Directed by:
Cary Joji FukunagaScreenplay:
Moira BuffiniCinematography:
Adriano GoldmanComposer:
Dario MarianelliCast:
Mia Wasikowska, Michael Fassbender, Judi Dench, Jamie Bell, Su Elliot, Holliday Grainger, Tamzin Merchant, Amelia Clarkson, Craig Roberts, Sally Hawkins (more)VOD (4)
Plots(1)
In the 19th Century-set story, Jane Eyre (Mia Wasikowska) suddenly flees Thornfield Hall, the vast and isolated estate where she works as a governess for Adèle Varens, a child under the custody of Thornfield’s brooding master, Edward Rochester (Michael Fassbender). The imposing residence - and Rochester’s own imposing nature - have sorely tested her resilience. With nowhere else to go, she is extended a helping hand by clergyman St. John Rivers (Jamie Bell) and his family. As she recuperates in the Rivers’ Moor House and looks back upon the tumultuous events that led to her escape, Jane wonders if the past is ever truly past. (Universal Pictures UK)
(more)Videos (2)
Reviews (14)
This is probably the most non-adapted book for a film that I can remember... it's actually the first adaptation that I dared to watch. And also the last. Fukunaga is my favorite director and I thought his directing skills could spark my interest in survival and a strongly outdated historical story. It didn't happen, and I don't want to see the grumpy Fassbender anymore... 6/10 ()
An exquisite Victorian romance, perfectly in tune with the current formal and aesthetic trends of modern filmmaking. Raw cinematography, zero pathos and spare dialogue passages, where everything is focused on editing, the actors' facial expressions and overwhelmingly unspoken emotions. Very modern yet period-accurate and full of the traditional values we love so much in these tales of fate from yesteryear. You'd almost want to say that these cinematic affairs were left in the dust somewhere in the late nineties, but thankfully that's not true, they're still around today, they're just far fewer and of a good quality. ()
A triumph of classicism, filmmaking and romantic proprieties. If I didn't know the actors, I'd have trouble dating the movie. Anyway, it's because of the actors and some wonderful romanticizing compositions that Jane Eyre is worth it. I'm just a little sorry that Fukunaga didn't keep it for his retirement and boldly did not go back to where he left off with Sin Nombre. ()
Why "only" three stars? The problem is with the actors, specifically the central couple. I didn't believe in Michael Fassbender's Rochester one bit. I don't know, maybe he's too much of a "pretty boy" for the role, maybe it's something else, but he wasn't nearly as cold and inhuman as I imagined him to be and as portrayed in the book, and I got the impression he got the role mainly because of his current popularity and not based on any casting. I kept thinking about Ralph Fiennes and what he did in The Duchess. That's kind of how I imagine Rochester. And then there's Mia Wasikowska - she's suitable for the role of Jana and plays it well, but I don't think she and the aforementioned M.F. go together at all and I felt minimal (no) emotion from their scenes together. That’s really too bad. Otherwise, the film is well shot, especially the "preconceived" camera makes beautiful pictures, but it didn't save me from boredom. Even Dario Marianelli didn't do much this time. ()
Extreme romanticism via an atmosphere à la Gothic horror. Simply gestures instead of speeches. Courting by the fireplace through verbal exchanges that make Nadal versus Federer a boring watch. It’s hopes of being movie theatre experience of the year are dashed by the emotionally chilly ending where gestures gave way to speeches and other maladies very familiar in most adaptations of the classics of Romanticism. ()
Ads