Customer Reviews

Jane Eyre

5 star:		(235)
4 star:		(63)
3 star:		(24)
2 star:		(13)
1 star:		(16)

 

 

A few months ago I watched both this 4-hour BBC production and the more recent A&E version starring Ciaran Hinds and Samantha Morton in one sitting ... an Eyre-athon! And in my opinion, this version EASILY won hands-down as the best (I've already seen just about every other filmed version). I've since watched it many times and never tire of it. If you love the novel, what a glorious, breathtaking treat this is!!

Yes, this production is long (good news for Bronte fans!) and it has a somewhat dated feel, but both the casting and acting are so brilliant that you won't want to watch any other version!

Timothy Dalton IS Edward Rochester... it's that simple. I don't care that other reviewers claim he's too handsome. Dalton is attractive, certainly, but no pretty-boy. In fact he possesses a craggy, angular dark charm that, to my mind, is quite in keeping with the mysterious, very masculine Mr R. And he takes on Rochester's sad, tortured persona so poignantly. He portrays ferocity when the scene calls for it, but also displays Rochester's tender, passionate, emotional side as well. (IMO the A&E production suffers in that Ciaran Hinds - whom I normally adore - seems to bluster and bully his way throughout. I've read the book many times and I never felt that Rochester was meant to be perceived as a nonstop snarling beast!)

Whenever I reread the novel, I always see Zelah Clarke as Jane. Ms. Clarke, to me, resembles Jane as she describes herself (and is described by others). Small, childlike, fairy... though it's true the actress doesn't look 18, she portrays Jane's attributes so well. While other reviews have claimed that her acting is wooden or unemotional, one must remember that the character spent 8 years at Lowood being trained to hold her emotions and "passionate nature" in check. Her main inspiration was her childhood friend Helen, who was the picture of demure submission. Although her true nature was dissimilar, Jane learned to master her temper and appear docile, in keeping with the school's aims for its charity students who would go into 'service'. Jane became a governess in the household of the rich Mr. Rochester. She would certainly *not* speak to him as an equal (as Samantha Morton does in the A&E version). Even later on when she gave as well as she got, she would always be sure to remember that her station was well below that of her employer. Nevertheless, if you read the book - to which this production stays amazingly close - you can clearly see the small struggles Zelah-as-Jane endures as she subdues her emotions in order to remain mild and even-tempered.

The chemistry between Dalton and Clarke is just right, I think. No, it does not in the least resemble Hollywood (thank God! It's not a Hollywood sort of book) but theirs is a romance which is true, devoted and loyal. And for a woman like Jane, who never presumed to have *any* love come her way, it is a minor miracle.

The rest of the casting is terrific, and I love the fact that nearly every character from the book is present here. So, too, is much of the rich, evocative dialogue. This version is the only one that I know of to include the lovely, infamous 'gypsy scene' and in general, features more humor than other versions I've seen. In particular, the mutual teasing between the lead characters comes straight from the book and is so delightful!

Jane Eyre was, in many ways, one of the first novelized feminists. She finally accepted love on her own terms and independently, and, at last, as Rochester's true equal. Just beautiful!

Now, WHEN WILL THIS BE RELEASED ON DVD?

EDIT: This has just been mastered and released on DVD in its original unedited format, which means a whole extra hour of footage... it's now 5 hours instead of 4, woot woot! You KNOW I'm happy! Buy it NOW!!

I've seen every version available (even the Scott/York one), and the Dalton/Clarke version is light years ahead of them all.

Timothy Dalton IS Rochester....passionate and vulnerable, flawed and ALIVE, his very existence tainted by that one "fatal error" that wrecked his past and threatens his future (with Jane). He drew me in completely, making me feel all of Rochester's conflicting emotions, aided by a delightful script that was faithful to Charlotte's great book. Whole passages of dialogue appear to have been excerpted, and oh! did those words ring true when filtered through Dalton's resonant, warm, perfectly-accented voice. His performance was so magnificent, I was able to suspend disbelief over the one flaw in casting him--he really *is* too good-looking (technically speaking) to play Rochester.

As for Zelah Clarke, she simply made Jane Eyre come to life, straight from the pages of Bronté's book, and there is no better compliment I can give her. I've heard some say that she was too "old" to play Jane, but she had such a grasp of the character, embodying Jane's very mannerisms, that honestly, this point never even occurred to me while watching the video. Now THAT's the mark of a great performance!

This video is a definite "must-buy"---one to be watched and savored over and over again. Enjoy!

Jane Eyre is without question my all time favourite book. I first read it in high school and I vivdly recall the hairs standing up on the back of my neck the first time Jane heard "Grace Pool"'s insane laughter in the night! This is the most faithful film version I've yet to see. OK, Timothy Dalton is too handsome to play Rochester, but he has the character nailed to a tee - passionate, tortured, sardonic with just the right level of bitterness at the way "fortune has knocked me about". And Zelah Clark is the best Jane I've come across. Quiet, understated, but she's no shrinking violet and does not hesitate to stand up to the brooding, unpredictable and intimidating Edward Fairfax Rochester. And the wonderful dialog comes almost directly from the book. I think the reason this is the best is because it was a mini-series and could accommodate the entire story (for the same reason the Firth/Ehle version of Pride & Prejudice is the best version of that story). A two hour movie cannot do either story justice.

I absolutely abhored the Zefferelli version - who in their right mind would cast William Hurt as Rochester???? And Charlotte Gainsbourg's Jane was a bit pouty and petulant. Plus, some scenes were combined or compressed to fit the time requirements distorting the story. For many of the same reasons, I didn't care for the A&E version, though Samantha Morton was a pretty good Jane. But the usually wonderful Ciaran Hinds (see him in Austen's Persuasion) portayed Edward as so overly bitter (bordering on pathetic) that I couldn't see why anyone would fall in love with him. I don't think that I've ever seen the George C Scott/Trish Van Devere version. And it's been eons since I've seen the Joan Fontaine/Orson Wells version, but if memory serves, the casting was good, but again, the story was compressed for time and the dialog was subpar. There are just some lines of dialog that simply MUST be included for me to enjoy any version of this story and if those lines are not there it's curtains!

If you are a fan of Jane Eyre, you might want to read a book called Wide Sargasso Sea by Jean Rhys. It's a prequel and tells a version of the story of Edward's time in Jamaica and his marriage to his first wife (a rather strange story focusing on voodoo, slave unrest and her mother's mental instability). It's also been made into a movie (circa 1998?) which was okay.

I love Jane Eyre as a novel and this wonderfully in-depth BBC version is the only filmed Jane Eyre that I think brings alive the period mood and murky, turbulent romanticism of the book. Zelah Clarke seems a bit too old to be the Jane of my imagination but she is a highly accomplished actress and brings the perfect amount of Victorian propriety and Brontesque-feminist assertiveness to the character. She plays the part young and shy... and yet ageless and bold at the same time. Her Jane is not a 20th century interpretation; she seems to be the real thing right out of Bronte's mind. And she's adorable; a friend you would want to have. Timothy Dalton is so seductive that one has to laugh when Jane calls him ugly; but his looks are unique enough to accept that he is not of the ideal Victorian mold of attractiveness. Like Clarke, Dalton understands the inner fire of his role and can play his Rochester as a self-brutalizing "non-beauty". Where his Rochester excels over all others is in his sensual utterance of Bronte's wonderful words (oh a screenplay that chooses to use the novel's own best lines; how refreshing!)... his beautiful command of the language and his magnetic power of presence give us finally the Rochester that made Bronte legendary. Clarke and Dalton have tons of chemistry in their scenes together; and it's never tame. Their cat-and-mouse courtship is worth the price of the whole video alone. The production values aren't the most lush ever filmed; they're of a typically early-BBCtv-enclosed look... but it takes only a minute or two to forget that completely as the characters blossom to life and fill the screen with real passion and vividness. Compare to the rich expensive production values of the recent duds starring William Hurt and Ciaran Hinds as newer Rochesters... who cares how much effort was spent on costuming and beautiful landscape shots when those protagonists have no chemistry and people seem either yawningly uninvolved in the plot or blurting out poor screenplay language with a total lack of inter-connection? This slightly older BBC version is full of emotion, harrowingly gothic surrealism and deeply gorgeous romanticism. And it's literate; the language is unexcelled. The actors themselves make it a lush and ultimately beautiful production of a very high quality. Cheers to the thrilling direction as well; the scary scenes ARE scary and the love scenes are intense. This really feels like Bronte's Jane Eyre brought to visual life. I own more than one film version, including the older Orson Welles version, but this one's the only one I watch when I really want to immerse in the full richness of the story.

I viewed this set of 2 VHS tapes with my daughter who is reading the book in a high-school English class. I thought that hearing the dialogue and seeing the period costumes and settings would help to bring the book to life for her. I was astonished by the richness and accuracy of this edition. Frequently, video adaptations of novels are weak substitutes and leave you disappointed, since the characters and scenes from your imagination are far richer than any shortened screen adaptation can ever be. Now, having seen this lavish BBC production starring Timothy Dalton as the irascible Rochester and Zelah Clarke as the irrepressible Jane, I can't imagine them any other way.

The video production was very accurate and true to the novel, leaving out non-critical scenes and some dialogue, but not changing events or people or altering the outcome in any way. At just under 4 hours, you may want to take several days to view the video, but you won't regret the time spent. The themes of feminine strength, love and forgiveness are still relevant today, hundreds of years after Charlotte Bronte wrote the book. The video can also serve as a useful supplement to understanding the novel (although I would never advise a student to forego reading the novel in favor of the video).

Having seen most of the film and video versions of Charlotte Bronte's classic novel, this BBC version by far is the best. The acting performances are particularly distinguished, not only by the lead characters of Jane and Rochester but also by the supporting cast. Timothy Dalton's charismatic Rochester is so powerfully convincing that his performance makes the "other" Rochesters anemic in comparison. His lines resonate with authority, and he is suitably harsh and sardonic one moment, then arrestingly tender and humorous the next. Dalton has a physical presence and fine voice that capture the essence of the male lead...excellent casting, here. I think there is great chemistry between Dalton's Rochester and Zelah Clarke's Jane. True, Dalton is much too easy on the eyes to visually be an authentic "ugly" Rochester, but his characterization and delivery are so accurate I am quite willing to overlook this minor point! Zelah Clarke's Jane is an intelligent combination of iron will and reserve, passion and compassion. Visually she is a petite, pale Jane, although not altogether "plain". I liked the way she visually "blossomed" from a repressed, somewhat dowdy schoolmarm to the glowingly beloved betrothed of her "master". I think Clarke's interpretation is also the most authentic I have seen; however there were moments I think that a little less reserve might be called for. Both Dalton and Clarke are admirable in the way they convey thought and emotion without words. The scenes between our leading characters here are often heartrending and spiced with pithy humour. I thought the featured "Mr. Brocklehurst" was suitably prissy and annoying. Also "Mrs. Reed" in this version was superbly done, as was "Mrs. Fairfax". Great performances all around. The novel, "Jane Eyre" is complex and difficult to do justice to on film or video. The near 4 hour length of this version is certainly called for. I don't believe the impact of the story can be fully realized in 1 1/2 to 2 hours as other versions have attempted to do.I am gratified that certain portions of the book were not left out, such as the "gypsy" and Moore House segments, and that the Gateshead and Lowood portions were not hastily glossed over. I am also pleased how faithful to the novel this version is, and that the lines were pulled straight from the novel. A true Jane Eyre addict who is very familiar with the book can easily go back and forth from video to novel without feeling a sense of outrage from the liberties that other screenplays have taken. I have such respect for this video of Jane Eyre that it is Dalton's and Clarke's voices I "hear" when I read the book. This cast and performance would have benefited from a more lavish "cinematic" production....I look for a better musical score in particular, but these are minor points...the strong performances here are what make this video version of Jane Eyre superior to the rest. For those who enjoy this genre, this video is a must-see, and for many, a must-have. I hope this comes out on DVD soon, and includes the material that I understand was cut from the original BBC airing.

I watched the recent 2006 Masterpiece Theatre adaptation of Jane Eyre, with a nagging certainty, this wasn't the dark, complex tale I remembered from childhood. So I revisited the book, which confirmed my suspicions. Over the next few months people started buzzing about a 1983 adaptation which, among other things, was more faithful to the novel.

