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
April 2019
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930    

Calendar Calendar


Jane Eyre reviews and spoilers 3

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

Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 4:13 am

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

Eyre (2011) Movie Review
Published on Mar 26 2011 // Drama
Jane Eyre (2011) Movie Review

jane eyre 1 303x450 Jane Eyre (2011) Movie ReviewIf you are looking for a good adaptation (good, not necessarily very much faithful) and a great film to watch, then Jane Eyre, one of the new movie releases this March, is the answer. Based on the most respected novel written by Charlotte Brontë, Jane Eyre is produced by Focus Features film production company and takes Mia Wasikowska (Alice in Wonderland) as the leading actress. This is an absolutely worth watching love film which is interwoven in a gothic and gloomy atmosphere.

Once the scene moves to the mysterious castle, the core of the love story begins. There, she meets the Lord of the castle named Mr. Rochester. An unpleasant, rude, mysterious master who, from the looks of his, seems to hide something. Contradicted first by the high self-esteem and confidence of her new governess, Mr. Rochester then feels attracted by her and tries some flirtation. And the love story goes, revealing the marvelous romantic scenes between them and some mysteries beyond Mr. Rochester’s character.

The film director Cary Fukunaga has successfully transferred the gothic mood of the novel into the big screen, making the romance clothed by the dark atmosphere. While the BBC miniseries for the same adaptation works more on the romance and hence put forwards mainly the sweet and romantic mood in the film, Fukunaga tries and is tremendously successful in blending both the gothic mood symbolized in the novel and the romanticism of the love story between Jane Eyre and Mr. Rochester, which is also depicted in details in the book. Thus, the great cinematography plays the main role here in bringing the blended gothic and romantic mood of the film into the audiences.

The actors are also great in portraying each of the character here. Mia Wasikowska here is better than she was in Alice in Wonderland. Michael Fassbender, though his looks does not fit much the description in the book, shows such a great performance as Mr. Rochester. The way he expresses his mystery is believable here. And don’t forget, Judi Dench as Mrs. Fairfax is also wonderful. This recent film releases provides you with many things that Hollywood film industry does not usually have. It is worth notice and watching, it has all the great things that will suck you into the movie and feel it, just the same feeling that you get when you read the book.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 4:13 am

http://thenewultraviolet.com/2011/03/review-a-breath-of-fresh-eyre/

Review: A breath of fresh “Eyre”
Community — By contributor on March 25, 2011 6:03 pm

By Mackenzie ’11

You might call me a Jane Eyre connoisseur. I’ve read the book four times, scoured the archives for remote film adaptations (I’ve seen seven out of the 18) and I even own a Jane Eyre costume (corset and all).

I am that bothersome person in the audience who yells “NO! That’s not how it’s ‘sposed to happen!” at the screen — you know, the one you want to strangle.

For those of you who also rejoice in a film adaption that is true to the original novel, you will not be disappointed in the Jane Eyre that premiered in theaters last week. Indeed this version is the most faithful I’ve seen, which is a breath of fresh air. The film only deviates from the book in that the narrative is not linear.

The film opens with a tear-streaked Jane taking flight from Thornfield Hall only to find herself lost on the blustery moors of the dark and barren English countryside. The story starts in media res and continues as a series of flashbacks and dreams that paint a picture of Jane’s life up to this point.

The film perpetuates a sense of Gothic melodrama, what with the dramatic settings and soundtrack and the gloomy lighting, and was blessed with an exceptional cast. I have dibs on Michael Fassbender and will ignore that pesky 16-year age gap and marry him as soon as I’m legal. He is Mr. Rochester. He adds a lethal sexuality, aggression, and wit to the brooding, Byronic hero. The pent-up sexual tension between Rochester and Jane is so wonderfully powerful that you’ll be tempted to yell out “Get a room, already!”(Oh, those frustrating almost-kisses!)

Mia Wasikowska (Alice in Wonderland) gives a certain poise and radiance to Jane. She is mind-blowingly talented at revealing glimpses of the passions bubbling beneath the outwardly simple Jane. And what character can’t Dame Judi Dench play? Well, she probably can’t play a bikini model. That aside, she plays a Mrs. Fairfax that you can’t help but love no matter how she irks you.

Perhaps the best quality of the film is that laughter is not lost amidst the darkness and bleakness of the backdrop and storyline. Appealing to hopeless romantics for almost 200 years, Jane Eyre is a durable piece with an impact. On a Mackenzie scale, I give the film a 9/10 (and Michael Fassbender a 10/10)!
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 4:14 am

http://mymysays.wordpress.com/2011/03/25/the-perfection-of-the-new-jane-eyre/

The Perfection of the New “Jane Eyre”
March 25, 2011

by mymysays

Upon leaving the theatre, my one and only reaction to the new film version of “Jane Eyre” was “perfect”. Everything about it was perfect!

More specifically, Moira Buffini selected just the right elements from Charlotte Bronte’s classic novel to bring freshness to a story that’s been filmed and re-filmed. The dialogue was smart and sizzling.

The casting was perfect – Mia Wasikowska (of “Alice in Wonderland” and “The Kids Are Alright”) is a brilliant Jane. And Michael Fassbender as Mr. Rochester – oh my! I think he’s just knocked Colin Firth’s Mr. Darcy off my romantic hunk pedestal! We also are treated to Judy Dench, Jamie Bell, and Sally Hawkins.

Another treat is the musical score by Dario Marianelli (“Pride and Prejudice”, “Atonement”) which beautifully and subtly created the restrained emotional tone of the times and then built with subtlety again to the emotional highs – no sappiness, just perfect. Filming perfect! Direction perfect! Length perfect!

Can’t say enough go things about this film – mymy‘s rating Hy!Hy!Perfect!
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 4:16 am

http://www.denverpost.com/entertainment/ci_17684795?source=rss

Movie review: Top-notch acting helps "Jane Eyre" adaptation score
*** STAR RATING (out of 4) | Literary romance
By Michael Phillips
Chicago Tribune
Posted: 03/25/2011 01:00:00 AM MDT

Mia Wasikowska, last seen in "The Kids Are All Right," brings a skilled performance to her role as the title character in "Jane Eyre." Director Cary Joji Fukunaga's version of Charlotte Bronte's classic novel honors its source material. (Provided by Focus Features )

The pretty, moody, well-acted new adaptation of Charlotte Bronte's "Jane Eyre" rests on a key early scene between Mia Wasikowska, as Bronte's protagonist and narrator, and Michael Fassbender, as the storm warning known as Edward Rochester.

This is one of the most famous getting-to-know- you passages in 19th-century literature.

With a disarming mixture of candor and restraint, Jane acquits herself so nimbly in the face of so much bluff, it's as if the charismatic bad boy with a secret were discovering a new species — a rare object of fascination and adoration.

Thanks to the enduring draw of Bronte's 1847 novel, generation upon generation of readers have made the same discovery.

Without making any provocative new discoveries, the latest film version of the novel, directed by Cary Joji Fukunaga, honors the source material. That's certainly a start and, if you have the right actors, sometimes it's enough for a satisfying finish.

We'll get to what's missing from this "Jane Eyre" in a minute. Here's what works, and what makes it worth seeing.

For starters, Wasikowska. If the actress playing Jane Eyre, the only potential pity party in popular fiction to rival Oliver Twist, begs for our sympathy in any direct fashion, the story dies. Bronte's Jane is bullied, beaten, cowed, humiliated and — worst of all — marginalized by her guardians, her Lowood schoolmasters and the wider world around her. Then she arrives at Thornfield Hall and her destiny.

Wasikowska, who starred in the recent "Alice in Wonderland" and co-starred in "The Kids Are All Right," has many virtues as an actress, but above all, she is as honest as the day is long. She seems to act very little, which sounds lazy or easy, but in fact requires great skill.

Fassbender's Rochester has the dash and spirit of a Byronic antihero; crucially, he also has a sense of humor about his harrumphing character's unexpected attraction to this pale, watchful governess. In their lengthy scene by the fireside, Wasikowska and Fassbender appear to be sussing each other out, pushing each other's buttons in all the right ways. It is a crisply paced highlight.

Screenwriter Moira Buffini has restructured Bronte's narrative so that the story begins near the end, and then flashes back. This works well.

What is lacking? I hesitate to use the most hackneyed two words in English, but: character development.

The 1944 Robert Stevenson version of "Jane Eyre," a wild-eyed, visually striking black-and-white affair starring Joan Fontaine and Orson Welles, has many flaws, but its screenplay manages a gradual and convincing coming-together of the main characters. This latest version radically condenses the process. Here, it's one scene and bam: love, hard and fast.

Director Fukunaga's previous film was "Sin Nombre," about Honduran nationals trekking north, perilously, to Mexico and eventually America. That film's mixture of realism and melodrama was very much like the unsteady world Fukunaga creates in "Jane Eyre."

Its view veers from windswept, hand-held-camera walks against the gray skyline of Derbyshire to classically minded camera swoops and glides. The results are all over the place visually.

To no one's surprise, the story still works like Gothic gangbusters, thanks in part to reliable backcourt support from Judi Dench (as Mrs. Fairfax) and Sally Hawkins (as Jane's venal guardian).

But this adaptation needed more of the thing for which Jane herself yearns: a sense of freedom.
"Jane Eyre."

