Lewis (1) Charles Dickens (2) Cinderella (2) Classic Hollywwod (6) Discovering Emma Week (2) Disney (5) Doctor Who (1) Elizabeth Gaskell (3) Emily Brontë (1) Emma (7) F.
Jane eyre movie 2016 movie#
Now, as we draw near the end I think my final conclusion is: It's a beautiful movie with lots of good acting, and a timeless story that most will enjoy.īut if you've read the book, expect that a lot of scenes will be missing.ġ2 Months Classics Challenge (1) 1940's (16) 1940's Week (12) A tale of two cities (2) A Winter Wonderland Blog Party (1) Agent Carter (2) Anne of Green Gables (6) Annie (2) Annie get your gun (2) Back to the classics (2) Beauty and the Beast (2) blogger award (2) Books (7) C.S. It was difficult getting a decent picture of this one, but here you can see the lovely little bows at the front. This one is my favourite! I love the pattern and the little collar. These are the sort of dresses I wouldn't mind wearing myself. Jane's dresses are very simply cut, but I think that is what I like about them. You know, I couldn't possibly review a period drama without commenting on the costumes. There is a few kissing scenes and you once see the characters in their sleep wear, but nothing inappropriate. I think I would have loved it unconditionally if I hadn't read the book.Īnd therefore I will in no way discourage anyone from seeing it, for it is a wonderful story.Ĭontent wise there is barely any. However, I think my strong reaction is due to the fact that I just finished the book and was anxious to see it acted out on screen. I know I can't expect a 2 hour movie to be completely faithful to a 600 pages book, but they could easily have made it perhaps 20 minutes longer and gotten a lot more of the plot in there. Then at other times they cut out huge plot points and dialogue, and I feel like you miss a lot of information. The main reason is that the plot is way too rushed! Some of the time it feels like they are giving you a summary of the story with a number of short scenes. With all this praise of the acting, you might think, then why was I disappointed in the movie? My only regret is that due to time, large parts of his character is cut out, so he seems rather one-dimensional in the movie. In my head I'd imagined him more like Rupert Perry-Jones, but Jamie Bell was an excellent alternative. The casting of St John Rivers was just perfect, in my opinion. She wasn't exactly like I imagined Mrs Fairfax in my head, but she made a great performance. Judi Dench playing Mrs Fairfax was a delightful surprise (and my one squeeing moment of the movie, was when she appeared). I'm just sad they cut out a lot of his and Jane's interactions, it didn't leave enough scenes to really get a feel of his character. He certainly masters the piercing gazes and intense emotions. That being said, he does a great job of the character.
Let me get my major peeve about him out at once: Michael Fassbender is way too handsome to play Mr Rochester! But I think she caught the gist of it, and the important scenes were spot on.
I think a challenge in adapting book-Jane is that she thinks a lot but doesn't say very much, so the actress really have to convey a lot without words. But they actually did a great job with Mia Wasikowska, making her appear really simple and plain.Īnd her acting was also really good. I was a little apprehensive about the casting of Jane, for in the book she is very plain and Hollywood have a habit of ignoring that and casting beautiful actresses anyway. I've been wanting to watch Jane Eyre ever since it came out, and since I recently finished reading the book, I thought it a good time to watch it.Īnd it was a good movie, very beautifully made, but it didn't quite live up to my expectations.īut let me start with the things I like, such as the casting: