy employer, Edward Rochester (Michael Fassbender) meets her, he becomes so intrigued by her that he is determined to get to know her, despite the class differences that were so significant in their time. As their feelings for each other intensify, strange events in the big, spooky house make Jane suspect that Mr. Rochester is hiding a dark secret. Jane’s story is revealed along with insights into her painful childhood through a series of flashbacks.

The quality of the acting is what really makes the film. Wasilkowska proves incredibly suitable for the role of the title character. She captures just the right spirit of a person who was described both as plain and otherworldly. Her performance shows a high degree of subtlety with a quiet manner that nonetheless hints at Jane’s rich inner life. Even when she’s just sitting around, you’d never make the mistake of assuming that she has nothing much going on in her mind. Her co-star, Fassbender, manages to be charismatic as Edward Rochester without entirely going against his character’s difficult personality. Appearances by Judi Dench and Jamie Bell are wonderful as well. The movie succeeds on the strength of the book’s unique characters and the actors’ compelling interpretation of them.

Although the performances are consistently rich and hypnotic, there are a few things in this movie that aren’t so well done. The biggest overarching problem is the film’s inability to stick to a certain mode, which made the pace rather uneven. It’s as if the director couldn’t quite decide what vibe to go for with this adaptation; how to strike a balance between sticking to the eerie and disturbing plot points and making the characters relatable.

As a story, Jane Eyre cannot be tampered with in order to be made more relevant to today’s audience. The characters are interesting and believable enough to fascinate each generation, but they are also more disturbing than romantic. Much as it’s fascinating to explore their personalities, it’s not always easy to justify their relationship. Because of this, trying to adapt the book to modern tastes does not necessarily benefit the work as it seems there’s no convincing way to do it. Softening the story’s creepy aspects makes it seem half-assed and confusing. Taking the focus away from the supposedly romantic side of the plot by concentrating on gloomy atmospheres and Jane’s emotional life was actually a good call on Cary Fukunaga’s part. This approach took some elements that were present in the book and made them more prominent. However, glossing over Jane’s abusive background and her troubling dynamic with Mr. Rochester, while trying to lighten up the mood with fabricated humorous moments, did not jive with the story. It just came across as a bunch of contrived tricks that cheapened the impact of the film.

Despite the shortcomings, this version of Jane Eyre is still worthwhile and enjoyable. Aided by hauntingly beautiful English scenery and the sorts of lovely costumes that period-drama fans get excited about, it definitely has an appeal. For the most part, it is the cast`s performances that make it worth seeing.
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Thu Mar 17, 2011 8:27 pm

http://www.moviesummary.net/jane-eyre/

Jane Eyre

by Michael The Moviegoer on March 17, 2011

Movie summary of Jane Eyre by Michael The Moviegoer
JANE EYRE = ***

“Love Is In The Eyre”

A new screen version of Charlotte Bronte’s Victorian-era romance novel “Jane Eyre” is the unlikely follow-up to director Cary Joji Fukunaga’s previous film “Sin Nombre”. It’s a faithful adaptation in every sense of the word. It’s not a reboot or a modernized update. It has the classical pacing of british Masterpiece Theatre and doesn’t feel any more modern than Franco Zeffirelli’s exquisite 1996 version.

This time around, Jane is played by Mia Wasikowska from “The Kids Are All Right” and “Alice In Wonderland”. The gorgeous cinematography looks very much like a pre-CGI era film. The only special effect in this movie comes from the make-up and costume designers who manage to make the impossibly beautiful Wasikowska into a believably homely plain Jane.

If you don’t know the novel or any of the previous film versions, the story of “Jane Eyre” is a bizarre combination of “Cinderella” and “Psycho”. Jane is the governess to the ward of the wealthy Mr. Rochester, played here by Michael Fassbender from “Inglourious Basterds” and “Fish Tank”. She lives in Rochester’s mansion Thornfield Hall where a romance develops between them even as he seems to be keeping a sinister secret up in the attic.

Although the film is a straightforward british romance drama, so many of the mysterious elements involved in their relationship have made it easy to cut a trailer for this film that makes it look like a teen horror film. Beware audiences hoping for that type of movie. The trailer is deceptive. This is not the movie it’s being advertised as being.

That should be welcome news to fans of Bronte’s novel. This “Jane Eyre” is one of the better versions you’re likely to see. Emotional, passionate and heartbreaking. An earnest attempt to capture the heart of Bronte’s story.

DVD Double Feature:

My favorite film version of “Jane Eyre” remains the 1996 version directed by Franco Zeffirelli. Charlotte Gainsbourg played Jane, with Anna Paquin playing her in the early scenes, just shortly after winning an Oscar for “The Piano”. William Hurt plays Rochester. The rest of the cast includes Elle Macpherson, Joan Plowright, Geraldine Chaplin and Maria Schneider.

Michael The Moviegoer
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Thu Mar 17, 2011 8:27 pm

http://itsjustmovies.com/10899

Under Review: ‘Jane Eyre’

– by ADAM POYNTER –

Focus Features — well known for its award-winning independent dramas — is taking us back to the time of courtship, suffering, forbidden love and tragedy in “Jane Eyre.”

Not having read the novel, I went in with the thought of period romantic dramas like “Pride and Prejudice,” but the dark and dreary settings and the way the movie is shot ended up reminding me of styles found in Tim Burton’s “Alice in Wonderland,” mixed with the mood of “Mary Reilly.” “Jane Eyre” is as much about the limitations put on women in the past as it is a romantic drama. It is a delicate and enigmatic tale woven from the bonds of societal expectations put on the women of that time.

Mia Wasikowska — who plays the title role — is certainly proving herself to be quite talented. She was first introduced to a mainstream audience as Alice in the previously-mentioned “Alice in Wonderland,” and then as the daughter of two lesbians who wants to know more about her past in “The Kids Are All Right.” Now, by bringing Charlotte Brontë’s iconic character Jane to life, she is well on her way to establishing herself as a new leading lady in Hollywood. Her portrayal of Jane is emotional and yet reserved; you can see the sadness in her eyes as she pretends to be indifferent. Her character design was pale and a bit unseemly, but that might have been the point, as Mr. Rochester saw the beauty within her.

