MovieChat Forums > Jane Eyre (2011) Discussion > Terrible Chopped Up Highlight Version of...

Terrible Chopped Up Highlight Version of the Book

posted 10 years ago by MovieBuff0202
8 replies | jump to latest

Are you kidding me?! A wonderfully written and amazing story like Jane Eyre and it was mutilated by the writers and producers of this version. I have to give credit where it is due and I will say I had no problem with the acting. The actors cast to play each part did a great job. It wasn't like I couldn't stand watching it because of the grotesque acting. What DID bother me was that this book is a birdungsroman tale of a woman with many chapters in her life and many different events that took place. Many significant events might I add, that all added up to one great tale of her life. What irritates me is that in order to capture all of the pieces of the book and keep it at your standard 2 hour long cinema, the book was essentially presented in highlight form! A quick snippet of her time with her aunt. A quick couple shots of her at the orphan school. A quick run of her time with her cousins and learning of her inheritance and then it's backs to Mr Rochester and finding out he's blind, a widow and now free to marry. If there wasn't an exceptional book before this atrocity to explain in depth what really happened throughout her life and what led to what, I would have thrown the remote at my TV for wasting 2 hours of my life on a poorly written film with holes EVERYWHERE!! Jersus. It was just awful. It's like they expect all the viewers of this movie to have read the book and they're like, "here guys, here's a quick highlight reel of what you just read. Enjoy!" No. That was awful. The least they could have done was highlight some areas but really put the focus on 2 or 3 main and important parts of her life. For one, I really didn't see how they even fell in love. They barely spent ANY time together talking, let alone flirting. It's like the love blossomed from nothing and what was with the other woman floating around and her advances with her?! If I were Jane I would have been like, what the *beep* dude?! Make up your damn mind because clearly everyone thinks you're in love with this other woman because you spend all your time courting her. But then again, Jane really spent NO time with Rochester in the movie so she really couldn't complain. And not once did he ask her to stop calling him Mr Rochester. It was so formal it didn't even give me that sultry, lovey dovey feel. She couldn't even call the guy by his damn first name let alone give him little pet names.

The film could easily have been a Wyatt Earp/Titanic 3-4 hour long film. Good stories do not have to be your blockbuster 2 hour long movie theatre film. Good movies get the whole story down and keep you engaged no matter how long. But they certainly don't cut out essential bodies of the story and leave gaping holes everywhere. Gosh, I'm dismounting my soap box now because I'm clearly frustrated that they ruined such a great book. But either way, don't waste your time on this one. There is an earlier version that is better and in all honesty if you're truly into these coming of age, hard knock life stories like Jane Eyre then read the book. No movie will ever live up to the literature anyway.

[–] supergran 10 years ago

Well, I know I've had my problems with this version, but my rants have been models of calm and moderation compared to this!

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

[–] mylesag 10 years ago

Never ever having read the book...and I don't think I'm adding it on my "To Read" list, I was really getting antsy by the 110th minute...that I wanted to fast-forward it quickly. Mercifully, it ended when it did. No need to stretch out this long-suffering story for OVER 2 hours. No one but a few Bronte-ites would sit through it.

[–] nimmy1 10 years ago

No one but a few Bronte-ites would sit through it.

😕

Only those with no valid argument pick holes in people's spelling and grammar. [yes]

[–] jacob_barreiro 10 years ago

I sort of felt the same way, that the movie was just a highlight reel of the overall story. I found it quite ineffective. I have no problems with alterations, compression or even changes to a story in an adaption, and feel like cramming everything from the books into 2 hours was a mistake. It would have been far better if the story focused intently on specific passages of Jane's life, than try to roll it all in.

[–] casydav 10 years ago

I would have to agree. I felt rather surprised when they professed their love and got engaged-thought there would be a better build up to this most important scene. I thought the Samantha Morton TV version was better. I have read the book but have to admit when it comes to the movie I want the primary focus to be Rochester and Jane-not so much her childhood, etc. although I get it that those scenes lead into Jane's overall character.

[–] MrBanBan 10 years ago

It's a long novel. Every adaptation will have some different edits.
I find that the cast in every Jane Eyre version is TOO pretty, they are not supposed to be so pretty, dammit! :) I actually liked how the story started with her running away and then coming back to it, I never seen it done like that before, as a flashback, almost giving an omage to Wuthering Heights...
What you have to look for is the portrayal of characters though I think, and what the director is trying to say through them as well for himself. Because as an auteur that is what the work will be - a part of his legacy - so to do a close reading - lets look at the scene of Bertha and see if she portayed as completely mad or not? That will give us some insight as to how we are to read this movie and how director is looking at madness, because really Bertha is an essencial part of this story, and it is how she is portrayed in her small role I think plays a big revelation to the whole. I also loved the music score to this film. And all the symbolism was everpresent there with fire and coldness etc...

[–] LifeVsArt 10 years ago

I also loved the music score to this film. And all the symbolism was everpresent there with fire and coldness etc...

I appreciate you mentioning Dario Marianelli's wonderful score. This film is very strong on the symbolism, as you nicely pointed out. Many have said that this version seems to have extra emphasis on Jane. Moira Buffini, who wrote the screenplay, intentionally put less emphasis on Bertha as being a monstrous incarnation of madness, she appears more human - this may be to some people's liking, or it may not. As I've mentioned before, it's not just that the film has beautiful photography (and music), but, as a whole, it's extremely cinemagraphic, the way the narrative was rearranged was part of this. As far as the cast in every Jane Eyre being "too pretty", you may have a point, but it definitely doesn't offend my eye, especially with such sensitive and intelligent performances as Mia's and Michael's. Of course, Judy Dench makes a wonderful Mrs. Fairfax, a great counterbalance to the other characters.

It will be interesting to see if in a few more years there's another Jane Eyre production - I have no problem with different perspectives on the story - there almost has to be, otherwise why bother to do it over and over again. It is a timeless story and I think it deserves to be reinvestigated every few years.

[–] agentbach 10 years ago

Love the casting, hate the film overall. They cut out the most important scenes. And that ending? Wtf.