WORDS CANNOT DESCRIBE HOW MUCH I LIKE TIMOTHY DALTON AS MR ROCHESTER.HIS PERFORMANCE CARRIES ME AWAY SINCE I WAS A LITTLE GIRL.YOU DONT FIND SUCH BRILLIANT TALENTS NOWADAYS
@Kamikazu08 I agree! I bought his audiobooks (he could've been reading a phonebook and I still would've bought them -- LOL) and they are (fans self) criminal! His diction is so perfect, even with the different accents, I could understand every word. They are a trilogy of mystery/crime books by Benjamin Black. I highly recommend them (got mine from Audible.com).
in my opinion, the older the jane eyre films are, the greater they are. for instance, this one is greater than the new one. the new one is just old and pathetic
I ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH YOU.TIMOTHY DALTON WAS THE BEST ROCHESTER EVER.FASSBENDER I THINK WAS JUST OK BUT THE WORST ROCHESTER EVER WAS TOBY STEVENS AND THE 2006 VERSION IS AWFUL IN EVERY ASPECT BECAUSE THEY CHANGED THE NOTION OF THE NOVEL
Just saw the 2011 version and was very disappointed. I tried to like Fassbender as Rochester, but he seemed emotionless. There is absolutely no comparison when you listen to them saying the lines: "Jane Eyre . . . Jane Eyre." Tim's voice wrings your heart; Michael's leaves you cold.
@pacemoy The 1983 version of Jane Eyre is brilliant of course, but after seeing the new version today, the 2011 version, I think it might have been surpassed. Brilliant. Not saying the 1983 version will be forgot. would watch it til the cows come home. the 2011 film is superb.
I fell in love with the 2011 version. I admit, it is a very short and missing a great deal of scenes with a very abrupt ending btu the actors playing Rochester and Jane had such a chemistry! I wish they had been playing in the BBC version....
Jane has a history in teasing him...if you read the book,the whole month before the marriage she did that for dissipate the sexual tension.(and maybe not to submit at her hormones)now the situation is much,much more serious and her instincts are the best.he was wallowing for about 1 year and she snapped him for good ;isn't this L U V!?!?
TD is fantastic at being manly and vulnerable in a split second. Rochester may have lost his sight and hand, but he didn't lose one bit of his masculine pride, which creates a tension between Jane and him that makes their relationship so dynamic. Yet, he is challenging her to grow and to lead a life she deserves, not to merely take pity on him and wait on him like a house nurse. He wants her but only as a full woman.
I love how quickly his head snaps in her direction when she says "down pilot." He still has the hope of Jane being there and now it's finally happened.
It's supurb acting by Timothy Dalton, knocks Stephen's and Hurt into a cocked hat. Best version by far, but it would of been interesting watching Timothy and Charlotte Gainsborough together in the parts.
Why is Jane all "I can build a house and you can sit in my parolour when you need company." Is she teasing him or something? Cuz I would've been all "MARRY ME!!" lol
Timothy Dalton makes one "hell of a" anyone who he portrays! I agree! The Best Rochester, Heathcliff....geeze, since 1969, when Sir Peter O'Toole chose TD for his first role, in THE LION IN WINTER. Katharine Hepburn came in on her day off, to do her dialogue against him, in his first scene. That's over 40 years ago! Thank you, Sir Peter for seeing something in God's magnificent piece of work! Thank you for this~ Janet
Can you all stop trolling each other some people prefer it to be the book and others like when people give a personal interpetation. To each their own. All of them have something good about them just sit back and enjoy the version you like the best and stop debating you will be at it till the end of time.
worst version, except for the one with George Scott. They follow the book too closely--if a movie follows the book so closely, what's the point of the movie?
@shineyourlight55 Oh my! What's the point of the movie? To watch the characters come alive, to cherish your favorite scenes, to relive the book with sight and sound. IMHO, that makes this the best version ;-)
@sporthorse10 but remember, mr rochester thinks he's dreaming and jane thinks he wants her to be his wife, in the book at least. Also, they were engaged at one point, so i would think they had a right to kiss, plus they were both overjoyed at seeing eachother again, because mr r thought she might be dead
Ruth Wilson had all the talent to play Jane but was let down by an awful production,where they bulldozed over the language of the book, replacing it with a trite, and without interior, language. That version, as a result, lacked psychological/moral insights and entirely missed Jane's claim to autonomy (through ideas of self-respect),her wish to gain her own voice within a freely arranged web of human relations.This is what happens when you presuppose what needs to be explored.
They are very different. 2006 is my favourite too, even if I miss the childhood there. But to be honest, Daltons' Rochester is truer to the novel and more fitting to the symbols and metaphores in the book. However, I don't think those aspects work on screen anyway.
Sandy Welch went for the psycology in the 2006 and that is awesomely done. And, at last, Jane Eyre is relieved :-) I think she has been quite missunderstood through the years.
I've read Jane Eyre several times, i have the book, i've seen every Jane Eyre ever made, especially this one, and when Jane returns it makes me understand only 1 thing about women as a whole and that is i know nothing about them at all.
