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 4 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 12, 2011 1:00 am

http://adventuresofthecautionarytale.blogspot.com/2011/03/squee-dear-reader-its-jane-eyre.html

Friday, March 11, 2011
SQUEE! Dear Reader... It's Jane Eyre!
that's right everyone! Jane Eyre comes out today! and as a MAJOR Janiac, I'm thrilled. I've read the book eleventy hundred times and seen many different productions of it. I also read the super awesome Jane Slayre
this was an AWESOME version with all the passion of the original with some kick ass paranormal slaying action. LOVED it!
I plan on going to see this newest version. I hope Michael Fassbender lives up to my high expectations of how Mr. Rochester should be portrayed. I keep picturing him in Inglourious Basterds and that might work against me. I love two productions of the film. they run neck and neck in their awesomeness. the first is the version with Orson Welles and Joan Fontaine. he was awesome and she was soo beautiful.and Mr Brocklehurst was creepy. he was played by contract bad guy player Henry Daniell. Agnes Morehead (Endora on Bewitched) play Aunt Reed. but Orson Welles' plaintive "Jane" when she is wandering the moors just clenches it for me. man, more people need to wander the moors.
but my all time fave(an I've even mentioned it before) is the A and E version with the uber sexy Ciaran Hinds. basically it's a yum fest. he is a perfect Mr Rochester. and the super cool Samantha Morton is Jane. it's an all around win.
so take advantage of another incarnation of this timeless story of Jane and Mr. Rochester. I know I will and I'll be rereading Jane Eyre. and I'm gonna find my damn copy of JE with Ciaran Hinds.
Posted by the cautionary tale at 10:07 PM
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 12, 2011 2:22 am

http://flixchatter.wordpress.com/2011/03/11/reminiscing-on-my-fave-rochester-jane-eyre-1983-bbc-miniseries/

Reminiscing on my favorite Rochester – Jane Eyre’s 1983 BBC miniseries

March 11, 2011 by rtm

The 2011 Jane Eyre’s film adaptation I’ve been waiting for quite a while opens today… alas, only in limited release. So that means I have to wait another two weeks before it finally opens in my neck of the woods, Focus Features site lists only ONE theater showing it on 3/25! Sad

My love for Jane Eyre started out perhaps five or six years ago when I came across this YouTube fan-made music video of the BBC 1983 version set to a Hoobastank’s song The Reason, an odd choice of song I thought but it kinda works for the story. In any case, it prompted me to rent this miniseries from Netflix, as well as bought the book (though I’ve only read the later half). I’ve also since seen two additional TV adaptations, the 1997 one with Samantha Morton and Ciaran Hinds and the most recent BBC adaptation with Ruth Wilson and Toby Stephens in 2006, but neither one ever came close to replacing the 1983 version. The reason? Well, isn’t it obvious? Timothy Dalton as Rochester, of course!

Yes, the production quality is far from perfect — poor lighting, uninspired costumes and sets and the totally dull, almost irksome music leave much to be desired. But once Dalton appears on-screen, you won’t notice ‘em … or anything else for that matter. I love how faithful this miniseries is to Charlotte Bronte’s vision, much of the dialog are taken from the book and the actors did a remarkable job delivering them convincingly. Zelah Clarke as Jane looks like a midget next to the 6’2″ Dalton and sometimes it’s a bit distracting, but her performance was strong and full of conviction which creates a powerful dynamic between the two.

Dalton is absolutely astounding as the ultimate Byronic hero. With that voice and screen presence, he’s born to play this role. I initially thought he’s far too handsome for a character that’s described in the book as someone ‘not possessing of a classic good looks.’ Though I’d be hard pressed to find a woman who thinks Dalton is ugly, we must remember that this was written in the 1800 where the standard beauty is fair hair, fair skin, with some kind of Greek statue-like features. So with that in mind, Dalton with his square jaw, dark hair and rugged, masculine features fits the physical description of the role nicely. But more importantly, he captures the essence of Rochester’s persona, the flawed hero with mercurial mood, ill temper, and a torrid past that still haunts him and ravages him with guilt.

Dalton imbues the complex character with such fire that makes other actors’ interpretation pales in comparison. Some plays the character way too angry who’s practically yelling the entire time (Hinds) or too romantic and a bit oversexed (Stephens). I know I’m going to get a lot of flak for saying that as that adaptation and specifically Stephens have a massive following, but hey, it is what it is. I really think Dalton’s interpretation is superior as he’s got a nice balance of danger, passion and longing, all the while retaining that mysterious and unpredictable aura about him that makes him so unnerving but yet so darn attractive. Rochester is the quintessential tortured soul and in Dalton’s eyes, that pain and forlorn-ness is apparent, especially in the scene where Jane was about to leave him for good, you could see his desperation and fear of losing her. There’s that frailty in him as he hits that breaking point and THAT scene to me is what sets Jane Eyre apart from other period romance. Dalton himself has said this role is one of his best works, and I absolutely concur. He totally sets the bar for the performance for me, or as my friend Prairiegirl said to me when I lent her my dvd recently, ‘Dalton spoiled it for me. I doubt anyone else will ever come close…’

Well, I’ve been going on and on about how terrific Dalton’s Rochester is. But why don’t you just check it out for yourself in some of my favorite scenes:

The ‘fire’ scene:

I knew you would do me good in some way, at sometime… I saw it in your eyes when I first beheld you…


Farewell, Mr. Rochester:

And how do people perform that ceremony of parting, Jane? Teach me; I’m not quite up to it.


The Proposal:

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

I must leave you (in two parts):

Mr. Rochester, I no more assign this fate to you than I grasp at it for myself. We were born to strive and endure–you as well as I: do so. You will forget me before I forget you.


So, dear readers, I’m utterly curious to see Michael Fassbender’s take on the role and how he’d fare against Dalton’s. He’s certainly has big shoes to fill. Now that I’ve shared mine, tell me who is your favorite Rochester and why?
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 12, 2011 2:52 am

http://alamain.typepad.com/a-la-main-nadine-design/2011/03/nerd-alert-jane-eyre.html

03/11/2011
nerd alert: Jane Eyre

The newest version of Jane Eyre opens this weekend. I can hardly wait.

Although I'm sure to watch pretty much anything Gothic, English, or involving the names Bronte or Austen, this new Jane is supposed to be even darker than previous versions, verging on a thriller. This is so natural for the book, which is intensely thrilling in its own right.

Michael Fassbender plays Mr. Rochester, here with Imogen Poots as Blanche Ingram.

Mia Wasikowska plays poor Jane. She has no idea what's in store - but lurking around corners is always a good start.

The movie poster may be one of my favorites ever

Posted at 06:57 AM
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 12, 2011 8:52 pm

http://www.boston.com/ae/movies/articles/2011/03/13/new_jane_eyre_film_is_the_latest_in_a_long_line_of_adaptations/

To Eyre is Hollywood
The new film version of 'Jane Eyre' is the latest in a long line of adaptations
By Laura Collins-Hughes
Globe Staff / March 13, 2011

Orson Welles was Cary Joji Fukunaga’s first Mr. Rochester: a brusque and brooding rich man holed up in his great stone castle, falling in love with a humble governess and trying mightily to ignore the madwoman he’s stashed in the tower. • The fog-enshrouded 1944 film adaptation of Charlotte Brontë’s classic Gothic romance, “Jane Eyre,’’ starring Welles opposite Joan Fontaine, had been one of Fukunaga’s favorite movies when he was a child. But it didn’t occur to him to check whether there were other versions until he had already signed on to make one of his own. • “I was like, holy crap, there are a lot of ‘Jane Eyres’ out there,’’ said the 33-year-old director, whose take on Brontë’s most enduring novel — the first major film based on it since Franco Zeffirelli’s in 1966 — opens Friday with Mia Wasikowska in the title role and Michael Fassbender as Mr. Rochester. “It’s like finding out your girlfriend had 50 boyfriends before you.’’

For such a prim and sheltered little creature, Jane is indeed far worldlier than one might suspect. The Internet Movie Database lists 22 film and television adaptations, stretching back to 1910. When the first talkie came out, in 1934, it followed a half-dozen silent versions. Broadway, too, has had a couple of fleeting crushes on Jane. She has even inspired operas.

“You would hope that people would embrace different interpretations, and that’s what the arts are for, anyway,’’ Wasikowska (pronounced vah-she-KAHV-ska) said, her speech tinged with a soft Australian accent. Wearing a gray sweater over a dress whose iridescent Peter Pan collar gave her the air of a sprite, she sat cross-legged on the couch of a sunny hotel suite on Charles Street.

Fukunaga, who made his feature-film directing debut with the 2009 thriller “Sin Nombre,’’ was sprawled in a neighboring chair.

“I think that’s what makes it exciting: sort of seeing what elements different people choose to magnify and focus on,’’ added the 21-year-old actress, who last year played Annette Bening and Julianne Moore’s daughter in the indie hit, “The Kids Are All Right,’’ and Alice in Tim Burton’s “Alice in Wonderland.’’

Ah, the choices. Brontë’s novel, an immediate hit when it was first published, in England, in 1847, offers adapters a panoply of possibilities. (Blanket spoiler alert: This article will disclose elements of Brontë’s tale that the uninitiated might prefer to discover for themselves. But the cat has long been out of the bag. The book’s most famous line is the uberspoiler “Reader, I married him.’’

