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
December 2019
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031    

Calendar Calendar


Jane Eyre thoughts

Page 5 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 5 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:06 am

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

Sunday, March 20, 2011
WTF, Jane Eyre?!
I've been looking forward to this movie coming out for roughly two months. Ever since I heard about it on one of the mindless but ADDICTIVE celebrity gossip blogs my sassy gay friend has introduced to me. Yes, I read them. Yes, I enjoy them. Don't judge.

But I digress! I love Jane Eyre! LOVE HER, I TELL YOU. When I saw the trailer for this movie I thought to myself, "Wow, looks like someone might have finally made a worthwhile and enjoyable movie adaptation!" Not to mention, Michael Fassbender is pretty easy on the eyes.

So I let my excitement grow. I read that it would be released in the US and Canada in early March, so I figured it would be released in Germany probably by April or May, at the latest by June. Usually the movie release dates are one to two months behind here, unless it's something huge like.....well, the only example I can think of right now is Harry Potter, and then I start snickering to myself about the joke possibilities when you combine "huge" and "Harry Potter" in the same sentence. So just trust me on this one.

This back story is leading up to something, I swear. This morning, as I was checking out NPR.org, (as I like to do on Sundays- it's a rock star lifestyle I lead.) I saw an article about Jane Eyre, which made me curious as to when it would be released here. So I went on a little internet hunt to find some answers.

Well, I found my answers. And I almost wish I hadn't. Ignorance sometimes really IS bliss. At least not knowing would have saved me from the rage I'm currently experiencing. Why?

Because Jane Eyre is not being released in Germany until September. SEPTEMBER. That's six months from now!! Why do those dirty sons of b-tches in the States get to enjoy this movie a full six months before European audiences?! And to further the outrage, the movie isn't even being released in the UK until September either! The movie was produced partially by the BBC...doesn't that at least warrant the British an earlier release date?! And lest you think I have real sympathy for the British, I'm really only upset about it because my back up plan was to go to London over the summer and see it then. s$#! balls, foiled again.

All I want is a little big screen Bronte in my life. Is that so much to ask?! I think not.

This all boils down to one thing: North America: 1. Everywhere Else: NEGATIVE ONE MILLION.
Posted by Bri C. at 3/20/2011
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 5 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Wed Mar 23, 2011 9:09 pm

http://www.indiemoviesonline.com/news/whats-the-deal-with-embedding-michael-fassbenders-face-in-other-peoples-bodies-210311

What's the deal with embedding Michael Fassbender's face in other people's bodies?
Posted on Mon, 21/03/2011 @ 09:30 by:
Emma Rowley

The X-Men: First Class posters have been named, shamed, spoofed and bettered but with Carey Fukanaga's Jane Eyre just released in the US, we are prompted to ask: what's the deal with embedding Michael Fassbender's face in other people's bodies?

We'll be reviewing Jane Eyre later on in the week, but in the meantime its poster caught our eye. Jane X: Governess Class, anyone?

Exhibit A:

Jane Eyre poster.

Exhibit B:

Magneto character poster for X-Men: First Class

Okay, so one is horrible and the other is rather nicely done but what are the makers of Jane Eyre trying to tell us? That before she became a governess, Jane could mould metal with her mind? Eh, it seems as likely a plot for a remake as anything else we've seen this week and consderably less silly than Red Riding Hood, for example.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 5 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Wed Mar 23, 2011 9:46 pm

http://thomaser.gmbh.tw/225.html

Jane, Not So Plain

Wednesday, 23. March 2011

After playing the famously unlovely guiding matron in adviser Cary Fukunaga’s new film alteration of Jane Eyre, Mia Wasikowska could do with some glamour. Aptly, the petite, nearly pixieish actress donned a floaty,Wholesale Baltimore Orioles MLB Jerseys, chiffon-dappled Elie Saab tea-length frock at the W journal and Saab-hosted (that’s the automaker, no the Lebanese designer) screening final night and it was someone of a relief. “I always ascertain the costume namely the last piece of the mystery for getting into persona,” Wasikowska said. “Especially for this film, it was so essential to feel the repression. The corsets are dreadful, I couldn’t wait to obtain out of it every day.”

Set to open in select theaters nationwide this Friday, this remake of the Charlotte Brontë classic novel is the latest in a long line of cinematic interpretations. But the coming-of-age (and discovery love, naturally) graph not seems to exhaust its evergreen entreat, especially among a smart woman set. Glenn Close, her daughter Annie Starke, and Zoë Kravitz entire caught the flick and after-party later at the Soho Grand Hotel. Rose Byrne professed that “it was an of my preference books I read in educate. It’s one of the seminal novels.” (The occasional guy has a soft speck for it too, like designer Thakoon Panichgul, at left with Wasikowska, who stopped along the bash.)

Another chapter of the draw was Wasikowska’s co-star, the handsome Michael Fassbender. (The duo too posed attach for the April cover of W.) In the film, the player takes ashore the conflicted role of Edward Rochester, a male who locks his mad wife up in the attic. “He’s a truly distressed guy, about bipolar you could say,” Fassbender described. Lucky for the ladies, his real-life persona was much more light-hearted. The performer revealed namely Catcher in the Rye was his favored classical. “Although,” he joined with a laugh, “Winnie the Pooh was really the 1st book to make one impression ashore me.”

—Bee-Shyuan Chang

Photo: Stephen Lovekin / Getty Images
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 5 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Wed Mar 23, 2011 10:20 pm

http://www.musicmovietreasure.com/2011/03/when-is-jane-eyre-2011-being-released.html

March 22, 2011
When Is Jane Eyre 2011 Being Released?
When will the new Jane Eyre movie be released at the local movie theatre?

A frustrating subject for me. Was it for you, too?

I was given the mistaken impression that the new Jane Eyre movie starring Mia Wasikowska as Jane Eyre and Michael Fassbender as Edward Rochester was being released on March 11, 2011. However, that turned out to be just plain WRONG, at least in part.

The movie was apparently released in SELECT THEATRES on that date but the rest of us have to wait until April 1, 2011. I suppose that would not be so frustrating if I hadn't been so keen on seeing it last week...

In the meantime, I have settled for watching two other Jane Eyre movies and now can say that I know the storyline pretty well and at least much better than I did originally.

The first one that I watched was Masterpiece Theatre's Jane Eyre 2006 Miniseries and I thoroughly enjoyed it. I am assuming the new version will be at least as good as this one given the big names associated with the new production and what I assume is a big budget since it is a movie being made for the big screen rather than the television.

The second was the A and E Home Video 1997 version of Jane Eyre, which I also enjoyed, particularly once I got over the difference in cinematography.

If you asked me to pick between the two, I would have to choose the 2006 version although I did enjoy the 1997 version, too.

Here's to a hugely successful new Jane Eyre movie in April!

See you
at the movies!
Brenda
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 5 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Wed Mar 23, 2011 10:38 pm

http://thechicspy.com/?p=8882

Movie Brief: Top 5 Reasons ‘Jane Eyre’ Should Be An Oscar Contender

March 18, 2011 at 12:43 AM

The film Jane Eyre, adapted from the Charlotte Brontë novel, hits the big screen today starring Mia Wasikowska in the title role opposite Michael Fassbender as Mr. Rochester. Although this film is an almost literal translation of the novel, it has a fresh edge to it that could possibly set it apart from the more than 40 versions that proceeded.

Like the novel, this film has heart and passion; one can’t help but empathize with the characters. This film could very well have what it takes to bring home the gold next February, whether it’s great acting, superb directing, quick-witted writing, or the eerie gothic vibe that makes ‘Jane Eyre’ stand tall only time will tell. Meanwhile, here’s my top 5 reasons ‘Jane Eyre’ is likely to be an Oscar contender.

Writing

The writing is well done for an adaption from a 19th Century English novel. The dialogue is quite easy to follow, and the intellectual wit of characters Jane Eyre and Mr. Rochester is captivating.

“I’ve become nothing to you. Am I a machine without feelings? Do you think that because I am poor, obscure, plain and little, that I am soulless and heartless?” I have as much soul as you and full as much heart and if God would have blessed me with beauty and wealth, I could make it as hard for you to leave me as it is for I to leave you.” (Jane Eyre to Mr. Rochester)

Acting

The chemistry between Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender is mezmerizing. The acting is so well orchestrated you can’t help but be drawn in and transfixed by their circumstances, evidenced by the scene ‘Why Must You Leave?’ above.
Directing

Cary Fukunaga directed only one movie prior to this film. His film debut was the Mexican-themed ‘Sin Nombre’, which won Fukunaga many acculades. But after watching ‘Jane Eyre’, it’s easy to assume the film is the work of a veteran director, from the way the actors rhythmically interact onscreen to the artistic angles used to shoot the scenes.
Cinematography

The shots used resembled portraits, capturing characters in ambient candle light or framing them in angular doorways. Just as compelling were the angles such as wide shots of the old English architecture that served as a gallant backdrop to the characters or extreme close ups that starkly exhibited emotion on the face of the young protagonist.
Costumes

A beautiful element in the film is the period costumes. Nothing can so readily transport our minds back in history than the fashions of the era. In ‘Jane Eyre’ we were regaled with looks ranging from riding suits to wedding dresses. An often used, but seldom seen fashion garment that imapcted the way much of the female attire appeared was the corset, which Wasikowska described as painful, allowing her to only breathe half breaths.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 5 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Thu Mar 24, 2011 4:22 pm

The contest is already done, but the comments are fun

http://www.screenjunkies.com/movies/movie-news/caption-contest-win-a-25-movie-gift-card-from-jane-eyre/

Monday, March 14 by Ian "Longshanks" Sobel
Caption Contest: Win A $25 Movie Gift Card From ‘Jane Eyre’

To celebrate the release of Jane Eyre, we’re giving away a $25 movie gift card, soundtrack sampler, bookmark, journal, and a pencil! Even if you hate movies but loooooooove scribbling down your deepest, darkest secrets, you’re in luck. I don’t imagine you hate movies though, or you’re visiting this site would be pure sado-masochism.