Michael Fassbender is great opposite of Wasikowska in his rendition of the flawed, but charismatic Mr. Rochester. I found many of the scenes between these two to be quirky and fun. I believed their chemistry and barely noticeed the age difference between them while watching the movie. Fassbender is also showing much diversity in the roles he chooses. He was just a Roman warrior on the run in “Centurion” and this summer he will play Magneto in “X-Men: First Class.”

The settings in “Jane Eyre” are beautiful, but one major problem with the movie is the lack of light. Almost every single scene is lit by a few candles and although this may be to help set the somber and mysterious mood of the film, I found others complaining that certain scenes were hard for them to see what was going on. However, I thought the way it was lit and shot gave it the feeling of a thriller at times and helped during slower times in the story. I enjoyed and was taken aback at the emotionality in the story when it seemed to start off so cold and desolate. There are a few scenes where the two leads just explode with heart-wrenching emotions as they discuss their feelings for each other and their possible future together.

“Jane Eyre” — which is rated PG-13 for thematic elements and brief violence — also stars Judy Dench, Jamie Bell, Amelia Clarkson, Sophie Ward and Joseph Klowska. It is playing in limited release now.
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Fri Mar 18, 2011 3:25 pm

http://arts.nationalpost.com/2011/03/17/film-review-jane-eyre-3-stars/

Film Review: Jane Eyre (3 stars)

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Jane-eyre


Now, if Michael Fassbender’s Rochester
was just a smidgeon better- or worse-looking, this totally wouldn’t
work. But because he isn’t, the chemistry with Mia Wasikowska’s Jane
Eyre is swoon-worthy.






Nathalie Atkinson
Mar 17, 2011 – 6:45 PM ET
| Last Updated: Mar 18, 2011 11:31 AM ET

It is a truth universally acknowledged, that — oops sorry, wrong novel.
I meant to quote Charlotte Brontë’s beloved classic (a bestseller
since 1847), but “reader, I married him” felt like too much of a
spoiler. And despite the many film and television adaptations (this
latest makes it 29), even the most famous bits of Jane Eyre aren’t as endlessly quotable as that other chick-lit Jane, Austen.
Brontë’s pithy passages may be fewer but hers is among the most
widely read novel in English, with enduring appeal: it’s been prequeled
by Jean Rhys (Wide Sargasso Sea), spoofed by SCTV (Andrea Martin as Jane Eyrehead) and Sesame Street, parodied by Jasper Fforde (his bestselling The Eyre Affair) and even spawns intertextual reworkings, also known as paraliterature, such as Mrs. Rochester, Jane Rochester or Kay Woodward’s teen novel Jane Airhead (to say nothing of the torrid fan-fic).
“I will show you a heroine as plain and as small as myself,” Brontë
told her writerly sister at the time of writing, and nearly 150 years
later, Mia Wasikowska (Alice in Wonderland) has finally shown
us Brontë’s perfect heroine. As the exceedingly plain Jane, Wasikowska
is, quite simply, sublime. A revelation. She manages to be
simultaneously mousy and luminous, offering a well-timed smirk and a
terse riposte to Rochester’s interrogations that balances respect with
subtle insolence.
I often find the leads in these unevenly matched, but thanks to Cary Fukunaga (Sin Nombre),
my inner incurable romantic can now die happy. The hipster director,
33, manages to move convincingly from the Gothic things that go bump in
the night to “you transfix me, quite.”
Messrs. Heathcliff, Rochester and Darcy are the holy trinity of
19th-century romantic heroes. For diehard fans, the novels themselves
can’t be improved on, so the success of any adaptation hinges on the
casting of the immortal lovers. Austenites and Eyreaholics alike play
with these cast lists like a fantasy baseball team, remixing personal
favourites to hypothetical perfection: aligning the spunky Keira
Knightley Eliza with the debonair Colin Firth Darcy, say, or arguing
that Greer Garson plus Matthew Macfadyen would add up to the perfect Pride & Prejudice,
and so on. Of these Byronic heroes, however, Rochester is my favourite —
neither as tortured and cruel as Heathcliff nor as capricious as Darcy.
Long-suffering and mercurial, but also gallant and tender.
The key is that Rochester not be particularly handsome — but not
hideous, either. He’s charismatic, but can’t have too much Byronic
swagger. Toby Stephens, in the most recent Eyre BBC miniseries,
was too dashing a matinee idol Rochester (think Hugh Grant,
distractingly crossed with Hugh Jackman) and let’s not even talk about
George C. Scott’s ridiculous 1970 attempt to woo Susannah York.
Enter Michael Fassbender (Centurion, Hunger), who
registers a 9.8 on the Rochester scale. He smolders convincingly, and
matter-of-factly enough. “You rare unearthly thing — I must have you for
my own.” Left unsatisfied, Fassbender’s hollow cries for Jane are as
feral as Brando’s Stanley howling after Stella.
You know the story, right? Here are the Coles Notes: orphaned heroine
Jane endures a Dickensian childhood — loveless and harshly bullied at a
religious school, her crown of braids might as well be thorns. She
grows up to be a plucky but ordinary governess, befriends housekeeper
Mrs. Fairfax (Judi Dench), and eventually wins the heart of one Mr.
Edward Rochester, the master of the house. The wind gusts, the moors are
damp and the first Mrs. Rochester rattles around in the attic of drafty
Thornfield Hall.
There’s only so much wiggle room from the source material (indeed,
this latest is often scene-for-scene of previous screen Eyres) but
thanks to fine chemistry between the leads, the familiar passages and
scenes feel fresh and ring truest. Interpreting the poetry of Brontë’s
prose, cinematographer Adriano Goldman makes the most of natural light —
the muted cold shades and flat light of the exteriors contrast with
warm chiaroscuro interiors. These are often moodily bathed in the
Rembrandt-like amber of flickering candlelight or flames. About that
recurring erotic imagery of flames: Jane rescues Rochester in the middle
of the night by putting out a fire in his bedchamber *cough*
and returning to her own room, sleeplessly burning with desire until
dawn. With strategic pauses and meaningful silences, that scene manages
to be more sexually charged than if they embraced.
“You that I love as my own flesh, when we have parted, when you leave
me, I believe that bond will snap, and I will bleed inwardly.”