The book opens on the orphaned Jane as an inquisitive, spirited, and plain-looking 10-year-old, loathed and mistreated by her cruel and wealthy relatives. Banished by her aunt from stately Gateshead Hall, she spends the rest of her childhood at Lowood Institution, a charity boarding school overseen by the wicked, self-righteous Mr. Brocklehurst.

At 18, she leaves to become governess to Mr. Rochester’s young ward at Thornfield Hall. Delighting in her employer’s intellectual companionship, she is taken with him despite his physical unattractiveness. When someone sets Mr. Rochester’s bed aflame one night, and when a houseguest sustains a gaping flesh wound mysteriously inflicted by human teeth, Jane is unsettled but unswayed: Mr. Rochester has won her heart, and she his. How is she to know that he has a mentally ill wife, Bertha, hidden away in an upper room?

Their wedding stopped at the altar by that revelation, Jane flees Thornfield and wanders the moors until, near death, she is saved by a handsome clergyman named St. John Rivers. St. John asks her to marry him, but the cold-blooded missionary is no match for the romantic Mr. Rochester, who is now free to marry her, since Bertha has burned down the house and perished.

Just as that synopsis necessarily leaves out myriad details dear to Brontë aficionados, the novel’s film, TV, and stage adapters tend to jettison whole story lines and numerous characters (often the kind ones, like Lowood’s saintly superintendent, Miss Temple) while adding elements Brontë never dreamed of, partly because that’s what the constraints of each form demand and partly because they’re storytellers, too. They’re not replicating Brontë’s book; they’re making it into something new.

Take Mr. Rochester’s castle from the 1944 movie, and the tower where Bertha lives: They’re Hollywood inventions. Brontë calls Thornfield a three-story, battlement-topped mansion “of proportions not vast, though considerable; a gentleman’s manor-house, not a nobleman’s seat.’’ But in cinematic tradition, it’s almost always an enormous, medieval stone pile.

Similarly, “Jane Eyre’’ on stage and screen tends to have principals significantly better looking than the homely specimens Brontë describes. For evidence of this, one need look no further than the 1983 TV miniseries, with a pre-Bond Timothy Dalton as Mr. Rochester. In the 1934 movie, starring Virginia Bruce and Colin Clive, Jane is an unabashedly glamorous and effervescent blonde, even as a child.

Made during the Depression, that version runs a scant 62 minutes. Nonetheless, it manages to introduce a whole new major character, a Thornfield servant named Sam Poole, whose necessity to the plot becomes clear at the end. Jane, in exile from Thornfield, is serving dinner to the poor at a mission when Sam, now unemployed, comes through the soup line and tells her of the fire.

Evolving social attitudes influence interpretations, too. In the book, Jane expresses sympathy for Bertha because her insanity is no fault of her own. But versions of “Jane Eyre’’ in other media make Bertha more human than Brontë did. She is often beautiful, and she is palpably in anguish. A stage version by the British theater company Shared Experience, which had its US premiere in 2000, exemplifies this: Once Jane arrives at Thornfield, Bertha is onstage throughout, her suffering unremitting and almost always unseen by the other characters.

Not even Blanche Ingram, the socially prominent but money-grubbing belle who Jane fears will marry Mr. Rochester, is universally scorned by adapters. The 2006 “Masterpiece Theatre’’ version dares to make her fairly sympathetic, the product of a vain and shallow mother and the victim of a man who is using her in order to inflame the jealousy of the woman he really loves.

But do adapters want their Jane to be united with long-lost relatives on the way to her happy ending? Frequently, that’s a strand of the story that falls away. The 2000 Broadway musical went so far as to have Jane inherit a colossal fortune not from an uncle she didn’t know she had but from the aunt who despised her — the one who, in Brontë’s telling, is nearly broke by the time she dies.

However faithful an adaptation — and the “Jane Eyre’’ award for fidelity surely would go to the BBC’s 1973 miniseries starring Sorcha Cusack and Michael Jayston, which makes its way through Brontë’s novel with near-religious devotion — it still can’t reproduce what’s in a reader’s head.

“There’s a desire to be respectful to the text. But that’s to the text, not to the fans,’’ said Fukunaga, who made his “Jane Eyre’’ from a screenplay by British playwright Moira Buffini. As he sees it, purists’ expectations can sometimes be unreasonable. “I’m gonna have to switch things in order to make it work on an emotional level,’’ he said, “and on a visual level.’’

Wasikowska, now with a pair of classic literary characters under her belt, likened the multitudinous reworkings of “Jane Eyre’’ to artists’ reinterpretations of the Mona Lisa, or playwrights’ dissimilar takes on the same subject in different eras.

“I think that’s cool,’’ she said, “because each film is like a little time capsule: a little study of the time.’’

Laura Collins-Hughes can be reached at lcollins-hughes@globe.com.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 12, 2011 9:24 pm

http://marissabidilla.blogspot.com/2011/03/on-masterpiece-theatre-and-adapting.html

Saturday, March 12, 2011
On "Masterpiece Theatre" and adapting the classics
After Downton Abbey ended, I wanted more Masterpiece Theatre in my life (my job has been stressful and I need to escape into British costume dramas), so I watched the rerun of the 2009 miniseries of Emma. And I just finished rereading Jane Eyre in anticipation of the new movie version. All this has got me thinking about the challenges of adapting classic literature, and how we watch and judge adaptations differently from how we view original stories.

Roughly speaking, the more movies or plays you see, the better you get at being able to predict where the plot is going or what the writer will do next. This tendency becomes even more pronounced if you have formally studied dramatic writing. I can distinctly remember realizing that I had started to watch plays "like a playwright," attuned to their construction and the tricks the writer was using, rather than just enjoying the drama as it unfolded.

When you're watching an adaptation of a familiar novel, rather than an original or unfamiliar story, it is even easier to pay attention to what the screenwriter is doing. What point of view does she take? What does she choose to emphasize that other adaptations leave out? Has she created any new scenes? If you take note of moments like these, when the adapter puts her own stamp on the material, you can often figure out where it's going.

So, watching the Emma miniseries, it became clear that the writer chose to emphasize the narrowness of Emma's world. Though Emma is in her early twenties, she has hardly left the village of Highbury -- never visited London or the seaside. I can't remember Jane Austen particularly emphasizing this theme, because in her era it was not so unusual for a young lady to live a circumscribed life. But it is a valid reading of the novel, suggesting that Emma plays matchmaker because she's in desperate need of some excitement in her life. And I can see why a 21st-century screenwriter would highlight it -- so that we can feel the contrast between Emma's era and our own.

So, during the first episodes of the miniseries, Emma kept commenting that she had never seen the sea. After the second or third time this happened, I turned to my roommate and said "What do you want to bet that the last shot of this is going to be Emma and Mr. Knightley walking on the beach?"


OK, so I was wrong. They're not on the beach -- they're on the cliffs of Dover.

But really, this wasn't hard to predict. All I did was pay attention to what the screenwriter had emphasized (Emma's desire to finally see the ocean), and added that to my knowledge of what the Masterpiece Theatre audience would appreciate (a picturesque, romantic final image) and my knowledge of Austen's story (Emma and Mr. Knightley get married), to come up with an accurate idea of where the series was going.

Moments like this, though, are why I find it hard to really absorb myself into movie adaptations. Because the plot cannot surprise me, I pay far more attention to the mechanics of how the movie was made, the choices made by the writer, actors, director, even the costumer! So I process it with my rational, judgmental, distanced brain, rather than my subconscious, emotional, immediate brain. However, I tend to believe that art that taps into your emotional, subconscious brain is more valuable than art that welcomes cool, distanced consideration.

Watching a movie adaptation of a novel I've read, I judge the actors harder than I judge actors in an original story, forcing them to compete with my memories of the book and my own ideas about what Emma Woodhouse or Mr. Darcy or Jane Eyre is "really" like. I get very attached to my preconceived notions. I think Michael Fassbender is very talented and very attractive, but when I heard he was cast in the new Jane Eyre movie, my first thought was "But isn't Rochester supposed to have black hair and eyes?"

Even when you haven't read the source novel, watching a movie adaptation can be problematic. For instance, you may still have picked up some preconceived notions about the characters or plot floating in the pop-culture ether. (I would wager that many people who have never read Jane Eyre are well aware that Jane is plain-looking and Mr. Rochester has a mad wife in the attic.) Or, if you truly know nothing about the story of Emma, but the first episode hooks you and you can't wait another week for the continuation, you can always just run out and buy the book. Or, you can watch the movie adaptation, and then feel guilty that you haven't actually read the novel, and think that you ought to read it, but you probably won't read it, because you already know the story!

I think maybe it's for all of these reasons that Downton Abbey was such a big success upon its premiere. People want the pleasures of a literary costume drama -- lots of characters, beautiful clothing and decor, a chance to escape to another era, touches of melodrama in the plotting -- without the literary pedigree. You can enjoy Maggie Smith's hilarious performance unfettered instead of saying "but the Dowager Countess wasn't like that in the book..." Even though some of the plot elements are familiar or predictable, there are also several surprises that keep the series lively. I found it much easier to really care about the characters of Downton Abbey because I, like them, had no idea what would happen next. Whereas, even though Emma was a well-done miniseries and Emma's gradual gaining of self-awareness is a good story, I knew all along where it would end up -- her and Mr. Knightley and a stroll on the beach.

Images from Emma (2009) with Romola Garai as Emma and Jonny Lee Miller as Mr. Knightley. For the record, I enjoyed their performances, even if I thought the age difference between them should have been more evident!