All you have to do is post the funniest caption you can muster in the comments section for the still frame below.

Contest ends Wednesday at 11:59PM EST. The winner will be announced via Twitter, Facebook, and on the site.

You can enter as many times as you’d like, but make sure your caption delivers the goods. I hear Mia Wasikowska has a fondness for funny fellows.

#
According to this, Rebecca Black was right about the Partyin' Partyin'
#
Wasn't this contest supposed to end two days ago?
#
Why is this damn letter blank? Pensive, sultry, what is my motivation for this scene?
#
Miss Eyre, are you seriously submitting an overtime bill for the night you put out the fire in my room?
#
You lookin' at me?
#
"I'm sorry, it appears the test results are negative... wait, that's a good thing? Wow, modern medicine is heading in a terrible direction..."
#
Bertha sent this letter to the insurance company asking how much would she get if Thornfield Hall was *accidentally* set on fire.
#
This is a shopping list from my wife reminding me to pick up some Excedrin and a pound of baloney.
#
You want me to do what to you with this lamp?
#
Really? Another period film that will only be watched by women in multiple-cat households? Why didn't my agent get my a part in Spiderman?
#
(Oops! One more time ... my submitted caption should have read):

If Sarah Palin had written Jane Eyre, this letter from Jane to Rochester would read: "You have misunderestimated me, Mr. Rochester. I reFudiate you! You have just wee wee'd up our relationship."
#
Guess Blanche Ingram found out about my failed wedding to Jane. She writes "How's that nutty-wifey thingy working for ya, Edward?"
#
If Sarah Palin had written Jane Eyre, this letter from Jane to Rochester would read: "You have misunderestimated me, Mr. Rochester. I repudiate you! You have just wee wee'd up our relationship."
#
So this certificate proves that despite what your Aunt Huckabee Reed says, you were NOT born in Kenya Miss Eyre?
#
Mrs Fairfax, you're trying to seduce me.
#
With this note, I will ask her if she likes anyone from class, you know, more than a friend.
#
I don't appreciate the amateur humor of this letter. There's an 'F' in my last name.
#
"So I'm assuming that when you said there's good and bad news, the good was merely the decorative and quality aspects of this paper?"
#
Yes, I did tell them the check was in the mail.
#
Reverend, these notes have got to stop. The heart seal on this one is a bit excessive, don't you think?
#
bad news... you should probably go see the free clinic.
#
A promotional still from "Steampunk Scooby Doo" staring Michael Fassbender as Fred.
#
"Are you f#%@#&! kidding me... you seriously don't smell that? How am I supposed to read this when Dame Judi Stench keeps panty-burping behind Emily?"
#
Sir Marty, what the hell is a gigawatt?
#
You're telling me this is all you have left to wipe with?
#
You were in a donkey show? What is a donkey show ?
#
Don't tell the pretty girls I can't read.
#
You can't be serious with this spaghetti sauce recipe, Charlie. Tiger blood?
#
what's anthrax?
#
A sphincter says what?
#
According to this document, we're supposed to be having sex right now
#
Your birth certificate says your 16 but who's counting!
#
Let me get this straight........ their in a dream, within a dream, within a dream?
#
Charlie Sheen wants me to do what??
#
The results are back from the test screening - apparently we should have added Zombies if we wanted anyone to see this film.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 5 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:35 am

http://blogs.chron.com/bookish/2011/03/why_we_cant_get_enough_of_plai.html

arch 25, 2011
Why we can't get enough of plain Jane Eyre

jane11
Michael Fassbender and Mia Wasikowska as Rochester and Jane in the new film, Jane Eyre.

Jane Eyre is 18 and single. But she's not the type guys usually go for.

Poor, small and plain, Jane is bereft of the creamy skin and generous bosom that scream beauty to 19th-century men. A working girl, she's lucky to land a governess job at the gloomy English estate of Edward Fairfax Rochester.

Rochester is no looker, either. As Jane observes, he's "broad chested and thin flanked, though neither tall nor graceful." He's also old. In his late 30s -- ancient by any teenager's standards -- he is twice Jane's age. Still, his confidence and broodiness turn Jane on.

Other than a lack of hotness, what does this unlikely pair have in common? Sharp wits and troubled pasts.

Jane Eyre is steeped in big secrets, barren landscapes and austere characters. All that and the odd couple at its core -- yes, reader, Jane marries Rochester -- keep us coming back to Charlotte Brontë's book, still fresh at 164.

jane21
Getty Images
Orson Welles and Joan Fontaine as Rochester and Jane, 1943.

Filmmakers keep coming back, too. One count claims 19 films (including the new one) and nine TV productions. That would mean Jane Eyre rivals James Bond for screen time -- and that's without the obvious lure of bikinis and fancy cars.

Directors can't seem to resist glamming up the lead characters. Joan Fontaine, Susannah York and Samantha Morton rank among the noteworthy Janes, all of them attractive. Hunky actors who took a crack at Rochester include a trim Orson Welles, Ciarán Hinds and Timothy Dalton, who also played the aforementioned James Bond.

The new film, starring Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender, follows this great tradition. Director Cary Fukunaga doesn't quite get the ages right -- Wasikowska is 21 to Fassbender's 33 -- but it's close. Wasikowska looks perfect as Jane, her plainness gesturing toward the ethereal, but she's a bit placid. She delivers her lines with fire, but I wanted more smoke and flames behind her eyes.

Fassbender is too good-looking for Rochester and too slim; he's missing thickness and gravitas. But he's a great actor and nails the flirty scenes with Wasikowska's Jane. Reader, I have fallen for him, too.

jane31
Miramax Films
Charlotte Gainsbourg and William Hurt as Jane and Rochester, 1996.

The truth is, neither the actors nor the story needs any sexing-up. Jane Eyre is a delicious yarn, with all the longing, love triangles and supernatural fancy that audiences of every century crave.

For starters, Jane is an orphan, in the great tradition of Oliver Twist, Harry Potter and countless others. The thing about orphans is, their lives are their own to build or ruin. Jane's fierce independence keeps her from being a doormat. This is key to her staying power -- with Rochester and nearly two centuries of readers.

Love often thrives on class conflict. Like many romances, Jane Eyre is a poor-girl-meets-rich-man story -- think Cinderella -- with a twist. Jane has high moral standards and a strong sense of self; Rochester has been kicked around by the world and is eager for a fresh start with Jane. They complement each other.

jane41
PBS
Toby Stephens and Ruth Wilson as Rochester and Jane, 2006.

In the current Twilight-addled era, the supernatural is every bit as fashionable as it was in 1847. For months, Jane cannot reconcile what she sees and hears in Rochester's house. Is she dreaming? Is the house haunted? As it turns out, no. In Brontë's post-Gothic tale, nearly all the supernatural murmurs have logical explanations.

That noise in the attic? It's Bertha Mason, Rochester's savage wife, thrashing about. The only real other-worldly plot twist -- and it's a biggie -- is the scene in which Jane hears Rochester calling for her across the moors. At this point, Jane is a 36-hour stagecoach ride away from her beloved, so this intervention is definitely divine.

Next, throw in a windfall of cash. Jane inherits 20,000 pounds from a dead uncle she never knew. She gives most of it away, but still. With money, she no longer needs a man or a job to survive, thank you very much.
Finally, and perhaps most poignant, the Rochester to whom Jane returns at the end of the story is a sadder but wiser version of the hothead she left.

Thanks to a fire, in which his wife has perished, Rochester has lost his sight and one of his hands. Some scholars say that Brontë knocked her Byronic hero down a few pegs to put him on equal standing with his young love. And with the wife out of the way, she's free to be his Mrs., too.

And isn't that how every great love story is supposed to end?

Some onscreen Janes and Rochesters:

1. Joan Fontaine and Orson Welles, 1943. In this black and white film, she's bland and he's great. Four stars for the foggy, shadowy sets.

2. Zelah Clarke and Timothy Dalton, 1983. Who is Zelah Clarke and what is she doing with James Bond? This TV mini-series is split into 11 episdoes.

3. Charlotte Gainsbourg and William Hurt, 1996. Despite the directing chops of Franco Zeffirelli, Hurt is hopelessly miscast in this film and this couple has no chemistry.

4. Samantha Morton and Ciarán Hinds, 1997. A handsome couple but short on chemistry in this TV production.

5. Ruth Wilson and Toby Stephens, 2006. The best of the bunch, in part because this TV mini-series take the time (3+ hours) to tell the story.

6. Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender, 2011. A strong film, with bold editing that keeps the action coming.

Posted by Maggie Galehouse at March 25, 2011 12:00 AM
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 5 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:55 am

http://thecinemonster.wordpress.com/2011/03/23/spencer-suggests-mar-25-2011/

week’s edition of Spencer Suggests, I found it easier to select older films that aligned with the newer ones, but I was torn: unlike last week’s releases, I’m really excited for this batch. So I don’t think these films could serve as replacements, but rather the second halves of two great double features! Let me know if you agree!

First Choice: Sucker Punch, directed by Zack Snyder; starring Emily Browning, Vanessa Hudgens, Abbie Cornish, Scott Glenn. In the 1950′s of an alternate timeline, five young girls try to escape a hellish mental institution, where the only way out is through the power of their imagination.

First Option: Thelma & Louise (1991), directed by Ridley Scott; starring Susan Sarandon, Geena Davis, Harvey Keitel, Brad Pitt. After being forced to kill a sexual predator, two women go on the run from the police, while discovering what kind of people they really are.


Why Pair These Two? Both are about female protagonists initially perceived to be weak, but summon the strength (and weapons) to face their attackers and survive. Both groups are also escaping from their previous existence (prisoners and housewives, respectively), as well as the tro0ps hot on their trail. Not many people thought Thelma & Louise was going to be a success when it was originally released; Ridley Scott hadn’t followed up Alien and Blade Runner with any hits, and a feminine empowerment tale didn’t seem up his alley. Fortunately, he had the pairing of Sarandon and Davis on his side, both of whom accumulated recent respect with their work in Bull Durham and The Accidental Tourist. There was also the fact that he had a formidable supporting cast of Harvey Keitel, Michael Madsen, Christopher McDonald and Brad Pitt (in his breakthrough role), and an edgy script that didn’t give any easy answers. Thelma & Louise is a hilarious, exhilirating adventure that turns the whole “buddy road trip” on its head, and I recommend it to any of you unlucky to not have seen it yet.

Second Choice: Jane Eyre, directed Cary Fukugawa; starring Mia Wasikowska, Michael Fassbender, Judi Dench, Jamie Bell. A young woman with a traumatic childhood is employed by a brooding older gentleman, who harbors a forbidden attraction to her and a terrible secret of his own.

Second Option: Rebecca (1940), directed by Alfred Hitchcock; starring Joan Fontaine, Laurence Olivier, Judith Anderson, George Sanders. A shy young woman is swept up in a whirlwind romance with a reclusive widower, whose house harbors more than one reminder of his wife.

Why Pair These Two? Both feature young women living in homes with older men and beginning a relationship with them, for better or worse. The house and its inhabitants also play largely into both films, and the ending to both is very similar, but I won’t spoil that for you readers out there. I was tempted to put either 1939′s Wuthering Heights, starring Olivier, or 1946′s Jane Eyre, starring Fontaine, but the parallels between the storylines and the uniting of the stars from each of these films was too irresistable. Rebecca won the Oscar for Best Picture the year after Gone with the Wind, which is the closest Hitchcock ever got to winning in a competitive category, and I wholeheartedly agree with this victory. It’s a suspenseful tale of incest, murder, lies and treachery, with Judith Anderson playing the most evil housekeeper you’ll ever come across. I don’t want to give away any more than what I’ve already said, but I’ll end with this: if you’re a Hitchcock fan but haven’t made it as far as this one, you’re in for a frightening treat!
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 5 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 6:15 am

http://americanvision.org/movieology/385/jane-eyre-feminism-and-romanticism-vs-christianity/

03/22/2011 3:15 am
Jane Eyre: Feminism and Romanticism Versus Christianity?

Coming up on Movieology, Jane Eyre! Does the movie make a good case for its existence, or do the other 35 some-odd film adaptations milk the novel for all it’s worth? Is the movie a crime of Hollywood obsession, or worthy recognition for one of the greatest stories of nineteenth century literature? Find out right now on Movieology!

Introduction

Welcome to Movieology; your ticket to engaging the spectacular world of film from the bedrock of biblical truth. I am your host, Joseph Darnell. You should watch Movieology on our website, Movieology.tv, subscribe to us on YouTube, like us on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and write emails to Info@Movieology.tv.

So I found Jane Eyre in one theater in the entire state of Georgia this past weekend, so I took the long drive out there and back again to bring to you this review. I say it was worth the hassle, but you better appreciate it. Anyway, Jane Eyre is an intriguing movie, so let’s get started. Shall we?
Summary

Jane Eyre flees Thornfield House, where she works as a governess for the wealthy Edward Rochester. As she reflects upon God, people, and the emotions that have defined her, it is clear that 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. She must now act decisively to secure her own future and come to terms with the past that haunts her — and the terrible secret that Mr. Rochester is hiding that has been revealed. Jane Eyre stars Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender in Charlotte Brontë’s classic novel, and is directed by Cary Fukunaga.
Review

Since I had not read the book or seen other film adaptations, I was left to my own interpretation of this movie to determine what Jane Eyre was all about. So I saw this movie with a fresh perspective. After viewing, I did research the novel and discussed it with friends who were familiar with it. I believe movies that are based on books should be viewed with the book in mind where the movie leaves details out.

This movie is well made with brilliant visual style and authenticity to the historical nature. The gothic tone of the story rang true, and the actors’ performances were first rate. The script impressed me since there was so much to work with in a 600 page novel. I found in my research the movie reduces the story to its simplest essence, nixing many side characters and subplots while still maintaining faithfulness to the major qualities of Jane’s story. Naturally, details play out differently or are skipped entirely. The movie captured the essence of the story in two hours. And what’s amazing is that I, a guy, felt like the time flew by.

The movie is not very spooky, contrary to what its trailer implies. There’s a surprising moment here and there, but nothing gave me the heebee-jeebees. The movie is primarily a drama, secondarily a romance.

Jane Eyre herself is a remarkable woman of literature who is faithfully depicted in the movie. Jane is like a better version of Cinderella. Where Cinderella is weak and lacks direction, Jane is strong and has clearly-defined convictions and Christian standards for living. If Prince Charming had to choose, I think he would pick Jane over Cinderella (had he known more about Cinderella other than her glass slipper size).

There is an air of feminism that comes out from Jane, but this depends in what you mean by “feminism.” Remember the novel it’s based on was published long before the feminist movement came along. The author, Charlotte Brontë, said herself the story didn’t mean to be interpreted this way. Grant you, the novel had some socially unacceptable ideas laid out for the 1840s and 50s, such as marriage should be based on mutual love and compatibility—not social classes and conventionality.

Whatever the case, you’ll see what you want to see in the movie. Since much of the novel is trimmed out, it leaves many issues subject to interpretation, and it suggests feminism is one of its stronger themes. However, I think it makes sense to interpret the movie with the novel in mind, and thus see the movie with the book’s intended point of view.

I see romanticism in the movie more so than feminism. The beauty of the romanticism is that it is held in check by Jane’s faithfulness to her convictions. She knows when to draw the line for her passions when they would lead to breaking her moral character and harm her faithfulness to God.

But this issue also is left to audience interpretation. People generally interpret life’s situations and stories in the most negative light they can manage from their points of view. Either Jane Eyre is consistent with the novel’s message of true Christianity and values, or it suggests those are unimportant when you find the love of your life, and one finds fulfillment in realizing a passionate emotionally-driven life.

Whatever way you look at it, the two primary worldviews in the story are romanticism and Christianity. I say Christianity is proven strong, and romanticism is proven weak. Those that disagree mainly look to the Christians in the movie that are corrupt and misguided. This is what you get from a film heavily influenced by post-modern filmmaking. The movie lacks a lot of the dialogue from the book that makes the message clear. Brontë said that all the characters are Christians; and to one degree or another faithful or unfaithful to a genuine Christianity.

If one knows the Jane Eyre story from other movie adaptations, or the novel, there isn’t any question about Jane’s moral standing. As Jane tells Mr. Rochester in the novel, “Laws and principles are not for the time when there is no temptation; they are for such moments as this, when body and soul rise against their rigor.” Jane Eyre is about limiting your passions, living by a biblical ethic, repentance, forgiveness, and acknowledging God’s intended purposes for biblical-minded living.
Rating & Conclusion

I give Jane Eyre four stars. The pros: it’s engaging, thought-provoking, well-performed, and has more to it than meets the “plain” Jane. My one con: the movie leaves much out from the novel, leaving easily misled viewers to determine their individual interpretations. I recommend if you are interested in worldview studies this will be a movie you mull over. It’s not perfect, but has a lot to consider and cipher.

So that’s it for today, folks. Remember, you can discuss this episode and all others on Movieology.tv or Facebook.com/Movieology in the comments sections. What’s your preferred adaptation of Jane Eyre? Tell us!
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 5 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 26, 2011 9:25 pm

http://www.montereyherald.com/living/ci_17698068?source=rss&nclick_check=1

Austen vs. Bronte: New movie rekindles the 'battle of the bonnets'
By MONICA HESSE
The Washington Post
Posted: 03/25/2011 01:36:45 AM PDT
Updated: 03/25/2011 08:36:24 AM PDT

Click photo to enlarge
Michael Fassbender and Mia Wasikowska portray Mr. Rochester and... (LAURIE SPARHAM/Focus Features)

Enough with the empire waistlines, the sparkly dialogue, the pride, the prejudice, the Colin Firth trudging out of the lake again and again on the late-night minithons on A&E.