Swoon.
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Fri Mar 18, 2011 3:28 pm

http://www.cbc.ca/news/arts/things-that-go-pop-blog/2011/03/film-review-jane-eyre.html

FILM REVIEW: Jane Eyre

* March 18, 2011 1:00 AM
* By Eli Glasner

Jane EyreMia Wasikowska stars as the title character of the romantic drama Jane Eyre, directed by Cary Fukunaga. (Laurie Sparham/Alliance Films)

Jane Eyre is the latest addition to what I call the "Big Dress" genre. The challenge with these historical Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous dramas is engendering sympathy for characters whose biggest concern is whether to use the bone china for afternoon tea. Still, I went in with an open mind and looking for love.

Underneath the bustles and bonnets, the best examples of this literature-inspired genre explore essential human truths. Thankfully, this is the case with the refreshingly original Jane Eyre, thanks to a young director not afraid to take liberties with the Charlotte Bronte classic and a more than capable cast.

Rising star Cary Fukunaga borrows a trick from Quentin Tarantino by starting the movie in the middle: with a young Jane Eyre fleeing across a field -- a dark blot on a grey and miserable landscape. That's another hint of what sets Fukunaga's adaptation apart. His Jane Eyre is no lush and lovely Merchant Ivory production. Set in Northern England in the mid-19th century, Fukunaga depicts a puritanical, hardscrabble existence. He underscores the setting by using natural light and darkness to increase the sense of isolation.

Now if there's a consistent formula to "Big Dress" pictures, it's the storyline. Most offer basic variations on "handsome-but-rugged iconoclast meets dowdy heroine with a forked tongue and a razor wit." Jane Eyre fits into this mould like a well-worn corset. Michael Fassbender portrays Mr. Edward Rochester, a glorious grump and the master of Thornfield Hall. Mia Wasikowska plays Jane, the new governess charged with taking care of his adorable French ward, Adèle.

Before we settle into Thornfield, however, Fukunaga takes us back through the horrors of Jane's early life. Orphaned and then abandoned, she's sent away to a brutal boarding school where she's taunted and treated as a liar. Actress Amelia Clarkson gives us the first glimpse of young Jane and her unshakable sense of self shining through the gloom.

Still, it's when the story returns to Jane facing off against the cantankerous Rochester that the film blooms. Much of the pleasure comes from their verbal sparring matches, with Rochester stunned to find someone who doesn't cower before him. Fassbender (who did some stunning work of his own in the amazing movie Hunger) makes a fine Victorian idol. With his jutting chin and high forehead, he resists the temptation to succumb too soon to Jane's charms.

Michael Fassbender and Mia WasikowskaMichael Fassbender, left, portrays Mr. Rochester opposite Mia Wasikowska's Jane Eyre. (Laurie Sparham/Alliance Films)

As the supposedly plain Jane, Mia Wasokowska is a far cry from the polished heroine of Alice in Wonderland. The steeliness in her gaze both distinguishes her and draws Fassbender's poor Rochester in.

Compared to other versions of Jane Eyre, Fukunaga draws out the suspense and keeps the couple glowering at each other until that moment in a sun-drenched meadow when everything changes.

Credit also goes to the playwright Moira Buffini, who managed to condense Bronte's novel but retain much of the original's baroque language

Jane: Everything seems unreal.

Rochester: I am real enough.

Jane: You, sir, are the most phantom-like of all.

A gothic ghost story brimming with emotion, this new Jane Eyre is a satisfying feast for the eyes and this critic's heart.

Rating: Four bonnets out of five
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:35 pm

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/mar/18/jane-eyre-a-worthy-addition/

‘Jane Eyre’ a worthy addition
Source material isn’t fresh, but Cary Fukunaga’s version is alluring and satisfying

By Alison Gang

Originally published March 18, 2011 at 11:21 a.m., updated March 18, 2011 at 11:20 a.m.
“Jane Eyre”

Rating: PG-13

When: Opens Friday

Where: Landmark Hillcrest

Running time: 1 hour, 55 minutes

★★★

Mia Wasikowska stars as the title character in the latest adaptation of “Jane Eyre.” Laurie Sparham

Hollywood isn’t exactly brimming with originality these days, so when you learn of yet another film version of Charlotte Brontë’s 1847 classic novel “Jane Eyre” — the fourth feature film since 1934, on top of at least six television versions made as recently as 2006 — it feels like they’ve run out of ideas entirely. That being said, Cary Fukunaga’s (“Sin Nombre”) version starring soon-to-be-household-names Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender easily stands on its own — even if it leaves you a little weak in the knees.

As the tormented Edward Rochester, Fassbender is entirely swoon-worthy, lording over the isolated Thornfield estate with his unpredictable ill temper and keeping his servants, including his trusted housekeeper Mrs. Fairfax (a scene-stealing Judi Dench), on their toes. When he returns with an orphaned French girl as his ward, he must add a governess to the mix, who is, of course, our poor and plain Jane Eyre.

Cast off by the wealthy, cruel aunt (Sally Hawkins) charged with her care, Jane endures sadistic discipline at a prisonlike school for girls, emerging as a young woman with an unbending gaze and a desire for dignity and some modicum of freedom. Pale as bone with an odd sort of innocent strength, Jane soon bewitches the boundary-testing Rochester. His teasing and taunts lure Jane in as well, despite the gulf of impropriety their potential relationship presents.

The unlikely chemistry between the strapping Fassbender and wispy Wasikowska makes for a casting coup. The 21-year old actress has been poised for fame since her memorable 2008 appearance on HBO’s “In Treatment,” but after her milquetoast turn in Tim Burton’s “Alice in Wonderland,” I wasn’t exactly clear why. Same with Fassbender, who’s had something of a cult following since 2009’s “Inglourious Basterds,” but had yet to strike a chord for me. And that’s why I’m not a casting director, because when these two come face to face — his light eyes burning white heat, her porcelain neck quivering beneath his possessive grip — the atmosphere is explosive.

While the film has its moments of haunting suspense, Fukunaga doesn’t overwhelm it with the heavy gothic overtones you might remember from versions past, particularly the 1943 adaptation starring Orson Welles and Joan Fontaine. Instead, Fukunaga’s Thornfield is eerily pleasing in the light of day, awash in muted, slightly foggy pastel hues and accented by Dario Marianelli’s lovely violin-centric score. As night rolls in, the candlelight feels both romantic and constraining, while the house creaks and groans and eerie cries float down from the mysterious room above.

While Moira Buffini’s screenplay gives us some nicely fleshed out characters, including the gossipy Mrs. Fairfax and Jane’s kindly benefactor St. John Rivers (“Billy Elliot’s” Jamie Bell, all grown up), it skimps out on the reveal of Rochester’s dark secret. Most of us may know who or what lurks in Thornfield’s hidden caverns, but its underlying significance — and the potential for a fright — is entirely anti-climactic.