Posted by Marissa at 10:52 AM
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 12, 2011 9:37 pm

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

Mar 12, 2011
Jane Eyre

For modern audiences this Victorian tale of romantic woe may be a little frustrating. So the guy is married to a crazy bitch? So what, Jane Eyre? Worst things have happened. Haven't you heard about the pursuit of happiness? Get a life!

In the age of Snooki and the Kardashians, we are very far from the oppressive condition of women in Charlotte Bronte's time, (just as the concept of concealed and repressed sexuality is alien to our age*), but what is eternally appealing about her fantastic yarn are the deeply archetypal, intricate layers to the story of deceptively plain Jane.

Jane Eyre's greatest tragedy is that she is an intelligent, talented woman (an artist!) trapped in a world that doesn't allow women the capacity to think. An orphan, a woman and poor, she is nobody, even if her greatest asset is her mind. In Victorian England, the social hierarchy was almost fetishistic (and a great source of wonderful literature). Love between members of different social classes was taboo (and it still is to an extent. To this day, the rich only marry the rich). Jane is a lowly servant, no matter how refined or educated. Even Mr. Rochester, her employer, has been shackled to misery by the conventions of marriage by money. So there's no chance in hell of love blooming. Taboo is of course, very sexy, so this is a very powerful hook.

Jane Eyre also is an impassioned protest against the established cruelties of the day. The everyday cruelty towards women, but also the cruelty born of the meanspirited "charity" of the clergy and the rich, both oozing contempt for the needy and the weak.

Both Jane and Rochester are complex and difficult characters, with too much feeling and backstory underneath the straitjackets they need to bear. They are soulmates: endlessly frustrated by society's constraints, and each sporting their own horrid tale of woe. They both have fiery passions underneath which are not the solely the passions of the flesh, but more dangerously, of the spirit. And then there is the whole spooky, Gothic, haunted woman in the attic thread, which hints at the Victorian obsession with repressing the strongest instincts of the soul. What is a more obvious metaphor than madness dwelling in a hidden room in a dreary mansion? We are all vulnerable to madness. And if we lived in the Victorian era with its crazy-making rules, it could be hard to escape its clutches.

Jane Eyre is eternally hypnotic: it's a great, romantic story of love and cruelty and a passionate proto-feminist manifesto. This latest film incarnation alas, feels strangely airless. Many things are right. The mood is dark and gloomy, the costumes and decor feel authentic without calling too much attention to themselves. The music by Dario Marianelli is duly ravishing. The cinematography by Adriano Goldman is lovely. The rich and sparkling dialogues seem very faithful to the source. Everything is careful and correct. But, and I say this with great heaviness of heart, there is a lack of passion, a lack of madness, a lack of fire. Which is to say that, among other things, there is no chemistry between Jane (Mia Wasilowska) and Rochester (Michael Fassbender). Their individual characters feel too constrained, as if director Cary Fukunaga was afraid to let loose and risk going over the top.

A diabolical idea just crossed my mind. Imagine Alejandro González Iñárritu's version of Jane Eyre. He would surely err on the side of mega melodrama, and we could run the risk of getting a campy telenovela with billowing skirts, but it wouldn't lack emotion. The filmmakers of the present version seem to approach the characters and their Victorian environment as if they were looking at a rare and fragile specimen behind glass in the British Museum.

I adore this intelligent story of romantic upheaval so my heart did flutter in places and I enjoyed the movie, but I expected to be ravished. There is too much control for that in this film. Wasilowska is a perfectly good actress. Her eyes betray intelligence and feeling, but she seems too muted. After enduring a horrible childhood, she seems to bear not a hint of a subconscious grudge. Amelia Clarkson, the wondrous young actress who plays Jane as a child is far more alive and fiery. Wasilowska is very good in the scenes when she falls in love for the first time. You can almost feel her heart beating out of her corset, yet she retains her smarts (which is more than one can say about anybody in the throes of a major crush), but she is too obedient.

Rochester is not an easy role either. He is both an alpha male and deeply sensitive, imperious, and like most males, clueless about the female heart. Michael Fassbender seems a bit tentative. He's not doing anything wrong but there is something unconvincing. We all imagine our Janes and Rochesters through the prism of our own experiences. To me his Rochester lacks a tad of bitterness, of cynicism and of turmoil. And a whole lot of mystery. The rest of the cast seems to have been instructed to be as discreet as possible. And some scenes that would benefit from great dramatic flair are blunted either by good taste or lack of daring. For instance, when the existence of Berha Mason is discovered, the camera focuses first on Jane's reaction. It would have been far more powerful for us to discover Bertha as Jane does, from her point of view.
Can't wait for the next version.

*This movie made me pine for the days when showing as much as a wrist would be considered foreplay. I'm not a prude, or maybe I am, but I do believe that what is suggested, forbidden and concealed is so much sexier than the literal and the explicit. And we live in a revoltingly explicit, vulgar age).

Posted by Grande Enchilada at 1:29 PM
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 12, 2011 9:45 pm

http://herbookself.blogspot.com/2011/03/me-and-jane-eyre.html

Me and Jane Eyre
Posted by lisa Smile , Labels: classics , reading habits Saturday, March 12, 2011 10:05 AM

I've never read Jane Eyre.

That's the look on your face about now, right?

I think I might be the only person in the book blogging world - and possibly even on the planet - that has not read Charlotte Bronte's masterpiece. I'm not sure how I got through high school and all of college (including multiple elective literature classes without reading it, but it's true. I know the story. I've seen the play and bits and pieces of the multiple film adaptations. I know the characters and could probably even bluff my way through a conversation about the book and appear to know what I'm talking about. And I've read Wuthering Heights which also lends me some credence to be able to talk about the Bronte sisters with some semblance of intelligence.

But I've never read Jane Eyre.

Until now.

With the release of the new movie version of Jane Eyre (starring Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender), I think its time for me to get with the program and move this one off my TBR pile. I'm really interested in seeing the film - as I said before I already know the story and the trailers for this one have me hooked - but I want read the book first. So here comes my challenge - Jane Eyre in a week! I know how long the book is and I know how slow I typically am in reading classics (yes, I started The Count of Monte Cristo in December; no, I still have not finished it) but I really want to push myself to see if I can get through Eyre in seven days or less. I have the book on my Kindle (oh trusty, glorious reading device!) and it's over 8000 "locations" long. I don't normally endorse speed reading and generally feel that great work should be savored, but for me Jane Eyre has been my ultimate procrastination, so I'm hoping a potentially frenetic pace will get me to dive into this one and finally read it start to finish. (For those who see no challenge in getting through a tome this long in a week, keep in mind that I work full time and have multiple commitments outside my job as well. Everyone reads at their own paces, and for me this will definitely be a stretch!)

Wish me luck! I'll be sure to blog about my progress!
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 12, 2011 9:47 pm

http://blashionista.com/2011/03/12/fashionista-movie-alert-jane-eyre-romance-intrigue-fashion-in-the-1800s/

Fashionista Movie Alert: Jane Eyre -Romance, Intrigue & Fashion in the 1800s
Written by admin on 12 March 2011

Jane Eyre is a phenomenal book even it fit takes a lot of patience to read. It will be interesting to see how director Cary Fukunaga will summarize this classic tale on film. Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender star in this deep romantic drama that will have fashion lovers drooling over the beautiful dresses of the 19th century. Full skirts with corset like bodices with bare shoulders and low necklines are so regal. Women wore these dramatic dresses everyday, while we reserve these dresses for special occasions. We found some dresses that you can wear this spring that are inspired by the dresses designed in the 1800s.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 12, 2011 10:29 pm

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/03/12/the-fading-masterpiece-theatre-movie/

Mar 12 2011 01:49 PM ET

'Jane Eyre' and the decline and fade of the 'Masterpiece Theatre' movie
by Owen Gleiberman

This weekend, the stormy, deluxe new version of Jane Eyre opens, and in just about every way the rituals that have long attended the mounting and marketing of a lofty romantic period piece have been duly observed. The film’s star, Mia Wasikowska, is a ravishing and talented up-and-coming classy It Girl of the moment — just as Gwyneth Paltrow was 15 years ago when she first set hearts aflutter in Emma (1996), and Helena Bonham Carter a quarter of a century ago when her stately carriage and wistful dark eyebrows anchored in A Room with a View (1985). Audiences, I have no doubt, will line up to see the movie, at least for a few weeks. And though I personally didn’t think Jane Eyre was all that, many critics have disagreed with me, like A.O. Scott of The New York Times, who gave it the kind of reverently thoughtful sendoff that distributors crave. For a long time, movies like Jane Eyre have occupied an essential niche in our moviegoing culture, and in this case the niche appears, once again, to have been filled.

Yet I don’t think I’m being churlish if I say that when it comes to these films, and you can call them what you will — literary chick flicks, Masterpiece Theatre movies — the bloom is off the rose, and has been for a while. I mean, name the last one you loved. To me, the last really terrific one was Pride & Prejudice, the sumptuous and playful Keira Knightley version that came out in 2005. That’s a long time ago, and since then, Joe Wright, the director of that film, made the overblown postmodern bodice ripper Atonement (2007), and we had a version of Brideshead Revisited (2008) that I thought was perfectly okay but that didn’t exactly set the world on fire, plus the Noel Coward-on-Adderall comedy Easy Virtue (2008). That’s not a complete list — I’m surely forgetting a few — but I don’t think that would be the case if these movies hadn’t become so…forgettable.