PG-13 for some thematic elements including a nude image and brief violent content. 2 hours, 1 minute. Directed by Cary Fukunaga; starring Mia Wasikowska, Michael Fassbender, Judi Dench, Sally Hawkins, Holliday Grainger. Opens today at area theaters.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 4:16 am

http://www.movieblender.com/jane-eyre-reviewed-by-rotten-tomatoes-on-infomania/

Jane Eyre Reviewed by Rotten Tomatoes on infoMania

Brett Erlich and Ellen Fox review “Jane Eyre,” the latest cinematic take on the classic 19th Century novel by Charlotte Bronte. Mia Wasikowska (“Alice in Wonderland”) makes an excellent Jane, while Michael Fassbender from “Inglorious Basterds” is a pleasantly brooding Rochester.

Brett Erlich and Ellen Fox review “Jane Eyre,” the latest cinematic take on the classic 19th Century novel by Charlotte Bronte. Mia Wasikowska (“Alice in Wonderland”) makes an excellent Jane, while Michael Fassbender from “Inglorious Basterds” is a pleasantly brooding Rochester.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 4:22 am

http://www.britscene.com/2011/03/brits-at-box-office-7/

Brits At The Box Office 3/25
Written on March 25, 2011 by Paul

No British movies released in the US this weekend, but still a couple of great opportunities to see some Brit stars in action.

Jane Eyre has been lauded by critics and kept its per theater average takings high within its first couple of weeks of release. The film is a Cary Fukunga’s darker take on the classic novel, it stars Mia Wasikowska (Alice in Wonderland) and Michael Fassbender (Inglourious Basterds) as well as Brits Dame Judi Dench and Jamie Bell. This weekend sees it expand to a number of new states and you can see if it is hitting a theater near you by clicking here.

I was surprised to see that the Simon Pegg and Nick Frost’s Comedy Paul did not perform better in its opening weekend (just over $13 million), we went to see it last Saturday and it was great (laugh out loud funny -see the red band trailer below for proof!). The good news is that it did well enough that it will stay in theaters for a few more weeks. It should also help increase the comedy duos profile this side of the Atlantic, so more movies will be forthcoming (The final part of “The Blood and Ice Cream” Trilogy coming in 2012!).

Over in the UK two British movies hit the big screen. The first, British director Kevin Macdonald’s The Eagle has already been to the US and the second, Hammer Horror’s return to its gory, creepy roots in Wake Wood will be heading to the US later this year.

Take a look at all the British Movies out this week. If you click on the title of the movie you will be whisked away to our British Movie Library entry for more, clips, trailers and other good stuff.

Have a great weekend !

Jane Eyre – Based on Charlotte Brontë’s classic novel, the romantic drama stars Mia Wasikowska (Alice in Wonderland) and Michael Fassbender (Inglourious Basterds) in the lead roles. In the story, Jane Eyre flees Thornfield House, where she works as a governess for wealthy Edward Rochester. The isolated and imposing residence – and Mr. Rochester’s coldness – have sorely tested the young woman’s resilience, forged years earlier when she was orphaned. As Jane reflects upon her past and recovers her natural curiosity, she will return to Mr. Rochester – and the terrible secret that he is hiding…
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 4:39 am

http://www.sheridanroadmagazine.com/blog/?p=1487

SR Goes to the Movies: Jane Eyre
March 25th, 2011 by Evangeline

I’ve heard that this rendition of Jane Eyre is reasonably faithful to its source material. Having never read Charlotte Brontë’s classic novel, I can’t say. But the exquisitely executed, highly involving, gothic love story that I just saw is one of the better movies I’ve seen this year.

Jane Eyre (Mia Wasikowska, Alice in Wonderland) was raised in an environment of horrible abuse and dehumanization, placed for ridicule on the “pedestal of infamy” and denied even the identity of gender pronouns, referred to as “it” directly to her face. Despite the world’s best efforts to rob her of identity and opinion, Jane keeps her unique quick wit and sharp tongue. When she lands the role of governess at the imposing and atmospheric Thornfield Hall, she begins a subtle duel of wills with the stern and brooding master of the house, Mr. Rochester (Michael Fassbender, The Inglorious Basterds). Their chilly regard leads to respect, flirtation, and then true affection. Just as it appears Jane will get all that she’s ever wanted, disaster strikes, and Jane must do as she’s always done: hold her head up and survive.

The Jane and Rochester relationship is the headline news here. Wasikowska and Fassbender play really well off each other and watching the romance steadily escalate is a real pleasure. When Jane can finally lower her defenses and smile at him with genuine affection, we gratefully smile with her. The dialogue between the two of them at their most passionate is practically poetry and it’s twice as effective when combined with the performances of these actors. The supporting cast is also excellent with Dame Judi Dench as one of the first genuinely kind people Jane encounters and Jamie Bell (Billy Elliot), who is a strange choice for the simultaneously hot and cold part of St. John Rivers since he’s so inherently likeable, but he does well with it.

I’m usually not a fan of period pieces, but the filmmakers here craft such an impeccably immersive world of candlelight, stone, custom, and class that it’s impossible not to get sucked in. It’s no surprise that the director, Cary Fukunaga, has worked extensively as a cinematographer; the use of light and shadow is simply gorgeous and the color palette is tonally perfect for Brontë’s notoriously haunted atmosphere. Brighter colors slowly infect the frame paralleling the evolution of Jane and Rochester’s relationship. Even depth of field is used to maximum effect, a focus pull to the back on Wasikowska’s neck imbues the audience with Jane’s sense of isolation in a crowded room. What we have here is masterful filmmaking in striking locations. There are a few times when the handheld gets too shaky, but that’s an easy line to cross so we’ll let it go.

Some of the twists and turns of the plot feel abrupt to the point of pre-destination, but none of it is jarring enough to remove you from the story for too long, and I understand that each epic lurch of this particular narrative has been beloved for generations already.

My personal opinion: The 2011 film version of Jane Eyre is a completely captivating love story served in rich hues of black and gray with tense gothic overtones. I loved it. I’d see it again.—Jake Jarvi

This entry was posted on Friday, March 25th, 2011 at 4:22 pm
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 4:45 am

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/34851/wknd-box-office-sucker-punch-jane-eyre-diary-of-wimpy-kid-rodrick-rules/

* “Jane Eyre“: Unlike many, I’ve never seen any other movie incarnations of the Charlotte Bronte novel. But I really liked this version. Mia Wasikowska, an actress I normally didn’t think much of, really does well in playing Jane Eyre through tragedy after tragedy and struggle after struggle. Michael Fassbender is excellent in his role as her master and love interest.

Yes, it’s essentially a chick flick, but one of the better ones and very classy and well done. If you’ve read the book, you know the story. If you haven’t, it’s the period piece story of an English girl whose parents die and whose wealthy relative despises her. The relative sends her to live in a mean, tough orphanage of sorts. When she grows up and gets out, she becomes the governess of the young ward of a wealthy English lord and develops romantic feelings for him. But all is not a bed of roses.

Beautifully shot and well acted. A little slow, but that’s kind of the typical tempo for pictures involving that slower time period.

THREE-AND-A-HALF REAGANS
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 4:50 am

http://www.filmmisery.com/?p=6626

Eyre takes down Red Riding Hood

Friday, March 25, 2011

What do Jane Eyre and Red Riding Hood have in common besides being strong independent women doing it for themselves? How about they both wear iconic cloaks. They are also the heroines in mythical gothic stories. While Red Riding Hood is a fairy tale, Eyre is a literary classic, and most people would’ve read both in school, although probably at different stages. And of course the two movies were released the same weekend.

This is where the similarities end. Although I was excited to see both, Jane Eyre, the movie, is a far superior work. The novel has been adapted many times on TV and film, but still this adaptation by writer Moira Buffini and director Cary Fulunaga is interesting. The story is stripped down to its base elements and the movie moves forward at rapid speed to its conclusion in a little bit more than 2 hours. That coupled with the very modern acting styling from Mia Wasilowska and Michael Fassbender as Jane and her suitor and tormentor, Mr. Rochester, makes this a Jane for our instant consumption, YouTube video age.

The acting is superb. Judy Dench brings her usual delightful mischief to the nosy housekeeper Mrs. Fairfax. Sally Hawkins is not annoying for once and unapologetically evil as the villain Mrs. Reed. Jamie Bell balances goodness and outright entitlement in his characterization of Jane’s suitor St. John Rivers. But of course the movie rightfully belongs to its two leads. Wasikowska acquits herself very very well. Although I thought she held back a bit and restrained her emotions. Fassbender did the same, but still made me feel all his demons. Plus he is a total sex bomb smoldering with intensity. Someone cast him quick in a great romantic lead. Oh wait, they just did. No wonder he is mentioned for every big movie being cast these days.

Red Riding Hood, on the other hand, meanders along incoherently for a long time. The movie starts slow, and never recovers despite some bouts of excitement throughout. It ends on such a hooky surprise that it just reaffirms its badness. What we get here is Red Riding Hood (saucer eyed gorgeous Amanda Seyfried) as a feisty young woman refusing an arranged marriage to a wealthy welder (Max Irons), preferring passion with her childhood friend (Shiloh Fernandez). Very obviously the movie tells us there is more to either suitor, setting our heroine for a Sophie’s Choice between the two. But there is just no commitment to this story. Neither suitor is passionate or dangerous or has chemistry with Seyfried. She has to take the full weight of the story on her shoulders. She is game and tries hard enough, but the over-wroughtness of the story defeats her in the end. It seems like every single choice that director Catharine Hardwicke went with backfired. From having the great Julie Christie as the Grandmother rock reggae braids, the stylized sorta tribal dancing, the artificial looking set, they are all just very bad choices.