The devoted readers of Bonnet Drama have always known that if it came down to it, if someone held a flintlock musket to their heads and demanded an answer, that "I love Jane Austen and the Brontes equally" would not suffice. Sides must be chosen:

You are either a Janeite. Or you are a Charlottan.

"When I need order in my life, I read Jane Austen," English film producer Alison Owen says. "When I'm feeling more emotional, and when I need that passionate punch, I turn to 'Jane Eyre.'"

For two decades, Austen's Janeites have held the public hostage in an infinite Regency-era loop. Elizabeth Bennet played by Jennifer Ehle, played by Keira Knightley, played by Aishwarya Rai. Elizabeth Bennet fighting zombies. A cultish What Would Jane Do movement emerged, as if Austen were not a favorite author but a chatty oracle.

The Charlottans have waited.

Now, victories:

"Jane Eyre" is the newest remake of the most famous novel to be written by Charlotte Bronte or her two author sisters, Emily and Anne. Owen is the producer of the movie, which stars Mia Wasikowska, the "Alice" of Tim Burton's "Wonderland," as plain governess Jane, and Michael Fassbender — an appropriate blend of sexy, cruel and mangy — as her tormented employer, Mr. Rochester.

In Britain, director Andrea
Advertisement
Arnold is finishing a new version of Emily Bronte's "Wuthering Heights" — the first version to cast a black actor as Heathcliff.

In New York, a Bronte fan launched a one-time magazine called "Eyresses," dedicated to the painstaking worship of the 400-page novel. It includes a "Jane Eyre Community Cookbook" and an e-mail chain between two dudes who confess that they both secretly love the book.

The faithful are very protective of their source material.

"There is nothing about this movie that is reinventing what the story should have been," Cary Fukunaga, who directed the new film, says in an interview. "The book is frightening," he says, promising that his "Jane" preserves the Gothic elements that have been sacrificed in previous versions. "There are other 'Jane Eyre' films out there that are mostly treated as romance films."

The problem for Brontophiles isn't that the books haven't been made into movies; with the exception of Anne's works (everyone always forgets about Anne), many have. The problem is that so many have been lacking. Whereas "Pride and Prejudice" will forever be defined by Colin Firth, the cinematic world is still in search of the perfect Bronte adaptation.

"I cannot tell you how many Bronte films I have seen," says Rebecca Fraser, a Charlotte Bronte biographer. "Orson Welles (1943) was very Byronic, but not so attractive. ... People generally think that Timothy Dalton (1983) did not work."

"The worst adaptation, that's the 1934 one," write Manuel Del Estal and Cristina Lara, co-sovereigns of the Bronte Blog, via e-mail. "It's almost like a parody." (They respond via e-mail because they are vacationing in Haworth, England, home of the Brontes, and they have authentically rented a house without a telephone.)

Most everyone agrees that the one starring William Hurt (1996) was a disaster. How could it not be? It bungled the best quote, with Charlotte Gainsbourg's Jane telling Mr. Rochester, "I may be poor and plain, but I'm not without feelings."

No. Incorrect.

The correct quote, to be spoken with immeasurable misery, is:

"Do you think, because I am poor, obscure, plain and little, I am soulless and heartless?"

Anyone who can't see the difference is entirely missing the point.

Jane Austen is easy to love. Her heroines are smart; her heroes are righteous. People say funny things and wear lovely clothes and spend a lot of time going to balls or sitting in drawing rooms, meaning that the scenery is just gorgeous. Everything ends happily for everyone who deserves it.

The Brontes are more difficult. Things don't end well. The writing is beautiful, but Mr. Rochester and Heathcliff are basically thugs in morning coats. They say savage things. They emotionally torture the women they claim to love. They keep other women locked in attics. Things burn. People die.

"Jane Eyre is basically like 'Mad Max,'" offers Mikki Halpin, one of the women behind the "Eyresses" project. "It's basically like a horror movie set in this very hostile terrain."

More modernly, Jane Eyre is "Twilight." The women who think it is sooo sexy that the vampire Edward Cullen is a borderline abusive boyfriend are the same women who will discover that borderline abusive boyfriends have been sooo sexy for 160 years.

Jane Austen? She is "Gossip Girl."

One doesn't know what Austen would make of the Bronte sisters — she died before their works were published — but one does know how Charlotte felt about her, as written in a letter to a friend:

"She ruffles her reader by nothing vehement, disturbs him with nothing profound. The passions are perfectly unknown to her: she rejects even a speaking acquaintance with that stormy sisterhood."

The storminess of the Brontes' writing makes for an intensely personal reading experience, a private world of melodrama and creepy love. This might explain why there has never been a definitive film version. Any screen adaptation approaching the emotional pinnacles achieved by readers in their imaginations would have to include so much emoting it would end up looking ridiculous.

"It's especially true with 'Wuthering Heights,'" says Andrew McCarthy, director of the Bronte Parsonage Museum in England. "As a naturalistic adaptation, it's unfilmable, really. There almost needs to be a new media or a new art form."

In some ways, McCarthy says, "the most successful adaptations are the ones that pay the least respect to the book."

Hush, Mr. McCarthy, and we shall never speak of that statement again.

Austen or Bronte. It's not as if it has to be one or the other, as if one must die so the other might live, when all have been dead for 200 years (The Brontes! All died before 40! So sad!).

"No one asks why Shakespeare in the Park is redone every summer," says director Fukunaga, slightly peevishly. There might be some latent, dismissive misogyny involved in the concept that there is only enough cultural love for one female literary figure at any given time.

Some analysts wonder if the Brontes are built for economic downturn — that difficult times draw us to difficult stories. The Bronte heroes find happiness, but not without losing a hand or their eyesight, or having their manor burned down. It's a bruised happiness, one that might appeal to the foreclosed modern viewer.

The new "Jane Eyre" hits most of the pleasure centers required of any good "Jane" adaptation. It has the horrible Red Room, the "left rib" speech, the muddy moors. It also handles gracefully the last third of the book, in which Jane lives with a minister and his sisters — which other versions have either ignored or totally mucked up.

It is likely to please the Charlottans.

Indeed, it is likely to please the Janeites, and anyone else who has ever loved the sight of a beautiful man begging for the love of a working-class woman.

Meanwhile, do you know what is long overdue for a big-screen adaptation?

"Middlemarch."

JANE EYRE
·Featuring: Mia Wasikowska, Michael Fassbender; directed by Cary Joji Fukunaga
·Opens: Friday, April 1
·Rating: PG-13 for some thematic elements including a nude image and brief violent content
·Running time: 2 hours
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 5 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Tue Mar 29, 2011 3:06 am

http://www.sdhalo.com/arts-entertainment/2011/03/28/jane-eyre-will-always-remain-a-timeless-classic/

Jane Eyre will always remain a timeless classic

Photo Credit: gomoxie.org

Jane Eyre will be featured at the Laemmle in Claremont on April 1.

March 28, 2011 • Monica Mikhail, Lifestyles Editor

The newest film adaptation of Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre opened in select theatres March 11, but will be features at the Laemmle in Claremont on April 1.

This film tells the tale of a simple woman living in the 19th century who strives to gain respect for herself as well as fulfillment in life while living in a society that has cast so many limitations on her for the mere fact of being a woman, first and foremost, and also carrying a low social standing.

Starring in this adaption is Mia Waskowsa as Jane Eyre and Michael Fassbender as the legendary Edward Rochester.

Senior Aloka Narayanan is currently reading this classic before it comes out at the Laemmle. Presently, she is particularly fond of the flow of the language throughout the book and the subtle hints of intellectual equality the author so easily expresses.

The desire of the equality in genders is what seeps from Brontë’s words as she attempts to justify the untraditional actions of Eyre which many people in the 19th century deemed unacceptable. Her famous saying sums it all up- “conventionality is not morality.”

“Women are supposed to be very calm generally: but women feel just as men feel; they need exercise for their faculties… It is thoughtless to condemn them, or laugh at them, if they seek to do more or learn more than custom has pronounced necessary for their sex” (Brontë 150).

Even though this is the main focus of this literary work, the struggle of maintaining a healthy and happy relationship is portrayed as a common battle by the romantic relationship of Eyre and Mr. Rochester.

“Relationships are hard, requiring both parties to give themselves up. This hasn’t changed for people,” said Fassbender.

Jane Eyre brings to view hindrances set before women at that time as well as a common feat for all of humanity which is the difficulty in maintaining relationships, romantic or not. Readers will always be able to relate to some aspect of the life of this single-minded and strong woman.
Director Cary Joji Fukanga divulges this novel onto the screen by retelling the story through the use of flashbacks with an emphasis in creating a gothic atmosphere.

