Either in movie or book the lines "My hope, my love, my life!" will always make me laugh. I usually add an anguished "My cheesburger" to the end of it.
@littledeadybear I ABSOLUTELLY AGREE WITH YOU.WHEN I READ THE BOOK DALTON AND CLARKE ARE JANE AND ROCHESTER FOR ME.I ALSO THINK THAT THE PARTICULAR VERSION IS THE BEST FROM EVERY OTHER IVE WATCHED SO FAR.TIM DALTON IS SUCH A BRILLIANT ACTOR
For those of you who are saying that Clarke's performance is a bore, then I think you are only proving that Clarke made an excellent performance. Jane Eyre is not enigmatic or anything special aside from her intellect. She is meant to be a boring little plain Jane.
Go read the book. I cannot imagine any other people than Dalton and Clarke when I read the dialogue between them. If you prefer a more interesting Jane, that is fine, but it is not what Bronte wrote or intended.
Indeed, more to the novel, which I like, but the actor and actress lack the chemistry. Jane Eyre 2006, at first I did not like the Jane actress, but then found she matched the character better, despite having more enthusiasm (smiling then suppose to). Even so, she and Mr. Rochester shared an equally burning passion and I fell in love with it. This version is a bore to be honest.
TD does a fantastic job of portraying an utterly selfish arrogant privileged man who seems to honestly feel himself to be above civil and moral law. He is a very unpleasant protagonist and i always feel so sorry for poor Jane that she has such an abysmal life that he wins her affection.
I miss the 80s... I miss to be 14 and watch it on TV and dream me away...dream about true LOVE and passion... I red the book billions ogf times and Rochester=Dalton in this version was exactly mr. Rochester as I imagened... may be a little more hansome here ;))
It was the way I saw it when I read it. TD is not overacting, this is the way an arrogant Man acts when love is walking away. MF would have been as good as TS if the script was better.
I dont care what anyone says but Timothy Dalton is the HOTTEST Mr. Rochester. Yes, this Jane is boring, but he makes up for it. Mr.Rochester is really the most emotional character in the book and i think he did the best......that man looked like hot fudge in this movie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We watch movies to see the book in action so authenticity should not be discounted. Dalton is not overreacting - he is caught in darkness, his escape, love, will not save him & he is @ fault. Love can be maddening & we forget this in our subdued world unless there is a news worthy crime of passion. She wants to save him but principles learnt in sanity must be obeyed in madness. Indeed this was the best. Toby like Orson Welles was also good. BUT, this was INTENSE, RAW & SENSUALLY DARK.
My fave is absolutely the 2006-version... Honestly, this Jane actress just don't do it for me, I don't think she acted very convincingly.. sorry.. :(
My favorite Jane Eyre adaptation has to be the 2006 version but after watching this movie this comes up closely to second. Been reading the book and love it so much. Its my favorite book of all time and probably is my favorite movie as well.
@SKA336 I am that much smaller then my husband, my kids (being taller than me) say I look like a child next to him. Once when I was pregnant my husband almost got beat up by a stranger who mistook me as a child. Still one can not choose whom they love. I imagen it was worse for my great grandparents, he was 6'4" and she was 5' hehe
Timothy Dalton does a pretty good job of showing his love and passion towards Jane, but Zelah Clark's acting throughout the movie was very emotionless. Jane Eyre was a passionate woman who was deeply in love with Mr. Rochester, and he knew it, too. In the novel, Jane was sobbing, and sorrowful, and struggling with her thoughts of leaving. Unfortunately this is not captured in this scene. It was very dissappointing.
I grew up with Orson Wells as Rochester. I think it was one of my mum's favourite movies. Then this series came out, I thought Dalton was amazing. Brooding and a bit scary but passionate, he's what I imagined Rochester would be like. This scene was my favourite.
I love the new series, especially Jane. And although Rochester is nothing like I imagined he'd be (I actually laughed when I first saw him) by the end you can't imagine anyone else.
@KellyGreen5555 You are so right. She does not seem to be in love with Mr. Rochester at all. She does not show any emotion and is completely cold. Terrible portrayal of Jane.
the only scene i liked from this movie was the gypsy scene. i like the 2006 version you can watch that movie and still be surprised by the twists of the book.
utterly terrible, zelah clarke may be petite like jane but that is where the similarity starts and ends. she has no presence at all, she's totally flat, lifeless and it's impossible to believe that she loves this man. i had to watch this at school and it was 5 hours of torture, thank god i had already read the book or this adaptation would have put me off for life!
This is such an important scene and so beautifully acted here-although I think that there should have been a little more feeling (she wept in the book) in Jane's acting-Ruth Wilson did a much better job, as did Charlotte Gainsborough(sp) in the Zeffirelli version. That being said, WHY did they not put this in the 2006 or in the Zeffirelli/John Hurt version version? They deleted the scene in 2006, WTF?? It's such an important part of the book!
You see Jane is a very passionate woman; Zelah Clarke portrays her very passionless this is so unlike the book in which she sobs and cries about leaving Rochester
In 1983, I was 15 years old, and I fell in love with Timothy Dalton from this scene! Personally I think Dalton is too good-looking for the character (the book is quite clear that he's not handsome) but his intense portrayal is spot-on to how he's depicted in the book.
@jadeyes914 Rochester has a tough time with emotions, and I think that's what's happening here. He just can't control his rage and despair at losing her. I think it's quite true to the scene in the book.
I like the 2006 version the best...I know it desviates more than this one from the book. But i don't like the actress that plays Jane on this one. Dalton outshines her... he's a way better actor than her. I liked the 2006 version because I find both actors great....more equal in talent.
The first time I watched this scene it was almost painful--you hurt for Rochester, but you're also a little embarrassed because most people's first instinct is to try to protect their emotions. They retreat, and Rochester pursues. Your heart pounds, you want to look away, but you can't. He's letting it all out, and there's nothing you can do but watch until the end. Beautiful acting.
i really do prefer the 2006 version above the other. Both Ruth Wilson but mostly Toby Stehens are very very good and Toby has such a gorgeous voice that I could listen to his voice for days.
love it, love it more than I can say. They captured the spirit of this romantic and sad scene of the original novel. The actor is so great. This version is much better than the latest one in which they change the conversation+ too much sexual action which only destroy the beauty of this. Thnx for posting this one
this version may be more true to the book but that doesn't discount the fact that clarke lacks any acting presence and that dalton is borderline overacting to compensate. being a replica of the book isn't the most important element (why not just read the text??).
the 2006 version gave a really interesting take on the scene which I think is great, especially when the actors had such great chemistry. anyone who thought the 06 scene was too raunchy obviously doesn't watch films rated over PG13!!
@fatsmackenzie I think Dalton is a pretty fantastic Rochester...the character is overly passionate, bordering on madness in this scene... But, DANG, Clarke bores me throughout this whole version.
I have to agree, also, that the 2006 version is pretty fantastic. :3
@fatsmackenzie They think the 2006 version is too raunchy? Really? The book is so sensual how could they grip over that? I also agree with this scene. I like it, but I think Dalton is the better actor. The 06 version is the only time I've actually enjoyed watching Rochester and Jane.
What happenend to the 1996 version? Do they skip it? Sadness... The '83 is much much more accurate to the book than 2006. It was the dialogue I first fell for, not the heated passion of the 2006 version. Then again, I am a teenager.... WHO SAYS NO TO BED MAKE-OUT SCENES?
Oh, and Dalton is the perfect Rochester in my eyes. He is just like I imagined him when I read the book at the age of 12 or smth like that, and it still remains so to this day.
2006 version seems to be modernized to cater to the younger audiences, and that's my problem with it. Everything seems to be a tad bit exaggerated, it's faster-paced and their language/accent is not as sophisticated as I would imagine it to be in 19th century. And wtf is the bed scene for????????? I love this version and always will, even though it has it's flaws.
@minkuce I am entirely with you. This is my favourite version and always will be. The 2006 seemed not as sophisticated, and with language that suits todays standards. And anyway, Rochester is portrayed more accuratley in this one.:)
Zelah Clarke was just 27-28, Jane is 18 in the book. 28 is not old! I think there is generation diffrenes in comments. I m 37 y.o, and I think this version is the very best! I feel uncomfortable to see the other versions,because I think the actors plays very ... overplayed. bu the younger audiens,they wants some ...mmm.. more passion?
I love Timothy Dalton here as Mr. Rochester, but I don't like Zelah Clarke as Jane at all. She seems too old here. I imagined Jane more like she is in the 2006 version.
In the 2006 version I liked Toby Stephens very much, but I think he was too beautiful to be Mr. Rochester :D,
I imagined him a bit older and not so good-looking
i love this version with timothy dalton, who i think is a very good (very tall) rochester. but i must say, i dont really like Jane in this version, she appears to old. But Rochester i love, he is meant to be more fiercly in love than we see him in other versions. i like the 2006 version too, and Toby Stephens makes a more 'dashing' Rochester. As for Jane, i think the 2006 version is better, as is the chemistry between the actors, possible because there isnt a foot of height difference :D
Wow! OMGosh this is like totally exactly like the book. I think Im gonna watch this version now! The only problem... What the crap is with their voices?
This Is My Favourate Part Of The Whole Series. It Always Makes Me Cry, I Just Want To Be There To Comfort Him. This Is mY Favourate Adaption Of Jane Eyre :)
In this version they respect the scene, like in the book....He stayes in front of her door, takes her to the living room and they talk...But I must say I prefere 2006 version, is more...romantic I think
The dialogue really strikes me, but this Jane feels too serene for somebody who has been mangled by life, and Rochester is simply frightening with his aggressive passion.
The quality is very good. But I (17) cant identify with it, especially in comparison to the 2006version.
I much prefer the 2006 one. This Jane just looks much too old - and the chemistry between the actors isn't nearly as intense.
I don't think it has to be word for word to the book to be good. Actually, a lot of the time, in a movie adaption, using old material in a different way but keeping the essence of the original is much more effective. I think that's the case here.
Is she on her knee in the 83 one? Because if not, she must be fucking tiny. I dislike this version. I'm sorry, but I don't like the way he keeps raising his voice at her. It wouldn't sway me, that's for sure.
Dalton&Clarke are altogether more believable than the actors in the 2006 version. This kind of scene does not require "modern" acting but exactly what D&C are doing. She is not cold, in fact I think she's very good at portraying Jane's shock and horror at the prospect of living in sin, even if he is the love of her life. If anything, it is the "bed scene" in the 2006 version that is utterly out of place. Let us not forget: this is supposed to be a period piece, not just a beautiful love story.
No. The acting is quite good. The dialogue is difficult, but they were just trying ton stay to the book. Why are you blaming the actiors? Can you tell me what they should do different?
I imagined Mr. Rochester not so wild. I looked at him and saw the actor not the character.
But you know, I think I must see the full film before judging - to feel the whole atmosphere. I'm sorry for such an emotional comment. it was written under the influence of the moment.
The "bed scene" in 2006 version is trully out of place but to my taste emotions are more sincere.
This is only my opinion, I hope I haven't offended anyone.
wow thats so BAD! omg....could they get anymore corny?? my favs are 1997 and 2006. this rochester and jane is horrible.... :/ I know 1997 is a little bad too, at times...but its better than this. and 1996 was even worse than this....
Well this version was more like the book, but I really don't think Mr. Rochester would be weeping like that! He is much stronger in the book. I like the 2006 version a little bit better because it shows the passion they have for one another! and how hard it musthave been for Jane to leave! I think the 2006 version portrays Jane's strength much, much better!
Hmm, I did not read the book, but the movie let me think of Jane as a strong Charakter facing problems ...well shown in the new 2006 Version, while the expression Jane in the 1983 Version gives the impression of constant, unbearble suffering of a small grey mouse???!!!!
This Szene do not touch me, the dialog shows a lot of deep feeling, but there is too much highvoiced weeping Lament for my taste ;-)
This is almost word for word from the book. The acting is eellent. What are you guys talking about? Its just a very melodramatic sene. But what would you have them do different? I mean rather then change the story from the book?
@lollipopfop : "This is almost word for word from the book. The acting is eellent."
Exactly. Timothy Dalton does his best with what he was given, and I rather like his Rochester, but he was given dialogue from a book, not made for a screenplay**. Which results in a rather theatrical outcome that is more 1950s than 1980s.
**Even in contemporary books people don't speak the same way as they would in real life. Much less so in books from the 19th century.
(cont.) The raw emotion from Rochester just gets jammed by theatrical wordiness.
The 2006 version keeps almost none of the dialogue but all of the emotion. And there is interaction between Rochester and Jane! Even if one does not like them rolling around on a bed, the heart of that scene is still there, and powerfully so. There is a deleted scene that shows Rochester's despair even better. Pity it got cut out.
in my opinion in like Mr rochester in this one but jane lacks passion....i like this scene in jane eyre 1983.n i like the script ...but overall i prefer 2006..coz der is a better chemistry between jane n rochester n its more romantic .....
True, 83 is much like a play, long wordy scenes, static camera work etc. I really like the words, it brings it close to the book, but as some have said it's very dramatic! This, I can forgive because I believe Rochester is this wildly passionate character (to the point of obession), all to Daltons credit. Totally agree with Gamdursol, not much chemistry though.
I've watched the entire 1983 version and liked it very much! Apart I really like both actors and I think they do a very good job, altough Timothy Dalton is much, much too handsome. The problem is, in my opinion, that they have no chemistry. You can see it in the proposal scene and when she returns to him at the end of the story. In this scene he ends up doing all the work, and you can almost see him deteriorate throughout the scene until he ends up being overdramatic and difficult to believe.
Oh, this is sooo theatrical, and so close to the book. I don't remember Rochester shouting so much, tho. It seems to me like it's on the stage, not watching the movie. Very outdated.