It wasn’t always so. But then, it’s worth remembering that these films weren’t always so vital and celebrated either. Back in the early ’80s, when I was starting out as a critic, you felt like you were drawing the short straw whenever you had to review a Merchant Ivory film. Too often, they were stodgy and half-baked, and they just about reeked of “prestige,” with overly arch performances and dialogue that could make your teeth hurt. James Ivory, as a director, still hadn’t quite figured out what he was doing, and so the films, in their very quasi-ineptitude, seemed to be flaunting their literary pedigrees to an unseemly degree, like the art-house version of a designer label. I confess that my casual disdain for such Merchant Ivory films as The Europeans (Henry James!) and Quartet (Jean Rhys!) was influenced by a remark Pauline Kael dropped into her review of The Warriors (1979), when she said that the counterculture kids started out as the film generation, but “now, they’re the Masterpiece Theatre generation.” At the time, that was a real insult. It was saying that for certain people, “art” had become a fancy word for “class.” A lot of us became movie buffs to get away from that sort of thing.

But then something happened: The Merchant Ivory team pulled itself together and made A Room with a View, an enchanting and much, much more finely woven drama of civilized feminine desire — and with that movie, a lace-doily revolution was launched. A form, and an audience, found each other, and it was love at first blushing gaze. A Room with a View was more than a hit — it was the elegant crystallization of a certain highbrow populist dream. I’m not just saying, however, that these movies, around that time, got better. They got better for a reason, which is that the purpose they were about to serve had become, spiritually and culturally, much more vast.

In the ’80s, Hollywood began to turn itself into a born-again high-concept playground for arrested adults, and the films that came out of it grew shoddier and shoddier, overrun with special effects and knockabout gross-out comedy. During this period, the virtues of a Merchant Ivory movie — shapely and rounded storytelling, a classical sense of understatement — began to seem far more redemptive. They were no longer the short straw. They were an honest relief from all the noise and clutter.

But these movies, for a time, sustained and fulfilled a mythological romantic promise as well. It’s no coincidence that their rise in the culture roughly paralleled the return of the romantic comedy. That form came back thanks, almost singlehandedly, to Nora Ephron, who kicked off its resurgence in 1989, with her script for When Harry Met Sally. And though the two genres — refined, teacup-rattling, ultra-WASPy literary adaptation; vulgar, wisecracking, love-on-rye screwball comedy — couldn’t on the surface have been more different, both expressed the desire of moviegoers, especially women, for a newly chivalrous ideal of manhood, and for a new set of tough-love rules for womenhood, in the wake of how hyper-sexual and degraded our instant-hookup, beer-bong “relationship” culture had become. The longing for a vision of love that was, in a word, old-fashioned wasn’t just nostalgia. It was downright primal — an essential corrective, and a rebirth as well. Suddenly, there were a lot of Bridget Joneses out there looking for their Darcys.

The Masterpiece Theatre movie, by which I mean films made in that style, not the actual PBS series (though that continues to thrive), became a genre unto itself. And it had a great run, buoyed by the presence of actors like Hugh Grant and Kate Winslet and Colin Firth — the 1995 six-part British television adaptation of Pride and Prejudice made Firth, as Darcy, the Tyrone Power of the genre — and, of course, Emma Thompson, who in the ’90s became a kind of poster girl for the radiant and funny sanity of these films. You only have to think back to Ang Lee’s Sense and Sensibility (1995) or the Merchant Ivory The Remains of the Day (1993) or Iain Softley’s ravishing adaptation of The Wings of the Dove (1997), starring Helena Bonham Carter in her richest and finest performance, or the grandly cutting upstairs-downstairs comedy of Gosford Park (2001) to realize how deftly these films had insinuated themselves into the universe of mainstream movies.

There were limits, though. Jane Austen, Henry James: To be adapted, these authors needed, in certain ways, to be simplified. There was, quite simply, no way to fit all the nuances onto the screen. That’s why, to me, no one has ever truly successfully adapted the creator of drawing-room psychodramas who I believe to be the greatest American novelist: Edith Wharton. No, not even Scorsese. The Age of Innocence was too fetishistic in its stateliness — it had gorgeous moments, but the interior chambers of Wharton’s characters are too vast, echoing with too many emotional crosscurrents. That’s why they resist adaptation. When filmmakers like Terence Davies and Jane Campion made their agonizingly ambitious art-film versions of Wharton and James (The House of Mirth, in 2000, and The Portrait of a Lady, in 1996), you could feel this genre begin to get stretched to the breaking point. It couldn’t accommodate what the filmmakers were trying to do, which was literally to put the novels, in their entirety (and with an added-value myopic leftist-feminist slant), onto the screen.

Yet now we face a moment when James, Wharton, and Austen, as sources, have been more or less squeezed dry. And what’s left, really? Another version of Wuthering Heights? Well, now we’ve got Jane Eyre, a movie by a different Brontë, featuring her (masochistic) variation on Heathcliff, but somehow I don’t suspect that Michael Fassbender’s unsmoldering, gentlemanly Mr. Rochester is going to take up residence in a lot of moviegoers’ dreams. That’s a male critic’s subjective assessment, of course. Far be it from me to say that Fassbender in mutton-chop sideburns isn’t the new Colin Firth, or that Mia Wasikowska’s not-so-plain Jane won’t make you swoon in empathy. But the trouble with a genre when it’s been around for this long is that its beloved tropes start to look like tics. We don’t just enjoy them, we expect them. And so it’s harder for them to delight us in the way they once did, and harder for a certain myth of idealized romantic suitor to feel as if he’s triumphantly undercutting the cruder, Jersey Shore frat-house spirit off our time. He has, instead, just become part of the wallpaper. The Masterpiece Theatre movie isn’t dead — it will probably be around for quite a while — but every time I see a new one, it’s starting to look more and more like a room with a very familiar view.

So do you agree with me? Have these movies lost their luster? If not, name a recent one that you adored. And what’s your all-time favorite Masterpiece Theatre movie?
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:21 pm

http://www.ismellsmut.com/2011/03/10/jane-eyre/

Jane Eyre

March 10th, 2011TanyaRandom Scent

I’ve never read Jane Eyre so I don’t know what all the hype is about, but there is a new version of Jane Eyre coming out next week with Mia Wasikowska as Jane Eyre and Michael Fassbender as Mr. Rochester and it’s been getting a lot of love from the media. It’s said to be a much darker interpretation of the book.

Because I don’t like to be left out of the hype I think I’ll add Jane Eyre next on my “to read” list.

Stacey: Who is this Michael Fassbender who seems to be everywhere all of a sudden?

(pic: Socialite Life)
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:50 pm

http://blogs.indiewire.com/carynjames/archives/2011/03/11/on_screen_this_weekend_dueling_storybook_heroines/

On Screen This Weekend: Dueling Storybook Heroines

You might think this weekend’s opening of Jane Eyre and Red Riding Hood would bring us heroines straight from the pages of Charlotte Bronte and the Brothers Grimm, but you’d only be half right.

Mia Wasikowska (above) is a true Bronte heroine and Michael Fassbender an outsized romantic hero in Cary Fukunaga’s beautiful new version of Jane Eyre, a film that deeply understands and conveys the passion that makes the novel so enduring. It’s my highest recommendation for the weekend. If you missed my review, you can find it here.

But don’t be lured by the pretty red cloak and wolfish plot of Catherine Hardwicke’s Red Riding Hood. She doesn’t reinvent the classic fairy tale; she turns it into a tedious echo of Twilight. Here’s my review. Want a second, third, etc. opinion? Rotten Tomatoes gives the film a dismal rotten splat.

Caryn James posted to Best on Screen at 9:00 am on March 11, 2011
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Sun Mar 13, 2011 5:25 pm

http://blogs.forbes.com/kiriblakeley/2011/03/13/jane-eyre-lustful-feminist/

Jane Eyre: Lustful Feminist
Mar. 13 2011 - 3:32 pm

By KIRI BLAKELEY

Since Jane Eyre was the book that made me want to become a professional writer, I desperately wanted to post something about the latest movie version, starring Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender, which opened on Friday. But I couldn’t think what to write. After all, what relevance does a heroine from 1847 have for women today?

After some thinking, here’s what I came up with. Warning: this post contains spoilers.

Jane Speaks Up

At the time the book came out, readers were shocked on several fronts. For one, Jane was essentially a radical feminist. She was an orphan with no family, no money, and no good looks (probably the first and last heroine repeatedly described by her author as unattractive). Yet, Jane had no problem telling off anyone she felt was treating her unfairly—whether it was the bullying scion of the family who took her in, the cruel headmaster of the school she was shunted off to, or even the guy she was madly in love with.

At the time, Jane Eyre’s habit of talking back to people was considered ungodly. Children were supposed to be seen, not heard. Women—especially poor ones—were expected to meekly accept their lot in life. A century before the women’s movement, Jane refused to do either.

Jane Was Sexually Liberated—Sort Of

The most scandalizing element of Jane Eyre was probably that the heroine lusted after her much older employer, the darkly mysterious Mr. Rochester. At the time, heroines of literature fell in love, but it was a dainty, practical sort of love designed to lead to marriage. There wasn’t really anything heart palpitating or lustful about it. Though Jane Eyre goes through the entire book without saying anything such as, “I wanted to rip off Mr. Rochester’s clothes,” you can feel it. You know damn well that’s what she wants to do. Her lust permeates every page.

She also later rejects another, much more appropriate suitor—a clergyman—because, well, she’s not sexually attracted to him. She’s also beyond her years and experience when it comes to sexual matters—Rochester, for instance, has an illegitimate child. When he tells Jane this, she basically shrugs.