Still, the “Jane Eyre” of 2011 is a gratifying sojourn into literary film that is both faithful to its source and enticing to its audience.
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:36 pm

http://www.fanbolt.com/headline/10947/Jane_Eyre_Review:_Creepy,_Out_Of_Order..._Yet_Romantic

Jane Eyre Review: Creepy, Out Of Order... Yet Romantic
Submitted by Emma on March 18, 2011 - 11:50 am

Jane Eyre hits theaters nationwide today. I have to admit that when I saw the film, I hadn't read Charlotte Bronte's literary classic on which the film is based. After Wuthering Heights (which I really enjoyed... just found painful to read), I hadn't read anything more from the Bronte sisters. But now Jane Eyre is high on my list.

After seeing the trailer for this movie, I was completely confused as to the type of genre this film fit into. It seemed that there was some sort of supernatural creature afoot... yet it also had a hint of Jane Austen. I was wrong... yet right. This take on Jane Eyre finds itself aligned with the opinions of many of those who have read the literary classic. Jane Eyre's love interest, Mr. Rochester, is a little bit creepy.

Jane Eyre (played by Mia Wasikowska) had a horrible childhood spent in boarding school with less than loving teachers. After being recruited to be the governess to Mr. Rochester's (played by Michael Fassbender) child - things start looking up for Miss Eyre. She quickly develops a bond with the child... and not to long after that a bond with Mr. Rochester (wink, wink). Mr. Rochester commences trying to woo Miss Eyre, which only goes so far considering that there is a skeleton (or maybe a more lively version) in his closet. Not knowing how to respond or feel about the matter, Jane finds herself leaving the estate and wondering the countryside.

There's no question that Jane Eyre is an enduring literary classic, and it's not hard to see why so many filmmakers have tried to translate it to screen. This latest effort though seems incomplete. Perhaps it's partially the way in which the story is told - non-chronologically, but I couldn't help but feel that we weren't being allowed to emotionally connect with the characters. When we meet Jane at the beginning of the film, she's already left the estate and is weeping without an end in sight. We haven't been allowed to see the pain that has brought her to this point. For the first quarter of the film, we jump back and forward between what is supposed to be present and then what was her childhood. Thankfully, for those of us who are not familiar with the classic, we get a hold on what's going on when we get about half way into the film.

It's a fantastic story though, and the casting was superb. Michael Fassbender was able to be creepy... yet incredibly sexy and tempting at the same time. Mia Wasikowska managed to come across as a plain Jane - which in real life she is anything but. Hair and makeup certainly helped here, but Wasikowska managed to retain an innocence throughout the film that translated to the audience feeling just as unexperienced as she was.

My only complaint was that it felt too edited, especially in the beginning. I think if the story had been told in order, it would have had a much greater effect on the emotions of the audience - especially those of us who are new to the world of Jane Eyre.

Grade: B

Review By: Emma Loggins
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:37 pm

http://www.pegasusnews.com/news/2011/mar/18/movie-review-jane-eyre/

Friday, March 18, 2011
Movie review: Jane Eyre

by Alex Bentley

The latest Jane Eyre to hit theaters likely won't move you in the slightest.
Photo, taken 2011-03-17 14:37:35

Jane Eyre is such an enduring literary classic that it's no surprise that multiple generations of filmmakers have tried to translate its tale to the big screen. In fact, Jane Eyre adaptations are almost as old as film itself, with the earliest known version being released in 1910. Since then, actual adaptations (as opposed to those that change the story to suit different settings or time periods) have come along every 10-20 years, perhaps giving audiences just enough time to forget the last version so as to properly enjoy the new one.

With the last Jane Eyre on film (it's also been adapted into multiple TV movies/miniseries) coming in 1996 starring William Hurt and Charlotte Gainsbourg, the timing of this latest version, starring Mia Wasikowska (Alice in Wonderland, The Kids Are All Right) and Michael Fassbender (Inglourious Basterds), and directed by Cary Fukunaga (Sin Nombre), fits right into that average. In case you've never read the book/forgotten it from your high school days, Jane Eyre follows the titular character (played by Wasikowska) through various stages of her life, most of which seem to cause her unending misery. These include being raised by an uncaring, sometimes monstrous aunt (Happy-Go-Lucky's Sally Hawkins), attending a boarding school, where she's treated even worse, acting as the governess for the children of Edward Rochester (Fassbender), with whom she develops a bond despite his lacking in couth, and taking a job as a teacher when circumstances force her to abandon her post as governess.
Jane Eyre rarely has anything to smile about.
Jane Eyre rarely has anything to smile about.

The film, unlike the book, is constructed non-chronologically, taking us back and forth between different points in time so that director Cary Fukunaga (Sin Nombre) and writer Moira Buffini (Tamara Drewe) can show us how Jane came to be the woman she is as an adult. However, for anyone without a great memory of the book, this only serves to confuse matters. The beginning of the film finds Jane weeping uncontrollably for unknown reasons as she wanders around the countryside. She eventually is taken in by St. John Rivers (Jamie Bell) and his sisters, and becomes a teacher in their small town. Fukunaga flips back to her stint with them several times in the first half of the film, then all but forgets about it for the last half, leaving the audience to wonder what happened to characters who previously seemed pretty important.

But the structure of the film mostly serves to blunt any emotions that might have built up had the story been told chronologically. Jane gains strength and independence as she grows older despite the many obstacles put in her way. By employing flashbacks and flashforwards, there's never a “present” for the audience to grasp on to (even during the long stretch Jane spends as a governess), so any relationships she builds feel fleeting at best, inconsequential at worst. The ending of Jane Eyre all but requires the audience to be truly invested in the proceedings, and the filmmakers somehow lost track of that goal along the way.
Mr. Rochester or a young George Washington? You decide.
Mr. Rochester or a young George Washington? You decide.

The acting in the film ranges from serviceable to quite good. Wasikowska is great in the title role, despite being hampered by a helmet of hair throughout. She hits all the right notes during each subsequent stage, even if the film holds her back a bit. Fassbender is fine as Mr. Rochester – he brings the requisite good looks and surly demeanor to the part. But there's nothing truly special about his interpretation, giving the feeling any number of actors could've filled in for him. Dame Judi Dench has a relatively small role as Mrs. Fairfax, Mr. Rochester's housekeeper, but she gives the film an extra dose of soul that it might not otherwise have had.