The supporting cast is uniformly bad. Vanessa Madsen hardly registers as Seyfried’s mother. What happened to her after that artistic breakthrough she had with Sideways. Anyone who thought that Fernandez or Irons would burn up the screen was sadly mistaken. Worst offender of all is Gary Oldman, hamming it up big time as the baddie, an obviously evil priest. Learn some restraint from Fassebender and Wasikowska man. Aside from Seyfried’s beauty and some gorgeous cinematography, there is nothing good.

Jane beats Red Riding Hood, hands down. In fact it was no competition. Fukunaga’s movie is essential viewing. Better luck next time, Hardwicke.

Do you agree that Jane wins? What do you think about Fassbender’s future prospects? Will Seyfried recover from this? Tell all in the comments.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:22 am

http://www.centredaily.com/2011/03/25/2605482/jane-eyre.html

'Jane Eyre'
By COLIN COVERT
- Star Tribune (Minneapolis)
March 25, 2011 11:01pm EDT

"Poor, obscure, plain and little" is how the heroine of "Jane Eyre" describes herself. The latest film of Charlotte Bronte's moody Gothic romance is anything but. There is not a drab image or a middling performance in the piece. The freewheeling adaptation drops needless scenes and spurs the story ahead with galloping momentum.

From the very first shot, this new version frames Jane (Mia Wasikowska, Tim Burton's "Alice in Wonderland") as a character of mystery and drama . We meet her as a young woman on the run in a rural downpour. What peril she is fleeing is unspecified. Jane is taken in by a dour young clergyman (Jamie Bell), and nursed back to health by his sisters whose Christian charity and curiosity about their new friend run neck-and-neck. Jane is many scenes into her recovery and subsequent adventures before the story circles back to her breathless flight, explaining all.

It's a bold approach, but one that honors Bronte's favorite literary gimmick. She was a master of generating suspense by dropping clues and hints while withholding the secrets we're dying to discover. This flashback-filled adaptation, written by Moira Buffini and directed by Cary Fukunaga, does her proud.

As Jane moves from her loveless childhood into the manor house governess position that was every Victorian orphan girl's glass ceiling, Wasikowska masters the screen actor's magic trick of transfixing our attention while seemingly doing nothing. Her excruciating beauty is tamped down here, but when it blossoms she is a pre-Raphaelite dream in the flesh.

As the cold, taunting master of the house, Mr. Rochester, Michael Fassbender has ice in his smile but fire in his eyes. When he invites Jane to his fireside for fencing match evening conversations, his tone is brusque and challenging yet almost intimate. He is decadent, subtly evil, unreachable yet irresistible. Jane, wise beyond her years yet naive about certain dark aspects of human nature, opens her heart. And then terrible truths come crashing down, impelling that tear-stained dash across a rainswept Yorkshire moor. Fukunaga wrings every ounce of passion, fury and pain out of the tale.

Adriano Goldman's cinematography makes seemingly haunted Thornfield Manor plausibly spooky, and gives the fires that warm (and imperil) the characters a rich, metaphorical intensity. The impeccable supporting cast includes Simon McBurney as that pious, decadent mole Mr. Brocklehurst and Judi Dench as Thornfield's salt-of-the-earth housekeeper Mrs. Edwards. The standout, though, is Sally Hawkins, casting aside a raft to recent cheeky proletarian roles to play Jane's haughty, malevolent aunt. She is deliciously despicable.

This "Jane Eyre" is unapologetic melodrama shot through with inspiration. Diehard "Twilight" fans looking for a deeper, darker romantic mystery would do well to check it out.

JANE EYRE

3 1/2 stars

Starring: Mia Wasikowska, Michael Fassbender

Directed by: Cary Joji Fukunaga

Rated PG-13 for some thematic elements including a nude image and brief violent content.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:22 am

http://noticios.com/p/17630

Catherine Reviews Cary Joji Fukunaga’s Jane Eyre [Theatrical Review]
Mar 25, 2011

The story of Jane Eyre shares several similarities with the phenomenon known as the teen romance, which has taken over young adult literature and film in recent years. A young inexperienced girl, a potentially dangerous and fiercely attractive male and a series of hurdles the two have to overcome before being together. Charlotte Brontë’s gothic novel was not written for teenagers, but many elements have been reconfigured in young adult stories. Cary Fukunaga’s new adaptation of an already much interpreted classic takes us back to basics, showing us how to really tell a romance with his compelling version of Jane Eyre.

Most people know Jane Eyre and her “tale of woe”, but here is a brief summary for those who are unfamiliar. Jane (Mia Wasikowska), an orphan whose childhood consisted of a cold aunt, an abusive nephew and an even more abusive education, is employed as a governess at Thornfield Hall by Edward Rochester (Michael Fassbender) for his ward Adele (Romy Settbon Moore). As her relations with Rochester progress, it becomes increasingly clear that there is a dark secret he desperately wants to keep hidden.
Those who know the story will be interested to know that the film takes Jane’s encounters with Rivers (Jamie Bell) and his sisters and shuffles events. The film begins with her arrival at Rivers and then flashes back and progressing through her story from there. This was a very smart move from screenwriter Moira Buffini. In addition to writing an outstanding adaptation, all potential pacing issues are solved by spreading out the important but uncharged interactions with Rivers as opposed to tackling it in an entirely separate segment, which might have brought the film to a definite halt.

Many period films, especially those depicting the Victorian era, unsurprisingly and understandably tend to have the same look and feel. Fukunaga and cinematographer Adriano Goldman create a very precise atmosphere, making full use of the many conventions of the Gothic romance. The film feels naturally lit throughout, creating an often dark and gloomy look with muted grey and brown tones. The barren landscapes, wind and rain and foreboding manors are just a few conventions employed here with stunning effect. Dario Marianelli’s score fills the soundtrack with emotive violins that express the suppressed passion that Jane and Rochester keep below the surface. Fukunaga has a clear vision which he executes with conviction, making it stand out from many adaptations of classic Victorian era literature.

Mia Wasikowska, destined for an exciting lifetime of impressive performances, captures the essence of Jane Eyre. Her dignity, guardedness and centered unwavering morals are all perfectly portrayed. She is understated and powerful, conveying subtle transitions in her face at every turn. It might just be the perfect incarnation of the heroine. Another newly risen star, Michael Fassbender, gives Rochester the appropriate coldness and inner torment, proving with his presence exactly why he is getting the attention he fully deserves. It is when the two actors are brought together that magic happens. It is a rare thing when the two romantic leads have the chemistry the story demands them to have; these two do. The film is most engaging when the two are onscreen together, not just from of the power their scenes have, but because of the way they portray the evolution of their relationship. Buffini makes sure that different circumstances surround each scene they have together, making every single interaction between the two unique.

An aspect of Jane Eyre that disappoints is the dilution of several key themes of the novel, making this adaptation a bit more simplistic than it ultimately should be. In regards of Jane’s character, the novel makes it explicitly clear throughout that she has a fear of losing her freedom. Being locked in the Red Room is a literal example. Her romance with Rochester is a continual inner struggle because she fears losing her identity through marriage. She needs to be in control of her own freedom and identity and this aspect of her character is not explored enough. This specific gender issue would have been refreshing to examine, considering so few romance stories bother to do so. Thankfully, Wasikowska captures the rest of her character so perfectly, that one can only complain about this up to a point.

Similarly, Bertha Mason ceases to be relevant in any way whereas she is probably the most analyzed aspect of Brontë’s novel. Granted, she is in such a small portion of the book, it is hard to expect much. Here though, she is never given the chance to have a purpose, much less a symbol. Lastly, Jane and Rochester’s romance is more conventionally structured here. Their mutual affection for each other makes itself known sooner and in a more straightforward and obvious manner than the novel does. Whether this is a flaw is unclear. On the one hand, I admired the complexities of the novel more but on the other hand, I was more taken in by their romance in this film.

In the end though, the film should be taken as its own work. A film adaptation of Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre is impossible to discuss without addressing the source material, particularly when taking into account how many times this story has been adapted to the screen. Jane Eyre succeeds because what it does take on is executed with memorable specificity as well as containing some of the best chemistry between two romantic leads in years. For those who are sick of the kinds of romance films that come put today, whether comedy, drama or fantasy, Jane Eyre provides an opportunity to revisit a classic. Was yet another adaptation necessary? Probably not, but it is hard to imagine anyone complaining about it after seeing Fukunaga and Buffini’s splendid interpretation.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:25 am

http://ingenu0us.livejournal.com/171636.html

2011-03-25 01:42:00

"Jane Eyre (2011)" Costume Exhibit and Review
I went to see "Jane Eyre" this week! Apparently it's only in limited release at the moment, but fortunate for me, I am close to one of the few theatres it is at. Even more fortunate is that my boyfriend willingly went with me, and even more exciting — there was a mini exhibit at the theatre featuring costumes from the film. I had no idea this was on, and I was beyond excited. I snapped photos like tourists at the museum (which Thomas and I had just visited) and I didn't care how funny I looked. I've always heard about these kind of exhibits but I've never seen one myself, so I thought I would share these pictures with you. (There are quite a few because no matter how I tried, none of the photos came out quite right..)


This is the front and back of a card that was available with the exhibit... at the very end in the bookstore. I thought it was a nice keepsake, nonetheless.


This was right near the entrance of the theatre. There were these display boards next to the three costumes that were showcased. I didn't read everything but I thought you could see the pictures they used. Most importantly, there's the dress worn by Mia Wasikowska as Jane. Even though it's "plain" I thought it was still so pretty. What I wouldn't give to be in period pieces just to be able to wear such dresses...

This outfit is worn by young Jane at Lowood.

A display to highlight the author of the novel, Charlotte Brontë. (There was also a huge shelf of copies of the book in the bookstore downstairs, all with the movie poster cover.)

This dress was worn by Imogen Poots as Blanche Ingram.

I thought I'd show off the size of the poster while also proving that I myself was at the exhibition.

Of course my poor boyfriend had to follow me around and hold a couple of things as I awed and squealed over each display. But it's not every day you see costumes from an adaptation of one of your favourite novels!

A Review of the Film Itself

(Please note, this is probably more of a review comparing the film to the 2006 miniseries more than it is about comparing it to the novel. I have to admit it's been awhile since I've read the book, though I want to reread it once I have the time!)

All in all, I enjoyed the film more than I thought I would. A couple of weeks ago I didn't even know if I wanted to see it in theatres because, to be honest, I wasn't too impressed with some clips showing Mia Wasikowska as Jane. I absolutely love the 2006 miniseries and it would be hard not to think of Ruth Wilson as Jane and Toby Stephens as Rochester. While I still prefer the miniseries, I appreciated this adaptation, too.

I liked Mia Wasikowska as Jane well enough. What I most liked is that she really suited the part physically — young, tiny and waif-like. Her acting was subdued, but I think it was also the way she portrayed Jane, who does not often reveal her emotions. I was personally disappointed with the lack of expression in the two biggest (most romantic?) scenes with Rochester — the proposal and the reunion — but more on that to follow. She did well to portray her own version of Jane Eyre though ultimately it left something to be desired.

Michael Fassbender was a wonderful Rochester. He seemed gruff and masculine, but still, almost charming. Certainly harsh when first introduced, slowly becoming more friendly, and yet cruel and tormented. There was something more appealing in him than Toby Stephens, even — a completely different look and manner, and his height adds to the hero-quality (and perhaps makes him more threatening?) I think he's more gruff and uncivilized than Toby Stephen's Rochester, and he towers over Jane in a way that makes the physical look and chemistry of Jane and Rochester undeniable. (Especially when Rochester is begging Jane to stay, and he has her neck in his hands and says he could break her like a twig, she is so small...) I think the biggest drawback to Rochester is that there seems to be relatively little of him onscreen, for there is only about two hours or so for the film to develop the story. I found that we went from gruff "you bewitched my horse" to tender "there is an invisible string between you and I" in such a short amount of time that it was hard to enjoy (and believe?) the relationship between Jane and Rochester. Still, he was so passionate and it broke my heart when Jane left and Rochester yells after her...

Judi Dench as Mrs. Fairfax! Can she do anything wrong? A relatively minor role but she was so warm-hearted and had some funny one-liners throughout. And I love the look of shock she gives Rochester and Jane when they come in after the proposal and they're basically making out in the foyer. And she warns Jane about men...

I really enjoyed the relationship between Adele and Jane. There are quite a few scenes of Jane really teaching and bonding with Adele, and Adele is not so annoying in this version. She's also not swept aside so much as she seemed to be in the miniseries.

I thought the flashback approach was interesting. It was hard for me to tell how well the events of the book were conveyed since I already knew what was happening, but Thomas said he understood. I thought it was done well, and it makes the beginning of "Jane Eyre" more interesting instead of just starting with Jane's childhood. Don't get me wrong, Jane's growing up at Gateshead and then Lowood is given adequate time, but I think it works well to begin with her running away from Thornfield and being rescued by the Rivers family. It certainly acts as a hook for the new viewer, because Jane's childhood can be slow, and this method enhances the gothic mystery. (I do think the transition between Lowood and Thornfield was too fast — there was very little given to show that Jane was a teacher who then advertised for a position as a governess.)

From the outset, Jane is portrayed as a strong female character. I thought it was too explicit in young Jane, especially her speech to Aunt Reed (Sally Hawkins). I personally remember Jane being more... subdued? Not so obviously willful or confident? There is also a comment early on made to Mrs. Fairfax about how Jane hates that they, as women, must remain within the boundaries of Thornfield while the men are free to go where they choose. It felt heavy-handed, like the filmmaker was shouting "This is what the story's about!"

One of the biggest issues with the film is always going to be time. Understandably, things must be cut that would otherwise appear in a longer miniseries. In this adaptation, there is very little time spent with the guests at Thornfield — that is, Blanche Ingram et. al. There's basically a parlour scene to show the dynamics, and how Blance and Rochester are "likely" to marry, and then the film moves on. I was disappointed not to see the scene with the "gypsy visit." The film did show the little moment between Jane and Rochester when Jane leaves the party and Rochester follows her. I love the scene from the book:

"I am tired, sir."

He looked at me for a minute.

"And a little depressed," he said. "What about? Tell me."

"Nothing — nothing, sir. I am not depressed."

"But I affirm that you are: so much depressed that a few more words would bring tears to your eyes — indeed, they are there now, shining and swimming; and a bead has slipped from the lash and fallen on to the flag. If I had time, and was not in mortal dread of some prating prig of a servant passing, I would know what all this means. Well, tonight I excuse you... Good-night, my—" He stopped, bit his lip, and abruptly left me.

— Jane Eyre, ch. 17, p.158


In this version, Rochester seems more tender with Jane. He doesn't say "Goodnight, my—" but he does genuinely seem to worry for her. Toby Stephens' version came off too abruptly for me — I think this exchange should be sweet.

Harry Lloyd as (Richard?) Mason! I was so surprised and I spoke out loud and Thomas was like, "Shhh." I'm really quiet generally but apparently I'm too loud in movie theatres. That's all.

After Jane and Rochester are engaged, there is a sweet little montage of the two as a giddy couple in love. They walk around the grounds, kiss, and Rochester teases Jane as she tries to draw their portrait. I suppose one could argue that this might be too "Jane Austen" for Jane and Rochester but I loved the romantic moments we get to see, since most of the film is rather full of angst. I also thought the scene where Rochester begs Jane to stay was wonderful — or rather, heartbreaking — and you feel for the characters. It starts with Jane coming out of her room, and Rochester is there resting on the floor waiting for her... He begs her to yell at him, but she just calmly pushes past him... And then she faints and he carries her away. (I'm going to say this is because she has not eaten much rather than showing typical feminine weakness since the rest of the film shows Jane as a very strong character.) It is another sweet moment between Rochester and Jane. Maybe I just like swooning over a romantic lead? Again, the tears and anguish of the following exchange is just heartbreaking as Jane refuses to stay with Rochester (though I think most women would not be so strong to Michael Fassbender's appeals.) It's very passionate as Rochester hugs her waist, lying at her feet, begging.

I was not impressed with the pivotal cry of Rochester to Jane's spirit — Jane was arguing with St. John in front of the house when she hears Rochester, and consequently starts answering it and runs away from St. John. I felt like the moment was tarnished and wished it had been handled differently. I don't remember specially what happens in the book, but isn't Jane alone when she hears his cry?

I was most disappointed in the two most important — or at least my favourite — scenes in the whole book: that is, the proposal scene and the reunion scene. I absolutely love the 2006 miniseries versions, and the film just seemed dull in comparison.





The film versions lacked the emotion and passion that Ruth Wilson and Toby Stephens have in the miniseries. Especially the lines delivered by Jane in the proposal scene: Ruth Wilson's performance is so sketched in my mind that Mia Wasikowska's delivery of the similar lines is so flat and emotionless. It was really disappointing, even in the context of the film as whole — though the scene itself was pretty. I did like Fassbender's emotions with his facial expressions as he transformed from teasing to professing his love. And then they turned giddy as they raced back to Thornfield in the storm and kissed in the foyer (with Mrs. Fairfax watching).

There was so little done with the final scene that it felt like a huge letdown. Firstly, it was so short and it just ended with Jane's first returning to Rochester. It also took place outside, rather than inside with Jane bringing Rochester his water. I think it took away from the surprise and the big reveal when Jane has nothing to do, for Rochester suspects much earlier (that is, instead of assuming it is a servant bringing him his drink). I suppose this scene is supposed to be quiet, with the emotions and subtle gestures and facial expressions speaking for themselves, but I would love a more satisfying ending — a larger "happily ever after" moment, I suppose.

I realize this was a very long review. I hope it was interesting to at least some. I'm afraid I'm not very good at the typical movie review, but perhaps some of you will be concerned or interested with the same things I am. I think the largest "problem" with the film was that there was not enough time to address anything, and that is an inevitable downside. I would say the first half of the film was rather slow, though, and the second half felt rushed. The main plot points were addressed, I think, and the spirit of "Jane Eyre" was well preserved, in most of the performances as well as the beautiful cinematography and costumes, and the gorgeous score of Dario Marianelli (whose "Pride & Prejudice" score I adore). There were even subtle Yorkshire accents which I loved — though I'm not very well-versed in accents, so I'm sure they were not exact. They weren't over-the-top, though, either, so I think that was well done.

I encourage everyone to see the film if you can! It was well done and I enjoyed it. It doesn't compare to the miniseries, but there are similarities and differences which you can appreciate. I even found some things that I liked better, so there are advantages and disadvantages to the different forms. I think Fassbender and Wasikowska present a great version of this epic couple, especially in their physical appearances and sizes, and they certainly make these characters their own. Of course, now I want to watch my 2006 DVD and revel in all the four-hour "Jane Eyre" glory. I still don't think anyone can beat Ruth Wilson and Toby Stephens as Jane and Rochester (though Michael Fassbender comes awful close.)
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:28 am

http://34st.com/2011/03/review-jane-eyre/

March 25, 2011 at 1:41 am
Review: Jane Eyre
Adaptation succeeds in as many ways as it fails.
By Elizabeth Horkley

Adapting Jane Eyre for the big screen is no easy charge — just ask one of the more than 18 directors who have previously attempted it. The latest to have a go at Charlotte Bronte’s 1847 novel is Cary Fukunaga, who approaches the novel with reverence, though in fitting the film into a two–hour time frame, shows some lack of judgment in deciding what to excise.

As most who will go to see the film already know, Jane Eyre (Wasikowska) is a governess with a woeful past who finds solace in Thornfield Hall — the estate of the ill–humored and mysterious Edward Rochester (Fassbender). It’s not long before the two brooding souls are drawn to one another, forming an intense relationship that blossoms into love. But something strange haunts Jane and Thornfield Hall itself — a secret that makes itself known to chaotic effect at the nuptials of Rochester and Jane.

Fukunaga begins the story in medias res, with the aftermath of the ill–fated nuptials constituting the ultimate framework of the film. The variation, which is Fukunaga’s most jarring departure from the source material, ultimately benefits the film by setting it apart from its predecessors and modernizing the story. Furthermore aiding the content of the film, this new approach also carries an emotional weight: when previously–seen scenarios are repeated, they are imbued with a new depth and the sort of sad sentimentality only made possible with hindsight.

Yet this progressive structure does nothing to quell the perpetual conflict in adaptations between time and patience. In certain instances, the film seems more concerned with clocking in at the allotted running time than with preserving the novel’s languid, yet effectively foreboding pace. Especially troublesome in terms of the relationships formed between characters, it is likely that motivation, and thus believability, will be lost on both fans of the novel and laymen alike.

The brunt of making the film’s central relationship convincing thus falls on the acting abilities of the film’s two leads. Wasikowska and Fassbender succeed in becoming Bronte’s immortal heroes, though neither actor is quite able to breathe new life into his or her character. Rather, it appears that the two are charged with bringing life to one another. When onscreen together, Wasikowska and Fassbender seethe sexual chemistry, which not only does justice to the narrative’s timeless love story, but also saves the film in its entirety from staleness.

Despite the film’s admirable achievements, it is hard to feel that something isn’t missing from Jane Eyre — something not easily definable, especially considering the film’s many merits— but which nonetheless amounts to the spark that could have propelled the film from a successful adaptation to a stand–alone masterpiece.


3/5 stars
Directed by: Cary Fukanaga
Starring: Mia Wasikowska, Michael Fassbender
Rated PG–13, 115 min.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:28 am

http://www.yesnofilms.com/2011/03/jane-eyre.html

Friday, March 25, 2011
"Jane Eyre"
First off, I will be judging this "Jane Eyre" movie adaptation solely on the movie itself; not compared to the novel, which I haven't read (but now want to), or any other movie or TV adaptations of it, of which there have been plenty. I knew the basics of the plot before seeing the film, but not the entire story, and between the cinematography, acting, and story, I ended up enjoying "Jane Eyre" very much

The movie begins with what we later find out is almost the end; Jane Eyre (Mia Wasikowska, "The Kids Are All Right") running through the rain, becoming soaked in her frock and hooded cloak. She finds refuge in a nearby house, where St. John Rivers (Jamie Bell, "The Eagle") and his sisters take her in and nurse her back to health. The film then returns to the beginning of Jane's life, where she is an orphan living with her aunt, who does not want her and sends Jane off to a cruel boarding school. When she is older, Jane becomes a governess for a little girl, who is the ward of Mr. Rochester (Michael Fassbender, "Jonah Hex"), who flat-out tells her that he does not enjoy the company of children or old women (referring to the housekeeper, Mrs. Fairfax, played by Judi Dench), but that he may possibly enjoy Jane's company. Jane finds herself attracted to him, and Mr. Rochester her, but he has a big secret that she doesn't yet know, which will impact any chance of a future she has with him.

The cinematography is gorgeous in the film, which was mostly filmed in Derbyshire, England, and the classical soundtrack meshes perfectly with it. I really liked that the film showed Jane's life partially in flashbacks, as it helps to show the audience who she is in the present and how she came to be that way. As far as the acting, we have a strong set of characters here, that are played well by Fassbender, Wasikowska, and Judi Dench; my only complaint is that the chemistry between Jane and Mr. Rochester wasn't that great - they are fine when they are just talking to each other, but when it comes to romance, it wasn't as believable as it could have been. The film also injects humor throughout it - for example, the first time Dench's character sees Jane and Rochester kissing, her eyes get big as saucers, and she blatantly stares at them - which was a nice contrast between the otherwise serious nature of the movie.

Yes, see this film. It cannot simply be dismissed as a "chick flick" - it is far too complicated for that. Although this is the first movie adaptation of "Jane Eyre" I've seen, I ended up really liking it, and I will probably read the original Charlotte Bronte book in the near future. Anyone can enjoy this film, and I hope that moviegoers do go and see it, regardless of any preconceived notions they may have.

"Jane Eyre" is in theaters today, March 25th.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:28 am

http://wattsupreviews.com/2011/03/25/jane-eyre/

Jane Eyre
By
Brad
– March 25, 2011Posted in: Movie Reviews

Jane Eyre

Cary Fukunaga’s ”Jane Eyre” was lovely , intelligent, fancy, and a little spooky. Based on Charlotte Brontë’s century-and-a-half old classic, which is a huge love story with a touch of Gothic mystery, and has been overly, and needlessly adapted, yet the filmmakers and the wonderful cast headlined by the two young up-and-comers breathe new life to what could have a been a deliberate, dawdling exercise.

Who are the Up and Comers? Mia Wasikowska of Alice in wonderland Fame and Michael Fassbender just made too much sense to falter on screen and thankfully they’re both up to the task. Fassbender plays a firm, delicate, devastating and the latter a towering Mr. Rochester – both unwaveringly boorish and mysteriously charming.
-
Director Fukunag had stated that he intended to embrace the spookier elements of Brontë’s novel, but his bigger contribution is the seamless, time-shifting narrative, which is poorly applied and rarely settles into a groove. SOME OF THE MEN IN THE CROWD WERE FALLING ASLEEP.
-

Following the title Character we go in and out of her past…. I somewhat enjoyed this flick… The Women will love it way more than the men…. And If you have read the book I am sure you will end up enjoying the flick a great deal.. Overall I will grade this Flick a B.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:29 am

http://www.movies.com/movie-reviews/jane-eyre-review/grae-drake/m66658?wssac=164&wssaffid=graereview

Grae Drake
Jane Eyre Review

Grae's Rating:
4.0

Ruffled my petticoat!

Who's In It: Mia Wasikowska, Michael Fassbender, Jamie Bell, Judi Dench, Simon McBurney

The Basics: Jane Eyre has had it rough. Her parents are dead and she has been raised by an aunt who can't stand her, and a cousin who chases her with swords. When she gets shipped away to a boarding school, Mr. Brocklehurst, a man whose name alone should keep him from casting stones, makes sure she has the devil beaten out of her. Then she becomes a governess, utilizing her French skills for tutoring, and she has to deal with Rochester, her cranky employer. When things begin to look up, she discovers a horrible secret that causes it all to come crashing down again. This time, Jamie Bell does his best to save her. But in the end, she manages to save herself.

What's The Deal: A wonderfully written screenplay by Moira Buffini (Tamara Drewe) translated to the screen by Sin Nombredirector Cary Fukunaga made for an incredibly captivating 130 minutes. My favorite thing about the film was how relatable the characters were, which is as much a credit to the director as it is to the performers. Mia Wasikowska has reached a whole new level here, transcending from being merely likable to riveting. Michael Fassbender goes up against her like a sexy brick wall. And Judi Dench tops it off like a sassy Victorian cherry.

When the Corsets Come Off: It's easy to forget how positively scandalous things were back in the day. I bet Charlotte Bronte was like the Courtney Love of the Victorian English Literary World. Even though people are thoroughly blanketed in layers and layers of clothing, just the sight of a collarbone sets the whole room aflame. This energy is present in the film too--when Jane and Rochester stand facing each other in the moonlight separated only by thin, floor-length, gauzy cotton, it might as well be nothing. Who needs daisy dukes and tube tops? Clothing is of no consequence when you're a strong-willed, intelligent survivor gazing into the eyes of a bold, strong protector with your lips a mere five inches apart. Ooh!

