![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
god forgive me, you are not getting away from me . . .
Now that my computer’s systems have made their miraculous recovery from The Virus, I must report that I have seen the 2006 BBC Jane Eyre, which makes seven versions I have under my belt (Susannah and Orson, I’ve got my eyes on you) (one wonders how I can bear to watch so many versions of the same thing – it is only devotion, my love) and now I regret to inform you that I must pass judgment on it.
I found that I did warm up to Ruth Wilson as Jane, even though I thought I could never give up my Zelah Clark. In some ways, I actually prefer Ruth, although her mouth makes me uncomfortable, especially when she’s crying, which is, oddly, rather how I feel about Samantha Morton. But Ruth is better than Samantha in many ways, not the lease of which is the fact that she actually looks like the child Jane is while acting like the capable, quiet adult that is in Jane’s mind. She’s fairly spot-on, while Zelah sometimes lacks some of the nuance that Ruth has.
As to Rochester, I declare that I shall never relinquish my Timothy Dalton, though this Toby Stephens was good. Both are rather too handsome in my opinion to really be Rochester, I do feel that Timothy was better still. I did like this Rochester, however, rather better than Cirian Hinds and miles better than William Hurt, who does not really deserve to be countenanced as EF Rochester more than once. Overall, I give this Rochester a 7.5, as compared with Timothy’s 9, Ciaran’s 6, and Hurt’s 3(totally uninspiring). Most of my problems with Rochester in this version stem more from the script than the actor who played him.
And as to that little thing. I have a great many bones to pick with Sandy Welch. First of all, with four whole hours, they could have spent more than fifteen minutes on the first ten years of Jane’s life. They inform so much of her character, and there are ten chapters on it in the book. For god’s sake, Helen Burns has literally two scenes, and she dies in the second one. Un-be-freaking-lievable. Mrs Temple has no name, and no one tempers Jane’s passion. Arg.
But I can let that pass. Nobody watches these things to see young Jane. That’s fairly dull. My biggest problem with it is the gutting of scenes. I will enumerate them for those of you who care (that’ll be one if I’m lucky).
1)The Moment After the Fire (end chapter 15): Sadly neglected. One of the early poignant moments between them and the first betrayal of Rochester’s real affection for her. Lacked treatment. It was barley even there. There was so little tension, though I liked the coda to it very much indeed.
2) The Gypsy(chapter 19): I commend the version for including it, because I have only seen it in two other versions. What I contest, is the means. Rochester did not dress as the gypsy, but employed one and hid behind a curtain to hear her. Cheep! &^$#^$@&(*&! The most fun of that scene comes from the goddamn crossdressing and they take that out! It seems they are determined to take all the fun away from me.
3)The Proposal (chapter 23): totally lacking fire. Left me wanting. The musical’s “The Proposal” was longer and had more passion than this version. I won’t, however, compare it to Hurt and Gainesburg because that whole movie lacked passion. It also wasn’t as weird and Hinds and Morton. It just didn’t have what Dalton and Clark had. That being, partially at least, textual accuracy. Whatev.
4)The Explanation of his Courtship of Blanche(chapter 24): There was none. One of the sweetest and most mischievous moments in the book, dropped entirely from this version. (I might add, that this was actually part of the song “The Proposal” and yet that song still has more in the proposing than this version). I do like, however, that Jane pushes Rochester away and teases him for the month before their would-be wedding in this version, which I can honestly say I have not seen done before so well and decisively.
5)Rochester’s Explanation of his Current Marital State: Once again, lacked fire. I think this is due to the fact that there is nothing whatsoever of the element of Danger to this Rochester, which is so important in the character. He is not frightening, he has no fury, and therefore his passion seems that much less. One of the greatest scenes in English literature, one of the greatest romantic heroes in the full glory of rage has been completely gutted. He tells her he won’t touch her, he wouldn’t think of compromising her, he only wants to be near her, this is not Rochester. This is . . . Mr Knightley. Unforgivable. If I wanted Mr Knightley I would be watching Emma. I wanted Rochester, who is fifty percent violence, and this Rochester didn’t even possess forcefulness in this scene. Unforgivable.
Aside from these flaws, I found it quite a good script, though it did seem to have a general disregard for textual accuracy which I had come to expect from the BBC. That is okay. It captured the spirit for the most part. The biggest issue (which causes many of the smaller issues) is the taming of Rochester. He is supposed to be wild and full of force and anger and violence. This was a neutered Rochester in a lot of ways. If only he had had a little more fire and a little less manners, I would have liked him that much more, though I will say he was probably the handsiest Rochester (well, he and Hinds will have to duel for that one because at least you can always see where Tobey’s hands are going).
That said, I will soon be buying it. Now, if only I could get ten monitors and watch all ten of the versions known to me at once, comparing them to each other scene by scene, well, then I’d really have a project.
I found that I did warm up to Ruth Wilson as Jane, even though I thought I could never give up my Zelah Clark. In some ways, I actually prefer Ruth, although her mouth makes me uncomfortable, especially when she’s crying, which is, oddly, rather how I feel about Samantha Morton. But Ruth is better than Samantha in many ways, not the lease of which is the fact that she actually looks like the child Jane is while acting like the capable, quiet adult that is in Jane’s mind. She’s fairly spot-on, while Zelah sometimes lacks some of the nuance that Ruth has.
As to Rochester, I declare that I shall never relinquish my Timothy Dalton, though this Toby Stephens was good. Both are rather too handsome in my opinion to really be Rochester, I do feel that Timothy was better still. I did like this Rochester, however, rather better than Cirian Hinds and miles better than William Hurt, who does not really deserve to be countenanced as EF Rochester more than once. Overall, I give this Rochester a 7.5, as compared with Timothy’s 9, Ciaran’s 6, and Hurt’s 3(totally uninspiring). Most of my problems with Rochester in this version stem more from the script than the actor who played him.
And as to that little thing. I have a great many bones to pick with Sandy Welch. First of all, with four whole hours, they could have spent more than fifteen minutes on the first ten years of Jane’s life. They inform so much of her character, and there are ten chapters on it in the book. For god’s sake, Helen Burns has literally two scenes, and she dies in the second one. Un-be-freaking-lievable. Mrs Temple has no name, and no one tempers Jane’s passion. Arg.
But I can let that pass. Nobody watches these things to see young Jane. That’s fairly dull. My biggest problem with it is the gutting of scenes. I will enumerate them for those of you who care (that’ll be one if I’m lucky).
1)The Moment After the Fire (end chapter 15): Sadly neglected. One of the early poignant moments between them and the first betrayal of Rochester’s real affection for her. Lacked treatment. It was barley even there. There was so little tension, though I liked the coda to it very much indeed.
2) The Gypsy(chapter 19): I commend the version for including it, because I have only seen it in two other versions. What I contest, is the means. Rochester did not dress as the gypsy, but employed one and hid behind a curtain to hear her. Cheep! &^$#^$@&(*&! The most fun of that scene comes from the goddamn crossdressing and they take that out! It seems they are determined to take all the fun away from me.
3)The Proposal (chapter 23): totally lacking fire. Left me wanting. The musical’s “The Proposal” was longer and had more passion than this version. I won’t, however, compare it to Hurt and Gainesburg because that whole movie lacked passion. It also wasn’t as weird and Hinds and Morton. It just didn’t have what Dalton and Clark had. That being, partially at least, textual accuracy. Whatev.
4)The Explanation of his Courtship of Blanche(chapter 24): There was none. One of the sweetest and most mischievous moments in the book, dropped entirely from this version. (I might add, that this was actually part of the song “The Proposal” and yet that song still has more in the proposing than this version). I do like, however, that Jane pushes Rochester away and teases him for the month before their would-be wedding in this version, which I can honestly say I have not seen done before so well and decisively.
5)Rochester’s Explanation of his Current Marital State: Once again, lacked fire. I think this is due to the fact that there is nothing whatsoever of the element of Danger to this Rochester, which is so important in the character. He is not frightening, he has no fury, and therefore his passion seems that much less. One of the greatest scenes in English literature, one of the greatest romantic heroes in the full glory of rage has been completely gutted. He tells her he won’t touch her, he wouldn’t think of compromising her, he only wants to be near her, this is not Rochester. This is . . . Mr Knightley. Unforgivable. If I wanted Mr Knightley I would be watching Emma. I wanted Rochester, who is fifty percent violence, and this Rochester didn’t even possess forcefulness in this scene. Unforgivable.
Aside from these flaws, I found it quite a good script, though it did seem to have a general disregard for textual accuracy which I had come to expect from the BBC. That is okay. It captured the spirit for the most part. The biggest issue (which causes many of the smaller issues) is the taming of Rochester. He is supposed to be wild and full of force and anger and violence. This was a neutered Rochester in a lot of ways. If only he had had a little more fire and a little less manners, I would have liked him that much more, though I will say he was probably the handsiest Rochester (well, he and Hinds will have to duel for that one because at least you can always see where Tobey’s hands are going).
That said, I will soon be buying it. Now, if only I could get ten monitors and watch all ten of the versions known to me at once, comparing them to each other scene by scene, well, then I’d really have a project.
no subject
Speaking of the Brits, have you started watching the new Dr. Who? Also, you should check out the 2nd and third episodes (the 2nd premiered this week, the third, next) of the Sarah Jane Smith Adventures - the Slitheen come back! (They're the fat, gaseous, green baby-faced ones.)
no subject
I always forget to watch tv because most of the good stuff is on when I'm not home. When does Dr Who and Co air?
no subject
no subject