This most recent adaptation of "Jane Eyre" is a visual masterpiece. The setting is carefully planned to represent characterisations and emotional states through nature or objects. Heavy rain underscores the turbulence within Jane as she runs from Thornfield. Fog mysteriously veils her first meeting with Mr Rochester, bright sunlight showcases the happiness of the couple during and after the proposal. Windows sometimes obstruct the view when Jane feels trapped. Darkness falls when she is confused or thinking. Colourful flowers and fluttering leaves frame her playful interactions with her fiancée. Yes, visually, there is next to nothing that could still be wished for.
One pivotal element of "Jane Eyre" is the mystery of Mr Rochester's past. There is a ghost at Thornfield Hall, the identity of which is crucial to further developments in the plot. Bertha Rochester, although never seen, must be felt at all times; her presence is the key to understanding Rochester's behaviour. This is one aspect where the adaptation fell woefully short. Adéle tells her new governess that a woman haunts the corridors at times, but no clues are given as to who she might be. Grace Poole, the infamous scapegoat Rochester uses in the novel to explain the terrifying events at Thornfield Hall, is not seen or even spoken of until the day of the wedding. All of this could be overlooked had the actual encounter with Bertha left more of an impact. There is a dream-like quality about that scene, aided by the sudden inclusion of echoes. I felt, however, that this decision softened the impact; meeting Mr Rochester's wife should have had a brutal effect on Jane and the watcher. It was underwhelming. They also forfeited the chance to depict Bertha setting Thornfield Hall on fire and instead had Mrs Fairfax tell Jane what had transpired. At the end of the film, we do not know who Bertha really is; her development should have aided that of Jane.
"Jane Eyre", the novel, is not a tragedy. In fact, it exudes strength, energy and a positive attitude in spite of unhappy times and circumstances. It was therefore discomfiting to see so much restraint and gloominess well after the first scene had played out. Everybody spoke in hushed voices, even the Rivers, as if they, too, had a Bertha lurking in their attic. In fact, there are only two instances where someone actually speaks in a loud voice: once at the wedding, once when St John tells Jane that they must marry. The actors are thus given little opportunity to act through their voices, e.g. by varying intonation. This is also a problem of the script. Rochester makes one joke to Adéle about her and her mother's charm; there could easily have been more instances of that. The ending, too, should have involved pronounced happiness; Mia Wasikowska's Jane shed tears where she should have been the woman in control. By the end of the novel, she has the strength to draw Mr Rochester out and alleviate his gloomy state. Here, she is toned down too much and thus misrepresented.
Another aspect that might have been handled better concerns the characters. The Reeds, Helen Burns, Bertha and Grace Poole are gone almost as soon as they are introduced. Adéle is disturbingly quiet; Mrs Fairfax is much too clever. Of the Rivers family, only St John is fleshed out to some degree; Miss Oliver was left out completely, however. St John merely relates to Jane that his struggles in the past are similar to hers. This is an unfortunate statement, as it creates the impression that he once truly loved and had his heart broken due to regrettable circumstances. A wholly different light could have been shed on him easily had his sisters been given a line or two. As it is, Jane observes that her concept of love differs from St John's, yet it is not shown how she arrived at that conclusion.
Blanche Ingram is underplayed to a point where she becomes unbelievable as a threat to Jane's happiness. In the novel, she is a foil to Jane, possessing the status and the cruel traits Jane lacks. The audience of this film is shown little more than her beautiful profile; Jane's neck fills so much of the screen that Miss Ingram gets little chance to shine. Gone is Mr Rochester's careful scheming. He openly acts in a confused manner when Jane speaks of Blanche as his love interest.
The film succeeded, on the other hand, in the depiction of a believable love story between its leads. Fassbender and Wasikowska have chemistry; especially the post-wedding scenes show how much better they could have been throughout the film had the blandness in the script not harmed them. Jane taking off her wedding dress in tears is one of the most moving scenes. It is followed by Rochester lying on the floor in a rather funny posture; there, his anxiety and his concern for her translate extremely well. It is a pity that they had so few of these opportunities; at times, I found myself wondering whether they understood their characters fully. My misgivings about the proposal scene were happily only confirmed to some extent. I would have liked to see more of an emotional outburst on Wasikowska's side, but she did handle it fairly well.
