Each film adaptation of Charlotte Bronte's Jane Eyre has upsides and downsides. Each film attempted to capture the essence of the book as well as it possibly could. Each actor in each film tried their best to portray the personality of their character and get their motives across. Some of the actors were able to better portray their characters and get their points across.
Zefferelli's film starring Charlotte Gainsbourg and William Hurt was very accurate to the plot of the book. Charlotte Gainsbourg's portrayal of Jane was very accurate to the descriptions of her in the book. Her physical features matched those described in the book and she behaved like her. William Hurt is a very talented actor, but I thought he was a little older and not quite as attractive as I had pictured him. The scenery was lovely and despite a few minor plot changes, the story line was very faithful to the novel.
White's film, which starred Ruth Wilson and Toby Stephens, was fairly faithful to the plot of the novel. I liked the way this film went into more depth to show how she was excluded by her her Aunt and the rest of her family. I thought Ruth Wilson had potential, but ultimately, I don't believe she really captured Jane's essence. Toby Stephens made an excellent Rochester and the proposal scene from this movie was arguably the best of the three. However, some of the other scenes from White's film were fairly cheesy. For example, the Red room in this film was very cheesy, as it was just a red light shining on her face. They could have made some different decisions for setting in this adaptation, but it wasn't a bad movie.
Cary Fukunaga's film starring Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender had a gorgeous setting and very attractive actors. My main quarrel with this film was that I found the actors to be more attractive than I thought the characters should be. Michael Fassbender is a very attractive man and Mia Wasikowska is a beautiful woman. Not to mention, St. John looked like he could have been a male model. This may sound silly, but I did not like the fact that Jane was blonde in this version. I think that at this time fair hair was a sign of beauty and Jane was specifically supposed to be plain. However, I really enjoyed the interpretation of Bertha in this version.
Ultimately, I have to say that I think Zefferelli's film is probably the best in my opinion because of how accurate it is to the novel. However, it would have been even better if they had Charlotte Gainsbourg's Jane paired with Toby Stephens's Rochester in the setting from Fukunaga's film. Don't get me wrong, Michael Fassbender is a beautiful man, I just felt that he was perhaps a little too beautiful to play Mr. Rochester.
I remember you talking about Jane's blonde hair in class and I still think it's a super interesting point that would not usually be considered. I feel like I'd usually think it a minor detail that doesn't have too much leverage, but now I agree that the color is much more important that I originally thought. This and other points make it clear that you put a lot of thought and analysis into these movies. Good job!
ReplyDeleteI like how you discuss the castings of Jane and Rochester at length. Since they are the two main characters, their representation is critical to the portrayal of the entire story. You mention how closely the Zefferelli and White versions stay to the novel, but do not comment on Fukunaga's. A sentence about this would connect the three reviews. I really enjoyed reading this post!
ReplyDelete