For Jane Eyre to work in the 21st century, it needs to be given some kind of extra punch that makes it rise above other period dramas. The non-chronological storytelling may have been the filmmakers attempt at doing so, but it instead neuters the depth of emotions that the story should have had.
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:37 pm

http://clatl.com/screengrab/archives/2011/03/18/film-clips-friday-march-18

Friday, March 18, 2011
Film Clips FILM CLIPS: Friday, March 18
Posted by Curt Holman on Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 9:10 AM

MOVIE GO BOOM: Greg Arakis Kaboom

OPENING FRIDAY
JANE EYRE 4 stars (PG-13) Charlotte Bronte’s steadfast young governess (Alice in Wonderland’s Mia Wasikowska) contends with the romantic overtures of her magnetic, enigmatic employer, Mr. Rochester (the excellent Michael Fassbender). Cary Fukunaga places the heart of Jane Eyre in the pair’s volleying conversations, while Moiri Buffini sustain the themes of female empowerment without neglecting the haunted-house flourishes. Jane Eyre’s depths offer a lesson in tortured romance and Gothic mood to fans of Edward Cullen and Bella Swan. — Curt Holman
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:39 pm

http://www.film.com/features/story/review-jane-eyre-gorgeously-gothic/45157917

Review: Jane Eyre Is Gorgeously Gothic
A spooky and spellbinding Jane Eyre!

"Jane Eyre" (2011) - Focus Features
Christine Champ, Mar 18, 2011

"Everything a Jane Eyre movie should be."

A distraught young woman bursts out of a gloomy manor into gray mist and howling wind. Sobbing, she stumbles, bordered by an eerie sky split with lightning. A lull of sunrise-streaked horizon seems hopeful. Then she's thrust back in the storm. It's not clear how much time has passed during her feverish flight, but it's evident from her countenance, and that of the vast, barren landscape -- she's reeling with terror and despair.

And we're off! Sin Nombre director Cary Fukunaga's Jane Eyre unfurls. Fukunaga reportedly spent a lot of time rereading Charlotte Bronte's book so he could capture "that sort of spookiness that plagues the entire story ... there's been something like 24 adaptations, and it's very rare that you see those sorts of darker sides."

Well, it's rare no longer. Fukunaga's adaptation whispers and wails with all the Gothic goodness you'd wish for from the screen incarnation of Bronte's shuddersome romantic thriller. True to her iconic 19th-century novel, Fukunaga's omage chronicles the life of feisty, free-spirited and independent-minded orphan Jane Eyre (Mia Wasikowska). Cast out by her callow upper-crust aunt and raised in a "fire and brimstone" charity school where disciplining young minds equals caning and the "pedestal of infamy" -- a visual aid that helps illustrate "how barren the life of a sinner". Eyre learns early that she's a wicked, unwanted girl.

Wonderfully, the sublimely beautiful cinematography of the opening scene isn't lost when Eyre enters the filthy Dickensian Lowood School for Girls, it's merely transmuted. Soft, ethereal white light wafts through her hard grim surroundings. An arresting contrast of light and shadow that conveys gothic mood, mystery and other worldliness throughout the film. When Eyre arrives at Thornfield Hall to serve as governess, she's welcomed by the housekeeper Mrs. Fairfax (period-film pro Judy Dench) into a home hidden in darkness except where the flickering fire light reveals its rich brown wood and warm gold walls. It's an inviting change from the bleak institute's gray stone and pale light, yet shrouded in intrigue.

When Bronte's brooding Byronic hero, the estate's wealthy owner Mr. Rochester (Michael Fassbender) returns from afar, he is instantly transfixed by the decades younger governess and her directness and sharp wit. He asks Jane if she finds him handsome, to which she bluntly replies, no. He then later remarks that she's no more pretty than he is handsome. Of course, even with raggedy muttonchops Fassbender can't hide his roguish good looks (apparently he's the Hollywood version of not-handsome). But with her austere yet sweet braided bun Wasikowska does plain-yet-handsome Jane quite well. And together, their playful repartee and passionate poetic flirting (eloquently lifted from Bronte's pages) turns up the heat. As Rochester pulls Jane close enough for a kiss and asks "aren't we friends" when it seems they've just met, their romance blooms in a bit of a rush. But it works in the Gothic context of extremes—both euphoric and horrifying. Like the horror of the deadly secret that haunts Thornfield and their amour.

Fassbender and Wasikowska breathe life into their breathless passion, Bronte's exquisite dialogue and her character's socially enslaved soul searching for freedom. Judi Dench is dependably amusing as the gossipy yet kindhearted housekeeper who prefers Jane's high-born company because she doesn't feel she can speak to other servants like equals. Fukunaga and his cinematographer Adriano Goldman and artistic crew breathe supernatural life into everything else--from the terrifyingly sudden and eerie flutter of a bird or billow of chimney smoke, to a dream of Rochester suspended in a doorway of night and silently falling snow. Fukunaga's Jane Eyre is profoundly stirring -- everything a Jane Eyre movie should be, and more.

Grade: A-
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:40 pm

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/03/17/MVHQ1IC1NN.DTL

'Jane Eyre' review: Hazy affair trumps loneliness

Mick LaSalle, Chronicle Movie Critic
San Francisco Chronicle March 18, 2011 04:00 AM Copyright San Francisco Chronicle. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Friday, March 18, 2011

ALERT VIEWER Gothic drama. Starring Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender. Directed by Cary Fukunaga. (PG-13. 115 minutes. At Bay Area theaters.)

Laurie Sparham / Focus Features

Michael Fassbender (left) as Mr. Rochester and Mia Wasikowska (right) as Jane Eyre in the romantic drama JANE EYRE, a Focus Features release directed by Cary Fukunaga.

Sometimes when you look at a cat, it will seem like it's observing you with a penetrating and eerie comprehension. But then the cat looks away, and you realize that the cat doesn't possess some uncanny understanding, that the cat is simply a cat, and that's just what cats look like. Mia Wasikowska's performance in the title role in "Jane Eyre" is a little like that.

She has a piercing, all-seeing look that seems to suggest a whole moral universe, a lifetime of deprivation and loss, spent at the mercy of people at their most vicious and perverse. But when she turns away, the spell breaks; and in emotional moments ... she's good, she's perfectly acceptable, but there's an extra something, a depth of soul or an understanding that's lacking.

