daria84

I-ll start by saying I've read Jane Eyre maybe 5 times, the last time being about 6 months ago, so I know the tale very well, and while this movie does bring something new to the others, it's just so rushed that a lot of things were left out for me, especially something very important: the evolution of Jane and Rochester's relationship!

They jump into falling in love so quickly I barely know how it happened, they barely talked, they never seemed to spend time together, and yet: bam! magically they fell in love.

The fire scene was also a shock, that scene is supposed to be charged with tension from both sides, and the only "tension" I saw was Rochester nearly naked and him trying to kiss Jane (that didn't happen in the book), both of them were stiff and it felt so forced. And let's not even start with the Orchard scene - woah. Bad in so many levels.

Mia Wasikowska was good as Jane, except for the tree scene where she seemed like a child reciting her lines rather than feeling them. Fassbender, well Rochester is a passionate man and Fassbender was stiff and boring, the only scenes where I saw real passion was when him and Jane returned soaking wet to the house after the proposal, when he tried to choke Mason, and in the living room scene where he was "convincing" Jane to re-think her decision. Plus, since when Rochester is better looking than St. John?

The things I liked though about this movie is Jamie Bell's performance, while he didn't fit the looks, he was cold, severe and great as St John, by far the best one I've seen and now I will picture him when I re-read the book. Mary and Diana were good too (nice to see Lucrecia Borgia again!), and of course, Lady (or Dame?) Judi Dench was excellent as Mrs. Fairfax. The music was fine, the landscape wonderful, it was truly great (except for Ferndean - buried in a deep wood? I saw a nice meadow around)

This movie would have been great if it was longer and didn't leave out important parts, such as Rochester confiding in Jane about Celine and just spending time talking, the veil part, her return a bit more heart- felt. And while Michael Fassbender is a great actor, this role just wasn't meant for him.

I'll start by saying this was the first version I've ever seen, and after watching it, I decided to read the book (not the other way around).

When I first watched it, I really had no idea what the story was about so I wasn't on my guard, and some scenes really stroke me in an emotional level I didn't believe it when I first started watching it. Samantha Morton as Jane was very convincing, not a beauty, not ugly, then I found out that was how Brontë described her in the book. Jane was well mannered, sweet and tender, but with iron will and fire in her soul, it was a perfect combination of a heroin in the book who had to endure a lot of things during her life.

As for Mr. Rochester, well I'm a big CIaran Hinds so I may not be completely objective in reviewing his acting, but for me, he was PERFECT. Yes he yelled, he was too proud, sarcastic, but his raw passion and angst was right there you feel it, and specially in the parts where he seemed to touch heaven, and the other part where hell was right before him (those who read the book or watched the movie will know what parts those are).

The chemistry between Morton and Hinds is amazing, when they are talking under the tree, I really began to cry and felt overwhelmed by the intense emotion flooding my screen, and then in the same tree after the "event", I cried some more because I could feel the despair from Rochester and Jane's sorrow but determination. And finally, in the end, I cried more and more with the strong performance from the two of them.

I read the book afterwards, and yes many scenes are left out (gipsy, Jane's aunt dying, Jane's dreams, the tale of Bertha Mason, Jane's new found fortune, etc...) but considering they had only 1 hour 40 minutes to consolidate an 800 pages book, I believed they did a pretty good job.

I read some comments about people who disliked Hinds performance as Rochester, saying he screams too much, well personally I didn't think he "screamed", he raised his voice and Rochester does that a lot in the book. I watched another version with Michael Fassbender, and it lacked the passion this Rochester has, it actually made me yawn.

I highly recommend this version, the casting is great, overall the movie is very true to the book, and the strong performances given by Morton as Jane, and Hinds as Rochester, is really something not to be missed. If you imagined Mr. Rochester as a handsome, well mannered, with integrity, soft spoken and tender man (in other words, a Jane Austen hero, I can't imagine why somebody would imagine him like that), you will hate Hind's Rochester, but if you imagined as a non-attractive man in a conventional way, sarcastic, snappish, moody, witty, intense, rough, tough, passionate, angry but tender when he must and overall, a tortured soul who finds redemption through pure love, you will not be disappointed with him.

I was stumbling on the internet and found this movie, and with a cast of the likes of Nicole Kidman, seeing Jack Black (who I passionately dislike) doing a dramatic role, and some minor roles with Ciarán Hinds, I thought it was worth the shot and I was right.

Basically the movie is about Margot (Kidman), whose sister (Jennifer Jason Leigh) is getting married with a struggling artist, Malcolm (Jack Black), and decides to attends to the wedding days before it actually takes place, even though both sisters haven't spoken in years. Both sisters share moments and secrets that afterwards are revealed, and both sisters do not agree on how the other is carrying her life, and while their pre-adolescent kids get acquainted, their lives start taking a certain turn.

I loved the acting in this movie, Nicole Kidman most of her work is flawless, and this is no exception, I can think of maybe 2 or 3 actresses that may have been able to carry the role of Margot as great as she did, but I'm sure Nicole was the best fit as the self-centered, judge and troubled Margot, who is juggling with the idea of leaving her husband while having an affair. Jennifer Jason Leigh, honestly i don't think I've ever seen her before, but she was perfect in this role and Pauline, the insecure, persuasive sister. I think Jack Black, who plays the groom who pretends he doesn't care about other people's opinions, did a good job here, actually in this movie I laughed more than in any of his comedy roles, I sure hope that was meant to happen. He was the only one who actually knew what was going on in the house, and was honest enough to reveal his secret to his bride before the wedding, but only because he was under a lot of pressure. I'm going to make a special mention to Ciarán Hinds, who may have had maybe 10 minutes of screen time, but his character Dick was important in the story as Margot's lover, who shakes Margots foundations and leaves her emotionally shattered in public, and then literally kicks butts (or butt).

I actually enjoyed this movie, the relationships were very well portrayed, real, a film that undresses a family that is supposed to be on the verge of one of the happiest moments of a person's life: a wedding. In the end, we're all humans, and sometimes we don't like how human flaws are portrayed and showed to us.