This timeless novel that has left its mark throughout the decades lives on through countless adaptions, but Fukunga’s alternative approach to this classic holds a zest that must be experienced.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 5 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Tue Mar 29, 2011 3:09 am

http://feminema.wordpress.com/2011/03/28/jane-eyre-2011-ahhhhh/

“Jane Eyre” (2011): ahhhhh.
28 March 2011

Mia Wasikowska, the 21-year-old actor who appears in virtually every shot of this beautiful film, is a wonder — and that’s saying a lot. I’ve seen many Jane Eyre adaptations but have always felt that I needed to bring a knowledge of the book to understand the depth of feeling Jane experienced. Whereas in the book we have her narrating her life, it’s hard for actors to convey how much Jane has learned through hard and lonely experience to suppress her feelings, maintain feminine reserve, and quietly inhabit her social rank, at least when with others. Wasikowska, however, has a preternatural capacity to let waves of emotion cross her face while also remaining placid; yet when she allows her true feeling to come forth in words and expression, we see how hard the effort of suppression is — and how much a brilliant mind lies behind that “plain and little” face. Oh my god, it’s amazing.

Here’s what I’ve noticed lately about the serious women actors of her generation (and I leave out the non-serious ones who act in teen comedies): even at their most excellent, they bury themselves so deep in a part that they don’t allow the viewer to see their inner conflicts. Take just two of them who earned so much praise last year (including from me): Jennifer Lawrence of Winter’s Bone and Hailee Steinfeld of True Grit. Their performances were truly excellent, yet between the nature of those roles — which demanded a high degree of stoicism — and the actors’ relative inexperience they ultimately demonstrate an extraordinary degree of actor’s modesty, especially when surrounded by male actors willing to appear far more vivid, fascinating, horrific. As a result, Wasikowska’s actorly range and bravery is amazing. (Not that I’m surprised after watching her on season 1 of In Treatment, which was so amazing I’d watch it all over again even though it’s got to be one of the most painful things I’ve ever seen.)

When I saw the film with my Dear Friend, she complained about Michael Fassbender (above) as Rochester, saying he drew too much attention to himself by using his eyes so much that it undermined the effect of his scenes. She also mentions that it’s hard to understand why Jane loves him (a shortcoming in the book, too, if you ask me) — and I want to suggest that these two things are related. Certainly Fassbender captures Rochester’s hard, bitter edge and the misogyny I always felt was part of his character; why else would he toy with Jane in that ridiculous attempt to make her jealous by flirting with Miss Ingram? My feeling is that Rochester is a tough role that’s too often played more softly as if he’s a romantic hero rather than a reluctant one; in that respect Fassbender does a great job. (It’s worth noting how much Fassbender has a scary propensity to play these slightly misogynistic roles, after his brilliant and somewhat horrifying turn in Fish Tank.)

More important, I thought the use of his eyes was crucial to the role — and maybe that’s because, for me, the love story is fundamentally about how Rochester truly sees Jane’s inner character, her intelligence, her unexpected strength, her soul. Even though she feels she’s concealing all of it behind that stoic mask she’s learned to wear, Rochester sees early on that she’s exceptional — no wonder the story works so well as a romance (don’t we all want to be seen for our true selves?). I want to suggest that we see through his huge, cruel eyes how much Rochester really doesn’t have control over his feelings, and that he wrestles with his own demons, his own tendency to bury himself in self-pity and hardness rather than open himself up to feeling for others. Jane expresses her emotion through her increasingly visible efforts to suppress it; Rochester expresses it through his increasingly uncontrolled eyes that don’t want to believe there could be such a woman for him. So, Dear Friend, I need a response to this claim!

A final note about Cary Joji Fukunaga’s directing and Moira Buffini’s screenplay, which captured the intensity of gothic horror and the passion of feeling so well. Having loved Fukunaga’s Sin Nombre (2009; and what a different film!) I knew this would be something to see; and it’s no easy feat to wrangle all of a 19th-c. novel into a neat 115 minutes. They achieve it by privileging the central tale of Jane and Rochester rather than her childhood and her time with the Rivers siblings — and I think it’s wholly successful, even for those who haven’t read the book and don’t know the litany of horrors she experiences before coming to Thornfield Hall and meeting Rochester. It never felt Harry Potter-ed, that is, like one of those excessively literal adaptations that labors to hit every key scene of a novel. It was scary, heartbreaking, dark, beautiful, compelling, and I can hardly wait to see it again.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 5 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Tue Mar 29, 2011 3:10 am

http://insidecassiesmind.blogspot.com/2011/03/my-review-jane-eyre-2011.html

Monday, March 28, 2011
My Review: Jane Eyre 2011

Last Thursday I went with my mom and some friends to see the 2011 version of Jane Eyre starring Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender. It was beautiful.

As a very brief overview, the music and cinematography were breathtaking and the casting and the actors were phenomenal. The dialogue was well-executed and stayed true to the novel and the style of Charlotte Bronte.

Wasikowska looked exactly like I had always pictured Jane, but, her Jane was very soft-spoken. Where was Jane's passion?

Fassbender was a perfect Mr. Rochester. I've always thought that Toby Stephens from the 2006 version was the best and now he is tied with Fassbender (I can't choose between the two). In his role, Fassbender was energetic, sardonic, vehement, annoying, pompous, haunted, etc... He was fantastic.

My main complaint about the film is this: It was too short. The scenes felt rushed and it seemed like I was only seeing brief choppy bits of a story on fast-forward. I didn't connect with it. Also, the ending was severely abridged. If they had made the ending longer by about ten minutes, it would have saved the movie in my opinion, but, they didn't.

Jane ran over the moors for a vast majority of the movie, but it was beautiful and the scenery was beyond gorgeous, so that made it more interesting.

It's most certainly worth watching... it's utterly gorgeous! My friend and I were crying at the end... so, yeah, it's amazing.

I like this version of the movie, I love the 2006 version, I adore the novel. There, you have my thoughts.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, about the rating: This film is rated PG13 for brief violent/thematic elements and a nude image. When I was looking up Christian movie reviews for parents on Jane Eyre before we went to see it, I could not find any so I'm going to elaborate:

In my opinion, the most inappropriate part of the movie are the passionate (and rather long!) kisses between Jane and Edward. My friend and I would turn away from the screen, look at each other and roll our eyes. They over-did it.

There are some "jump" scenes, and without giving away the whole movie, I will say that there is some blood and a serious-looking injury.

The nude image is in a painting on the wall. Jane stops to look at it, but my friend and I turned away.

Most the the thematic/violent elements and the nude image are pretty easy to see coming. The jump scenes are unexpected and I would not recommend the movie for anyone under the age of 12.

All in all, the book is the best and the 2006 version starring Ruth Wilson is the best movie version. There are some "iffy" scenes in that one too, but it's much longer and its more accurate.

Here is the movie's link on IMDb: Jane Eyre 2011 on IMDb

Did any of you see the movie? If so, how would you compare it to the book?

A few days ago, I talked with my friend (who I went to see it with) about the film and I'm curious to know if any of you picked up on any of the things that we noticed. I'd love to talk with anyone about the subtleties of the film.

Did you like it?

Did you think that the actors portrayed their characters well?

I look forward to hearing your thoughts!

------------------------------------------------------------------

For those interested, I would recommend this article on the movie:
Another Hike on the Moors for 'Jane Eyre'
at 9:05 AM
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 5 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Tue Mar 29, 2011 4:24 am

http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2011/mar/27/battle-of-bonnet-dramas/

Battle of 'Bonnet Dramas'
New movie rekindles Austen vs. Bronte
BY MONICA HESSE
The Washington Post
Sunday, March 27, 2011

Enough with the empire waistlines, the sparkly dialogue, the pride, the prejudice, the Colin Firth trudging out of the lake again and again on the late-night minithons on A&E.

The devoted readers of Bonnet Drama have always known that if it came down to it, if someone held a flintlock musket to their heads and demanded an answer, that "I love Jane Austen and the Brontes equally" would not suffice. Sides must be chosen:

You are either a Janeite. Or you are a Charlottan.

"When I need order in my life, I read Jane Austen," English film producer Alison Owen says. "When I'm feeling more emotional, and when I need that passionate punch, I turn to 'Jane Eyre.' "

For two decades, Austen's Janeites have held the public hostage in an infinite Regency-era loop.

The Charlottans have waited.

Now, victories:

"Jane Eyre" is the newest remake of the most famous novel to be written by Charlotte Bronte or her two author sisters, Emily and Anne. Owen is the producer of the movie, which stars Mia Wasikowska, the "Alice" of Tim Burton's "Wonderland," as plain governess Jane, and Michael Fassbender as her tormented employer, Mr. Rochester.

In Britain, director Andrea Arnold is finishing a version of Emily Bronte's "Wuthering Heights," the first version to cast a black actor as Heathcliff.

In New York, a Bronte fan launched a one-time magazine called "Eyresses," dedicated to the 400-page novel.

The faithful are very protective of their source material.

"There is nothing about this movie that is reinventing what the story should have been," Cary Fukunaga, who directed the new film, says in an interview. "The book is frightening," he says, promising that his "Jane" preserves the Gothic elements that have been sacrificed in previous versions. "There are other 'Jane Eyre' films out there that are mostly treated as romance films."