In a similar way, this latest adaptation of the Charlotte Brontë novel is careful, respectful and even enjoyable, and yet dry, singularly humorless and played without the lavishness of spirit that makes sense of Gothic melodrama. The essence of the Gothic, after all, is in its suggestion of the nightmare, the primitive and the Id, and of pent-up, bottled-up sexuality. These are hinted at in architecture but usually expressed more fully and dramatically by the sky and the elements.

The Gothic suggests the hugeness of life being squashed, compressed and corseted into something too small, and so we wait and look for signs of the ultimate explosion. Yet without that suggestion, that underlying enormousness, we're left with the miniature and melancholic, with incidents in the life of young, perceptive girl who just can't seem to catch a break.

Jane grows up as an unwanted orphan and is educated at a sadistic boarding school, before arriving at the grand house of Mr. Rochester (Michael Fassbender), to work as the governess to his young ward. Rochester sees something in Jane. Moreover, he sees that she sees him, that she's smart and honest enough to engage with him as an equal. So he is intrigued. Still, the film conveys little sense of a spiritual connection being forged through their conversations.

Moreover, director Cary Fukunaga loses some possibilities for drama by playing down the distance and imbalance inherent in the master/servant relationship. He also makes Rochester's choice too easy. In this version, Jane is rather attractive, and the fiancee has middling looks and a repellent personality. By contrast - for example, in Franco Zeffirelli's 1996 version - the fiancee was a reasonably appealing woman played by Elle Macpherson, the swimsuit model, while Charlotte Gainsbourg was made to look quite plain as Jane. Yet so meticulously had Zeffirelli made us understand Rochester and Jane's soul connection that Macpherson's beauty seemed pedestrian and Gainsbourg's plainness became beautiful.

Anyway, it's a good story. Fassbender, who played the dapper English spy in "Inglourious Basterds," is an attractive and plausible Rochester, and Judi Dench is a welcome presence as Mrs. Fairfax, the housekeeper. "Jane Eyre" has endured and maintained its appeal for more than 150 years, because it's a durable piece. Even when only half-realized, it has an impact.

-- Advisory: This film contains adult conversations and disturbing scenes.
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:46 pm

http://alisongang.blogspot.com/2011/03/reviews-jane-eyre-3-stars-i-am-2-12.html

Friday, March 18, 2011
Reviews: Jane Eyre (3 stars); I Am (2 1/2 stars)
If you're as emotionally beaten up as I am by the happenings in the world over the last week -- the disaster in Japan, the House's anti-NPR bill, the draconian cuts to education and social programs in California (including my full-time employer UC), and more I can't bring myself to think of -- then the two films I reviewed this week might serve you well.

The dreamy Michael Fassbender as
Edward Rochester in "Jane Eyre"
First, find comfort in the familiar with the umpteenth film adaptation of "Jane Eyre." With so much unforeseen devastation in real life, sometimes it's nice to know exactly who is hidden in the attic. But still, director Cary Fukunaga's version stands on its own and is certainly worth a trip to the theater (Michael Fassbender's jawline alone is worth the price of admission). My full review here.
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:51 pm

http://www.digthisjive.com/deals/my-picks-things-to-do-in-san-diego-march-19-20/

My picks: Things to do in San Diego, March 19-20

| March 18, 2011

This weekend’s picks include free food all day long on Saturday, a plug for the latest “Jane Eyre” film starring the dreamy Michael Fassbender and the beauteous Mia Wasikowska, and 50% off cocktails around the city on Sunday.

Things-to-do-San-Diego-March

Sunday, March 20:

* 11:30 a.m. Catch one of the first 2011 films starring Michael Fassbender. If he looks familiar, then it’s probably because you watched “Inglorious Basterds.” And if you watched “Inglorious Basterds,” then recall the ill-fated British Lieutenant who, despite passing as a German soldier when he spoke, blew his cover when he incorrectly displayed the number three using his fingers. That’s Michael Fassbender and 2011 looks to be his year, at least according to both Entertainment Weekly and Vogue. Watch his star begin to rise as in Focus Features’ film adaptation of Charlotte Brontë’s classic “Jane Eyre.” Catch this screening at Hillcrest’s Landmark Theatres and only pay $8 per ticket. To quote Animaniacs’ Yakko and Wakko, “Hello, Nurse!”
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:58 pm

http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/03/18/opening-weekend-limitless-jane-eyre-paul/

Jane Eyre

I know what you’re thinking. Who needs another adaptation of Jane Eyre? The Charlotte Brontë romance on the moors, lodged in the bedrock of prototypical chick lit, must be one of the most frequently adapted novels in the English language. Since 1910, there have been 18 feature versions and nine TV versions. But what’s astounding about this seamless production—directed by Cary Joji Fukunaga (Sin Nombre) and written by Moira Buffini (Tamara Drewe)—is that it feels definitive. The filmmakers have employed a flashback structure to rejig the narrative, but aside from that, the rendering feels wholly authentic. It also feels bold and fresh without dubious overlays of modern hindsight. Shot in wide-screen 35 mm., the visuals have a rich cinematic lustre. But what really makes this Jane Eyre sing is the strength of the performances, and the dynamic chemistry between the two leads, who are separated by a dangerous age difference. Mia Wasikowska (The Kids Are All Right, Alice in Wonderland), who’s now 21, proves that she’s perhaps the most compelling actress of her generation. She’s attractive, but not distractingly so; her features refuse to to settle into a pose, throwing us off at every angle. And for someone so young, there’s a motherlode of intrigue behind the eyes. It’s as if you can see her carving out her maturity and confidence as the camera rolls. Fassbinder, who was so forceful in Hunger and Fish Tank, makes a richly charismatic Rochester, so entitled yet wildly fallible. And as the icing on the cake, an overqualified Judy Dench glides through her role as Mrs. Fairfax as if to the manor born.
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:59 pm

http://www.macguffinpodcast.com/macguffin-content/fim-review-jane-eyre/

Fim Review – Jane Eyre
Date: Fri, 18 Mar, 2011 at 09:50 AM | Author: Edward Davidson |

Jane Eyre is one of the most often filmed books in English literature. This Gothic tale of a girl’s upbringing and inner strength is a classic. While most famously filmed before by Robert Stevenson with stars Orson Welles and Joan Fontaine, there is a new version just being released.