I obtained a copy and as promised, it was more faithful to the novel . . . among other things.

- For the pervasive dark tone, only the 1944 adaptation with George Barnes' exquisite black and white photography and lighting captures the mood VISUALLY, at least to me. The necessary rewrites (this one's only 97 min.) are well crafted and tonally consistent. But the story is woefully incomplete and the acting may at times, seem a mite self conscious to the modern ear.
- The 2006 (228 min) is visually lovely, but maybe TOO lovely, even sumptuous in places where understatement or stark ugliness would better serve. And Rochester has been so neutered, he's unrecognizable, if not out-and-out awkward. The rewrites here range from prosaic to shamefully expository. And the Gateshead-Lowood segment is so truncated, her grim childhood context barely registers. To her credit, Ruth Wilson (Jane) makes the most of what she is given...but sorry, no cigar.

One of the most defining elements in Charlotte Brontė's story telling, is her language. Her words not only tell us of feelings and events, but through sharp, deliberate dialog, also keenly shape her characters and by corollary, their relationships. For this, only two adaptations are notable. Both by the BBC, done in '73, and '83.

- 1973 (275 min) The plot and language here is faithful to the novel. But personally, I found the performances, too intellectualized to capture the passion and subtleties in the story. It's also rather wordy. Like the '83, the '73 has comparatively low production values -- video interiors, film exteriors, bad lighting, unimaginative camera work. I realize for some folks, that's the deal breaker. But if it's not, read on, because the similarities end there.

- 1983 The more emotionally charged '83 adaptation (which clocks in at 5 hrs.18 min.), staring Zelah Clarke and Timothy Dalton, not only beats out '73, but in my opinion, trumps all the others by deftly balancing all the story's components the best. Here Jane's bleak childhood is given it's weight. From her marginalized upbringing with her hateful aunt, Mrs. Reed, to her perilous life at Lowood Institution -- where beatings, humiliation, unfounded accusations and a relentless barrage of damning judgment, were administered on the regular. Sean Pattenden as young Jane plays the more feisty, rebellious side of Jane's nature, than the sympathetic one, but she does a fine job. Robert James as the sadistic Mr. Brocklehust is sensational. And this may be the first time, Helen Burns is portrayed as more than just a abused, saintly martyr. This Burns is also distant and alarmingly passive, which casts shadows on her rabid dogmatism. Fully fleshing both these characters, allows the controversial "Evangelism" thread, enough presence, to smoothly carry over to her year at Moorhouse. A thread that's usually obscured at best.

Zelah Clarke as adult Jane is restrained, curious, appropriately guarded and willful. Each time I view her performance I'm struck by how profoundly she listens. And how subtly responsive she is. Watch her look of shock and disgust as Rochester nearly hurls the portfolio of art work at her, then blames her for keeping Adele up too late. Initially some of this might be missed due to the shock of her costar's thunder.

What can I say about Timothy Dalton that hasn't already been said? How about this...
He is the Tony Soprano of Edward Rochesters. Most times you can't tell if he's going to kill her, f*ck her, or shake her hand. Which works spectacularly well. Rochester is after all, about attraction/repulsion. He's the ultimate forbidden fruit. Sure close ups reveal an unfairly handsome man, but that's okay, because Dalton manages to capture Rochester's conflicting nature, with energy to spare... balancing his magnetism, desperation, warmth, wit, playfulness, against his imposing stature, manipulation, sarcasm, brazen sexuality, ethical elasticity, and of course his taste for outrageous debauchery -- like a master juggler. And apologizes for none of it.

And he's sometimes flat out bratty.
When *his* Rochester explains to Mrs Fairfax (Jean Harvey), that Jane bewitched his horse, HE MEANS IT! Which gives Harvey, (who's terrific), a wonderful fall-off-your-chair-in-disbelief moment, when she stammers out, "s-sirrr!?."