The More Things Change: There's plenty to like about this movie: beautiful setting, amazing production design, wonderful costumes, great performances, engaging dialogue. The best thing though is how bonkers these novels get--today's "crazy" is but a mere shadow of how whacked out things were back in the day. The Housewives of New Jersey have nothing on Rochester and his dark secret. If you haven't read the novel I don't want to spoil it for you, but it's totally gasp-worthy. Even though I sport a pink fauxhawk, I watched wide-eyed in shock and feeling thoroughly puritanical.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:30 am

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

Friday, March 25, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW: Jane Eyre
Guest blogger Liz Parker is back from an advance screening of "Jane Eyre". Is this latest screen version of the classic book by Charlotte Bronte just another boring rehash or something new and wonderful? Let's read what Liz thinks...

First off, I will be judging this "Jane Eyre" movie adaptation solely on the movie itself; not compared to the novel, which I haven't read (but now want to), or any other movie or TV adaptations of it, of which there have been plenty. I knew the basics of the plot before seeing the film, but not the entire story, and between the cinematography, acting, and story, I ended up enjoying "Jane Eyre" very much

The movie begins with what we later find out is almost the end; Jane Eyre (Mia Wasikowska, "The Kids Are All Right") running through the rain, becoming soaked in her frock and hooded cloak. She finds refuge in a nearby house, where St. John Rivers (Jamie Bell, "The Eagle") and his sisters take her in and nurse her back to health. The film then returns to the beginning of Jane's life, where she is an orphan living with her aunt, who does not want her and sends Jane off to a cruel boarding school. When she is older, Jane becomes a governess for a little girl, who is the ward of Mr. Rochester (Michael Fassbender, "Jonah Hex"), who flat-out tells her that he does not enjoy the company of children or old women (referring to the housekeeper, Mrs. Fairfax, played by Judi Dench), but that he may possibly enjoy Jane's company. Jane finds herself attracted to him, and Mr. Rochester her, but he has a big secret that she doesn't yet know, which will impact any chance of a future she has with him.

The cinematography is gorgeous in the film, which was mostly filmed in Derbyshire, England, and the classical soundtrack meshes perfectly with it. I really liked that the film showed Jane's life partially in flashbacks, as it helps to show the audience who she is in the present and how she came to be that way. As far as the acting, we have a strong set of characters here, that are played well by Fassbender, Wasikowska, and Judi Dench; my only complaint is that the chemistry between Jane and Mr. Rochester wasn't that great - they are fine when they are just talking to each other, but when it comes to romance, it wasn't as believable as it could have been. The film also injects humor throughout it - for example, the first time Dench's character sees Jane and Rochester kissing, her eyes get big as saucers, and she blatantly stares at them - which was a nice contrast between the otherwise serious nature of the movie.

Yes, see this film. It cannot simply be dismissed as a "chick flick" - it is far too complicated for that. Although this is the first movie adaptation of "Jane Eyre" I've seen, I ended up really liking it, and I will probably read the original Charlotte Bronte book in the near future. Anyone can enjoy this film, and I hope that moviegoers do go and see it, regardless of any preconceived notions they may have.

"Jane Eyre" is in theaters today, March 25th.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:31 am

http://www.unewsonline.com/2011/03/wasikowska-delivers-expert-performance-in-%E2%80%98jane-eyre%E2%80%99/

Wasikowska delivers expert performance in ‘Jane Eyre’
By
Brent Lang
– March 24, 2011Posted in: Arts

Although it has become a cliché that a film is incapable of representing a novel, especially one of such worth as “Jane Eyre,” you will be surprised with this film.

Among the many films which have already attempted this feat with Charlotte Brontë’s novel, the acting, costume and effective use of sets make this version stand apart.

Director Cary Fukunaga (“Sin Nombre”) brings us this new interpretation which innovatively begins with Jane (Mia Wasikowska) desperately escaping from Thornfield amidst a bleak landscape expertly directed with a combination of long and medium shots.

Later, we receive the plot in the form of flashbacks, allowing the novel to effectively be compressed into a feature film.

Nevertheless, the film did miss the mark in depicting the suffering she experienced in boarding school, but such faults are to be expected in any adaptation to the big screen.

At the same time, the audience still recoils in terror at the sight of her abuse, much as they would upon reading of it.
In terms of the relationship between Jane and Mr. Rochester (Michael Fassbender), the stages of their relationship were lacking, but Wasikowska delivered an expert performance as the intelligent and stoic Jane. Not only was she able to deliver quotes from the book, but her ease in period costumes was evident as well.

As for Mr. Rochester, although Fassbender was able to display some of the menacing qualities of the character, he ultimately does not achieve to depict him as the book does.

Although the film has some obvious flaws in comparison to the novel, it can be enjoyed by audiences that are unfamiliar with the story.

I recommend taking the time to watch it; it will not disappoint.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:31 am

http://brandonfibbs.com/2011/03/24/jane-eyre/

Jane Eyre
March 24th, 2011

3 out of 4 stars

It is ironic that Charlotte Brontë’s 1847 novel Jane Eyre, one of the books that could be most relied upon to elicit groans and yawns from a high school English class, is also one of literature’s most frequently adapted for the screen. For this reason, and because it has been done very well in the past, we are forced to wonder if this latest version of the story about piety, suffering in silence, smoldering eroticism and Gothic horror was truly necessary or merely a filmmaker’s passion project. Necessity is certainly debatable, but this new adaptation’s quality is not. Jane Eyre is a sumptuous, transcendent melodrama—it feels more tragic, more authentic and more alive than ever before.

Mia Wasikowska steps into the shoes of Jane, a young woman who, after a childhood spent at a soul-crushing boarding school where she was taught little more than how to endure pain, becomes the governess at Thornfield Hall for the cold Edward Rochester (Michael Fassbender). Astonishingly, the plain, penniless Jane and the aristocratic, wealthy Mr. Rochester fall for each other. Happiness, it seems, is finally in our heroine’s grasp. But it will be sorely tested when Jane discovers Mr. Rochester is hiding a terrible secret.

Director Cary Fukunaga (Sin Nombre) and cinematographer Adriano Goldman shoot Jane Eyre as if it is the offspring of Stanley Kubrick’s Barry Lyndon—much of it by candlelight. The famed heather-crusted moors appear as something otherworldly, shrouded in mist and fog, and echoing ghostly voices, carried on the wind. Dario Marianelli’s score is, by turns, plaintive and tender and as menacing as the rain-lashed heath. The script, evoking not just Brontë, but also Dickens and even Cinderella, is told through the skillful use of flashbacks; it is trim and nimble, showing evidence of great compression but equally grand narrative economy.

This is easily the most spiritual of the adaptations. Fukunaga mines the Gothic horror elements of the novel better than any of his predecessors, evoking phantoms, ghouls and specters—of course, the only demons here are secrets, clamoring to get into the light. It is also the most blatantly feminist. “I wish I could have action, have a life, like a man,” Jane tells us, conjuring freedom and free will as untasted ideals. Alone and isolated in the world, she has no choice but to secure her own future as best she can. But doing so requires that she abide by a suffocating legion of rules and social mores designed to stifle her sex’s ambitions. The ability to act, without constraint or prejudice, and the capacity to think as she wills, without fear or insincerity, is Jane’s ideal.

Wasikowska, not a gorgeous actress nor as appropriately plain as she is made out to be here, does a tremendous job as the courageous, humble, feisty and candid Jane, virtues that might come off as insufferable affectations were the heroine and the woman bringing her to life not so authentic. Jane is not a saint, but she does endure her unjust sufferings without self-pity. A life of hardship has created a backbone of steel that somehow stopped short of her heart. The great Michael Fassbender plays Rochester not as a raging dynamo as has been done in the past, but rather a sullen, abrupt, cynical and deeply wounded human being. At first glance, and, to be honest, several glances beyond that, we genuinely don’t know if he is a good man or even a likable one. But because Rochester’s Victorian wildness is never far from his dashing charisma and innate goodness, he never feels cut off from Jane’s redemption or ours.

The result of all this fussing is neither stiff and inflexible or radically divergent and reimagined. It is exactly as it should be—a dynamic romance that rings true with the most important critic of all, our heart.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:34 am

http://aviewfromnormal.blogspot.com/2011/03/in-which-i-tear-apart-movies-dreams.html

Thursday, March 24, 2011
In which I tear apart a movies dreams
Well, I just waisted two hours of my life I could have been using to, I don't know, be happy or sing about how wonderful life is. Instead I had to sit and watch as one of my favorite books was turned into a weepy sad fest with no redeeming factors what so ever!
I am angry!

The book is Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte. I just saw the new movie with Michael Fassbender and Mia Waskowska or whatever her name is. I know I can be pretty nasty when I am angry but I don't care. After you have slaughtered one of the most perfect heroins in literature history I have no sympathy for anyone.

I am getting ahead of myself.

Two hours ago the only movie version of Jane Eyre that I knew was the 2006 adaption with Ruth Wilson and Toby Stephens. If you have not seen this version then I highly recommend that you do. It is a sweeping two part epic that stays as close to the book as you could possibly want.

Then there is this new version.