Charlotte Brontë herself fell in love with a married man and likely this story contains a lot of private wishes. It was probably a rare thing in those days for a woman to meet a man who expected her to be intelligent like a man. Not a thing to be easily thrown away.
I find this part a little off..... Jane doesn't go and cuddle Mr. Rochester while she tells him she will be his companion. At first she kisses him, but then she thinks that Mr. Rochester might be angry with her, and that is when she offers to just be his companion.
After all, most housekeepers don't start kissing their "masters" while trying to get a job at their house..... that would be a bit disturbing indeed.
Ahh, that wasn't my point. I said that it is a bit weird that she offers to manage his house and such while kissing him. It's not how it is in the book. She's a bit shy when she seems him again, and that's why at first she only offers to be a companion for him.
Ok. ) Perhaps the creators of the series had in mind, that she hastened to assure him of her love in this way: "I agree on everything." And about the "manage his house": Jane says so because she in embarrassment. It means:"I will help you in everything, regardless of whether you are getting married on me or not". She can not say: let's hurry and marry me ... )))
Generally in this series a lot of strange things ))). For example, Jane said that spilled half a glass of water, when we clearly saw that this was not ))).
Tiny details like that don't bother me. I just found some a bit weird, as it was not how it is in the book. If you want to make a movie out based on a great book, then why not follow every detail you can?
I think it is impossible to follow every detail. Then all the film adaptation will be similar to each other. For us in fact interesting what director took from the book into a film, what not, where he made accents, as actors have coped with this interpretation of the book. Then we will have something to discuss ;)
I couldn't agree with your comments more, SportHorse10 - I also think this adaptation was faithful to the book on the whole, but somethings were a little off, like you said. For example here Rochester justs shouts at Jane 'Leave me!' in a sudden outburst of temper when she suggests being his companion... The thing is,
that never happened in the book and he was overjoyed to have Jane back again, so this was a little unromantic and pointless in my opinion, even if the director was trying to show Rochester's hurt feelings etc.
He shouts at her 4:31. This is contrary to the book. This is not just a detail. This is a profound misunderstanding of what happened with Rochester, when Jane was not with him. Misunderstanding of what happened not only with his BODY (he is blind cripple now) but of what happened with his SOUL (true repentance and humility before God). He loses the light in eyes, but gets true light in the soul. Such a person would not scream. Return Jane is God's blessing and mercy to him. Did he reject it?
It is, at least, a misunderstanding about what pity means in chapter XXXVII of the novel:
«[...] you have an affectionate heart and a generous spirit, which prompt you to make sacrifices for those you pity [...]. I suppose I should now entertain none but fatherly feelings for you: do you think so? Come - tell me.
«[...] I am content to be only your nurse, if you think it better.
«"But [...] you must marry one day."»
Rochester sees pity as good thing; but he wants more from Jane...
It's not a temper tantrum, it's the right reaction of a man who is being pitied when pity is the thing he least needs. People with a physical disability are often patronised and treated like retarded children, which is what Jane does when she states her intention of being his nurse. But Rochester is exactly the same man he used to be: he is blind, not stupid. Therefore his angry reaction is absolutely realistic.
he is passionate..plus you have to think of what he went through when Jane left him..once she's with him again, it makes sense he couldn't contain his emotion. It's just his way.
I am going to take a big leap and say that I did not like this version as much as the 2006 version with Toby Stephens and Ruth Wilson. I think that if that movie had had the script of this movie it would have been perfect, but to me it still stands as the best. Toby Stephens as Rochester took my breath away.
I agree - if only 2006 had been more faithful to the book - the two of them had wonderful chemistry - they teased each other and Stephens played each nuance so well
I saw 1996, 1983 and 2006. I like 2006 the best, and it's a tie between 1996 and 1983. TD was a great Rochester on the agressive part, but I thought he lacked the darkness R is supposed to display. Also, I couldn't stand ZC as Jane, and I didn't see the chemsitry between them. But it was close to the book. 1996 was too short, and felt rushed, and the chemistry was also a bit lacking. 2006 despite being further from the book, showed a dark/humorous R which is IMO what he's supposed to be...
and finally, 2006 also managed to make me feel the same emotions as when I read the book, whereas none of the other versions did, despite the fact that they took a lot of liberties in that last one. I totally saw why they loved each other, and it wasn't clearly shown in the other versions.
Michael Jayston (1973) is the best Rochester, from my point of view. But Dalton does supremely too. Only a little overacted for my taste in some scenes. Prabably not his fault (but the director's).
Daltons the best and most complete Rochester, the 83 version is the best, Zelah's an excellent Jane and is growing on me all the time. Brilliant, one of my favourite period story's.
When I re-read the book, I only can see Clark and Dalton as Jane and Rochester. Other versions are great, but 1983 is the best by content and performance.
I love it when people compare Rochesters! My personal opinion is that Toby Stephens in the 2006 version is the best. He is handsome...enough, but not HOT. His acting is great, not too much, but not too little. He is dark and brooding. Timothy Dalton is second. But sometimes he's too over the top, but I love the emotion he puts into the character. Hinds and Hurt too old. Rochester is only 20 years older than jane which makes him 38. Orson Welles in the 1944,very good. has dark brilliant eyes!