Clarke and Dalton are never better than during the first crucial interviews. When Rochester explains to Jane that, "[he's] a trite, commonplace sinner, hackneyed in all the petty dissipations of the rich and worthless."... we don't doubt it. His transitions are flawless. Watch him turn away -- as he conceals from Jane, he's been studying her -- then slip into a trance, fixed on some distant point imperceptible to us, uttering what sounds like nonsense. Lines that might easily land with a thud, move unselfconsciously over the man's tongue. Here Edward also plays the corrective teacher, when he tells her, with certainty, "[repentance] is not the cure..." for what ails him. This is probably the first time Jane's heard anyone say those words and it's a VERY IMPORTANT LINE. Through it all, Clarke 's Jane grapples intensely, turning her enigmatic boss's words over in her head. Opining only when asked, in a balance of poised candor, and soft, deep-seeded concern. And from here this relationship is off to a running start, developing from the point from which Brontė intended. It is also here, we first appreciate the power of the author's language and an artist's ability to translate it.

OTHER NOTABLE SCENES
- About Adele (Jane's Smack-Down) Jane verbally flogs her boss for his abhorrent behavior toward Adele, without breaking a sweat, while exuding moral superiority in the process. You go girl! This is also the first Rochester who actually seems to do something. I mean like work. He even seems good at it. Dalton establishes this in one decisively delivered line at the end.
- After The Fire: Edward holds Jane's hand with an expression of profound warmth and gratitude, while pulling his panicked but entranced employee closer to him. He needs her to stay with him tonight. He cannot justify overpowering her, but he enjoys knowing he can. This scene superbly captures the duality in this character. I think more artful camera work might have helped amplify Jane's POV.
- The Gypsy Scene (Dalton In Drag) He's mostly hilarious and solidly on the mark as he uses Brontė's words to soothe, shock and ultimately manipulate Jane. The scene shifts and Clarke is mesmorizing as she moves from impatience with the feeble fortune teller to near hypnotic fascination by her faint recognition of the words and their oddly insightful messenger.
- After Richard's Departure: The louder he gets, the softer she becomes. Rochester raptures on sardonically, about the virtues of Blanche. In response, Jane softly says "yes sir" three times, hitting the line three different ways. The third time, is in pained resignation and is barely audible. They're both phenomenal here.
- Mrs. Reed's Deathbed: Clarke's spin on Jane's forgiveness of her aunt (Judy Cornwell)is a sharp departure from every other actress I've seen play this scene. Here there is a bite in Eyre's tone. Whatever forgiveness means to *this* Jane, it may not be so generous as to permit forgetting, nor rendering Mrs. Reed free from Eyre's own judgment and disgust. What's important is she's now free of any damage Mrs Reed may have inflicted. To me, this interpretation is closest to the Jane in the novel. And Cornwell is superb, as she hisses out her last words of condemnation at her "tormenter."
- The Proposal: Notable mainly because, Dalton is the only Rochester who really seems to know how to kiss his girl. And his rambling justification about atonement is chilling and exquisite. Otherwise the scene clearly needed reworking and is one of the few instances where you can see the effects of a tight budget and scheduling intrude.
- The Tell-Tale-Torn-Veil: In this explosive scene, Dalton and Clarke lock horns over Grace's continued presence at Thornfield. This helps make the absurd Grace Poole story line a touch more palatable (Carol Gillies as Grace delivers some rare moments).
- Aftermath Of The-Wedding-That-Wasn't: Perhaps the most sensual scene EVER. Jane leaves her room, stumbles, Edward catches her, securing her on his lap, and starts talking softly into her neck in a deep, throaty voice. Jane is palpably exhausted, disheartened, depleted. Sexy and poignant, what more can you ask for.
Unfortunately some of the scene that follows tips into melodrama, even after a good start, (which is rare here). I think this is likely due to time constraints and/or directorial assy-ness. Still there are some great moments to be had. Clarke, who's nearly despondent, fully captures a woman brutally injured, by a mighty blow to the heart.
- Moorhouse: Andrew Bicknell hits a home run as St. John Rivers. He embodies the icy, remote man, whose kind acts are more motivated by securing his box seat in the kingdom of heaven, than his full capacity to feel on earth. "You are ... forgive the word . . . impassioned," he warns Jane, with the hesitancy of telling someone they have a boil on their chin.
- Return To Thornfield: Many great moments here, from his tearful discovery that his wayward faery has returned, to Janes teasing him into a fury.