KW: Eek! Watched it again. I really like this, I guess. I loved this scene, but I thought maybe it was a bit melodramatic how Timothy Dalton held his head in his hands to cover his face. But, I just read the book. That truly keeps the spirit of this scene. In the book Mr. R buries his head in the couch. This scene was so wonderful it sent me back to the book to study, and it was done well here. A true climax, which I didn't understand from some of the other versions.
KW: Wow! This is really awesome. I saw the 2006 version first and really love it. But, this after the wedding scene with Dalton is much more like the book. And, very, very profound. I like it. (And, I don't like to compare. Someone said the 2006 version was "sensual", and that is what it is. Beautiful and sensual and flawless. Just different than this one.)
I simply LOVE this scene, I love the way they play, dear God they're so good together!! it's definitely my favourite, it doesn't even need a comparison from my point of view with the 2006 version, like galinaqt said so well, looking as modern people put in old fashioned clothes.
I think this and the 2006 version are good...but 2006 is more "gothic" which is truer to the spirit of the book.
This is almost...funny. The acting is a little silly - Dalton is too handsome, and good acting does not equate to shouting when angered...it's about nuances. Still he's a good Mr Rochester in other ways...
I think Zila Clark is brilliant! its so many feelings there if you see little better... all the nuanses on her face its just lovely... I LOVE this version.its "Jane Eyre" as it must be.
I think Zelah Clarke is the best Jane Eyre, she doesn't talk as much as some film Janes- but we must remember she is the narrator of the book and that's how we have access to her feelings. She was telling the story from the past with her commentary. I'm sure she was very stoic as the events happened. Jane Eyre is the type of person that always try to maintain composure at the expense of her personal feelings. Zelah's performance highlighted the self control.
i love the orson welles version, this dalton/zelah version second, then toby stephens third.
the hurt/charlotte one doesnt even rank...very dumbed down, the language which makes the writing so wonderful completely gone, and hurt's accent HURTS, and charlotte is a terrible jane, she walks around like death....and i felt no chemistry between them.
the 2006 and 1983 films compared, the 1983 definitely stays true to the book... I don't like the 2006 version at all (although it's better filmed and acted--Dalton exempted-- of course...)
A wonderful piece of acting from Timothy Dalton. He really made the scene. I can't help but admire it. The new 2006 version is awsome too. Thank you for posting.
Better acting? Ruth blubbered and sobbed or giggled for the most part. Toby Stephens was fine but lacked Dalton's depth. And he was too young & handsome. Granted, Dalton was too hot too. But he fits "Vulcan like" while Toby looks way too fluffy. And the deformities? Toby doesn't even lose his hand!
And for havens sake, Rochester in the book DID have a lot of mood swings. As to the new Mr. Rochester I think he is a bit too cold, and Jane is too hot :)
Yeah, that a bit of funny when Jane sais to Dalton Rochester that he is not handsome, but if I were asked so blintly I'd definitely answer the same :)
Well, I think the portrayal of 1983 Jane is more true to what the English lady would be acting at that time in England, especially the one that grew up in the religious boarding school. At least this is my picture from reading many English novels of that time. I think the new Jane is too modern. I'd never picture that sciene two of them laying on the bed.
It's so old-school acting that I can't enjoy it! A bit ridiculous for me! And Timothy Dalton is not manly enough to be Rochester, and the actress playing Jane... she's more like a doll than a real person. I love the 2006 BBC version, it is so close to my heart. People must have had feelengs in the 19th century too, and that version shows it and it's great! My favourite scene is that when Jane asks Rochester to let her visit her aunt they are so cute in that scene!
I don't like the way of acting of that Jane Eyre, and the choice of Tim Dalton was stupid (He is too awesome to play Rochester),but we must admit that version is the most faithful to the novel of Charlotte Brontë. The new version of the BBC is wonderful, passionate and romantic, but they change personalities of pricipals characters. So what version is the better?
I believe different viewers put different meaning in the word "faithful", and in addition to that - faithful to what? The novel's text? Or how the characters are depicted? If the latter - well, then it depends how the reader interprets the novel's text. My opinion is that the BBC mini from 1973, in general, is closest to the novel. Hovever, although a very good scene in JE73, not the closest in this particular scene. Here JE83 is closer. (Search YT for 'Jane Eyre 1973 - Clip 4' for comparison.)
I agree with you, everyone has a different view of the novel, that's normal. When I said faithful, I thought at the strict, the objective view. For example, Rochester is decribed, physically ,not like someone beautiful, that's the only thing which choke me, when I watched this version. Except that small detail, the version of 1973 is the closest of the novel.
great green coffee beans, i wanna see this version in full... *shivers* this is so intense, it literally brought tears to my eyes. Dalton's Rochester super-glued me to the screen
I don't like the old version. I much prefer the new one. I think the old version had great actors, but the person who played Jane wasn't how I imagined her to be at all.
My favorite moment from 07.00 when Jane says But i can not BE yours.And after he kisses her and says -And now...and now...It is SO heartbreaking...(((
Totally agree, Julia, and thanks for putting it so well. I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings by being blunt but I was horrified by the '06 version (as with the '05 Pride & Prejudice). The whole point of Jane Eyre was that her virtue was strong enough to stop her from even kissing a married man--after she knew he was married. The smooching on the bed in the '06 version was almost sex...AFTER Jane knew Rochester was married! Modern rewriting, ugh...can nobody understand what "morality" is now?
What they did in the 2006 version i agree was not true to the book and i would have liked to see Ruth and Toby act that out, however what you have to take in to concideration is that the 2006 version was trying to bring in a wider audience. The 83 version is true to the book but i feel personal that Timothy carried that whole scene!!! i'm sorry if i've affended fans of Zelah Clarke but for me her performance was flat.
I know this is a much more true version of the book, but I still perfer the 2006 version. I think the acting is better, and I think Toby Stephens makes a better Rochester.
Yes, JuliaDelta, i've read the book many times and I like it very much. I like the version with Timothy Dalton, but the one with Toby Stephens and Ruth Wilson impress me much more.
I've always loved this version...I also feel it is truest to the book and period the book represents. Mr. Rochester's intensity and draw on Jane's character in this version is superior. The attraction between these two characters was never suppose to be a physical one initially...it was that they found true companionship in each other and found themselves individually through each others company. I like that this version preserved that....
I completely agree. You took the words right out of my mouth! I love everything about this version. The book is one of my favorites and I was SO glad to see that Tim and Zelah did it so much justice. :)
This version is far superior to the 2006 film. Wow, it has been a long time since i have watched this version, fantastic. Rochester is so intense with Jane, the way he just grabs her and pleads with her to stay and love him. Just great!
I getting this version out from the library years ago...
Timothy Dalton is quite amazing as Rochester. I like the 2006 version too, I just think both the actors play Rochester in a slightly different way.
As for the difference in height between the actors, isn't Jane supposed to be very small and delicate looking, almost childish, in the book? The actress here fits that criteria really well.
