Printable View
What did you make of it?
Filming wise and actors?
I felt it the lighting was too dense almost impressionist and the actors slightely fad.
I thought Dame Judy Dench only made it slightely bearable to watch.
The landscape throughout the film however was rather wild.
I liked it a lot, especially compared to the book, which annoyed me to no end.
Well, this film has been sitting on my hard drive since it came out and I still haven't taken the time to watch it. Maybe I should take this as a reminder and just watch it this weekend or something. After that I will share my insights on the film. I have not read the book yet (I know, I know) so I'm going through this without prior experience of reading the book.
I loved it, but then I loved the book, too, which I read when I was about 15. I thought it was well-acted, myself. I liked all the actors in it, especially those who played Jane and Rochester.
Don't worry haha.Quote:
Originally Posted by RicMisc
I watched the film first then read the book.
The experience was very unpleasant. The two are nothing like each other the film and the book that is.
Not as good as the 2006 version but it was watchable. I believe Toby Stephens was the best Rochester though. Also was not long enough to depict it properly.
I disliked it quite a bit. I will not be watching it again.
It was FAR too choppy even for an adaptation. The characters came across as very flat and undeveloped.
The 2006 mini-series IS the Jane Eyre version to watch. Second perhaps would be the one with Timothy Dalton, though he does stage act, and the woman playing Jane Eyre is so dull.
Agreed, the 2006 mini-series was far better. LOVE Ruth Wilson. LOVE. The other version I love is the 1943 film with Joan Fontaine and Orson Welles.
I wasn't impressed with the with the 2011 film. I cannot remember exactly why at the moment, but I remember being bored. Maybe I should re-watch for a better analysis hahaha