The problem for Brontophiles isn't that the books haven't been made into movies; with the exception of Anne's works, many have. The problem is that so many have been lacking. Whereas "Pride and Prejudice" will forever be defined by Colin Firth, the cinematic world is still in search of the perfect Bronte adaptation.

"I cannot tell you how many Bronte films I have seen," says Rebecca Fraser, a Charlotte Bronte biographer. "Orson Welles was very Byronic, but not so attractive. ... People generally think that Timothy Dalton did not work."

"The worst adaptation, that's the 1934 one," write Manuel Del Estal and Cristina Lara, co-sovereigns of the Bronte Blog, "It's almost like a parody."

Jane Austen is easy to love. Her heroines are smart; her heroes are righteous. People say funny things and wear lovely clothes and spend a lot of time going to balls or sitting in drawing rooms, meaning that the scenery is just gorgeous. Everything ends happily for everyone who deserves it.

The Brontes are more difficult. Things don't end well. The writing is beautiful, but Mr. Rochester and Heathcliff are basically thugs in morning coats. They emotionally torture the women they claim to love. They keep women locked in attics. Things burn. People die.

"Jane Eyre is basically like 'Mad Max,' " offers Mikki Halpin, one of the women behind the "Eyresses" project. "It's basically like a horror movie set in this very hostile terrain."

More modernly, Jane Eyre is "Twilight."

Jane Austen? She is "Gossip Girl."

The storminess of the Brontes' writing makes for an intensely personal reading experience, a private world of melodrama and creepy love.

Some analysts wonder if the Brontes are built for economic downturn, that difficult times draw us to difficult stories. The Bronte heroes find happiness, but not without losing a hand or their eyesight, or having their manor burned down.

The new "Jane Eyre" hits most of the pleasure centers required of any good adaptation. It also handles gracefully the last third of the book, which other versions have either ignored or totally mucked up.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 5 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Fri Apr 01, 2011 4:51 am

http://mhpbooks.com/mobylives/?p=30050

Resting in peace, sort of: Jane Eyre
1 April 2011

Charlotte Brontë died 156 years ago yesterday, prompting me to recall that last week I was in midtown when my girlfriend asked me whether I had a copy of her Jane Eyre at home. I didn’t, but since the New York branch of Book•Off was on nearby 45th Street, I had reason to think we could find one. (Book•Off is Japan’s largest chain of used bookstores and, as far as I know, it’s the only international chain of used bookstores. The New York store used to be near the mid-Manhattan branch of the New York Public Library. They’ve moved.)

At Book•Off we found the copy that we wanted under the arm of another young lady standing in front of the “classics” shelves. It took me a minute or two — I was helped — to understand the sudden demand for a book first published in 1847.

I grew up in a benighted time when books by women were not part of the ordinary secondary school curriculum. Most boys who attended my high school graduated without having read one. A teacher once encouraged me to read S.E. Hinton, whose books did not interest me, but in four years, during which I took between forty and fifty literature classes, the only two books by women that I was asked to read for class were Charlotte’s Jane Eyre and her sister Emily Brontë‘s Wuthering Heights (Jane Austen‘s Northanger Abbey (!) was on one summer’s reading list). Antique, gothic romance is not the compulsory reading that I would recommend for most teenage boys.

As you probably already know, there’s a new film adaptation of Jane Eyre in theaters now, starring Mia Wasikowska (The Kids Are All Right; In Treatment) and Michael Fassbender (Inglorious Basterds; Hunger). Since this had prompted my girlfriend’s sudden need for a copy of Jane Eyre, and, I imagined, that of the other girl in Book•Off, I got curious about the competition between Jane Eyre and that other perennially adapted favorite, Pride and Prejudice, and the book sales of both.

I was surprised to learn, if IMDB can be relied on, that Jane Eyre has been filmed many more times than Pride and Prejudice—more than twenty film and television adaptations are listed, including several silent treatments, beginning with Jane Eyre in 1910 (they’re all titled Jane Eyre, except one, also from 1910, titled The Mad Lady of Chester).

By contrast Pride and Prejudice is listed a mere eight times, the first a UK production starring Welsh actress Curigwen Lewis in 1938. I haven’t included the Pride and Prejudice and Zombies variants (yes, there are more than one).

Opening the Amazon books page just now I find, to my further surprise (like a book critic, I’m easily “astonished”), a banner across the top of the page: “Jane Eyre, Charlotte Brontë, Now a Major Motion Picture.” Clicking on the banner takes me to the movie tie-in version of the book, published by Vintage, with Mia and Michael on the cover.

For the time being at least — until the next film version of Pride and Prejudice is released — Jane Eyre, the book, is beating the top-selling edition of Pride and Prejudice, the book, by more than three to one (according to Nielsen BookScan). Then again, so is the book version of the Pride and Prejudice and Zombies.

Posted by Melville House
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 5 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Sun Apr 03, 2011 1:09 am

http://ant.ag/2011/03/the-many-faces-of-jane-eyre/

The Many Faces of Jane Eyre

Oh No They Didn't!

March 31 marks 156 years since Charlotte Brontë’s death. Yet her best-loved creation, Jane Eyre, still endures. Jane’s story resonates with audiences long after its original publication – we cringe at the way the young orphan is treated by relatives and teachers; we worry with Jane about the mysterious events at Mr. Rochester’s home; we sigh happily when Jane and Rochester are able to be together at last. We love Jane Eyre for her independence, her passion, her ability to understand and forgive others.

It’s those qualities that have kept audiences coming back to Jane Eyre year after year – not just to the original book, but to dozens of adaptations and reimaginings for stage, screen and the printed word. Today we look at a few notable takes on Eyre.



The classic 1944 film wasn’t the first big-screen Jane Eyre – it was preceded by five silent films and a 1934 talkie – but it was far above its predecessors in terms of star power. With Orson Welles as Rochester and Joan Fontaine as Jane Eyre, the movie offered a moody, foggy atmosphere that was true to Brontë’s gothic romance. Welles contributed enough to the movie’s artistic vision – the fog and long shadows were reportedly his ideas – that he was offered a producer’s credit, but he turned it down. Another of this adaptation’s claims to fame: it includes a very young Elizabeth Taylor in an uncredited role as Jane’s childhood friend Helen.



There have been several musical adaptations of Jane Eyre. A notable one is the Tony-nominated 2000 Broadway musical. Though it ran only six months, it gained a cult following and earned Drama Desk and Outer Critics Circle awards for Marla Schaffel as Jane. It joins other adaptations in a musical trend that’s heated up over the past 15 years: a 1994 ballet created by the London Children’s Ballet, operas by John Joubert in 1997 and Michael Berkeley in 2000, a symphony by Michael Bosc in 2009, and other, less successful stage musicals.



The BBC has displayed an understandable love for Jane Eyre over the years. It has produced not one, not two, but four television versions: in 1963, 1973, 1983 and, after a bit of a delay, 2006. Respectively, they starred as Jane the actresses Ann Bell, Sorcha Cusack, Zelah Clarke and Ruth Wilson. U.S. fans of Masterpiece Theatre may have caught the most recent version when it was broadcast here in 2007. Reviewers loved it, and the Emmys loved its look – it won for Art Direction, Costumes and Hairstyling.



Jane Eyre’s adaptations go beyond stage and screen. Authors have been inspired to write sequels, prequels, retellings and more. Written in 1963, Jean Rhys’ Wide Sargasso Sea tells the story of Bertha Mason, Mr. Rochester’s former wife whose madness leads him to confine her to the attic and conceal her existence from Jane. The retelling explores her early life and allows her to be more than just the inconvenient madwoman – she’s young and beautiful and complex. Jasper Fforde’s 2001 The Eyre Affair takes the plot of Jane Eyre and turns it on its ear as part of a goofy, crime-solving romp through Eyre and other novels. In last year’s Jane Slayre, author Sherri Browning Erwin runs with recent trends as she turns Jane into a vampire killer. And there are more, from Rochester’s point of view to Adele’s, from Daphne du Maurier’s Eyre-inspired Rebecca to the recent young-adult novel Jane Airhead.




Taking the reins in 2011 is a new film adaptation, released on March 11 and starring Mia Wasikowska as Jane and Michael Fassbender as Rochester. It starts in the middle of the story and tells many of the novel’s events in flashback, allowing a tightened version of the story for modern (read: impatient) movie audiences. The locations offer Gothic gloom to compare with what Orson Welles gave us in 1944. And audiences are responding, with critics and regular folks alike giving it high marks – especially for Wasikowska, who is being called by some the best cinematic Jane Eyre yet.

What would Charlotte Brontë think of the myriad projects her novel has inspired? It’s hard to say for sure, but we like to think she’d be proud of Jane Eyre’s enduring popularity… and that she’d have a soft spot in her heart for even the strangest of adaptations.

Source

ONTD, have you seen the latest Jane Eyre? Thoughts/comments/reviews?
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 5 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Thu Apr 14, 2011 3:07 am

http://insearchofchickenpotpie.blogspot.com/2011/04/1840s-fashionista.html

Tuesday, April 12, 2011
the 1840s fashionista
and a host (a small host) of other things vaguely to do with textiles and style.