He is passionate and beautiful (too beautiful true) and she is reserved, very reverent, a little prudish, but also passionate. Perhaps the restraint shown by both characters does not appeal to modern sentiments-no nudity.
I agree that their vast difference in height is a little awkward. And the actress paling Jane looks a little old. Isn't Jane supposed to be, what?, 18 years old?
Either in movie or book the lines "My hope, my love, my life!" will always make me laugh. I usually add an anguished "My cheesburger" to the end of it.
Cherrysakura5 3 days ago
@littledeadybear I ABSOLUTELLY AGREE WITH YOU.WHEN I READ THE BOOK DALTON AND CLARKE ARE JANE AND ROCHESTER FOR ME.I ALSO THINK THAT THE PARTICULAR VERSION IS THE BEST FROM EVERY OTHER IVE WATCHED SO FAR.TIM DALTON IS SUCH A BRILLIANT ACTOR
annetekoul 2 weeks ago
For those of you who are saying that Clarke's performance is a bore, then I think you are only proving that Clarke made an excellent performance. Jane Eyre is not enigmatic or anything special aside from her intellect. She is meant to be a boring little plain Jane.
Go read the book. I cannot imagine any other people than Dalton and Clarke when I read the dialogue between them. If you prefer a more interesting Jane, that is fine, but it is not what Bronte wrote or intended.
littledeadybear 3 weeks ago 2
Indeed, more to the novel, which I like, but the actor and actress lack the chemistry. Jane Eyre 2006, at first I did not like the Jane actress, but then found she matched the character better, despite having more enthusiasm (smiling then suppose to). Even so, she and Mr. Rochester shared an equally burning passion and I fell in love with it. This version is a bore to be honest.
JayLynnization 1 month ago in playlist More videos from 01ZaRa10
TD does a fantastic job of portraying an utterly selfish arrogant privileged man who seems to honestly feel himself to be above civil and moral law. He is a very unpleasant protagonist and i always feel so sorry for poor Jane that she has such an abysmal life that he wins her affection.
judithj1 3 months ago 2
I miss the 80s... I miss to be 14 and watch it on TV and dream me away...dream about true LOVE and passion... I red the book billions ogf times and Rochester=Dalton in this version was exactly mr. Rochester as I imagened... may be a little more hansome here ;))
OlHa1972 4 months ago
It was the way I saw it when I read it. TD is not overacting, this is the way an arrogant Man acts when love is walking away. MF would have been as good as TS if the script was better.
louisanna30 5 months ago 4
i actually prefer mia wasikowska an michael fassbenders version, this one is kind of creepy
holachao76435281 6 months ago
WTF why have they made this scene so scary? Rochester is psychotic... :o
BlueberrySparrow 7 months ago 2
oh dear Timothy Mr Rochester...how can a girl simply resist u @@ ?
wincipoet 8 months ago
I'm sorry, but I laughed at 8:40 and 9:22. He's waaaay overacting.
TheRentFan 9 months ago 2
I dont care what anyone says but Timothy Dalton is the HOTTEST Mr. Rochester. Yes, this Jane is boring, but he makes up for it. Mr.Rochester is really the most emotional character in the book and i think he did the best......that man looked like hot fudge in this movie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
moonwolf2024 11 months ago
yes jane! u want to kiss the husband of bertha mason, it's not his fault she's crazy and that "divorce" isn't part of their vocabulary!
awesomeinuyashagirl 11 months ago
We watch movies to see the book in action so authenticity should not be discounted. Dalton is not overreacting - he is caught in darkness, his escape, love, will not save him & he is @ fault. Love can be maddening & we forget this in our subdued world unless there is a news worthy crime of passion. She wants to save him but principles learnt in sanity must be obeyed in madness. Indeed this was the best. Toby like Orson Welles was also good. BUT, this was INTENSE, RAW & SENSUALLY DARK.
louisanna30 11 months ago 2
Timothy Dalton for sure!!!!!
tanejaable 11 months ago
omg she's sooooo tiny. I mean whoa! Aside from that...she's really not a good actor. Yuck. Why did they put her with Dalton? They have no chemistry.
Storms11 11 months ago
I love this version! better than the 2006. i could watch it a hundred times. The emotion of mr. rochester's love is so much, i love it.
bubblesx777 1 year ago
my all time fave is 2006 version, Toby and Ruth are simply unbeatable!
dontfascisizeme 1 year ago 3
My fave is absolutely the 2006-version... Honestly, this Jane actress just don't do it for me, I don't think she acted very convincingly.. sorry.. :(
MissLicn 1 year ago 4
My favorite Jane Eyre adaptation has to be the 2006 version but after watching this movie this comes up closely to second. Been reading the book and love it so much. Its my favorite book of all time and probably is my favorite movie as well.
TheMsJessicaNapier 1 year ago 2
Cheesy!!!!! 2006 version much much better. My favorite movie of all time.
MynameisMusicGirl1 1 year ago
She's too small for him, she's like a child it's disturbing to watch!!
Dalton is lovely though, I like the 2006 version myself it's brilliant and Toby and Ruth have fantastic chemistry :-)
SKA336 1 year ago 2
@SKA336 I am that much smaller then my husband, my kids (being taller than me) say I look like a child next to him. Once when I was pregnant my husband almost got beat up by a stranger who mistook me as a child. Still one can not choose whom they love. I imagen it was worse for my great grandparents, he was 6'4" and she was 5' hehe
amikomurakami 1 year ago
@SKA336 Actually Jane was supposed to be really small, and I pictured Mr. Rochester being much taller than Jane when I was reading the book.
RetroJenny 1 year ago
Timothy Dalton does a pretty good job of showing his love and passion towards Jane, but Zelah Clark's acting throughout the movie was very emotionless. Jane Eyre was a passionate woman who was deeply in love with Mr. Rochester, and he knew it, too. In the novel, Jane was sobbing, and sorrowful, and struggling with her thoughts of leaving. Unfortunately this is not captured in this scene. It was very dissappointing.
MWils641 1 year ago
I grew up with Orson Wells as Rochester. I think it was one of my mum's favourite movies. Then this series came out, I thought Dalton was amazing. Brooding and a bit scary but passionate, he's what I imagined Rochester would be like. This scene was my favourite.
I love the new series, especially Jane. And although Rochester is nothing like I imagined he'd be (I actually laughed when I first saw him) by the end you can't imagine anyone else.
summerseasongs 1 year ago
This Jane is such a bore...she is not worthy of Dalton's Rochester.
KellyGreen5555 1 year ago 6
@KellyGreen5555 You are so right. She does not seem to be in love with Mr. Rochester at all. She does not show any emotion and is completely cold. Terrible portrayal of Jane.