I could quibble that this or that, might have been tweaked (The occasional scoring is bad and it runs in half hour segments which is annoying. A few scenes needed to be reworked, but only a few). But with 90% plus of remarkable drama, at likely the lowest budget per hour... "quibble" don't amount to a hill of beans. And you know the director Julien Aymes deserves a lot of the credit for that. And Alexander Baron who wrote the dramatization, also did a bang up job.

Despite the low production values (I think most of it was shot on video rather than film, which is entirely excusable given the budget constraints of older BBC productions), this is the best motion picture version of Jane Eyre I have ever seen. The credit for this goes, in my opinion, almost entirely to one person: Timothy Dalton. He portrays Rochester perfectly, and I say this because [enter lit geek] I actually watched this once while following along with the book, and Dalton matched Bronte's descriptions of Rochester's inflections, facial expressions, and emotions scrupulously and to great dramatic effect. (Seriously, anyone inclined to do this should look at the proposal scene. It's uncanny.) [exit lit geek] Dalton is able to convey the many contradictions in Rochester's character and actions--his world-weariness, his humor, his surliness, his kindness, his depression, his barely contained passion, his selfishness, and his subtle, somewhat sinister, manipulativeness. For example, watch the manic matter-of-factness in his face when he says "It's not because she's mad that I hate her!" Watching Dalton, you can see why Rochester poses both a great temptation and a monumental threat to Jane--why she is so attracted to him, and yet has to leave him. My only criticism of Dalton as Rochester is that he is a bit too handsome, but I'm not complaining.

I must agree with those who said that Zelah Clarke looks a bit too old to play Jane (Physically, Samantha Morton--1997--looks the part more than any other Jane Eyre I've seen.), and I need to add that Clarke's enunciation kind of bugged me, but otherwise I think she does an excellent job. Whether trading barbed witticisms or exchanging painful confidences, Clarke and Dalton interact with humor, affection, and intensity.

The one problem with this version, and it is probably a direct result of sticking so close to the book, is that some of the speeches seem to go on a bit too long. But then, this production is more like a play than a movie, so soliloquies don't seem out of place. People who enjoy theater productions (and by this I don't mean _Cats_ or _Beauty and the Beast_) will probably get a lot more out of this production than those who are primarily used to Hollywood films.

I have seen them all, from Joan Fontaine as the far too pretty Jane, to some of the newer made for A&E versions. Even the George C. Scott one has some value if only for the scenery.
Zelah Clark is Jane Eyre, she starts out as homely as Charlotte describes her, but as she falls in love with Rochester, and he with her, she blossoms, and becomes beautiful...but she always was. Timothy Dalton is the BEST Rochester, he IS dark and brooding, he is imperious and mysterious, he fits Bronte's Rochester description to a T. I think that this version makes the underlying story come to light. Two broken betrayed people find each other, understand each other's pain and make the other beautiful if only to each other. They are willing to defy the expectations of society, and follow love, a sincere and wholesome, deep love. He doesnt marry the "beautiful" Blanche Ingram, he marries the deeply beautiful Jane...she does not care about his money as a matter of fact it makes her uncomfortable.
Jane does not follow StJohn Rivers, He is played well as a priggish young Brocklehurst, something about him resonates with Jane as well as repels her, she is striving to do the right thing, and pay a penance for falling in love with a married man.
Dont forget to watch Timothy Dalton beg Jane not to go after the failed wedding...still gives me the shivers...boy did she have will power!

There are many adaptations of Charlotte Brontė's classic novel "Jane Eyre", and taking into consideration the numerous reviews written about them there is also a lively discussion on which of them is the best. The short film adaptations all suffer from the fact that it is simply not possible to cram the whole plot of the novel into a movie of about a 100 min. length, consequently these movies only show few parts of the novel. The TV series have proved to be a more suitable format to render all the different episodes of the heroine's life.

