These heart-soaring tales of romance and tragedy are widely considered four of the finest novels in English literature. Wuthering Heights is an immortal story of love and obsession on the stormy Yorkshire moors.
Firstly, the '73 version has the weaker script, which very often stays too close to the novel for is own good, yet at times diverts unnecessarily from the literary model.
It may sound paradoxical that a production Above all jane eyre is a Jane Eyre can stay too close to the novel, but so it is. The long dialogues between Rochester and Jane are a joy to read, but when they are transferred to the screen in nearly their full length as in this production, their complexity and very unusualness create an impression of artificiality and staginess.
The '83 version, on the contrary, shows how superbly these dialogues can be adapted to the screen. There, scriptwriter Alexander Baron did not keep all the lines, but infallibly picked the core lines which are essential to characterize the protagonists and convey the essence of the scenes.
Faithful as the long conversation are rendered in the '73 version, they appeal to the intellect rather than the heart, they are interesting, but not captivating, and they lack the focus and also the intensity of the scenes between Rochester and Jane in the '83 version.
Another negative point is the more than frequent use of Jane's voice-overs.
Nearly all versions make use of that technique and with just reason, but in this adaptation it is driven to absurd extremes. Jane's inner voice constantly interrupts even the dialogues between her and Rochester, only to inform the audience about what is already blatantly obvious and what could have been shown as effectively by plain good acting.
She either raises her eyebrows or wears an amused, know-all smile, which is simply not enough to render the character of the novel's heroine. But then her whole concept of Jane is wrong.
She plays Jane as a self-confident, sophisticated and worldly-wise young woman, who is right from the beginning on terms of equality with Mr Rochester. She completely misses Jane's guardedness, her shyness, modesty and inexperience. Her Jane is even snappish and pert at times. But the misrepresentation of Jane's character is not Cusack's fault alone but partly also due to the script, which brings me back to my first point of criticism: A very attentive reader of the novel will have noticed that they frequently put repartees and remarks in Jane's mouth which she does not utter in the novel and which give her a sophistication, shrewdness and boldness the young and inexperienced Jane of the novel does not possess.
And getting Jane wrong they also got the relationship between her and Rochester wrong. She constantly has the final say during their conversations, she dominates and lectures Rochester instead of being lectured by him.
With such a Jane there is little Michael Jayston as Rochester can do. Jayston is an admirable, subtle actor, who speaks his many lines well and who is really the highlight of this version, but unfortunately he lacks that charisma, that great overpowering presence and natural authority which are necessary to play Rochester and which for example make Orson Welles a more convincing Rochester in the '44 movie, although he has much less screen time than Jayston and does not possess the latter's subtlety.
Jayston is superb at playing the eloquent and refined gentleman, but simply cannot portray Rochester' imperious and dark side, and his outbursts of anger and temperament seem unnatural and forced. Unfortunately there is also little chemistry between Jayston and Cusack: The first is the gypsy scene.
In this version Jane guesses who the gypsy woman really is even before she sees her.
Rochester can only say a few sentences before Jane makes him stop the masquerade. Better to leave out that scene than to mutilate it in that fashion. The second is the parting scene after the aborted wedding. This scene would have benefited if they had stayed closer to the novel, but for some reason they considerably shortened it and consequently that scene conveys next to none of the heartbreak and despair of the scene of the novel.
Again, both these scenes are done to perfection in the '83 version. For my part I have found the definitive Jane Eyre in the '83 adaptation. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.Jane Eyre (Alto/Mezzo - F sharp below middle C to E a 10th above, 18 - 20) Jane is a strong-willed and passionate young woman but outwardly quiet, watchful and shy.
In many ways the character is a self-portrait of Charlotte Bronte herself, thus she has all the complexities and contradictions inherent in the possessor of a profound spiritual. Quickly, the wealthy man’s passionate nature reawakens Jane’s hidden self, but darker secrets are stirring in the attic above.
Performances of “Jane Eyre” are Thursdays, Fridays and Saturdays at p.m. and Sundays at 2 p.m. A brief summary of plot. Jane Eyre, to run through a summary of the plot is the story of an orphan girl, reared at a Charity School amid many hardships, going out into the world as a governess, and falling in love with her employer, Mr.
schwenkreis.com yields herself to her own passion and to his masterful love-making with an eager, an over-eager abandonment. Jane Eyre is an exceptional character of Victorian era who challenged the notions of accepting “compromises”.She is plain and little as she accepted in the novel ; a stubborn girl abandoned by others later transit herself as a strong head girl.
"Reader, I married him." Credits George P. Landow, who created the brief chapter summaries above, formatted this text for the Victorian Web using the Project Gutenberg text [eBook #; release date April 29, ; release date April 29, ] that David Price transcribed from . Because it is important for her, as a single woman in Victorian culture, to maintain her decorum; "above all things, I wished the result of my endeavours to be respectable, proper, en règle." The chapter's emphasis on propriety and decency is continued during Bessie's conversation with Jane.