MWils641 1 year ago
the only scene i liked from this movie was the gypsy scene. i like the 2006 version you can watch that movie and still be surprised by the twists of the book.
enchantedmistress06 1 year ago 2
she looks tiny compared to him, I llike the jane from 2006 version.
sonasri0789 1 year ago
utterly terrible, zelah clarke may be petite like jane but that is where the similarity starts and ends. she has no presence at all, she's totally flat, lifeless and it's impossible to believe that she loves this man. i had to watch this at school and it was 5 hours of torture, thank god i had already read the book or this adaptation would have put me off for life!
emerald764 1 year ago 3
@emerald764 You are so right. Nothing like the book at all.
MWils641 1 year ago
This is such an important scene and so beautifully acted here-although I think that there should have been a little more feeling (she wept in the book) in Jane's acting-Ruth Wilson did a much better job, as did Charlotte Gainsborough(sp) in the Zeffirelli version. That being said, WHY did they not put this in the 2006 or in the Zeffirelli/John Hurt version version? They deleted the scene in 2006, WTF?? It's such an important part of the book!
venetiancat 1 year ago
You see Jane is a very passionate woman; Zelah Clarke portrays her very passionless this is so unlike the book in which she sobs and cries about leaving Rochester
Schoolgirl325 1 year ago
Comment removed
Schoolgirl325 1 year ago
Very book accurate word for word but I feel no love or passion from Zelah Clarke's portrayal of Jane Eyre
Schoolgirl325 1 year ago
I think if you took the Jane from 2006 with the 1983 rochester it would have been a better scene. The 1983 Jane's voice is way too squeaky.
paleobc65 1 year ago 2
I think if you took the Jane from 2006 with the 1983 rochester it would have been a better scene
paleobc65 1 year ago 2
she looks like an old lady, I don't like her acting, she is so fake
andrychan 1 year ago
she looks like an old lady
andrychan 1 year ago
I think Jane looks so little, vulnerable, unprotected here... And so strong at the same time...
OlHa1972 1 year ago
In 1983, I was 15 years old, and I fell in love with Timothy Dalton from this scene! Personally I think Dalton is too good-looking for the character (the book is quite clear that he's not handsome) but his intense portrayal is spot-on to how he's depicted in the book.
Janeite1 1 year ago
this version just makes me angry. i like 2006's rochester better. this guy has no right to be snapping at her.
jadeyes914 1 year ago
@jadeyes914 Rochester has a tough time with emotions, and I think that's what's happening here. He just can't control his rage and despair at losing her. I think it's quite true to the scene in the book.
Janeite1 1 year ago 4
dalton is great- i dont like jane
srhpirate2 1 year ago
@srhpirate2 I agree
Schoolgirl325 1 year ago
how can she just walk away?????????? masen or no masen i could never leave him thus, especialy once his decleration was so profound and earnest
turnedonbyfangs93 1 year ago
i love this!!!! :0 sooo good
Bekylee9991 1 year ago
thank you for posting these comparisons.
I like the 2006 version the best...I know it desviates more than this one from the book. But i don't like the actress that plays Jane on this one. Dalton outshines her... he's a way better actor than her. I liked the 2006 version because I find both actors great....more equal in talent.
carolhj22 1 year ago
The first time I watched this scene it was almost painful--you hurt for Rochester, but you're also a little embarrassed because most people's first instinct is to try to protect their emotions. They retreat, and Rochester pursues. Your heart pounds, you want to look away, but you can't. He's letting it all out, and there's nothing you can do but watch until the end. Beautiful acting.
Avari20 1 year ago 5
this version is closer to the book but i happen to like the other version better =D
much more romantic. <3
ispksarcasm 1 year ago
i really do prefer the 2006 version above the other. Both Ruth Wilson but mostly Toby Stehens are very very good and Toby has such a gorgeous voice that I could listen to his voice for days.
Well done
raptout91 1 year ago 2
love it, love it more than I can say. They captured the spirit of this romantic and sad scene of the original novel. The actor is so great. This version is much better than the latest one in which they change the conversation+ too much sexual action which only destroy the beauty of this. Thnx for posting this one
sueclooney1214yt 1 year ago 2
this version may be more true to the book but that doesn't discount the fact that clarke lacks any acting presence and that dalton is borderline overacting to compensate. being a replica of the book isn't the most important element (why not just read the text??).
the 2006 version gave a really interesting take on the scene which I think is great, especially when the actors had such great chemistry. anyone who thought the 06 scene was too raunchy obviously doesn't watch films rated over PG13!!
fatsmackenzie 2 years ago 38
@fatsmackenzie I totally agree with you!
Schoolgirl325 1 year ago
@fatsmackenzie I think Dalton is a pretty fantastic Rochester...the character is overly passionate, bordering on madness in this scene... But, DANG, Clarke bores me throughout this whole version.
I have to agree, also, that the 2006 version is pretty fantastic. :3
tesstheroo 10 months ago
@fatsmackenzie They think the 2006 version is too raunchy? Really? The book is so sensual how could they grip over that? I also agree with this scene. I like it, but I think Dalton is the better actor. The 06 version is the only time I've actually enjoyed watching Rochester and Jane.
SnapeHermioneshipper 10 months ago
@fatsmackenzie It wasn't raunchy at all, just sensual :D
shortsandsheep 9 months ago
What happenend to the 1996 version? Do they skip it? Sadness... The '83 is much much more accurate to the book than 2006. It was the dialogue I first fell for, not the heated passion of the 2006 version. Then again, I am a teenager.... WHO SAYS NO TO BED MAKE-OUT SCENES?
neotigger143 2 years ago 4
I'm liking Dalton as Rochester. Not crazy about his Jane, though.
gillyrosh 2 years ago
'you won't kiss the husband of Bertha Mason.'
Such heartbreaking words!
junejoyleng 2 years ago
Oh, and Dalton is the perfect Rochester in my eyes. He is just like I imagined him when I read the book at the age of 12 or smth like that, and it still remains so to this day.
minkuce 2 years ago 2
2006 version seems to be modernized to cater to the younger audiences, and that's my problem with it. Everything seems to be a tad bit exaggerated, it's faster-paced and their language/accent is not as sophisticated as I would imagine it to be in 19th century. And wtf is the bed scene for????????? I love this version and always will, even though it has it's flaws.
minkuce 2 years ago 3
@minkuce I am entirely with you. This is my favourite version and always will be. The 2006 seemed not as sophisticated, and with language that suits todays standards. And anyway, Rochester is portrayed more accuratley in this one.:)
classicalgirl01 2 years ago
Zelah Clarke was just 27-28, Jane is 18 in the book. 28 is not old! I think there is generation diffrenes in comments. I m 37 y.o, and I think this version is the very best! I feel uncomfortable to see the other versions,because I think the actors plays very ... overplayed. bu the younger audiens,they wants some ...mmm.. more passion?
p.s. sorry my english))
OlHa1972 2 years ago 3
I love Timothy Dalton here as Mr. Rochester, but I don't like Zelah Clarke as Jane at all. She seems too old here. I imagined Jane more like she is in the 2006 version.
In the 2006 version I liked Toby Stephens very much, but I think he was too beautiful to be Mr. Rochester :D,
I imagined him a bit older and not so good-looking
Liisamyts 2 years ago 4
i love this version with timothy dalton, who i think is a very good (very tall) rochester. but i must say, i dont really like Jane in this version, she appears to old. But Rochester i love, he is meant to be more fiercly in love than we see him in other versions. i like the 2006 version too, and Toby Stephens makes a more 'dashing' Rochester. As for Jane, i think the 2006 version is better, as is the chemistry between the actors, possible because there isnt a foot of height difference :D
jessicacoles100 2 years ago 2
Wow! OMGosh this is like totally exactly like the book. I think Im gonna watch this version now! The only problem... What the crap is with their voices?
FreakaboutJChrist 2 years ago
This Is My Favourate Part Of The Whole Series. It Always Makes Me Cry, I Just Want To Be There To Comfort Him. This Is mY Favourate Adaption Of Jane Eyre :)
xDannie007x 2 years ago 3
please do a comparison of the "proposal scene" of the three adaptions.
kissmyshades 2 years ago
In this version they respect the scene, like in the book....He stayes in front of her door, takes her to the living room and they talk...But I must say I prefere 2006 version, is more...romantic I think
ellenush08 2 years ago
The dialogue really strikes me, but this Jane feels too serene for somebody who has been mangled by life, and Rochester is simply frightening with his aggressive passion.
The quality is very good. But I (17) cant identify with it, especially in comparison to the 2006version.
acerflots 2 years ago
And Jane's voice is really annoying. The acting and passion between them is just not the same here, I don't think.
toothbrush55 2 years ago
I much prefer the 2006 one. This Jane just looks much too old - and the chemistry between the actors isn't nearly as intense.
I don't think it has to be word for word to the book to be good. Actually, a lot of the time, in a movie adaption, using old material in a different way but keeping the essence of the original is much more effective. I think that's the case here.
toothbrush55 2 years ago 2
I agree. I don't feel any real chemistry here. It looks and feels forced. Eww.
Hah.
Dancin2DanceMusiq 2 years ago
I think it would be impossible to tire of watching this scene.
ADyingFaith 2 years ago 32
OMG thanks for this words! I am so glad somebody else likes it so much...
01ZaRa10 2 years ago 6
@01ZaRa10
Me too, Timothy Dalton is sooo adorable. :))
Get lost, Jane Eyre! Mr. Rochester is mine! :D
Schraubili 1 year ago 2
Is she on her knee in the 83 one? Because if not, she must be fucking tiny. I dislike this version. I'm sorry, but I don't like the way he keeps raising his voice at her. It wouldn't sway me, that's for sure.
sblood311 2 years ago
Dalton&Clarke are altogether more believable than the actors in the 2006 version. This kind of scene does not require "modern" acting but exactly what D&C are doing. She is not cold, in fact I think she's very good at portraying Jane's shock and horror at the prospect of living in sin, even if he is the love of her life. If anything, it is the "bed scene" in the 2006 version that is utterly out of place. Let us not forget: this is supposed to be a period piece, not just a beautiful love story.
beignet58 2 years ago 2
Yes, this is more like the book. The most literary adaption.
But gosh!! the acting is soooo baaad!!!
WatercolourHazard 2 years ago
No. The acting is quite good. The dialogue is difficult, but they were just trying ton stay to the book. Why are you blaming the actiors? Can you tell me what they should do different?
lollipopfop 2 years ago
I imagined Mr. Rochester not so wild. I looked at him and saw the actor not the character.
But you know, I think I must see the full film before judging - to feel the whole atmosphere. I'm sorry for such an emotional comment. it was written under the influence of the moment.
The "bed scene" in 2006 version is trully out of place but to my taste emotions are more sincere.
This is only my opinion, I hope I haven't offended anyone.
WatercolourHazard 2 years ago
wow thats so BAD! omg....could they get anymore corny?? my favs are 1997 and 2006. this rochester and jane is horrible.... :/ I know 1997 is a little bad too, at times...but its better than this. and 1996 was even worse than this....
blkRNcld101 2 years ago
Well this version was more like the book, but I really don't think Mr. Rochester would be weeping like that! He is much stronger in the book. I like the 2006 version a little bit better because it shows the passion they have for one another! and how hard it musthave been for Jane to leave! I think the 2006 version portrays Jane's strength much, much better!
couturegirl90 2 years ago
he's really a great Rochester... but she's like.... a stiff rock. It would be amazing to miss both version and get Ruth Wilson with Tim Dalton ;)
krissbennet 2 years ago
Hmm, I did not read the book, but the movie let me think of Jane as a strong Charakter facing problems ...well shown in the new 2006 Version, while the expression Jane in the 1983 Version gives the impression of constant, unbearble suffering of a small grey mouse???!!!!
This Szene do not touch me, the dialog shows a lot of deep feeling, but there is too much highvoiced weeping Lament for my taste ;-)
SvartOrk 2 years ago
This is almost word for word from the book. The acting is eellent. What are you guys talking about? Its just a very melodramatic sene. But what would you have them do different? I mean rather then change the story from the book?
lollipopfop 2 years ago
@lollipopfop : "This is almost word for word from the book. The acting is eellent."
Exactly. Timothy Dalton does his best with what he was given, and I rather like his Rochester, but he was given dialogue from a book, not made for a screenplay**. Which results in a rather theatrical outcome that is more 1950s than 1980s.
**Even in contemporary books people don't speak the same way as they would in real life. Much less so in books from the 19th century.
(cont.)
CaveatVideot 11 months ago
(cont.) The raw emotion from Rochester just gets jammed by theatrical wordiness.
The 2006 version keeps almost none of the dialogue but all of the emotion. And there is interaction between Rochester and Jane! Even if one does not like them rolling around on a bed, the heart of that scene is still there, and powerfully so. There is a deleted scene that shows Rochester's despair even better. Pity it got cut out.
CaveatVideot 11 months ago
Zelah Clarke has no pasion, she is so wooden and so borring. In 2006 version Ruth Willson is much better, almost perfect Jane.
CikiTuzas 2 years ago 2
I adore Tim Dalton, he's gorgeus!!!!! But she's pathetic, an horrible actress...I don't like it !!!!
eskapulita 2 years ago
yessss agree
acerflots 2 years ago
My God, she's so small next to him!
gummibears7526 2 years ago
this is much more similar to the book than the newer version.......although i prefer the 2006 one the most.............. ;)
332synic233 2 years ago 2
in my opinion in like Mr rochester in this one but jane lacks passion....i like this scene in jane eyre 1983.n i like the script ...but overall i prefer 2006..coz der is a better chemistry between jane n rochester n its more romantic .....
i love da book...charlotte bronte is gr8
amerrydrugs 2 years ago 3
timothy dalton is too agressive..
okay, rochester is not a nice and kind man.. but dalton is too much for me.
LOLbaby000 2 years ago
agreed......