This latest retelling by director Cary Fukunaga stars Mia Wasikowska. The film opens with Jane desperately running through the desolate English countryside, searching for solace from an unknown danger. Then the film flashes back to her childhood, efficiently laying out her upbringing by an uncaring aunt while surrounded by relatives and servants who show her little compassion. When her wretched male cousin hits her, instead of accepting the abuse like most females were meant to at that time, Jane fights back hard. Subsequently, Jane’s aunt ships her off to boarding school to learn her place, where she is introduced to a world where girls are whipped for forgetting their place. Simply for making a scene, Jane is forced to stand on a chair amongst her schoolmates so she can be formally ostracized. Growing up in this world she finds only one friend in the world, who develops an ailment and leaves the young protagonist alone again.

All of these events lead Jane to graduating school to become a governess for the mysterious and abrupt Edward Fairfax Rochester, played rakishly by Michael Fassbender. She joins his household to care for his young French “ward” whose mother has died (it is implied that Rochester “knew” the girl’s mother while travelling in France). During her time there, our heroine becomes taken with the brooding lord of the household, and he with her as well. But there are ominous noises at night about the manor and Rochester is harboring a dark secret. If you are unfamiliar with the story, I will save the rest for your discovery.

Anchoring the film with her performance, Mia Wasikowska is terrific here as the title character. Her Jane is thoughtful, strong, defiant, and courageous. Her reactions to everyone around her are controlled, but you can see in her eyes the thought and emotion at play. In an early conversation with Rochester, she knows she must keep to her station, yet it is her willingness to speak up for herself that first attracts him. When he refers to her as plain looking and asks in return if he is attractive, she looks him straight in the eye and says “No sir,” then goes on to explain how his demeanor taints his looks. Behavior like this was unheard of in polite English society from a girl, and especially from one of lower caste. But it is this very directness that catches Rochester’s attention.

Dame Judi Dench is winning in the supporting role of the properly helpful Mrs. Fairfax. It is through her character that we learn much about the head of the manor. Speculation about his motivations are given to Jane as gossip, which lends to the Upstairs/Downstairs plotting. When Mrs. Fairfax tells Jane of the master’s preparations for travelling abroad for another year to be away from the household, you can see her young heart breaking. Late in the film Jamie Bell (of Billy Elliott fame) ably portrays a kindly parson who ends up making assumptions about our heroine that almost limit Jane’s fate as well.

Echoes of this story can be found in other famous tales. Joan Fontaine played a similar role in Rebecca a couple of years before playing Jane Eyre in the 1943 version. The “don’t go in the west wing” feel of Beauty and the Beast seems to have its origin in this story as well.

Previously Fukunaga had directed Sin Nombre, a much heralded film about gang members in Honduras. While famous English literature would seem to be a great departure from the rough streets of his previous film, he has created one of the best adaptations of this story yet. The production design feels lived-in and realistic. Gothic tales of this kind tend towards high melodrama, so it’s welcome that the film is subdued and subtle in presenting this somber story. Jane and Rochester love big, they feel big, but the film makes us believe them. It’s not sappy, just right. Highly recommended.

Rating: A-
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Fri Mar 18, 2011 5:00 pm

http://ifzombiesweresupermodels.blogspot.com/2011/03/sneak-preview.html

Friday, March 18, 2011
Romance for Uggos

I saw a sneak preview of Jane Eyre last night. I thought the actors were too good looking for the characters they played but I still liked it. When I read the book, I imagined Jane to actually be, "poor, obscure, plain and little" with dark eyes and hair like fairy person. They did a nice job of trying to make Mia Wasikowska look plain, her hair is certainly hideous but you could still tell by the slenderness of her features that she's actually pretty. I don't know if they even tried to make Michael Fassbender look ugly- he was total babe. Doesn't Hollywood get that Jane Eyre is supposed to be a love story for Uggos? I love this poster by the way.

And now I'll leave you with bit of comedy.


During the movie, I kept thinking about this cartoon and giggling to myself!
Posted by SillyHeart at 9:13 AM
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Fri Mar 18, 2011 5:13 pm

http://paramainti.info/film-clips-friday-march-18/

JANE EYRE 4 stars (PG-13) Charlotte Bronte’s true immature governess (Alice іn Wonderland’s Mia Wasikowska) contends wіth thе regretful overtures οf hеr magnetic, puzzling employer, Mr. Rochester (thе shining Michael Fassbender). Cary Fukunaga seats thе heart οf Jane Eyre іn thе pair’s volleying conversations, whіƖе Moiri Buffini means thе themes οf womanlike empowerment but neglecting thе haunted-house flourishes. Jane Eyre’s inlet offer a doctrine іn tortured intrigue аnԁ Gothic mood tο fans οf Edward Cullen аnԁ Bella Swan. — Curt Holman
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Fri Mar 18, 2011 5:14 pm

http://samarasthoughts.blogspot.com/2011/03/jane-eyre.html

Friday, March 18, 2011
Jane Eyre
Wednesday evening I had the privilege of attending an advanced screening for the new Jane Eyre.
It was such a fun evening, even apart from the film.

But for anyone who cared, I thought I'd share my opinion of the movie.
Jane Eyre directed by Cary Fukunaga, based on the novel by Charlotte Bronte
Starring Mia Wasikowska, Michael Fassbender, Jamie Bell, and Dame Judi Dench
Music composed by Dario Marianelli
Synopsis: A mousy governess who softens the heart of her employer soon discovers that he's hiding a terrible secret.

I thought the movie was worth seeing, especially for someone who has read the book. I absolutely loved certain parts of it. However, while I was expecting that the film would not (and could not) live up to the book, I was still disappointed by what they chose to cut--which included my favorite lines.
The first two-thirds or so was very well done. But the last part of the movie was so compressed and the ending so choppy that it almost ruined the story.
I must say that I didn't realize until after the fact that the movie was rated PG-13. This made things make a lot more sense and I think I would have been better prepared if I had paid attention to the rating. The movie was extremely intense at times. Due to the way it is filmed, my friends and I definitely jumped; and at one point, I couldn't help covering my eyes.
Not only was the film visually intense--as they graphically showed the abuse Jane suffered in her early life--but it was just as emotionally intense as they played up the supernatural fears of the heroine. Keeping with the sense of the novel, which came out of the original gothic tradition, the movie, at times, feels very dark.