Jane Eyre was published 26 years before Anna Karenina and nine years before Madame Bovary, the other two major books with heroines who cast off social convention in favor of passion. But both of those women paid for their behavior in the end by offing themselves. Not so Jane Eyre, who ends up married, rich and happy. Then again, Eyre manages—just barely—to keep her panties on.

Jane Wants Him To Put A Ring On It

Rochester, who has a crazy wife stashed in his attic, can’t legally marry Jane, so he suggests (begs, really) that she become his mistress. Jane turns him down flat—and then takes off so she won’t be tempted to sleep with anyway.

While on the surface her reasoning is that she’s a good Christian girl who would never engage in such slutty behavior, Jane also seems to have a keen understanding of the fact that if she takes Rochester up on his offer, she loses all power. She’ll become a complete dependent of Mr. Rochester, forever reliant on his whim. Like Anna Karenina after her, she would spend every minute worrying about the day that—god forbid—he might change his mind and cast her off. Then she’d be in real trouble, with nowhere to go, no way of making a living, and ruined for any subsequent marriage. That’s the way it was back then, ladies.

Jane’s The Boss

From the beginning of their intense and somewhat sadomasochistic courtship, Jane calls the shots. At one point in the story, Rochester brings home another woman, one who is rich, blonde and pretty, and flirts with her in front of Jane, just to get a rise out of her. Jane is so angry that she tells him off with the famous exclamation, “Do you think that because I am poor, obscure, plain and little, that I am soulless and heartless?” Chastened, Rochester breaks down and asks her to marry him.

At the end of the book, Rochester, caught in a fire, is blinded and crippled. He must now forever rely on Jane to take care of him. That suits her just fine—she probably figures it will keep him out of trouble.

Kiri Blakeley’s book, Can’t Think Straight: A Memoir of Mixed-Up Love, is on sale now. She likes to think the book is similar to Jane Eyre, if Jane had lived in Brooklyn and had a gay fiance. Visit her (Kiri, not Jane) at kiriblakeley.com.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Sun Mar 13, 2011 6:05 pm

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

Sunday, March 13, 2011
New Jane Eyre
Just when I think we have the utmost performance of Jane Eyre, a new movie version is being released this year. BBC films are introducing Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender in the lead roles. I do hope they put the two hours allotted for the story to good use. We have a good chance of it since it is BBC. Let’s be honest Hollywood CANNOT do the classics as well as the Brits.

The first thing they do is dummy down the language into modern lingo. Guess they don’t believe Americans have the intelligence to understand nineteenth century English. Or the American (plus Kiera Knightly) actors they choose aren’t good enough to speak it. Ack.

I IMDB’d Ruth Wilson and find that she has been doing some good screen work. Hopefully she will break the bad habit of Jane Eyres not going on to film popularity. Also I received comments that the new Jane Eyre is a fine one. I’m so excited that I can hardly wait to see it.

Here is more info from IMDB of Jane Eyres made:
Jane Eyre (1910/I) Jane Eyre (1914/II) The Castle of Thornfield (1915) Woman and Wife (1918)
Jane Eyre (1921) Jane Eyre (1934) Jane Eyre (1943) Sangdil (1952) "Jane Eyre" (1955)
"Jane Eyre" (1956) Jane Eyre (1961) (TV) "Jane Eyre" (1963) Jane Eyre (1968)
Jane Eyre (1970) (TV) "Jane Eyre" (1973) "Jane Eyre" (1983) Jane Eyre (1996)
Jane Eyre (1997) (TV) "Jane Eyre" (2006)
Posted by Arlene S. Bice blog at 6:05 AM
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Sun Mar 13, 2011 10:19 pm

http://www.jetsettersblog.com/blog/2011/03/13/wayfarers-includes-jane-eyre-movie-locations-in-2011-u-k-walk/

Wayfarers Includes Jane Eyre Movie Locations in 2011 U.K. Walk
March 13, 2011 on 5:25 pm | In London, Outdoors, Scotland, United Kingdom, Wales |

The Wayfarers created a seven-day walk through the wild heather-filled moors, towns and villages that inspired the Brontë sisters to create “Wuthering Heights” and “Jane Eyre,” which is featured in a new film version directed by director Cary Fukunaga, to be released this month. In its exclusive Brontë Trail walk, The Wayfarers brings literature fans up close with landmarks well-known from “Jane Eyre.” Walkers pass by North Lees Hall in Peak National Park, the private manor that inspired Charlotte Bronte to create “Jane Eyre” and which was used in various film adaptations as Thornfield Hall, where Jane works as governess for Mr. Rochester.

The private guided tour of Haddon Hall will take on new meaning to movie fans this year, as the 12th century medieval manor house is cast as Thornfield Hall on-screen in Focus Features’ “Jane Eyre,” which opens in New York and Los Angeles on March 11 and in additional cities throughout March. The movie stars Mia Wasikowska as Jane, Michael Fassbender as Mr. Rochester, Jamie Bell, Golden Globe Award-winner Sally Hawkins, Holliday Grainger, Tamzin Merchant, Imogen Poots, and Academy Award-winner Judi Dench. Throughout the week-long program, walkers will discuss the novel and film with experts and also get the inside scoop on anecdotes from the filming of the new movie. The walk is scheduled for June 19 to 25 and Aug. 21 to 27 and is priced at $3,595 per person.

The Jane Austen walk, following Hampshire routes familiar to author Jane Austen, is offered June 26 to July 2 and Oct. 2 to 8, and is priced at $3,695 per person. Like the Brontë Trail walk¸ this walk includes day and evening accompaniment by literary experts who explain Austen’s involvement with her surroundings, in addition to a music recital one evening and another evening’s “Dressing Jane Austen” presentation with actors who sport Regency period costumes. The third literary walk, Wales’ Pembrokeshire Coast, meanders along coastal pathways through areas that inspired much Welsh literature, and includes an enlightening evening with Welsh Poet Laureate Gillian Clarke. This walk is offered Sept. 24 to Oct. 1 and is priced at $3,795.

To be fully immersed in local culture and customs, The Wayfarers’ chooses accommodations in rustic inns and manor houses and meals in traditional pubs and restaurant. Favoring small group sizes, most Wayfarers’ walks average eight to 10 participants. Packages include all accommodations, meals and trail snacks, wine with dinner, entrance fees, guides, van transport for moving luggage and resting walkers, and all taxes and gratuities at hotels and restaurants.

Named by National Geographic Traveler as purveyor of one of the “50 Tours of a Lifetime,” The Wayfarers offers an eco-sensitive walking holiday of both culture and fitness in 15 countries, with 39 itineraries and 76 departure dates. Now in its 28th year, The Wayfarers offers exclusive entrées into homes and gardens otherwise closed to the public, graceful accommodations, outstanding cuisine, and meetings with local residents. Walks are from 6 to 13 days and are rated on a five-level challenge scale. A new iPad and iTouch app containing walk info, video and news is available free at iTunes. The Wayfarers is a member of Trusted Adventures, dedicated to the highest standards of small-group travel and to giving back to the areas visited. For more information, call 800-249-4620 or visit www.thewayfarers.com.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Tue Mar 15, 2011 2:05 am

http://whinesisters.com/2011/03/14/something-in-the-eyre/

Something in the Eyre

by Sherri Browning Erwin on March 14, 2011

In case you hadn’t heard, there’s a new Jane Eyre movie out drawing rave reviews. Starring Mia Wasikowska (Alice in Wonderland) and Michael Fassbender, with the incomparable Judi Dench as Mrs. Fairfax.

Mia, at the Jane Eyre premiere.

Michael Fassbender, not looking very Rochesterly.

What’s very flattering is that I’ve been getting letters from readers asking why they didn’t make Jane Slayre instead. My readers are fantastic. They’re righteously indignant on my behalf. But I’m more realistic. Jane Eyre! It’s a classic! I always love a new adaptation. Can’t wait to see it. In the meantime, I benefit from the extra attention.

Focus Features Film, makers of Jane Eyre, have done a slideshow of Eyre adaptations on their website, including Jane Slayre (too cool!). And over the weekend, I was invited to read from Jane Slayre at a Brooklyn event celebrating the film’s release, A Celebration of Eyresses (from the Eyress e-zine). I had a chance to mix it up with a new crowd. Not romance readers, oh no. I walked in and realized… I was not hip enough for the room. By far. There were guys in skinny jeans. With pointy shoes. If I managed to be hip enough (I wore black, big plus), I was certainly not young enough. But they welcomed me with open arms, and we had a good time. Of course! We had common ground in our love of Jane Eyre.

I was already in NY, and it was my husband’s birthday, so we checked into a Manhattan hotel for the rest of the weekend. The Muse on 46th, between 6th and 7th. Amazing. If you’re looking for a romantic getaway, this is one to consider. Plus, there’s a really cool wine bar in the lobby. You know it’s cool when you finally give in to the cabernet and have to hit the lobby bathroom. Not the usual His and Hers set-up there. There are six to choose from, and you’re suddenly torn and confused– which to choose?

Envy, Rebel, Macho, Passion, Glam, and Vain. All of them were single user, decorated to their own unique theme. Passion, for example, was all red with dim lighting. Glam, gold with a fleur-de-lis mirror. Rebel? The mirror was fragments on the wall. I happened to walk by two teen girls trying to decide and one explained to the other, who was clearly not as quick on the uptake, “They represent the seven deadly sins, duh.” I did not correct her by observing that there were only six. And Macho, as a deadly sin? Who knew? But I could get on board with that.