....he's too grabby :)
332synic233 2 years ago
8.44 dalton cries tears of frustration i cant work with wood!
nameofnobody 2 years ago
True, 83 is much like a play, long wordy scenes, static camera work etc. I really like the words, it brings it close to the book, but as some have said it's very dramatic! This, I can forgive because I believe Rochester is this wildly passionate character (to the point of obession), all to Daltons credit. Totally agree with Gamdursol, not much chemistry though.
2hopskipjump2 2 years ago
I've watched the entire 1983 version and liked it very much! Apart I really like both actors and I think they do a very good job, altough Timothy Dalton is much, much too handsome. The problem is, in my opinion, that they have no chemistry. You can see it in the proposal scene and when she returns to him at the end of the story. In this scene he ends up doing all the work, and you can almost see him deteriorate throughout the scene until he ends up being overdramatic and difficult to believe.
Gamdursol 2 years ago 3
Much prefer Toby and Ruth,
there is a lot more passion between them, you get the feeling they would like nothing more than to rip the clohes off each other,
but these two are way to stiff,
Jane looks and sounds to much like a old maid, not a passionate, girl in love.
msmoviefanatic 2 years ago
how is yelling at her compelling her to go with him?
SteeleMina 2 years ago
Oh, this is sooo theatrical, and so close to the book. I don't remember Rochester shouting so much, tho. It seems to me like it's on the stage, not watching the movie. Very outdated.
sanyam71 2 years ago
KW: Eek! Watched it again. I really like this, I guess. I loved this scene, but I thought maybe it was a bit melodramatic how Timothy Dalton held his head in his hands to cover his face. But, I just read the book. That truly keeps the spirit of this scene. In the book Mr. R buries his head in the couch. This scene was so wonderful it sent me back to the book to study, and it was done well here. A true climax, which I didn't understand from some of the other versions.
iwilder 2 years ago 2
KW: Wow! This is really awesome. I saw the 2006 version first and really love it. But, this after the wedding scene with Dalton is much more like the book. And, very, very profound. I like it. (And, I don't like to compare. Someone said the 2006 version was "sensual", and that is what it is. Beautiful and sensual and flawless. Just different than this one.)
iwilder 2 years ago 3
I don't like the 83' one that much. The girl who played Jane bothered me and Dalton was way too overdramatic, i mean it's not a Shakespeare play lol
BarbieGirlz001 2 years ago 4
I simply LOVE this scene, I love the way they play, dear God they're so good together!! it's definitely my favourite, it doesn't even need a comparison from my point of view with the 2006 version, like galinaqt said so well, looking as modern people put in old fashioned clothes.
it's far off better, thanx for the vid! :*
RRRAAALLLUUUCCCAAA 2 years ago
"In-DOMITABLE!!!"
Ah, wonderful :)
I think this and the 2006 version are good...but 2006 is more "gothic" which is truer to the spirit of the book.
This is almost...funny. The acting is a little silly - Dalton is too handsome, and good acting does not equate to shouting when angered...it's about nuances. Still he's a good Mr Rochester in other ways...
SandyBreeches 2 years ago 2
This is SOOOOOOOOOOOO much better! it is about real love, not just physical.
catlover9990 2 years ago
This was by far one of the best renditions of this scene from the book! Dalton was amazng, he made me feel Rochester's sadness just like in the book.
mEdiEvalaRtiSt 2 years ago 3
I love very much this movie, but I still think Toby Stephens and Ruth Wilson are the best Mr. Rochester and Jane Eyre.
13ma98 2 years ago 3
I think Zila Clark is brilliant! its so many feelings there if you see little better... all the nuanses on her face its just lovely... I LOVE this version.its "Jane Eyre" as it must be.
OlHa1972 3 years ago
I think Zelah Clarke is the best Jane Eyre, she doesn't talk as much as some film Janes- but we must remember she is the narrator of the book and that's how we have access to her feelings. She was telling the story from the past with her commentary. I'm sure she was very stoic as the events happened. Jane Eyre is the type of person that always try to maintain composure at the expense of her personal feelings. Zelah's performance highlighted the self control.
authorgirl87 3 years ago 3
its a little wordy for me, but its very well acted and directed :D
dodginraindrops 3 years ago
LOVE THIS MOVIE.
supergirlforeman 3 years ago
Timothy Dalton is brilliant in this, he's perfect.
evchen3 3 years ago
i love the orson welles version, this dalton/zelah version second, then toby stephens third.
the hurt/charlotte one doesnt even rank...very dumbed down, the language which makes the writing so wonderful completely gone, and hurt's accent HURTS, and charlotte is a terrible jane, she walks around like death....and i felt no chemistry between them.
kila4 3 years ago
YOU WIIIIIIIILL!
I love this version...how amazing!
Fujikorific 3 years ago
This version stays more true to the book,but i like the 2006 one better,it's more passionate,better acted and better filmed!
itsjustanickname 3 years ago
the 2006 and 1983 films compared, the 1983 definitely stays true to the book... I don't like the 2006 version at all (although it's better filmed and acted--Dalton exempted-- of course...)
nosuchnouschke 3 years ago 2
very boring, i don't think this is romantic, 2006 is much better
sanne1994 3 years ago
I think in 2006 version the best than ever.
I accept this version exactly same at the book..but the other one,more (the most) romantic than this..
ypine 3 years ago
This part of their seperation is better in this version.Other versions are either boring or overmade.
Bufurzone 3 years ago
A wonderful piece of acting from Timothy Dalton. He really made the scene. I can't help but admire it. The new 2006 version is awsome too. Thank you for posting.
elinor33 3 years ago
Boring ,2006 way better ;)
mmhs20 3 years ago
2006 is dumbed down. Read the book.
Elisabetta611 3 years ago 7
well weather the 2006 one is not like the book the 2006 has way better acting for sure
Ms x
mmhs20 3 years ago
Better acting? Ruth blubbered and sobbed or giggled for the most part. Toby Stephens was fine but lacked Dalton's depth. And he was too young & handsome. Granted, Dalton was too hot too. But he fits "Vulcan like" while Toby looks way too fluffy. And the deformities? Toby doesn't even lose his hand!
Elisabetta611 2 years ago 2
actually, he did miss a hand.... just the wrong one ;)
but on the rest of what you said, i agree :)
332synic233 2 years ago
@Elisabetta611 but oh so much more enjoyable XD I admit it. The 2006 version of this season is by far my favourite. Shameless, I know XD.
MadameChristie 1 year ago
And for havens sake, Rochester in the book DID have a lot of mood swings. As to the new Mr. Rochester I think he is a bit too cold, and Jane is too hot :)
Yeah, that a bit of funny when Jane sais to Dalton Rochester that he is not handsome, but if I were asked so blintly I'd definitely answer the same :)
78rap 3 years ago 6
Well, I think the portrayal of 1983 Jane is more true to what the English lady would be acting at that time in England, especially the one that grew up in the religious boarding school. At least this is my picture from reading many English novels of that time. I think the new Jane is too modern. I'd never picture that sciene two of them laying on the bed.