I really did go into the theater hoping for the best. I knew it would not be the best but myabe it could hold its own. I was wrong.
Mia plays Jane. She has the span of exactly four emotions: crying, victimized, serious and crying. Never was there a convincing smile on her face. I did not see her fall in love with her co-star or give anyone else a genuine feeling. She just made me want to yell "Impostor!"

Michael as Rochester was alright. He also needed to smile and joke more but his 'desperate to keep the woman he loves' act was very convincing. It would have been better if the woman he loved was not a leaky stone wall incapable of emotion. Michael and Mia together had no chemistry. Even when they kissed there was something lacking. I think the director should have stopped filming when he saw the lack of passion and forced them on a road trip or locked them in a closet or dropped them on a glacier. Or something, anything to get a real emotion between them!

The only actor who was any good was Jamie Bell. His character, St.John, was the only one who had constant convincing emotions.
Besides the acting it was just a bad movie. The lighting was either blue or gold but mostly blue. Gloominess saturated the scenes. If I had been down hearted before I saw it I would have felt like jumping into a lake afterwards. It was a depressing movie.

It was a patchwork of all the big important moments. Then they took the biggest most dramatic epic proposal scene and turned it into a mild halfhearted confession of love that you already saw coming.
I am trembling. I have never been this worked up about a movie before. The book was perfect, the 2006 version was perfect. This was such a drastic decrease of quality that I think I am in shock.

i am going to go watch the 2006 version to cleanse my mind and sooth my now haunted soul. Haunted by a movie that makes you wonder if being in love makes you depressed. Because I feel depressed after watching that.

Posted by Tallie Raye at 6:30 PM
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:34 am

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

Thursday, March 24, 2011
'Jane Eyre'
'Jane Eyre' (2011) (PG-13) (3 stars)

Writer: Moira Buffini based on Charlotte Bronte novel
Director: Cary Fukunaga
Starring: Mia Warsikowska, Micheal Fassbender, Judi Dench, Sally Hawkins, Jamie Bell,
Simon McBurney, Valentina Cervi

The novel "Jane Eyre" has a heartbreaking and very passionate love story. The 2011 movie adaptation honors that love story with two great performances and a sure handed direction. It is a classic love story that smolders with intensity in a film that looks bleak and that is it's power. I didn't fully embrace this movie but I admired it and I thought the love story and chemistry between it's two leads was perfect.

"Jane Eyre" tells the story of Jane who was raised in a sad and bleak house by a woman who abused Jane mentally. Jane was also physically abused at times in the boarding school she resided in. In a powerful scene she makes friends with an abused girl and sees her die right before her eyes. Jane is sent to be a governess for a cold and pained Mr. Rochester. They strike up a friendship that turns into pure love, Jane has finally found love and attention. Their love is tested because it is frowned upon and through certain circumstances she has to leave. Everyone who has read this story knows what it's about. I haven't read the book but I could probably guess that to it's readers it has to be a powerful love story.

The film may be too cold in spots but I love it's cinematography and the haunting way it is always dark, cloudy and filmed in damp, cold settings. The director Cary Fukunaga takes great care in building this love story and the final third where Jane falls in love with a servant played by Jamie Bell adds great drama. Fukunaga is a talented director, his first movie was the impressive "Sin Nombre". Like Nombre though I felt the movie needed more depth. The love story here is passionate but the movie can also leave you cold and depressed.

Mia Warsikowska is wonderful as Jane and this talented young actress announces her leading lady status with this performance. She had been solid in "Alice in Wonderland" in the lead role but she shows more here because it is a more dificult role and she is up to it. You will hear a lot about Michael Fassbender very soon and he gives another great performance here. He has been on the cusp of greatness with his acting in "Inglorious Basterds" and was excellent in the powerful indie drama "Fish Tank". Fassbender is building a great career here so far and it won't be long before he makes a big Hollywood splash and becomes a hearthrob. He has all the goods and his chemistry with Warsikowska is great in what is a difficult relationship. These are two wonderful actors in a timeless love story that is solid.
Posted by Vincent Snavely at 4:20 PM
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:43 am

http://blog.oregonlive.com/madaboutmovies/2011/03/jane_eyre_review_a_gloomy_and.html

'Jane Eyre' review: a gloomy and romantic film, just as Charlotte Bronte wrote it
Published: Thursday, March 24, 2011, 4:00 PM
Shawn Levy, The Oregonian By Shawn Levy, The Oregonian The Oregonian
Follow

Charlotte Bronte’s 1847 novel “Jane Eyre” has been a warhorse of the movies since the silent era, with at least 18 theatrical and TV adaptations -- or about one every five years for the last century.

You wonder what could draw new filmmakers to tackle the thing, particularly as even the best versions (many would cite the 1943 effort starring Joan Fontaine and Orson Welles) aren’t exactly reckoned classics. But maybe that’s the answer right there: no one has quite nailed the blend of gloom, romance, moralizing, hope, feminism and knotty plotting that has made Bronte’s novel beloved for generations. Why not give it a fresh go?

Indeed, that’s exactly the spirit with which director Cary Joji Fukunaga (“Sin Nombre”) treats the material. This new “Jane Eyre” is recognizably built on a classic, but it imparts a pared-down, revisionist feel. It’s often gorgeous but never merely pretty; the cruelties of man and fate have neither been softened nor exaggerated; and the cast attacks the sometimes stilted language of the novel with realistic vigor. At times there’s a sense of imbalance, with a slightly modern approach infecting the cinematography or the performances. But in the main this is a faithful and honest adaptation, with a real savor of Bronte complimented by muscular acting and a sober sense of craft.

Mia Wasikowska (“Alice in Wonderland,” “The Kids Are All Right”), plays the grown Jane, orphaned as a child, abused at boarding school, and thrust out in the world to work as a governess, a position which brings her to Thornfield Hall, a massive house in Yorkshire. There, under the ministry of a kindly housekeeper (Judi Dench), she tutors Sophie, the ward of the mysterious and moody master of the house, Edward Rochester (Michael Fassbender of “Inglourious Basterds”). Jane and Rochester are drawn to each other -- they even get as far as the altar -- but his past catches up with him, and terrified by what she learns, she flees. Eventually, she is taken in by a country parson (Jamie Bell) and his sisters, and her heart wends through several more turns and tribulations.

For the most part, Fukunaga and his crew have made an effort to keep the feet of this “Jane Eyre” solidly on the cold, hard ground of the novel. (The film opens with a jittery passage, which disconcerts, but which is revealed later to be a preview of an appropriately jittery moment.) Much of the film is dark, quiet, strained -- all in harmony with the material at hand. Yorkshire and Thornfield Hall are lovely, truly, but you wouldn’t want to be made to live in their austere, foreboding confines.

The cast is as solid as the setting. Wasikowska is asked to play mousy and reserved, and she expresses ably Jane’s simultaneous fear and boldness. Fassbender makes a fine Rochester: like Welles, he’s handsome but not overly, and equally proud as he is haunted. And the child actors -- Amelia Clarkson as young Jane and Eglantine Rembauville-Nicolle as Sophie -- are particularly vital and real.

Is it dreary, stingy and strained? Well, yes: it’s “Jane Eyre,” after all. But it’s also robust and full-blooded and forceful: it’s “Jane Eyre,” after all. And besides, if time has taught us anything about film adaptations of “Jane Eyre,” if you don’t care for one, another one will be along in five years or so which you might prefer.

(112 min., PG-13, Fox Tower) Grade: B
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:43 am

http://cinenthusiast.wordpress.com/2011/03/24/review-jane-eyre-2011-fukunaga/

http://criterioncast.com/2011/03/24/catherine-reviews-cary-joji-fukunagas-jane-eyre-theatrical-review/

24 Mar 2011 2 Comments

by Catherine in 2011, Film

The story of Jane Eyre shares several similarities with the phenomenon known as the teen romance, which has taken over young adult literature and film in recent years. A young inexperienced girl, a potentially dangerous and fiercely attractive male and a series of hurdles the two have to overcome before being together. Charlotte Brontë’s gothic novel was not written for teenagers, but many elements have been reconfigured in young adult stories. Cary Fukunaga’s new adaptation of an already much interpreted classic takes us back to basics, showing us how to really tell a romance with his compelling version of Jane Eyre.

Most people know Jane Eyre and her “tale of woe”, but here is a brief summary for those who are unfamiliar. Jane (Mia Wasikowska), an orphan whose childhood consisted of a cold aunt, an abusive nephew and an even more abusive education, is employed as a governess at Thornfield Hall by Edward Rochester (Michael Fassbender) for his ward Adele (Romy Settbon Moore). As her relations with Rochester progress, it becomes increasingly clear that there is a dark secret he desperately wants to keep hidden.

Those who know the story will be interested to know that the film takes Jane’s encounters with Rivers (Jamie Bell) and his sisters and shuffles events. The film begins with her arrival at Rivers and then flashes back and progressing through her story from there. This was a very smart move from screenwriter Moira Buffini. In addition to writing an outstanding adaptation, all potential pacing issues are solved by spreading out the important but uncharged interactions with Rivers as opposed to tackling it in an entirely separate segment, which might have brought the film to a definite halt.

