Things we loved in the book, but weren't included in the series

Hi Tomatish. 

What a cracking idea for a new thread! And great to see someone taking an interest in the board. It's much too quiet!

My name is Janet! Because I've never been all that keen on my name, I've never been unhappy that this version doesn't use it. I know what you mean, though. It's use adds intimacy to their conversations.

I'll have to think about favourite scenes from the book that didn't make the series. Mmm....

Well, to start with, I've always liked this passage in chapter 9, as Jane is sitting by the fire with the "gypsy":

Where was I? Did I wake or sleep? Had I been dreaming? Did I dream still? The old woman's voice had changed: her accent, her gesture, and all were familiar to me as my own face in a glass — as the speech of my own tongue. I got up, but did not go. I looked; I stirred the fire, and I looked again: but she drew her bonnet and her bandage closer about her face, and again beckoned me to depart. The flame illuminated her hand stretched out: roused now, and on the alert for discoveries, I at once noticed that hand. It was no more the withered limb of eld than my own; it was a rounded supple member, with smooth fingers, symmetrically turned; a broad ring flashed on the little finger, and stooping forward, I looked at it, and saw a gem I had seen a hundred times before. Again I looked at the face; which was no longer turned from me—on the contrary, the bonnet was doffed, the bandage displaced, the head advanced.

"Well, Jane, do you know me?" asked the familiar voice.

There is a mesmerising quality to this scene. It's like Jane is under a spell. I know the whole gypsy episode is a bit silly really, but it's so well written and demonstrates both Rochester's "quirkiness" and his desperation to get inside Jane's head. However, I know it could never be pulled off on the screen. When it has been attempted in other productions, it's never worked. Therefore, I think the 2006 "compromise" was an inspired idea. We still see Rochester's eccentricity, still get an idea of his desperation, but don't have to witness the humiliating sight of Toby in drag! Lol. Kudos to Sandy Welch.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~


I was disappointed at the lack of scenes with St John. Andrew Buchan was very good. Although he wasn't "glacial" enough, I like the fact that the portrayal avoided caricature. However, I loved the scenes between St John and Jane in the book. Particularly this:

I stood motionless under my hierophant's touch. My refusals were forgotten—my fears overcome—my wrestlings paralysed. The Impossible—I.E., my marriage with St. John—was fast becoming the Possible. All was changing utterly with a sudden sweep. Religion called—Angels beckoned—God commanded—life rolled together like a scroll—death's gates opening, showed eternity beyond: it seemed, that for safety and bliss there, all here might be sacrificed in a second. The dim room was full of visions.

"Could you decide now?" asked the missionary. The inquiry was put in gentle tones: he drew me to him as gently. Oh, that gentleness! how far more potent is it than force! I could resist St. John's wrath: I grew pliant as a reed under his kindness. Yet I knew all the time, if I yielded now, I should not the less be made to repent, some day, of my former rebellion. His nature was not changed by one hour of solemn prayer: it was only elevated.

"I could decide if I were but certain," I answered: "were I but convinced that it is God's will I should marry you, I could vow to marry you here and now—come afterwards what would!"

"My prayers are heard!" ejaculated St. John. He pressed his hand firmer on my head, as if he claimed me: he surrounded me with his arm, ALMOST as if he loved me (I say ALMOST—I knew the difference—for I had felt what it was to be loved; but, like him, I had now put love out of the question, and thought only of duty). I contended with my inward dimness of vision, before which clouds yet rolled. I sincerely, deeply, fervently longed to do what was right; and only that. "Show me, show me the path!" I entreated of Heaven. I was excited more than I had ever been; and whether what followed was the effect of excitement the reader shall judge.

All the house was still; for I believe all, except St. John and myself, were now retired to rest. The one candle was dying out: the room was full of moonlight. My heart beat fast and thick: I heard its throb. Suddenly it stood still to an inexpressible feeling that thrilled it through, and passed at once to my head and extremities. The feeling was not like an electric shock, but it was quite as sharp, as strange, as startling: it acted on my senses as if their utmost activity hitherto had been but torpor, from which they were now summoned and forced to wake. They rose expectant: eye and ear waited while the flesh quivered on my bones.

"What have you heard? What do you see?" asked St. John. I saw nothing, but I heard a voice somewhere cry -

"Jane! Jane! Jane!"—nothing more.


It makes my hair stand on end, just reading that!


I'll post when I can think of more.







Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain.

I love this adaptation of Jane Eyre, but I really wish it had more time to devote at Lowood. Helen and Jane interact on only a couple of occasions, we don't see Miss Temple and Jane's friendship (!), and we don't see Helen bearing abuse by Miss Scatcherd. I would have at least liked Jane and Helen to spend more time together, making Helen's death all the more poignant, but I understand why these scenes were filmed and deleted. You can view these scenes online and I think they were right to cut them out as much as I wanted more, due to time constraints.

I liked the use of the Gypsy in this version, but it was hilarious in the book that the Gypsy was Rochester in disguise. :)

I disliked the first twenty minutes or so because it skimmed over the first parts of Jane's life so much, and changed and added things unnecessarily. There was some set-up that I didn't appreciate until later like the family portrait, but there were also much-overdone setups like the red scarf motif. Did Jane ever have a dream of wearing a red scarf in the desert? That dislike colored my reaction to the next hour or so, but I eventually warmed to it.

I also harbored a desire to see Stephens as the gypsy.

www.freerice.com

I'd like to add one thing that fortunately didn't appear in this version altho it has been in other versions: the confusion when Jane first meets Mrs. Fairfax that she is the owner of the estate and the pupil is her daughter. It has always seemed awkward and makes Mrs. Fairfax seem scatterbrained for not mentioning it in her correspondence with Jane before her arrival. This version simply manufactures that detail in the correspondence.

My guess has always been that it was meant to show how Jane jumped at the chance to escape Lowood, without really getting all the information she should have about the position, but I'm glad to see a version that finally removes it.

www.freerice.com

Several lovely scenes in the book that were strangely omitted in the TV-series:
1. In the book, after Jane runs away from Thornfield, she starves, but does not simply walk about on the mores for days. Oh no, she's not the kind of girl who'd simply lie down and die. She tries to sell her gloves for food and finally, under a heavy rainstorm, she fronts the door of a cabin and begs to be let in. It's all very dramatic. But in the Tv-series..naah, cut away.
2. Also, one of the utter dramatic highlights of the book is the scene were Rochester calls out to Jane, when they are far apart. And she hears him. And she answers. Yes. She cries "I'm coming! Wait for me, oh, I'm coming! It's despair and longing. But in the TV-series: naah, no answer, she just happily bounces off.

Less drama in the TV-series version - yet, the series have a look about it as though it was shot by someone who has only made crime stories before. Strange camera angles, "dramatic" shots of the Thornfield Hall tower. But what about the drama inside the persons?