Also, even though I was fortunate to be away from it all and having a wonderful time, I couldn’t help thinking about the people of Japan. Unbelievable quake, and aftershocks still hitting. So worried for them. If you want to help, check into donating to the Red Cross.

I forgot to mention that I’m excited to try my first Skype chat tonight. With a whole class of students at Seton Hill University. Professor Emily Wierszewski included Jane Slayre as required reading for her Advanced Lit English class, and I will be on hand for a class Q & A, via Skype. Too cool!

What would you add to or remove from the list of deadly sins? Have you ever showed up at an event and realized you were all wrong for the crowd? What’s your ideal weekend away? Are you a Jane Eyre fan, planning to see the new movie?
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Wed Mar 16, 2011 10:01 pm

http://louisa-edwards.blogspot.com/2011/03/book-into-movie.html

Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Book into Movie

I'm getting really excited for the new movie version of Jane Eyre! That's one of my favorite books of all time, and I've never been entirely satisfied with any movie based on it, so my hopes are high. Michael Fassbender seems like a great choice for Rocherster--dark, dangerous, handsome, a little cruel. I know less about Mia Wasikowska (didn't see Alice) but the reviews so far make it sound like she's perfect for Jane.

Movie adaptations of beloved books are very tricky--we, as readers, form such close attachments to our own ideas of the characters that if the movie doesn't conform to the original, it can be very jarring. I don't personally feel that a movie has to be word for word, to-the-letter faithful in order to be a good adaptation. In fact, sometimes that's a detriment, because what makes a great book isn't the same as what makes a satisfying movie experience. So long as the movie catches the spirit of the book and transports me to the same emotional place, I'm happy!

So what's your favorite movie adaptation of a book?

Posted by Louisa Edwards at 1:23 PM
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Wed Mar 16, 2011 10:04 pm

http://balletbookworm.blogspot.com/2011/03/jane-eyre-costume-dramas-and-romans.html

16 March 2011
Jane Eyre, costume dramas and Romans
While I wait impatiently for the new Jane Eyre adaptation to make an appearance in Iowa (I've been stalking the Focus Features website for updated listings - as it currently stands I'll have to drive 100+ miles on April 8 to get to the nearest screen), the Blu-ray player and Netflix Instant are getting a workout (costume dramas are my favorite). In-between re-watching the 2006 Jane Eyre and You've Got Mail I recently saw:

Jane Eyre: The 1943 adaptation with Joan Fontaine and Orson Welles. I haven't seen this in years so I was pleased to see it pop up on the Instant offerings considering I was salivating over a new adaptation. I'd forgotten Elizabeth Taylor makes an appearance as Helen Burns and Agnes Moorhead (aahhh! Endora!) is Mrs. Reed. Novel-butchering aside, Joan Fontaine is quite good as Jane Eyre but Orson Welles as always bothered me as Rochester. It's like he's not "English" enough, if you get what I mean. There's a bit too much swagger and not enough "toff" in his accent.

The Crown Prince: 2006 Austrian mini-series about Crown Prince Rudolf of Austria and the utter mess his life turned into. Surprisingly, this is shot in English, not German and dubbed in English as I had expected, with a European cast (Klaus Maria Brandauer is Emperor Franz-Joseph and it suits him well). I have a thing for the history of European royal families and the Hapsburgs are a particularly interesting set. This was a very good mini-series, well worth watching, with great location shots (I've been to Schonbrunn), fantastic costumes, and good acting. Rather than rely on the possibility of mental instability being inherent to Rudolf's character, the film builds on Rudolph's frustration as being balked at every opportunity and his subsequent descent into drug use and illness.

A Midsummer Night's Sex Comedy: Woody Allen and Shakespeare. Good combo or bad combo? I'm leaning toward "meh" combo. It's got funny lines and neurotic characters but I just wasn't that interested in the movie. Woody Allen might have made the fantastic Annie Hall but all his movies seem to have similar scripts and jokes.

The Young Victoria: I had wanted to watch this in the theatre last year but it only made an appearance the weekend I was out of town (you got it, one weekend). So I had to wait until the DVD came out and then it was so far down the Netflix queue that I was able to watch it on Instant (Starz play, or something like that). I really like this movie - good cinematography, good casting, great costumes (although I do think I saw at least one zipper on the back of a dress). Emily Blunt is wonderful and Rupert Friend (who I didn't like much as Wickham in Pride and Prejudice) does a very good job bringing Victoria's "plus one" to life. Loved Jim Broadbent and Harriet Walter as King William IV and Queen Adelaide. I would have given this five stars in my Netflix review except for the very glaring historical error about Albert getting shot while protecting Victoria from an assassin; he was never shot and if you're going for serious historical accuracy it's hard to ignore. So it got a four. But I think I might buy this one anyway, I liked the rest of it that much.

Bright Star: I was pretty irritated that this never came near Iowa last year. I love Keats's poetry and I really wanted to see what Jane Campion would do with the love story between Keats and Fanny Brawne (cut short by Keats dying of tuberculosis at the age of 25; he thought he was a failure as a poet...little did he know). This is a pretty movie, very vivid with all the colors of Fanny's dresses and bonnets and the outdoor shots of what is supposed to be the Hampstead Heath in London. I found it interesting that there wasn't much of an orchestral score - something I expect in a "romantic" movie - and what music there is are pieces from the time period. I thought Ben Wishaw was good as Keats but I wasn't entirely sold on Abbie Cornish as Fanny; she didn't do a bad job but I wasn't all that impressed either. The movie did drag somewhat in the middle but I didn't lose interest.

Centurion: Let me introduce you to my favorite new hottie-pants, Michael Fassbender. He has gorgeous eyes (Irish and German ancestry *melts*). He can kick some serious butt, as evidenced by this movie and his role as Stelios in 300 (which I found to be a distracting movie because of Gerard Butler and not in a good way). He is the new Magneto in the X-Men reboot and Carl Jung to Viggo Mortensen's Freud in A Dangerous Method, the Excalibur remake, and in the adaptation of At Swim-Two-Birds, a Flann O'Brien novel I've had in the TBR for a long while). I have Hunger at home in the Blu-ray...where was I? Oh, yeah, Centurion. It's pretty good, particularly if you like bloody hand-to-hand combat and Olga Kurylenko as a blood-lust crazed Pict. Not too much in the way of plot, but good for an evening's entertainment of drooling over watching Fassbender while I wait to see his Rochester.

Posted by Melissa at 1:20 PM
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Wed Mar 16, 2011 10:46 pm

http://sanskritibist.blogspot.com/2011/03/bragging-on.html

Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Bragging On…

Jane Eyre Movie Poster-2011

In my last blog I bragged a lot about how my, “I Hate Classics” slogan took a completely different turn. To continue the bragging I thought about introducing one of my favorite classics aside from LOTR (Lord of the Rings).

As usual almost most of my book adventures take place at the book fair and because I buy mostly all my books from my one and only favorite book fair store it starts out with Rupa Publications. The main reason for me buying this book was because it was quite cheap, Rs. 85 then the other shops who were selling it for at least a 100. In fact, Jane Eyre wasn’t even in my list of ‘books-to-buy’, I just happened to be at the classics section immensely happy about how cheap classics are. Which is my favorite aspect about classics, even if I end up despising them, they are just so cheap it doesn’t even matter (like the day I brought Wuthering Heights by Emily Brontë it cost me only Rs. 30 and it was almost new!) To continue about Jane Eyre -I liked the cover and didn’t even bother to read the back and bought it.

Jane Eyre:

Jane Eyre written by Charlotte Brontë
in 1847 is one of the most renowned
classic of all times.
Jane Eyre is an orphan raised by an aunt who believes her social status to be far beneath her own and her family. Being a nine year old, she has a nature to rebel and has a free spirit making her poles apart from the other people in the 18th century. Amongst her cousins, her alien personality regularly gets her into fights with her eldest cousin who punishes her for touching his future inheritance. She is sent to a charity school called Lowood by Aunt Reed who can no longer support her foreign nature. After residing in the school for eight years, when she reaches adulthood she leaves to becomes a governess in Thornfield Hall. The master of Thornfield Hall, Mr. Edward Rochester, falls in love with her and asks her to marry him. Jane soon realizes that she has made the biggest mistake of her life by saying 'yes' soon the marriage is cancelled at the last minute, and Jane flees from Thornfield alone without a single penny. In her new life she has a new economic and social position, but eventually makes her way back to Rochester, a man now having no economic stability all because his insane secret wife, who was the reason of Jane and Edward's broken marriage.

My Opinion:

Classics are known to get on your nerves. For most human beings they are defined to be long, tedious and exceptionally descriptive. That can be one reason why you should read Jane Eyre because it eludes all these characteristics of a so called classic. No words can be great enough to describe it, perfectly. Its that kind of a book which is adored by everyone be it a little eleven year old girl to a fifty year old man. There is something magical about Charlotte Brontë’s style of writing that pulls you in and captures your imagination. If the protagonist is a female and the reader is a male, believe it or not the male reader will dissolve into the character of Jane. All of you who can’t read sad love stories, that is only a small aspect of Jane Eyre's story, in truth its a touching novel about the self discovery of a independent women living in the 18th century. Its through her words you will see the trauma of that era, the fear of God and the power of love. (By the way to all of you. ‘I-cant-read-sad-stories’ the ending is happy anyway.)

Additional Information:

The movie “Jane Eyre” has just released on 11 March 2011 (the date is not valid in India). It stars, Mia Wasikowska (actress know for her performance in "Alice in Wonderland") as Jane Eyre and Michael Fassbender (actor known for his performance in "Inglourious Basterds") as Mr, Edward Rochester. I am really exited to watch the movie but as my saying goes, to enjoy the book read it before watching the movie.