Many period films, especially those depicting the Victorian era, unsurprisingly and understandably tend to have the same look and feel. Fukunaga and cinematographer Adriano Goldman create a very precise atmosphere, making full use of the many conventions of the Gothic romance. The film feels naturally lit throughout, creating an often dark and gloomy look with muted grey and brown tones. The barren landscapes, wind and rain and foreboding manors are just a few conventions employed here with stunning effect. Dario Marianelli’s score fills the soundtrack with emotive violins that express the suppressed passion that Jane and Rochester keep below the surface. Fukunaga has a clear vision which he executes with conviction, making it stand out from many adaptations of classic Victorian era literature.

Mia Wasikowska, destined for an exciting lifetime of impressive performances, captures the essence of Jane Eyre. Her dignity, guardedness and centered unwavering morals are all perfectly portrayed. She is understated and powerful, conveying subtle transitions in her face at every turn. It might just be the perfect incarnation of the heroine. Another newly risen star, Michael Fassbender, gives Rochester the appropriate coldness and inner torment, proving with his presence exactly why he is getting the attention he fully deserves. It is when the two actors are brought together that magic happens. It is a rare thing when the two romantic leads have the chemistry the story demands them to have; these two do. The film is most engaging when the two are onscreen together, not just from of the power their scenes have, but because of the way they portray the evolution of their relationship. Buffini makes sure that different circumstances surround each scene they have together, making every single interaction between the two unique.

An aspect of Jane Eyre that disappoints is the dilution of several key themes of the novel, making this adaptation a bit more simplistic than it ultimately should be. In regards of Jane’s character, the novel makes it explicitly clear throughout that she has a fear of losing her freedom. Being locked in the Red Room is a literal example. Her romance with Rochester is a continual inner struggle because she fears losing her identity through marriage. She needs to be in control of her own freedom and identity and this aspect of her character is not explored enough. This specific gender issue would have been refreshing to examine, considering so few romance stories bother to do so. Thankfully, Wasikowska captures the rest of her character so perfectly, that one can only complain about this up to a point.

Similarly, Bertha Mason ceases to be relevant in any way whereas she is probably the most analyzed aspect of Brontë’s novel. Granted, she is in such a small portion of the book, it is hard to expect much. Here though, she is never given the chance to have a purpose, much less a symbol. Lastly, Jane and Rochester’s romance is more conventionally structured here. Their mutual affection for each other makes itself known sooner and in a more straightforward and obvious manner than the novel does. Whether this is a flaw is unclear. On the one hand, I admired the complexities of the novel more but on the other hand, I was more taken in by their romance in this film.

In the end though, the film should be taken as its own work. A film adaptation of Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre is impossible to discuss without addressing the source material, particularly when taking into account how many times this story has been adapted to the screen. Jane Eyre succeeds because what it does take on is executed with memorable specificity as well as containing some of the best chemistry between two romantic leads in years. For those who are sick of the kinds of romance films that come put today, whether comedy, drama or fantasy, Jane Eyre provides an opportunity to revisit a classic. Was yet another adaptation necessary? Probably not, but it is hard to imagine anyone complaining about it after seeing Fukunaga and Buffini’s splendid interpretation.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:45 am

http://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/content?oid=1943687

Reader, she married him
Jane Eyre

By Jonathan Kiefer

This article was published on 03.24.11.

Headstrong teenaged displaced-orphan governess falls for a brooding lord with a dark past, and they’re both too beautiful by far.

Yes. Charlotte Brontë’s 1847 novel has been adapted into some form of motion picture at least once per decade since 1914, but only now has Jane Eyre been done by a young Oakland-born director whose previous film concerned train-hopping Hondurans sneaking into America and the Mexican gangsters making an already miserable life even harder for them.

It was anybody’s guess where filmmaker Cary Fukunaga would go after Sin Nombre, his affecting, award-winning 2009 feature debut. Headlong into the sooty, bonneted world of Brontë? Maybe it’s not such a stretch. After all, this is a guy who knows big-screen brooding. Among the many delights of Fukunaga’s new movie is the freedom to disregard how it compares with all previous Eyres. Instead, consider how improbably well Sin Nombre has set it up: In that film, a headstrong teenaged displaced illegal immigrant falls for a brooding gangster with a dark past; in this one, a headstrong teenaged displaced-orphan governess falls for a brooding lord with a dark past. How about that? From chugging freight trains to huffing horses, from weather-beaten rail yards to wind-swept moors, from a goth atmosphere of skeevy gang initiation rituals to a gothic atmosphere of stuffy English manners, maybe it really is all just variations on a single archetype. Who knew?

The most important thing to understand about Jane Eyre is that she’s quite self-possessed, given the rotten childhood she’s endured and the arduous journey that’s led her to live and work at the gloomy estate of one Edward Rochester. This fellow, too, might be called self-possessed, and perhaps also just a tad temperamental. As he and Jane talk to each other, most of the time in beautifully lofty language, they find themselves engaged in a mutually invigorating battle of wills. (The script was intelligently adapted by Moira Buffini, most recently the intelligent adapter of Tamara Drewe.) A romance between them should therefore seem inevitable, but also unlikely; in addition to the differences of age and social status, there is also that one rather important something that he’s not telling her. Hint: Is that a voice in her head or in the attic? And which, exactly, would be worse?

That Jane, said to be plain, and Rochester, said (by Jane) to be ugly, are portrayed respectively by the unplain Mia Wasikowska and the un-ugly Michael Fassbender shouldn’t impugn Fukunaga’s fidelity to the book. You can just take it for granted that these two characters have a long movie history of interesting but technically inaccurate casting: She’s been played by the likes of Joan Fontaine, Charlotte Gainsbourg and Samantha Morton; he by the likes of Orson Welles, William Hurt and Timothy Dalton. What matters most is the rapport between them, and with Wasikowska and Fassbender in the roles, it’s electric.

For any pair of actors, this duo is a strange inheritance. Taking Jane Eyre into account, along with Fish Tank before it, Fassbender might be seen as settling into that peculiar niche, formerly occupied by Jeremy Irons, of the slender suave Englishman who seems always to be having on-screen affairs with teenaged girls. Well, power to him. He sure is good at it. Wasikowska, for her part, delivers exactly the right blend of wisdom and vulnerability in Jane’s most resonant lines, like, “I wish a woman could have action in her life like a man,” and, perhaps more importantly, “I must respect myself.” Having abided Tim Burton’s ultimately shrug-worthy Alice in Wonderland, Wasikowska finally has the reboot of a classic that she deserves.

The supporting cast includes strategic applications of Judi Dench, Jamie Bell, Sally Hawkins and—not least—Simon McBurney, a familiar English character actor who in this case has a paradoxically generous way of overacting just enough to set the mood and bring the other performers’ subtleties into sharper relief.

Fukunaga also benefits from his reunion with Sin Nombre cinematographer Adriano Goldman, who again shows a keen eye for the inherent expressionism of natural light. By being greater than the sum of its parts, this Jane Eyre should stay fresh at least until the next one comes along. If that’s not exciting per se, isn’t it at least sort of comforting to think that every generation gets a new cinematic way to cheat on its English homework?
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:51 am

http://www.southphillyreview.com/arts-and-entertainment/Jane-Eyre-118542469.html

Jane Eyre
By R. Kurt Osenlund
Posted Mar. 23, 2011

Jane Eyre (Mia Wasikowska) steps out on the moorland in the creepy yet romantic “Jane Eyre.”

There’s a certain sense of incompletion to the latest incarnation of “Jane Eyre” – a palpable breezing-through of pivotal plot developments and time jumps that keeps the film from achieving a sweeping, satisfying totality. But director Cary Fukunaga (“Sin Nombre”) has greater and more interesting ambitions than to simply deliver one more sweeping costume drama. Building greatly upon the script by Moira Buffini, he offers something darker, something more individualistic, something remarkably un-dusty for being the 28th filmed adaptation of a 164-year-old novel.

Charlotte Brontë’s unassumingly feminist heroine, played here by fair-featured Mia Wasikowska, is as mysterious as ever, a woman of strong passions and ideals, but one who hides behind a wall of austerity forged by a history of abuse. In the performance that will ensure her future in film, Wasikowska tackles Jane’s stoicism with superb restraint, and she’s shatteringly present in emotional scenes where Jane’s principles and human sympathies finally come to blows.

“You transfix me quite,” Jane is told by her coldly dashing employer, Mr. Rochester, who’s introduced in flashback after Jane is seen surviving her wretched aunt (Sally Hawkins) and a nightmarish reform school. In the classic role, the great Michael Fassbender uses stunning intensity to fill the gaps of the screen couple’s underdeveloped attraction, and he makes gold of the dialogue, reminding how old-world language can cause romance to ache and tremble in ways modern fare can’t touch.

And yet, there’s modernity in Fukunaga’s approach – his “Jane Eyre” feels as much an auteur film as one could hope would result from this director-for-hire project (Buffini’s script sat unproduced for years; Fukunaga got the job in 2009). Playing up the story’s Gothic origins, he opts for a marvelous, shadowy aesthetic, comprised of foggy gray exteriors and haunting candle lighting. He downplays elaborate sets and costumes with authentic English gloom. He skirts tidy resolutions for challenging and uncompromising passages. Without explicitly bucking tradition, he makes the old new again.

Jane Eyre
PG-13
Three-and-a-half out of four
Opens tomorrow at the Ritz Five
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

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

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