Pages

Saturday, April 2, 2011

Review: Jane Eyre



I'm going to level with you: I love costume dramas. Now, I don't love them as a favorite genre; I consider them a way of life, an art form to study. Give me Austen, Dickens, any Bronte and a day to bask in the glory of the film, and I am the happiest girl in the world. I own versions from several different decades of all of my favorites, including both the 1943 and 2006 adaptations of Jane Eyre. I'm not going to brag or anything (since I haven't expressed my geekiness fully), but I consider myself an expert on heritage films. I took several classes in college on film adaptations, and it only fueled my passion.

You can imagine how incredibly geeked up I was to find out about this newest version of Charlotte Bronte's oeuvre. It didn't seem like it was ever going to come to my city, but a little internet sleuthing and a 30 minute drive is a small price to pay for such a glorious movie.

Yes, I used the word glorious. Because I LOVED this version. Had I not been on the other side of town with errands to run, I would have bought another ticket and stayed to absorb the beauty of this gem all over again. The scenery? The costumes? The acting? The dame herself, Judi? I can go on and on, ad nauseum. I was worried about a 2 hour version of JE since my favorite version that tells the whole story is a whopping 4 hours. Can a feature film contain a story that is normally produced in miniseries format? This one absolutely does.

Is the story condensed? Yes, of course. Are some complicated details smoothed over? Understandably. One notable exclusion is the face that St. John Rivers, Jane's pseudo rebound post broody Rochester, is Jane's cousin. Yes, first cousin. And, I understand why the filmmakers decided to omit that part; it's shocking to modern audiences and another complication in the last 15 minutes of the film. To be honest, I didn't really miss it.



Look at the chemistry in the picture above. Can you stand it? Michael Fassbender's tender interpretation of a normally steely Edward Rochester was refreshing and immensely satisfying. Mia Wasikowska was stoic as strong-willed Jane, a wonderfully feminist character in a decidedly unfeminist time. Mrs. Fairfax's role was amped up to give Judi Dench some room to showcase her considerable acting chops, and it was perfect. She was warm and maternal, yet she conveyed an array of emotions with just the shift of her eyebrow. An utterly fantastic performance that rounded out a strong cast.

At times a bit spooky (director Cary Fukunaga drew from the novel's gothic elements) and and many times romantic, this newest adaptation of Jane Eyre joins 27 other films, and, unlike some of the more forgettable versions, it will stand the test of time.

images via

No comments:

Post a Comment