Movie trailer:

Posted by Sanskriti Bist at 1:42 AM
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Wed Mar 16, 2011 10:53 pm

http://cinephiliaandsass.blogspot.com/2011/03/eyre-athon-rochester-hot-o-meter.html

Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Eyre-athon: Rochester Hot-o-meter
So let's judge some men on their attractiveness, yes? WRONG! It's time to judge them as 'Rochesters'. Rochester is noted for not being all that handsome but having an allure nonetheless. He is supposed to be brutish and in his 30s. He should have a darker look to him--brown hair, dark eyes--but not as exotic looking as sister Emily's Heathcliff. Let the judging begin!

1934 Version: Colin Clive's Rochester with his Jane (Virginia Bruce)
Score: 8/10 (Above-Average Rochester)
Wow, Dr. Frankenstein! What a good Rochester you make! He isn't traditionally handsome but there is something attractive about him, I must say. And he's a larger man (I'm not calling him a fatty, by the way) which I always imagined Rochester would be. Yay 1934 version for getting it nearly right! There is something a bit 'pretty' about him, yes? Which is a big no-no for Rochester. He ain't a pretty-boy.

1943's Orson Welles as Rochester with J-Fontaine

Score: 6/10 (Surprisingly Hot But Still Mis-matched Rochester)

You may be thinking 'but Matt! Welles actually looks kind of HOT in that picture!' and in that case I certainly agree. But that picture is not all that indicative of how attractive he is in the film. He looks gussied up for that promotional photo. More importantly is the fact that he just isn't Rochester, and that falls more on his performance than his looks. He doesn't give Rochester any redeeming qualities, which made me almost forget that he actually looks sort of attractive in the film. Yes Rochester's looks are important (as this article is arguing) but that can all be thrown to s$#! if he isn't played well!

Timothy Dalton with that cancer Zelah Clarke
Score: 4/10 (Blerg Bond Rochester)
I want to believe in Timothy Dalton, I really do. But he is too suave and has too much of that James Bond swagger and charm to make a good Rochester. I'm still beasting through the mini-series and his performance is quite good, but looks-wise he is a very inappropriate Rochester. There's nothing questionable about his morals just by looking at him, and all of the other Rochesters have a mystery to them. They can also strike much fear into their Janes, and Dalton seems incapable of doing so.

William Hurt's Rochester and Gainsbourg's Jane Eyre at the interrupted wedding!
Score: 5/10 (Inadvertently Gentle Rochester)
I am so on the fence with this one, guys. I actually believe in him at moments (because his performance is pretty good), but I just look at his face and laugh. He would've been my last choice for a Rochester in terms of his looks for the simple fact that he looks harmless. Even when he is supposed to be scary and curt and moody he comes across as just a tad bit perturbed. If I were Charlotte Gainsbourg's Jane I would think him pathetic! He makes a good effort though so I have to give him points for that!

Ciaran Hind's Rochester with Sammy Morton's Jane
Score: 9/10 (Near-Perfect Rochesterness)
Oh Ciaran Hinds. You scare the bejesus out of me. There's something about him that is so creepy and malevolent but his Rochester exploits that when needed and otherwise covers it up with an allure that is unexplainable. The man is quite genius. I just wish he didn't look so old, because he looks like he's in his 40s, and Rochester shouldn't be quite as old. It adds a creepy underscore to the relationship that shouldn't be as obvious. Their love certainly starts out as a bit creepy since he is older in the novel (although the 19th century wouldn't have thought it all that creepy) but this version exploits that. I can see why he was cast though, as he makes quite a good Rochester. So kudos!

Toby Stephen's Rochester with Ruth Wilson's Jane
Score: 3/10 (The Austen Rochester)
Toby Stephen's Rochester is swoon-worthy. He obviously is well, built, he has a gorgeously handsome face, and beautiful blue eyes you could get lost in. And yet, that is not Rochester at all. This Rochester resembles much more of a hero in an Austen novel. Yes, he's flawed, but he's also soooo handsome and soooo dreamy and sooo in love with our protagonist, but just watch how something goes wrong and he has to win back her and her family's trust and then they get together and live happily ever after ZOMG. That is not the story of Jane Eyre. Sorry Toby Stephens, but I just can condone you.

Michael Fassbender's Rochester and Mia Wasikowska's Jane

Score: ?/10 (Potentially Perfect Rochester)

I haven't seen the new Jane Eyre yet because if I had I'd be writing it up non-stop here at Cinephilia & Sass, so I unfortunately can't judge his hotness in relation to his performance as Rochester. I will say that he seems as though he could be the perfect Rochester. He's handsome in a very masculine way, but not overly so. He has dark hair and eyes and seems like he'll be able to turn on the steely glances and backhanded remarks just as easily as the charm and seduction. He could surpass Hinds' Rochester purely because he doesn't look too much older than Mia's Jane. I have very high hopes that this could be a 10/10, but I've been let down before. (It must be said that I have never been let down by Mr. Fassbender, so let's hope that trend continues!)

If any of you lovers disagree with my opinions, please comment! I'd love to hear any conflicting opinions as my own are purely subjective to my movie-watching experiences!

Posted by Matthew at 9:46 PM
Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Wed Mar 16, 2011 11:15 pm

http://www.thesetonian.com/pirate-life/adapting-a-classic-romance-in-the-eyre-1.2109753

Adapting a classic: Romance in the Eyre
Newest film adaptation of popular Brontë novel captures essence of original work

By Emily Lake

Staff Writer

Published: Wednesday, March 16, 2011

Updated: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 22:03

Michael Fassbender and Mia Wasikowska star in the atmospheric new film, “Jane Eyre,” based on the novel by Charlotte Brontë.

It may seem impossible to capture the magnitude of a 624 page novel in a 115 minute long film, but director Cary Joji Fukunaga has certainly come close with her adaptation of "Jane Eyre."

Fukunaga is not the first to attempt to reincarnate the beauty and intrigue of Charlotte Brontë's "Jane Eyre." For the past 101 years, film and television directors alike have been entranced by the story and have strived to emulate the magnificence of Brontë's romance in a medium the author herself could scarcely have imagined.

There have been 22 adaptations of "Jane Eyre" dating as far back as 1910, most of which have missed the mark. Now, nearly a century later, it seems as though one director has finally come close to hitting that bull's eye.

So what exactly does it take to make a film like "Jane Eyre" a success? Is it complete orthodoxy to the text, a thoughtful interpretation or a combination of the two?

Karen Gevirtz, an English professor at Seton Hall, said that an adaptation of a story like "Jane Eyre" calls for deep exploration that goes beyond the words themselves.

"It requires really careful reading and thinking, reading and thinking that attends to what is in the text and not just to what we want the text to say for us as viewers, a culture, a film director, a screenplay adaptor or a movie studio," she said. "Reading in the expectation that something will speak in a certain way or on a certain subject usually gets us into trouble."

It would be impossible to create a film that includes each intricate detail that makes the novel "Jane Eyre" such a masterpiece, but Fukunaga seems to have paid the type of close attention to the text that Gevirtz recommends.

Part of what makes "Jane Eyre" such an intoxicating read is the way Brontë interweaves elements of gothic literature with those of a Victorian romance, and that is the great triumph of Fukunaga's film as well.

Brontë manages to mix the tragic and frightening parts of Jane Eyre's life with the beautiful and poetic. However, there are certain respects in which Fukunaga's version falls short.

One of the most rewarding parts of reading "Jane Eyre" is the way the autobiographical tone of Jane's narrative pulls you into the dramatic twists and turns in the life of this small, prudish governess. It is a deeply personal work of fiction that enables readers to feel Jane's passion for Mr. Rochester and fear as her spiteful aunt locks her in the foreboding "red room."

Without the eloquence of Jane's first person narrative, these sensations are often lost in the film. However, a legacy of 22 adaptations over the span of 101 years certainly demonstrates that there is a sort of magnetism about "Jane Eyre" that keeps pulling people back to it.

Gevirtz offers insight into what exactly it is that makes "Jane Eyre" resonate into the 21st century.

"Plenty of us struggle with the difference, sometimes seemingly insurmountable, between our aspirations and our situation, as Jane Eyre does," she said. "That moment when Rochester offers her not just love, but wealth and passion, in exchange for her integrity—I suspect a lot of people could recognize the conflict, whether they see it as Jane's or Rochester's or both: what am I willing to give up in order to get something I desperately want?"

The conflicts, challenges and triumphs in "Jane Eyre" have a sort of universality that holds true to this day. Despite the differences in clothing, culture and circumstance, there is an essential human element behind the experience of fear, love and jealousy so poignantly captured in both the original novel and Fukunaga's latest film version. This continues to move audiences and bind them to Jane's story.

Emily Lake can be reached at emily.lake@student.shu.edu.
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Thu Mar 17, 2011 7:59 pm

http://raindropteablog.blogspot.com/2011/03/night-with-jane-eyre.html

3.17.2011
A Night with Jane Eyre

For her honors project, one of my freshmen read and submitted an essay to Multnomah County Library sponsored contest for the Focus Features 2011 adaptation of Jane Eyre. She read the novel, wrote a draft, revised, submitted, and was selected as one of the winners. As a result, she and four guests were invited to attend "An Evening with Jane Eyre," and she chose a 9th grade friend, her mother, her brother, and me to accompany her.

First, we went to the Heathman Hotel, where we supped on Stilton cheese, cucumber sandwiches, and other delicacies that Jane and Mr. Rochester might have enjoyed back in that era of wind-swept moors and gothic romances. Then the author Chelsea Cain read to us the opening of Charlotte Bronte's novel, and I was reminded of how much I've coveted having a window seat to hide away in and read ever since reading that particular passage of the book. The two freshmen girls and I all took home a brand new, free copy of the book, which was perfect, because I was sitting there thinking, "I am definitely going to want to re-read this (for the 3rd time!) after tonight." I had such a good time with these young minds, so excited and passionate, lovers of books and learning! Both girls agreed that the fact that they'd won a free copy of a book had made their entire night! Their entire week! I concurred!

And I do want to re-read it! Especially after the film. I've rarely seen such chemistry between two people on screen. There was so much tension in their unquenched desire; there were whole scenes during which I didn't move or breathe. Michael Fassbender and Mia Wasikowska were so well casted in these roles and the cinematography was so stunning; I want to wander on the dusky, wind-swept moors in a cape and return home to my brooding lover. Or, maybe just revisit my two favorite Bronte novels, Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights while curled up in a window seat.

Posted by Jessica at 3:48 PM
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Fri Mar 18, 2011 6:29 pm

http://mysticlibrarian.wordpress.com/2011/03/18/rochester-fail-a-new-adaptation-of-jane-eyre/

Rochester fail! A new adaptation of Jane Eyre
Filed under: Uncategorized by lonelywanderer
March 18, 2011

There have been many adaptations of Jane Eyre. Haven’t seen them all though. This new adaptation is directed by Cary Fukunaga. Starring Mia Wasikowska from “Alice in wonderland” and Michael Fassbender “Fish Tank” and “Inglorious basterds” and Madame Judi Dench. I’m a little skeptic to the movie cause I like Rochester very much. Rochester in my mind have a dark tormented soul and some charisma, very experienced in contrast to Jane. Jane is really plain and simple, innocent with a touch of mental scars. I like one scene where Rochester tries to get a kiss from Jane, but Jane seems to flee his attempts to woe her or just take advantage of the situation. You can call it Rochester fail! Hilarious!
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:43 pm

Something to do after you watch the film:

http://moviemoxie.blogspot.com/2011/03/book-to-film-club-march-2011-film-jane.html

Sunday, 20 March, 2011
Book to Film Club March 2011 Film: Jane Eyre

Jane Eyre, our February book and March film selection for the Book to Film Club came this weekend - at least it did here in Toronto, although I've heard from folks in other locations that it's not out yet. I hope it reaches everyone soon! The film version of this classic novel by Charlotte Brontë stars Mia Wasikowska (Alice in Wonderland (2010), The Kids Are All Right), Michael Fassbender (Fish Tank), Judi Dench and Jamie Bell (Billy Elliott), and is directed by Cary Fukunaga (Sin nombre).

Here are some things to ponder when thinking, writing and/or journaling about the film:

* Did you enjoy the film?
* Was the film what you expected from reading the book?
* Have you seen other film versions Jane Eyre? If so - how does this one compare?
* How did the book and the film compare?
* How did you feel about the tone of the film?
* How did you feel about the casting? Were the characters what you expected?
* Were there characters, moments or ideas you liked better in the book? If so, what were they?
* What was your favourite thing about the book?
* Were there characters, moments or ideas you liked better in the film? If so, what were they?
* What was your favourite thing about the film?
* Was there anything you understood more after seeing the film?
* Was there anything you felt was missing from the film?
* Did the film capture the spirit of the book?
* Who would you recommend the book to?
* Who would you recommend the film too?
* Are you happy you read the book before seeing the film?
* Would you recommend people read the book before seeing the film?
* What was the impact of reading the book before seeing the film?

If you don't have a site of your own, you can always start a blog or posterous site or share your thoughts and connect though Good Reads (feel free to friend me on Good Reads here).

Jane Eyre (2011) Film Reviews by Book to Film Clubbers:
Be the first!
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Tue Mar 22, 2011 12:15 am

http://www.metro.us/newyork/entertainment/article/808321--romance-in-the-time-of-eyre

Romance in the time of ‘Eyre’
LAURIE SPARHAM/FOCUS FEATURES

Michael Fassbender and Mia Wasikowska star in the latest adaptation of “Jane Eyre.”
NEW YORK
HEIDI PATALANO
Published: March 20, 2011 6:05 p.m.
Last modified: March 20, 2011 6:08 p.m.

Let’s face it: The world wasn’t exactly in dire need of another version of “Jane Eyre” — at least 11 other adaptations have been done for film and television. However, stars Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender make this update feel as if it is the purest interpretation of Charlotte Bronte’s classic novel. As a willful governess, Jane (Wasikowska) must squelch her feelings for her employer, Mr. Rochester (Fassbender) while also ignoring his strange advances in Cary Fukunaga’s new adaptation of the book.

Both Fassbender, 33, and Wasikowska, 21, respect the story of “Jane Eyre” — but neither finds the Victorian period too attractive a time to be looking for love.

“I’ve never been happier to be someone born in this time than I have when I put on the corset,” says Wasikowska. “Everything they say about them is true. There were moments on set where I was like, do I have the water or the muffin? Because I’m really thirsty and I’m kind of hungry, which one do I want? I’ve got this much space in my stomach.”

Courting, of course, was equally restrictive. And Michael Fassbender feels for the ladies.

“I mean, would you rather live back then when women weren’t supposed to say anything? They were supposed to just look pretty and be quiet,” he asks. “Victorian England, Jesus ... I wouldn’t want to live in those times.”
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Admin on Tue Mar 22, 2011 12:32 am

http://labuzamovies.blogspot.com/2011/03/jane-eyre-men-arent-only-thing-out-to_21.html

Monday, March 21, 2011
Jane Eyre: Men Aren't The Only Thing Out to Get This Poor Girl
Jane Eyre
Directed By: Cary Fukunaga
Written By: Moira Buffini (Based on the novel by Charlotte Bronte)
Starring: Mia Wasikowska, Michael Fassbender, Jamie Bell, Judi Dench, and Sally Hawkins
Director of Photography: Adriano Goldman, Editor: Melanie Oliver, Production Designer: Will Hughes-Jones, Original Music: Dario Marionelli
Rated: PG-13, for brief violence, and some other strange happenings

Recollections of the name Jane Eyre may conjur many things for different people. Perhaps some will think about their college or perhaps high school years reading the novel, with its quick wit and gorgeous prose by Charlotte Bronte. Others may picture the numerous film adaptations—either William Hurt as Mr. Rochester or perhaps Orson Welles, and actresses like Charlotte Gainsbourg or Joan Fontaine in the role of the titular character. Call it my naïveté or simply lack of serious intellectual pursuits, but I have never seen anything related to Ms. Bronte’s now famous novel. Jane Eyre has been a missing link on my education (oh what do they teach these days!), and thus I went into this latest version as an “Eyre-gin,” so to say.

So colored me surprised to not find another girl caught up in marriage pursuits, as is a favorite story of Ms. Bronte’s 19th century counterpart Jane Austin. Of course, that is the endgame in Jane Eyre, but through the eyes of Cary Fukunaga, Jane Eyre is darker than witty, more gruesome and haunting than charming and delightful. Sure it has its gorgeous moments, but its also creepy and effecting in its drab presentation and almost lifeless landscapes.



This is not unfamiliar territory for Mr. Fukunaga, whose last film was the realistic but audience pleaser Sin Nombre, which took place mostly atop trains heading from Latin America to the Texan border. Mr. Fukunaga, working with director of photographer Adriano Goldman, strips Jane Eyre of its life in hope of creating a more ordinary world, one stoked not in fancy parties, but in societal minutia.

For those who don’t know the story, the film begins with Jane as a young girl, orphaned by her parents and cast off by an unforgiving aunt. After a stay in a boarding school (much longer in the novel, I’m told), Jane (now played by Mia Wasikowska) works as a governess at a small estate in the middle of nowhere. She’s looked after by the estate’s servant head (Judi Dench), as well as the estate’s owner, Mr. Rochester, played by Michael Fassbender. Mr. Fassbender, best known for his role as a film critic turned spy in Inglorious Basterds, though perhaps more fascinating in the UK drama Fish Tank, plays Mr. Rocahester with a cunning wit, rarely seen in these type of period dramas. He sways between a more casual fascination with Jane to an almost obsessive fierceness, blurring the line between bad boy with a heart of gold and your run-of-a-mill pedophile.

Of course, Ms. Wasikowska holds her own to Mr. Fassbender’s cunning, and while the film is dark (literally too—many scenes gorgeously lit by only candles), Jane’s quick remarks toward Mr. Rochester prove to create some amazing chemistry for the two. The film zooms sideways like the novel toward some curious melodrama by the end, and the film’s ending seems rushed to fill the major plot points, but Mr. Fukunaga has blown fresh air into the British period piece, a sensibility more often seen in Japanese horror perhaps. With his gothic palette, Mr. Fukunaga is not afraid to let us see that Jane Eyre is darker than our childhood has imagined. In an early moment, Jane stares out not as a sunset, but as a lightning storm, gathering just ahead. Who knew that the magic of falling in love could capture both such magic and such fury?
Posted by Peter Labuza at 10:06 PM
Admin
Admin
Admin

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

Back to top Go down

Jane Eyre thoughts - Page 4 Empty Re: Jane Eyre thoughts

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

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

Back to top

- Similar topics

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