To conclude, it was certainly not the worst adaptation ever, in spite of its shortcomings. It must be stated, however, that it is a far cry from what it could have been. The limited running time does not explain everything that went wrong; I had to push my knowledge of the novel to the back of my mind, because I did not feel it was translated accurately to the big screen. As a standalone piece, it is marvellous. I will be happy to give it another chance when it comes out on DVD.
One pivotal element of "Jane Eyre" is the mystery of Mr Rochester's past. There is a ghost at Thornfield Hall, the identity of which is crucial to further developments in the plot. Bertha Rochester, although never seen, must be felt at all times; her presence is the key to understanding Rochester's behaviour. This is one aspect where the adaptation fell woefully short. Adéle tells her new governess that a woman haunts the corridors at times, but no clues are given as to who she might be. Grace Poole, the infamous scapegoat Rochester uses in the novel to explain the terrifying events at Thornfield Hall, is not seen or even spoken of until the day of the wedding. All of this could be overlooked had the actual encounter with Bertha left more of an impact. There is a dream-like quality about that scene, aided by the sudden inclusion of echoes. I felt, however, that this decision softened the impact; meeting Mr Rochester's wife should have had a brutal effect on Jane and the watcher. It was underwhelming. They also forfeited the chance to depict Bertha setting Thornfield Hall on fire and instead had Mrs Fairfax tell Jane what had transpired. At the end of the film, we do not know who Bertha really is; her development should have aided that of Jane.
"Jane Eyre", the novel, is not a tragedy. In fact, it exudes strength, energy and a positive attitude in spite of unhappy times and circumstances. It was therefore discomfiting to see so much restraint and gloominess well after the first scene had played out. Everybody spoke in hushed voices, even the Rivers, as if they, too, had a Bertha lurking in their attic. In fact, there are only two instances where someone actually speaks in a loud voice: once at the wedding, once when St John tells Jane that they must marry. The actors are thus given little opportunity to act through their voices, e.g. by varying intonation. This is also a problem of the script. Rochester makes one joke to Adéle about her and her mother's charm; there could easily have been more instances of that. The ending, too, should have involved pronounced happiness; Mia Wasikowska's Jane shed tears where she should have been the woman in control. By the end of the novel, she has the strength to draw Mr Rochester out and alleviate his gloomy state. Here, she is toned down too much and thus misrepresented.
Another aspect that might have been handled better concerns the characters. The Reeds, Helen Burns, Bertha and Grace Poole are gone almost as soon as they are introduced. Adéle is disturbingly quiet; Mrs Fairfax is much too clever. Of the Rivers family, only St John is fleshed out to some degree; Miss Oliver was left out completely, however. St John merely relates to Jane that his struggles in the past are similar to hers. This is an unfortunate statement, as it creates the impression that he once truly loved and had his heart broken due to regrettable circumstances. A wholly different light could have been shed on him easily had his sisters been given a line or two. As it is, Jane observes that her concept of love differs from St John's, yet it is not shown how she arrived at that conclusion.
Blanche Ingram is underplayed to a point where she becomes unbelievable as a threat to Jane's happiness. In the novel, she is a foil to Jane, possessing the status and the cruel traits Jane lacks. The audience of this film is shown little more than her beautiful profile; Jane's neck fills so much of the screen that Miss Ingram gets little chance to shine. Gone is Mr Rochester's careful scheming. He openly acts in a confused manner when Jane speaks of Blanche as his love interest.
The film succeeded, on the other hand, in the depiction of a believable love story between its leads. Fassbender and Wasikowska have chemistry; especially the post-wedding scenes show how much better they could have been throughout the film had the blandness in the script not harmed them. Jane taking off her wedding dress in tears is one of the most moving scenes. It is followed by Rochester lying on the floor in a rather funny posture; there, his anxiety and his concern for her translate extremely well. It is a pity that they had so few of these opportunities; at times, I found myself wondering whether they understood their characters fully. My misgivings about the proposal scene were happily only confirmed to some extent. I would have liked to see more of an emotional outburst on Wasikowska's side, but she did handle it fairly well.
To conclude, it was certainly not the worst adaptation ever, in spite of its shortcomings. It must be stated, however, that it is a far cry from what it could have been. The limited running time does not explain everything that went wrong; I had to push my knowledge of the novel to the back of my mind, because I did not feel it was translated accurately to the big screen. As a standalone piece, it is marvellous. I will be happy to give it another chance when it comes out on DVD.