That being said, Mia Wasikowska played a near-flawless Jane. That was one of the things I was most worried about. Would Jane be pretty when she was supposed to be plain? Would she show too much or too little emotion? Would she convincingly show the struggle between conviction and feeling? She was absolutely fabulous. They were able to make her plain while letting her subtle and inner beauty make its full display. The emotion and the struggle was acted so well, I only wish they would have given the story more time to allow this to develop.


Michael Fassbender's Mr. Rochester was another superb, true-to-the-novel character. He definitely captured both Rochester's humor and his emotional neediness. The film successfully captured the chemistry between the two--although, I thought, they should have given it more screen time. Despite liking the way Fassbender played his character, I could not help being repelled by how selfish and--at times--creepy he was. This is also part of the novel, but was definitely a focus for these filmmakers.

The supporting cast were just as marvelous. The brilliant Jamie Bell was a convincing St. John Rivers (although, I found myself distracted by the fact that Jamie Bell and Mia Wasikowska played such a believable married couple in Defiance). Mrs. Fairfax, the housekeeper was, of course, played pitch-perfect by Dame Judi Dench.
Costumes, cinematography and effects all aided to the feel of this period drama.
I also must note how excited I was when I heard that Dario Marianelli was scoring this film, but half way through I noticed how little music there actually was. It was relieving in a way. The music was beautiful, but let the acting and dialogue speak for themselves as opposed to over-dramatizing everything. The music that is there sounded classical and haunting and both Beethoven and Mozart were incorporated into the film, again adding to the Victorian atmosphere.
Overall, the movie was enjoyable. But with the film coming in just under 2 hours (115 minutes), I left wishing they had added at least 15 more minutes and several other significant parts of the novel.

Posted by samara at 8:46 AM
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Admin on Fri Mar 18, 2011 5:16 pm


http://frontrow.dmagazine.com/2011/03/fukunaga%E2%80%99s-jane-eyre-distinguishes-itself-with-its-gothic-texture-brooding-and-beautiful/

Fukunaga’s Jane Eyre Distinguishes Itself With its Gothic Texture, Brooding and Beautiful

Author:
By Peter Simek
Post date:
March 18th, 2011 10:31am

Rating
G Y R
Location
Angelika Film Center 5321 E. Mockingbird Ln. Dallas, TX 75206
Dates
Opens Mar 18

There has been no shortage of adaptations of Charlotte Bronte’s novel, Jane Eyre — from TV-series to feature films, beginning back in 1934. So the question that arises when a new movie based on the classic story of the orphan governess and the wealthy, forlorn eccentric who falls for her is what does this story have that continues to captivate filmmakers and audiences alike?

Jane Eyre is a seductive tale, powered by great melodramatic tension. As it indulges our emotional hunger for honest sentiment, it satisfies an inclination towards moral heroes with un-floundering vision for what is right.

What is ultimately so attractive about the character of Jane Eyre is her fidelity to her innate sense of personal righteousness, and it is in her judicial sense that we discover a powerful argument for a moral order that is not a social or religious imposition, but is rather found written on the human heart. Jane is the modern hero in a pure and convincing manifestation: a common girl with an individualistic spark that glows brightly in spite of intolerant, oppressive forces.

Director Cary Fukunaga’s Jane Eyre distinguishes itself with its great gothic texturing, a brooding, beautiful cinematic canvas that affects the story’s tone with the feel of a Tim Burton film. The film warms up its contemporary audience — more accustomed, in general, to movie “experiences” than stuffy adaptations of British novels — with a couple of sudden, shocking bumps within the opening 10 minutes. When Jane’s nasty cousin tugs aside a curtain behind which the young girl is hiding from his assaults, the man next to me jumped and yelled out. A few seconds later, a billow of black chimney smoke explodes from the fireplace with a great puff, and my audience neighbor yelped again. Fukunaga does not turn Jane Eyre into a bump and thump thriller, but he knows how to set the mood, and he sustains this tension throughout, using it to charge the impending romantic chaos.

These little scares come when orphan Jane Eyre (Mia Wasikowska) is living with her aunt, a cruel woman who eventually sends the young girl off to boarding school to have manners literally beaten into her. Jane, whose life seems a suffering succession of misunderstandings and injustices which she must endure, has too bright a spirit and too resistant a will to survive such a place unscathed. She stands up for her classmates and her sense of right, and she is beaten for it.

After her only friend, Helen, dies of consumption, Jane leaves the school when she finds a job as a governess at the estate of Thornfield. There she is taken under her wing by the kindhearted housekeeper Mrs. Fairfax (Judi Dentch). With Fairfax, though nervous and shifty in her own right, Jane has encountered the first adult who shows her honest affection. It is also at Thornfield where Jane eventually meets the master, Rochester, a wild-hearted, depressive romantic, who is often away, drowning himself in philandering experiences on the continent, but is quickly entranced by his new, young governess.

Fukunaga rearranges the chronology of the novel in part to adequately fit its longish plot into a brisk 115 minutes, but the technique also manages to broaden the film’s emotional scope long before the story gets to the juicy romance between Jane and Rochester. Before the governess even arrives at Thornfield, we see action that comes after that episode. A weary, dying Jane makes her way through a dreary countryside and comes upon the home of the preacher, St. John Rivers (Jamie Bell), and his two sisters, who take her in. It is not long before Rivers has also fallen for young woman.

Wasikowska shows a great sensitivity for her character, bringing to it a balance of tight-hearted reserve and a burning streak of muzzled ferociousness. She is reminiscent of a young Oliva Hussey, who could capture in a quiet gaze that volatile mix of burgeoning intellectual energy and clumsy sexuality — cloaked in a subdued beauty — that makes a type of young woman mind-numbingly irresistible to a certain kind of man.

Michael Fassbender’s Rochester is that man. Fassbender is a born action hero, virile and uncommonly in control even when he pushes himself to display emotional vulnerability. His Rochester succeeds best when he struggles to keep the character’s inner turmoil under wraps, bumbling and blundering his way through romantic profusions. Despite this movie’s gothic coloring and dramatic verbosity, adaptations of Jane Eyre succeed and fail based on the viability of this central relationship. In this latest version, it sizzles.
Admin
Admin
Admin

Posts : 27093
Join date : 2009-09-20
Location : California

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2 - Page 3 Empty Re: Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 2

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum