Customer Reviews

Jane Eyre (1944) [Import]

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I've been having a "Jane Eyre-athon." There are many good versions of this gothic story of the fight between worldliness and virtue. Many have one really outstanding element, but this version, with Orson Welles and Joan Fontaine remains overall the best. Like most, it eliminates much of the second half of the book, which is the really important part for Bronte, who is one of the finest religious thinkers of her age. There are so many bests in this version, it will always be hard to top for getting Bronte right.

This version was shot when black and white filmmaking was at it's best, and Fox was known as the best at noir/gothic, with velvety blacks, and really crisp lighting and shading. One thing that helps this film be better is that it has the best script (by Huxley, Stevenson and Houseman). The script transitions well, and really captures the major emotional elements of the story. This version also has the best child Jane (Peggy Ann Gardner). I agree with many that Zelah Clarke (Jane in the 1983 miniseries) is probably the definitive adult Jane, but Joan Fontaine is equally fine, and many people will simply not sit through the slow miniseries. Joan Fontaine has a real sense of refined restraint that seems very natural, and her strength is not so much in knowing she is strong, but overcoming her weakness. That is a very important mental/emotional component for getting Jane right.

Orson Welles is beefy and sexy, and plays every note of Rochester perfectly. If he is a bit too young for the role, that is the only flaw. While I feel that Cairin Hinds (the 1997 film version) is the best Rochester, Welles performance equals him. Once again, the striking dark haired beauty Blanche was cast with a platinum blonde, she is undeniably and great and striking beauty, and is the best of the Blanche - easy to see why men like her, and why women don't. Little Margaret O'Brien, who I usually find cloying and hammy is, of course, the perfect Adele, so we have the best Adele, too! She is absolutely convincingly the daughter of a diva, a dancer and coquette, and her "look at me" peskiness is just right for Adele.

The supporting roles, just simply nail the characters as described in the book, Broklehurst, Agnes Morehead as the Aunt, Mrs. Fairfax, and young Elizabeth Taylor as young Jane's friend all add up to make this a masterpiece. Having Bernard Herrmann do the score doesn't hurt a bit, either. (Film buffs will find it of interest that some of the exact themes and sound cues used in this film were also used again in Hitchcock's NORTH BY NORTHWEST.)

See the 1934 version for a laugh and film history. See the 1983 miniseries to see the truest rhendition of the book. See the 1997 version for breathtaking color, scenery and Cirian Hinds' Rochester. See this to be fully satisfied. This is simply an exquisite film - filmmaking at its best in every respect; and while not as letter-perfectly definitive as the 1983 miniseries, I feel it is overall the best, truest version of JANE EYRE.

I agree with the previous reviewer that the classic 1944 film version of Jane Eyre staring Orson Welles and Joan Fontaine is obviously a great movie but this DVD is an import from Korea and has Korean subtitles (captions) that can't be turned off. I have nothing against the Korean language but I just don't like having sub-titles that can't be turned off and I also wouldn't like it if it was English sub-titles that couldn't be turned off! Someone needs to get this movie out on DVD in English with the other language sub-titles that can be turned off!

This in my mind is the definitive version of which i noe tend to mark all other version by and they don't come close.With an exellent Joan Fontanine and as a previous reviewer said a Beefy and sexy Orson Welles,with a fine supporting cast.

If you enjoyed Franco Zeffirelli's 1996 version, you should check out this 1943 version of Charlotte Bronte's "Jane Eyre". The two adaptations are almost identical, both chose to front- weight the story, placing considerable emphasis on Jane's childhood and condensing the Gothic romance at the end. Although this makes the ending a bit rushed, it insures that the Bronte's theme is given sufficient consideration.

While the story is generally thought of as a Gothic romance, it is really a tale about how people can make a difference. Jane's childhood was quite horrible and should have permanently warped her, as it would anyone suffering similar abuse and the absence of love. But Bronte wanted to show the positive impact a single individual can have on someone at a formative time. Enter Helen (Elizabeth Taylor) as Jane's (Peggy Ann Garner) salvation, allowing her to have much the same impact later with Adele (Margaret O'Brien).

Director Robert Stevenson was content with the agreement letting the overbearing Orson Welles (two years after "Citizen Kane") direct his own character (Edward Rochester) in the later scenes with costar Joan Fontaine, Stevenson's real interest was in directing children. Which is probably why Garner, O'Brien and Taylor have such a prominent part in the film.

Garner turns in the best performance of the three girls but you have to marvel at six year-old O'Brien's credible French accent.

Welles liked Stevenson and had a good time on the set except when O'Brien was present. O'Brien was thrilled when she first put on Adele's ruffled white gown, and the cast and crew were amused because she could not keep from glancing at herself in the mirror. But Orsen was not pleased and snidely told his secretary that the kid was nothing but a "little scene stealer".

Welles received $100,000 for playing Rochester, about the same amount he got for acting, directing, producing, and partially writing "Kane".

Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.

This story was my favourite when young and still is decades later. I think Orson Welles in this film is the best version of all as he brings a certain depth to the brooding character of Mr. Rochester he portrays. It always helps to have read the book first of course. Joan Fontaine, as the new governess, is innocently open to the influences in her new surroundings and the subsequent darker mysteries which unravel later. Meantime she befriends little Adele, Mr. Rochester's ward, and teaches her daily. Margaret O'Brien as Adele is cute as a button and leaves her dancing impression on the parlour scenes.

I bought the VHS version months ago, which is fine, and thought of trying the DVD version with English substitles but was very surprised and disappointed by the number of errors. Almost every second or third phrase of the subtitles printed inaccurately; example: print of "as selection" when the obvious words heard were "insurrection". Obviously it is an import, and a cheap one, my first experience with this kind of thing. Hopefully, one day a more correct subtitled version will be available, in proper English of course. Meanwhile the public seems obliged to settle for the poor quality product.

Orson is the perfect Mr Edward Rochester, and Jane, while some say that Joan Fontaine was far too pretty for the role of Jane, She captured Jane's quiet strong spirit and aced the role. The Gothic moodiness of the moores and Thornfield is perfect. Complete with mist and contrast of dark and light. I delight in this film.
My only thought of improvement would be if it could have been longer and not rushed along so much. Though this version may not exactly follow the book, the mood and feeling are there. It is full of heart
A must see!!!

No offence to Orson Wells, but I do not like his portrayal of Rochester much. He is a little too wooden. It feels weird, the way he says in his very low voice: "Jane! Jane!" When he says her name, I don't know if I want to be frightened or sad or andry. He doesn't exhibit much emotion. SPOILER: He doesn't repent even in the end. He makes me feel very sorry for Jane. One might wonder how Jane would fall for someone like him.

Joan Fontaine is fine as Jane Eyre. She lacks a little stubborness though as Jane. Young Elizabeth Taylor is a very angellic Helen. Sometimes though, I'm not sure if they want to make it a horror film (ex. When young Jane finds Helen dead, she screams. The camera is focused on the hands like a weird murder movie).

In short, I didn't like this adaptation that much. I maybe biased though because I am a literary purist.

Like I mentioned, I just saw this version. I have read the book many times and love the book. First thing, this version does not follow the bood very closely. Too many things were left out. There was not very much emotion portrayed in this version. There was much of it in the book and other versions I have seen. Jane was too pretty in the the movie. I couldn't imagine Jane being that pretty in the book. It tells me in the book that she was plain. Everything was sickly sweet and glossed over.