So! Of late the Gochenour household (okay fine just this resident of the Gochenour household) has been All About watching Movies! In the last five days I've seen:

* Pride and Prejudice (the 2005 version with Kiera Knightley -- seen the 5 hour BBC one already)
* The Princess Bride ("You keep using that word. . . I do not think it means what you think it means. . .")
* Sleeping Beauty (the 1959 Disney version, which I saw last as a 12-year-old! yeah, it's REALLY BAD)
* Love in the Afternoon (in the genre of "Audrey Hepburn goes to Paris and falls in love with a much older man" movies, it's right up there)
* Kirikou et la sorcière (haven't formed an opinion as yet? French children's movies are not so much something I'm familiar with)

Those were all watched on my trusty Dell! (which, side note, I have just replaced! with an Asus. But it still works, so I am currently typing on the Dell.) BUT ALSO. My mom and I actually went to see a movie in a theater! The Ruth Sokolof Theater north of Old Market (which neighborhood is apparently called "NoDo," short for "North Downtown," by some foolish folks who apparently don't realize how moronic that sounds), to be precise. What did we see? Jane Eyre, the new remake staring Mia Wasikowska (Alice from Alice in Wonderland and one of the kids in The Kids Are Alright) and Michael Fassbender (known for having a name that sounds like it would a great brand for electric guitars or amplifiers. what. oops.)

I wore the new copper cuff bracelet I bought in the Souk in the Old Market, so I suppose I was in a stylish frame of mind. Or stylishly observant state of mind? In any case, I was in the mood to notice details.

I have a fascination with costuming that is all out of proportion to my actual knowledge. Both my mother and my maternal grandma are what I would consider textile artisans -- my grandmother regularly pieces and quilts bedcovers and wall hangings, and my mother majored in textiles and clothing design after making almost all her own clothes throughout high school. We have always had books like English Clothing in the Nineteenth Century (C. Willett Cunnington, a reprint by Dover) and Everyday Fashions as Seen in Sears & Roebuck Catalogue Between 1880 and 1920 (paraphrase) floating around the house. Later, my mom went to work for a while at a historic house built in the 1870s or so in Omaha, and more information diffused my way, in the form of the original garments she would occasionally bring home to patch up for display. So while I remain blissfully thumby when it actually comes down to sewing something (I can use a sewing machine! really! it just jams up all the time and then I have to figure out how to rethread it), I have a general knowledge of what dress shapes happened when through most of the 1800s and the sorts of processes one might use to construct them.

I'm also curious about the process of historical costume design and adaptation -- when I checked up on the costumes from Pride and Prejudice, I came to the conclusion that the designer had chosen to sleek-ify the actual 1810s fashions into something a little more elegant to the modern eye. I was curious to see how Jane Eyre dealt with the costumes -- how accurate they were to a given time frame, but also if and what they changed as a concession to the modern viewer. The original book was published in 1847, and one assumes that Charlotte was writing the thing for a couple years before that and set it in her own modern time. After some searching (the results of which I'll give you more of below), it looks to me like the costumes were dead on the money for historical accuracy. Jane's clothes in the movie are plain, but the frequent closeups give you time to appreciate the shapes and proportions and edges and construction details. I should note quickly here -- I didn't look much at men's fashions, because I find them both silly-looking and rather boring in this era. So.

One of the first things I noticed was the preponderance of lace shown -- at cuffs, at necklines, on shawls, and so on. Women during the 1840s had relatively few clothes and often dressed them up with different types of inserts and add-ons. Jane had a black dress with a slight v neckline that her chemise poked out out of, around the edge of which there was a very subtle bit of lace, which she wore while Mr. Rochester entertained. You could see pretty easily how she could just sew on a different piece of lace for a different look.

When I got home I was hungry for more of what made 1840s dress awesome: Lace, pleats, fitted bodices. The internet brought me to the Metropolitan Museum of Art's Costume Institute's database, which has many thousands of pictures of different period clothing. (All the photos in this post, unless noted, are from that site.) I plugged in "1830" and "1840," bringing up lace shawls like this one, and lace pelerines like the one below (pretty sure Judi Dench was wearing one of these at one point.) Both of these are American-made, cotton and/or linen, from about 1830.


I also got into my mom's books a little. These are largely unhelpful when looking for graceful and simple lines of Jane's everyday dresses, as they focus on the higher end of fashion and all the attendant frou frou.


The movie runs from sometime in the late 1830s to the early 1840s, judging by the costumes. Jane's aunt wears a dress very similar to the one on the far left, a British walking dress made of cotton from 1830, in the beginning of the movie. I don't think Jane had any major sleeve poofs like the second two dresses (silk, French and British respectively, made between 1830-1835), but the detailing around the waist and the bodice is very similar to the movie's costumes.

These are from the 1840s -- the first two are American cotton dresses from between 1840-1845, and the third is a silk French dress from 1840. The center one is almost a dead ringer for one of the dresses Jane Eyre wears, though I'm not sure hers had quite as full of sleeves. The waist of the bodice comes to a small point, like most of the dresses in the movie.

This was a detail shown frequently in the movie -- the tailoring of the back of the dress that emphasizes a delicate waist (which Mia Wasikowska certainly has.) Obviously they wore stays and corsets, but it's still a striking effect.

Jane's charge Adele is shown in a blue plaid dress very like this cotton American-made one from 1840. I remember the tucking in the front and the low, straight neckline. That tucking detail, incidentally, survived in children's clothing for quite some time -- I remember seeing it in the 1864 clothing for the American Girl doll Addy and the 1904 clothing for Samantha (the costumes of which were usually pretty scrupulously researched, I think.)

This is from the Cunnington book my mom has, showing hairstyles between 1840-1846. These are on the tame end of the spectrum; this era was a pretty doofy one for women's hair. Lots of little curl puffs by the ear (modified Princess Leia is what I dubbed it in my head) showed up in the movie, such as those worn by St. John's two sisters. The wicked aunt had a hairstyle I've run across but didn't show here -- a high bun on the top with two long dangly locks of curls on either side of the head. Jane herself was thankfully spared this treatment -- her hair was parted straight down the middle, draped over her ears, and pulled back into a braid which was wrapped into a bun.

There were also a lot of bonnets in this movie and this era, varying from the bucket-shaped or ridiculously silly (what young Jane wears in her boarding school) to the intricate and elegant (the bonnet Jane wears in the ending scene.) Sadly I could not find anything like the marvelous straw bonnet Jane finishes the movie in (chosen obviously for the dramatic dappled shadows it threw across her face), but here's a silk one from 1840.



One thing I find kind of frustrating about modern clothing is the frequent lack of attention paid to construction detail. I pulled the diagram above from a photo of the Cunnington book I mentioned -- you can see the dozens of little pleats that went into making the fitted bodices and full skirts. I'm sort of plotting some sort of short garment with fitted pleats like this. . . which will probably never happen, but I can dream. Another search pulled up the following (modern) item -- a child's dress from Sugar City (and another version of it by Home Made Happy.) I could see incorporating this type of pleating detail in a fairly casual garment.

I also love the idea of lace inserts on top of modern clothing that can be switched out and changed out. There's a lot of creative potential here. . .

Side note: I also got a leather cuff bracelet at the Souk. I am pretty happy with it as well.

Posted by Sharon at 4:50 PM
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 5 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Mon Apr 25, 2011 1:22 am

http://cindysbookclub.blogspot.com/2011/04/my-review-of-jane-eyre-by-charlotte.html

Sunday, April 17, 2011
My Review of Jane Eyre, by Charlotte Bronte

Michael Fassbender and Mia Waskikowska in the current movie version of Jane Eyre

"This year, thousands of high school English classes will assign Jane Eyre (and tens of thousands of high school students will complain about it). But then, something magical will happen. Young women accustomed to the sarcastic chatty prose of the Gossip Girl series will get swept up in Brontë’s luxurious language. They will be enthralled by Jane’s story, her strength and determination. She is the thinking girl’s heroine, and they will see themselves in her. Because of Jane, generations of young women have been — and will continue to be — reassured that even if they are 'poor, obscure, plain, and little,' they can still make a happy ending if they are true to themselves.-Alexandra McAaron (hat tip: The Bronte Blog)

For years I've been saying that Jane Eyre is my favorite novel of all time--
and that it is.

But I've never written a review of it! I suppose I thought of the book as being so much a part of the fiction landscape that any review I would attempt to write of it would be superfluous.

But as my sister and I were chatting about the current movie version of the book (which is getting excellent reviews, by the way), I realized that not everyone has read this classic. She hasn't read it, although she's always had it on a mental to-read list.

I also realize there are a crop of young people, particularly young women, who may not be acquainted with the book. So I just finished reading it for possibly the 50th time (that probably isn't much of an exaggeration!), and while it's fresh on my mind, I offer my review.

This is the cover of the copy of Jane Eyre I've had since high school. The portrait is that of author Charlotte Bronte, and I must admit, when I read the book, this is who I picture as Jane

Jane Eyre, by Charlotte Bronte

The story opens on a wet, wintry day. When we first meet her, Jane is a 10-year-old orphan who is living with an aunt-in-law who doesn't love her and cousins who despise her.

When Jane unexpectedly defends herself against her bullying older cousin, John, she is banished to a room that is particularly frightening to her. It's the room where her uncle died when she was an infant, with his last request being that his wife would raise Jane as her own.