There are three TV mini series, released in '73, '83 and 2006. The 2006 version is not only the worst of these three, but the worst of all Jane Eyre adaptations and a striking example of a completely overrated film. The novel's beautiful lines are substituted by insipid and trivial ones, and crucial scenes are either deleted or replaced by scenes which have nothing whatever to do with the novel. What it all leads to then is that the characters portrayed have not only nothing in common with the Rochester and Jane of the novel and behave in exactly the opposite way as described in the book, but that also their behaviour and language is absolutely not consistent with the behaviour of the period in which the novel is set. It is a silly soap opera, in which the actors look and act as if they had been put in the costumes of the 1850ies by mistake. This "Jane Eyre" (as it dares to call itself) is indeed a slap in the face of Charlotte Brontė.

The 1973 version is very faithful to the novel in that the long dialogues between Mr. Rochester and Jane are rendered in nearly their full length. But what works beautifully in the novel does not necessarily work beautifully on the screen. At times the language of the novel is too complex and convoluted as to appear natural when spoken on screen, and the constant interruptions of the dialogues by Jane's voice-overs add to the impression of artificiality and staginess. And despite the faithfulness to the novel the essence of the scenes is not captured. Another problem is the casting of the main characters. Sorcha Cusack's portrayal of Jane as a bold, self-confident, worldly-wise young woman is totally at odds with the literary model, and Michael Jayston, although a good actor, does simply not possess the commanding physical presence or the charisma necessary to play Rochester. Although a decent adaptation it simply fails to convey the passion and intensity of the novel and never really captivates the audience.

All the faults of the '73 version stand corrected in the TV mini series of '83 with Timothy Dalton and Zelah Clarke. Although from a purist's point of view Timothy Dalton is too handsome, tall and lean to be Rochester, he possesses the essential qualities for the role: He has an imposing physical presence, great magnetism and an air of self-assurance and authority. And despite his undeniable handsomeness he looks grim and stern enough to play the gloomy master of Thornfield convincingly. But the excellence of his performance lies in the way he renders all the facets of Rochester's character. Of all the actors who have played Rochester he is the only one to capture them all: Rochester's harshness, nearly insolence, his moodiness and abruptness, as well as his humorous side, his tenderness, his solicitude and deep, frantic love. Dalton's handling of Charlotte Brontė's language is equally superb. Even Rochester's most far-fetched and complicated thoughts ring absolutely true and natural when Dalton delivers them. He is the definitive Rochester, unsurpassed and unsurpassable, and after watching him in this role it is impossible to imagine Rochester to be played in any other way or by any other actor.

Zelah Clarke delivers an equally excellent performance in a role that is possibly even more difficult to play well than the one of Rochester. She portrays exactly the Jane of the novel, an outwardly shy, reserved and guarded young woman, but who possesses a great depth of feeling and an equally great strength of will. She catches beautifully the duality in Jane's character: her modesty and respectfulness on the one hand, and her fire and passion on the other, her seeming frailty and her indomitable sense of right and wrong. She and Dalton have wonderful chemistry and their scenes together are pure delight.

As regards faithfulness to the literary model this version also quotes verbatim from the novel as does the '73 version, but with one important difference: The dialogues are shortened in this version, but the core lines which are essential for the characterisation of the protagonists and the development of the plot are rendered unchanged. Thus the scriptwriter avoided any artificiality of speech, while still fully preserving the beauty and originality of Charlotte Brontė's language. And in contrast to the earlier BBC version the essence of each scene is perfectly captured.

The plot of the novel is followed with even greater accuracy than in the '73 series. It is nearly a scene for scene enactment of the novel, where equal time and emphasis is given to each episode of Jane's life. It is the only Jane Eyre adaptation that has a gypsy scene worthy of the novel, and the only one which does full justice to the novel's pivotal and most heartrending scene when Jane and Rochester meet after the aborted wedding. Timothy Dalton in particular plays that scene with superb skill. He renders with almost painful intensity Rochester's anguish as he realizes Jane's resolution to leave him, his frantic attempts to make her stay and his final despair as she indeed leaves him. It is a heartbreaking, almost devastating, scene, which will stay with the viewer for a long time.

With even the smaller roles perfectly cast, an excellent script and two ideal leading actors this is the definitive and only true "Jane Eyre".