78rap 3 years ago 2
It's so old-school acting that I can't enjoy it! A bit ridiculous for me! And Timothy Dalton is not manly enough to be Rochester, and the actress playing Jane... she's more like a doll than a real person. I love the 2006 BBC version, it is so close to my heart. People must have had feelengs in the 19th century too, and that version shows it and it's great! My favourite scene is that when Jane asks Rochester to let her visit her aunt they are so cute in that scene!
kinguska87 3 years ago
"..My favourite scene is that when Jane asks Rochester to let her visit her aunt they are so cute in that scene! "
! CERTAİNLY !
ypine 3 years ago
I don't like the way of acting of that Jane Eyre, and the choice of Tim Dalton was stupid (He is too awesome to play Rochester),but we must admit that version is the most faithful to the novel of Charlotte Brontë. The new version of the BBC is wonderful, passionate and romantic, but they change personalities of pricipals characters. So what version is the better?
(Sorry for faults of language, I'm french)
mimo9513 3 years ago
I believe different viewers put different meaning in the word "faithful", and in addition to that - faithful to what? The novel's text? Or how the characters are depicted? If the latter - well, then it depends how the reader interprets the novel's text. My opinion is that the BBC mini from 1973, in general, is closest to the novel. Hovever, although a very good scene in JE73, not the closest in this particular scene. Here JE83 is closer. (Search YT for 'Jane Eyre 1973 - Clip 4' for comparison.)
domramalaja 3 years ago 4
I agree with you, everyone has a different view of the novel, that's normal. When I said faithful, I thought at the strict, the objective view. For example, Rochester is decribed, physically ,not like someone beautiful, that's the only thing which choke me, when I watched this version. Except that small detail, the version of 1973 is the closest of the novel.
mimo9513 3 years ago
this version is kinda creepy. he has to many moodswings
WallisISaGirlsName 3 years ago
Thsi one is more true to the book, but I have to confess, I can't decide =P
Alies 3 years ago
great green coffee beans, i wanna see this version in full... *shivers* this is so intense, it literally brought tears to my eyes. Dalton's Rochester super-glued me to the screen
CassandraMotou 3 years ago
I´m sorry. But I´m allowed to put on YT videos only to 10 minutes. The whole scene would be longer.
01ZaRa10 3 years ago
its cool ^_^ wasnt a request, just a statement- since its really freakin awesome
CassandraMotou 3 years ago
The Dalton version is still on Youtube, just search for Jane Eyre 83
LadyAmaltheaUnicorn 3 years ago
ive already found it, after scouring YT a bit lol thanks tho!
CassandraMotou 3 years ago
I don't like the old version. I much prefer the new one. I think the old version had great actors, but the person who played Jane wasn't how I imagined her to be at all.
Milfuelle100 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Reiculously dramatic, rediculously passionate, rediculously obsessive. Rochester needs to take a chill pill.
TheFenianWarrior 3 years ago
My favorite moment from 07.00 when Jane says But i can not BE yours.And after he kisses her and says -And now...and now...It is SO heartbreaking...(((
OlHa1972 3 years ago
I´m glad you like it too. It´s a very sad scene but.. the idea that somebody loves you so much.. and you cannot...
01ZaRa10 3 years ago
No, thank you. I thought it was obvious enough from my comments that I truly LOVE THE BOOK and that`s why I dislike 2006 version.
This "Jane Eyre" (1983) brought the feeling back to me of reading "Jane Eyre" for the first time. It has caught the very spirit of the book.
JuliaDelta 3 years ago
Totally agree, Julia, and thanks for putting it so well. I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings by being blunt but I was horrified by the '06 version (as with the '05 Pride & Prejudice). The whole point of Jane Eyre was that her virtue was strong enough to stop her from even kissing a married man--after she knew he was married. The smooching on the bed in the '06 version was almost sex...AFTER Jane knew Rochester was married! Modern rewriting, ugh...can nobody understand what "morality" is now?
tapestrythreads 3 years ago
What they did in the 2006 version i agree was not true to the book and i would have liked to see Ruth and Toby act that out, however what you have to take in to concideration is that the 2006 version was trying to bring in a wider audience. The 83 version is true to the book but i feel personal that Timothy carried that whole scene!!! i'm sorry if i've affended fans of Zelah Clarke but for me her performance was flat.
stasiauk 3 years ago 2
I know this is a much more true version of the book, but I still perfer the 2006 version. I think the acting is better, and I think Toby Stephens makes a better Rochester.
oozebeckastan 3 years ago 5
I steel prefer the 2006 version- whith Toby stephens and Ruth Wilson.
13ma98 3 years ago 5
Have you read the book?
I love this book, I love to read it. But I couldn`t watch even 10 min. from 2006 version. it was awful, at least for me.
JuliaDelta 3 years ago 2
Yes, JuliaDelta, i've read the book many times and I like it very much. I like the version with Timothy Dalton, but the one with Toby Stephens and Ruth Wilson impress me much more.
13ma98 3 years ago 3
Charlotte Bronte would be much "impressed" from this version also, I am sure.
What a plain, little, and especially QUAKERISH governess?!
2006 version is just modern interpretation of a classical book, not adaptation.
JuliaDelta 3 years ago
I am with you. To me 2006 is the worse adaptation among all. It is not true to the book and time.
galinaqt 3 years ago
i do like timothy dalton as rochester, and i like his jane aswell she's more understated and subtle
sg1danny11 3 years ago
I've always loved this version...I also feel it is truest to the book and period the book represents. Mr. Rochester's intensity and draw on Jane's character in this version is superior. The attraction between these two characters was never suppose to be a physical one initially...it was that they found true companionship in each other and found themselves individually through each others company. I like that this version preserved that....
eppechacek 3 years ago
I completely agree. You took the words right out of my mouth! I love everything about this version. The book is one of my favorites and I was SO glad to see that Tim and Zelah did it so much justice. :)
fluteandmetal 3 years ago
This version is far superior to the 2006 film. Wow, it has been a long time since i have watched this version, fantastic. Rochester is so intense with Jane, the way he just grabs her and pleads with her to stay and love him. Just great!
bushka99 3 years ago 4
this version is the most faithful representation to the book....Dalton even cried like Rochester would have...well done...
hoolacat 3 years ago 10
I getting this version out from the library years ago...
Timothy Dalton is quite amazing as Rochester. I like the 2006 version too, I just think both the actors play Rochester in a slightly different way.
As for the difference in height between the actors, isn't Jane supposed to be very small and delicate looking, almost childish, in the book? The actress here fits that criteria really well.
friendlyrabbit 3 years ago 3
I think the Dalton/Clarke version is the best.
He is passionate and beautiful (too beautiful true) and she is reserved, very reverent, a little prudish, but also passionate. Perhaps the restraint shown by both characters does not appeal to modern sentiments-no nudity.
jlfittro 3 years ago 6
I agree that their vast difference in height is a little awkward. And the actress paling Jane looks a little old. Isn't Jane supposed to be, what?, 18 years old?
pianista24 3 years ago 4