2007-01-31 03:05:40 · 3 answers · asked by GrassRootsRabbits 3 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
It followed the book a bit more closely than the other version I saw, so I approved of that.
They did take just a few more liberties with the storyline than I would've liked, though. Were they alone together that often in the book? Just seems a bit risky to me, I suppose. Not quite fitting the time period the movie is set in.
I didn't think Jane was quite plain enough and I thought Rochester was much too good looking. Now, the guy that played Rochester from the other version, he was almost perfect for the part. Not what you would call handsome, but definitely likeable.
This Rochester was both handsome and likeable, but the book Rochester isn't supposed to be.
Bertha didn't quite seem insane in this version, more just violent.
I enjoyed watching it, though.
2007-01-31 03:24:16 · answer #1 · answered by Lady Ettejin of Wern 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If that is the same one i just watched on our PBS channel..it wasn't that great. Jane Eyre has long been one of my favorite novels..ever since childhood. I really think there has been no better version (on film) than the old version with Orson Welles. It was much more realistic of the time period the novel was written. The newer versions just cannot get the right atmosphere. Also i notice they tend to veer a bit with the actual dialogue. The old version held true.
2007-01-31 03:15:05 · answer #2 · answered by Shar 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have seen another version but it was such a long time ago that I felt like I was watching it for the first time. I have yet to read the book (really want to) but I enjoyed the movie...thought it was pretty interesting.
2007-01-31 04:06:59 · answer #3 · answered by Laceyfromcali 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