Her resulting fright and hysteria, and her aunt's cold mercilessness in response, set the stage for the next chapter in Jane's life. She is sent away to school.

I won't go into much more of the story, because I don't want to spoil it for those of you who haven't read it yet. Suffice it to say that years later, Jane ends up as the governess of the little girl who is the ward of Edward Fairfax Rochester, a wealthy bachelor.

How this young girl--who describes herself as "poor, plain and little"--finds an all-consuming love, loses it, then seeks it again--is the basis of the story.

An indomitable heroine

The character of Jane is, to me, one of the most admirable and appealing fictional characters of all time. Poor and plain she may be, but her spirit is indomitable.

In an era when women were expected to be brainless and ornamental, Jane (through the words of Charlotte Bronte) refused to bow to those expectations:

"Women are supposed to be very calm generally; but women feel just as men feel; they need exercise for their faculties and a field for their efforts as much as their brothers do; they suffer from too rigid a restraint, too absolute a stagnation, precisely as men would suffer; and it is narrow-minded in their more privileged fellow-creatures to say that they ought to confine themselves to making puddings and knitting stockings, to playing on the piano and embroidering bags. It is thoughtless to condemn them, or laugh at them, if they seek to do more or learn more than custom has pronounced necessary for their sex."

Jane's love for Mr. Rochester is strong and profound, again without giving into the excesses common in Victorian fiction.

And later, when she is offered a marriage that would be devoid of that kind of love, Jane steadfastly refuses. She knows what real love is, and she won't accept anything less.

One thing that Jane Eyre does have in common with other books of the Victorian era is a tendency toward wordiness, many of those being words we don't toss around frequently nowadays, like "auditress and interlocutrice," and "cicatrixed visage." You may want to keep a dictionary nearby!

Why do I love this book so much? Even now, after having just finished it again, I have a hard time putting it into words.

But I will tell you that it's not the mother of all gothic novels for nothing. It has everything: romance, mystery, suspense, a dangerously attractive love interest and a heroine we admire and care about.

It's no wonder, 164 years after it was first published, this book is still captivating readers and prompting movie adaptations.

If you've never read Jane Eyre, I strongly encourage you to do so...I can't recommend it highly enough!
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 5 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Mon Apr 25, 2011 9:52 pm

http://www.buffyholt.com/blog/2011/04/25/jane-eyre-the-movie-and-this-silly-limited-release/

jane eyre, the movie. and this silly limited release.

Posted by Buffy on Apr 25th, 2011

Jane (Mia Wasikowska) and Mr. Rochester (Michael Fassbender)

I am, quite frankly, aghast that the movie Jane Eyre is only on limited release – 300 theatres nationwide, or something ridiculous like that. I never was much a fan of Jane Austen. I read her entire library in middle school, because that’s what you do when you’re a teenage girl obsessed with all things British. But I never rated her (Colin Firth notwithstanding). Not the way I did the Bronte girls. I thought Anne a better writer than Emily, even though I had a teenage crush on Wuthering Heights. But it was Jane Eyre that I fell so passionately in love with. Flynn and I saw the film separately over the weekend and we both agree, it’s wondrous. The novel itself is just under 400 pages, so it’s probably no surprise that a moment or two in the film seemed rushed. But these bits were brief because the actors were so compelling and believable in their passion and reserve. Michael Fassbender and Mia Wasikowska are perfect as Rochester and Jane. Throw in Jamie Bell and Dame Judi Dench and …. you get a limited release.

Makes absolutely no sense.

If you can find a cinema showing it, you really need to get out and watch it. If you can’t, then beg for it. In the meantime, some Bronte inspired photos for your viewing pleasure.

West Yorkshire Countryside

West Yorkshire Countryside

Charlotte Bronte’s Manchester lodgings, where she began writing Jane Eyre.

The new 2005 sign reads: In 1846 the Reverend Patrick Bronte came to Manchester for cataract surgery accompanied by his daughter Charlotte. They took lodgings at 59 Boundary Street West (formerly known as 83 Mount Pleasant). It was here that Charlotte began to write her first successful novel, Jane Eyre.

The Bronte Parsonage in Haworth, West Yorkshire

The Bronte Parsonage in Haworth, West Yorkshire

The Bronte Parsonage in Haworth, West Yorkshire

The Bronte Parsonage in Haworth, West Yorkshire

Path leading from the Bronte Parsonage in Haworth, West Yorkshire, to the Church of Saint Michael and All Angels

Clergy Daughter’s School attended by the Bronte sisters.

Clergy Daughter’s School attended by the Bronte sisters.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 5 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Tue Apr 26, 2011 2:46 pm

http://literarysluts.com/?p=2300

Jane Eyre and Lizzy Bennett: A Conversation
Posted on April 25, 2011 by meyoung

Last week I saw the latest movie rendition of Jane Eyre, starring Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender. The production was gorgeous and the stars well cast (which is particularly tricky with respect to this story), and it made me want to re-read the book. Upon starting it I realized I had read it in its entirety only once, as opposed to Pride and Prejudice which I’ve read at least a couple dozen times. Barely scratching the surface of the first chapter, I knew why. Bronte’s writing is as dense as Austen’s is airy with none of the latter’s humor, and “I dearly love a laugh.”

The novels were published about 30 years apart, P&P predating JE. In between, many of the classic Gothic works (e.g., Frankenstein, Manfred, The Fall of the House of Usher, as well as Bronte’s own sister’s Wuthering Heights) were published. But Gothic lit got its start in the 1700s, before Austen’s time; see Northanger Abbey as Austen’s Gothic satire. So Austen and Bronte could very well have been contemporaries, which made me wonder what would happen if post-matrimonial Lizzy and Jane got their kids together for a playdate.

There would have been the usual pleasantries, compliments on each other’s children, and so forth. (I won’t conjecture whether the meeting takes place in Pemberley or Thornfield.) The nannies would have taken the children away, leaving Jane and Lizzy free to take tea and enjoy each other’s company. Conversation would eventually turn to their husbands, who, I imagine, would perhaps be out together partaking in gentlemanly pursuits of their own.

Lizzy: Dear Jane, you know it is a truth universally acknowledged, that a married man in possession of a good fortune will go grouse hunting at every opportunity.

Jane: How can you jest so, Lizzy. Mr. Darcy is nothing but attentive.

L: You are right, of course. Fitzwilliam is just what a husband ought to be, attentive, sensible, and good humored. Of course, he is handsome, which a husband ought likewise to be, if he possibly can.

J: Yes, well I am sure most people think my Edward an ugly man; yet there is so much unconscious pride in his port; so much ease in his demeanor; such a look of complete indifference to his own external appearance; so haughty a reliance on the power of other qualities, intrinsic or adventitious, to atone for the lack of mere personal attractiveness, that in looking at him, one inevitably shares the indifference; and even in a blind, imperfect sense, puts faith in the confidence. Even if he only has one eye and one hand.

L: Calm yourself, dear, I meant no offense. Mr. Rochester is an imposing figure, unquestionably. I was merely attempting to conceal my embarrassment.

J: Embarrassment? Embarrassment over what?

L: Jane, you are my friend, almost a sister, are you not? We may speak frankly? Sometimes I wish Fitz were less…formal.

J: There is something a little stately in him to be sure, but perhaps I do not perfectly comprehend your point.

L (after a pause): A lady’s imagination is very rapid; it jumps from admiration to love, from love to matrimony, in a moment, but beyond matrimony thoughts lead to children with relatively little time spent on the process by which they arrive.

J: …

L (distressed): You are too generous to trifle with me. Please end my mortification and give me leave to broach this very untoward topic.

J (shaking her head): Lizzy, I was but a Quakerish governess.

L: Oh, you and Edward role play! I am so glad to hear it! But I would not be a Quakerish governess. When I met Fitzy he was sick of civility, of deference, of officious attention. He was disgusted with the women who were always speaking, and looking, and thinking of his approbation alone. I roused him. Indeed, governess is good, but my role would be the strict, quite demanding, sort of governess.

J: Lizzy, you misunderstand –

L: Alas, he is forever the gentleman. Goodness, that one small reproof, a reproof, I might add, of which I had not the smallest idea of being felt in such a deep way, could lead to such misguided physical temperance! Jane, when you play governess, does your Edward overwhelm you?

J (conflicted, then decided): Lizzy! … Before I married, I resolved that my husband should not be a rival, but a foil to me. I will suffer no competitor near the throne; I exact undivided homage. He does not have a right to command me, merely because he is older than I or because he has seen more of the world than I have. His claim to superiority depends on the use he made of his time and experience.

L: And he was experienced when you married, wasn’t he Jane? I mean, you did mention that he was a widower when you married him.

J: …

J (slowly smiling): There was also a French opera dancer.

L: Oh how I envy you, Jane! Won’t you tell me?

At this moment, the Rochester and Darcy children enter the room in a happy mixed tumult, little Charles Darcy in the lead to tell his mother that his father has arrived having killed hundreds and hundreds of birds. Lizzy looks flushed, but Jane grabs her hands and, as the gentlemen enter, whispers, We will continue this conversation after dinner!
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 5 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 5 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Back to top

- Similar topics

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