Love timothy he is a great actor for Rochester. He rolls his Rs so nicely. I think Jane is a little soft spoken in this version, i much prefer her in the 1996 version. But Timothy is handsome we all agree. Rochester is supposed to be ugly...I like the 2006 rochester just a bit better. This movie is just like the book with every line.
Oh, how could she just leave him like that without even a goodnight kiss??? Especially since they had been separated for a year. If I were Jane, I would have sat on his lap and kissed, embraced & caressed him for hours. Maybe that was inappropriate back then, but love transcends time & customs. Oh well, my imagination will have to do...
I think Jane did the right thing to leave Mr. Rochester not knowing whom she had been with. To make him just as jealous as he tried to do her with that messing with Blanche. It is a form of pay-back, you know. :-)
I agree. May be it is a cultural thing. Not in every culture people hug or kiss each other when they meet or leave. BYW I saw your comment on Hurt's version. The last scene he was like a creature from a horror movie. I had hard time to get rid of his image. 96th adaptation is only a notch better than 06. It doesn't have any passion. He neither looks neither plays book's character.
Hmm... I think somehow I could JUST agree with your arguement over Hurt's portrayal. He had good posture, and his hair was shaggy (so that gave him something of a wild look), but overall he didn't really measure up to Rochester as portrayed here by Timothy Dalton.
You know I wonder if that has to do with this idea of modern acting. People may say that acting from the old Hollywood until the 80's was more cheesy or more dramatic, but I will take that over this new almost non emotional acting that doesn't even pull you in the way those actors did
You find the answer to your doubts near the end of chapter XXXVII of the novel, when Rochester says: "Jane! [...] I did wrong: I would have sullied my innocent flower - breathed guilt on its purity [...]"
I think it was related to trying to marry her and not making her a mistress. I may be wrong. I think Hinds generally looked like book's description - not handsome, strong, black hair, around 35.
It wasn't in the book, but it was very powerful dramatization when he asked her to live thinking that she is pittying him. When he was healthy on the contrary he begged her to stay.
WORDS CANNOT DESCRIBE HOW MUCH I LIKE TIMOTHY DALTON AS MR ROCHESTER.HIS PERFORMANCE CARRIES ME AWAY SINCE I WAS A LITTLE GIRL.YOU DONT FIND SUCH BRILLIANT TALENTS NOWADAYS
annetekoul 3 months ago 3
Mr. Rochester really mastered his Jane senses! LOL! :-)
KarliMarieRoberts 3 months ago 3
@sophie01761
I ABSOLOUTELY AGREE WITH YOU.I THINK THIS ONE IS THE BEST ADAPTATION BY FAR FROM ALL THE REST!
annetekoul 4 months ago 2
1:37 "Let me touch you"
LOL.
When I say that to my wife, she slaps me !
Sooo Romantic......
Hazra1969 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Hazra1969 LOL -- Maybe it would help if you were blind?
pacemoy 4 months ago in playlist Jane Eyre 1983
@Hazra1969 Your wife needs to learn a thing or two. XD
KarliMarieRoberts 3 months ago
"jane eyre.....jane...eyre"
his voice just caresses her name.....ohhh he should be outlawed. Timothy Dalton's voice should be outlawed for the safety of women everywhere
Kamikazu08 4 months ago 5
@Kamikazu08 I agree! I bought his audiobooks (he could've been reading a phonebook and I still would've bought them -- LOL) and they are (fans self) criminal! His diction is so perfect, even with the different accents, I could understand every word. They are a trilogy of mystery/crime books by Benjamin Black. I highly recommend them (got mine from Audible.com).
pacemoy 4 months ago in playlist Jane Eyre 1983
@pacemoy he has audiobooks? welll.......good bye new boots.....those books are on MY XMAS LIST NOW :D
Kamikazu08 4 months ago 2
@Kamikazu08 LOL -- Who needs new boots? You can always tie plastic bags over your shoes . . . Tim's audio books are MUCH more of a necessity ;P
pacemoy 3 months ago
@pacemoy Amen! Tim's voice = audio-erotica!
miapatagonia 3 months ago 3
in my opinion, the older the jane eyre films are, the greater they are. for instance, this one is greater than the new one. the new one is just old and pathetic
Sophie01761 4 months ago 2
@pacemoy
I ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH YOU.TIMOTHY DALTON WAS THE BEST ROCHESTER EVER.FASSBENDER I THINK WAS JUST OK BUT THE WORST ROCHESTER EVER WAS TOBY STEVENS AND THE 2006 VERSION IS AWFUL IN EVERY ASPECT BECAUSE THEY CHANGED THE NOTION OF THE NOVEL
annetekoul 4 months ago
Just saw the 2011 version and was very disappointed. I tried to like Fassbender as Rochester, but he seemed emotionless. There is absolutely no comparison when you listen to them saying the lines: "Jane Eyre . . . Jane Eyre." Tim's voice wrings your heart; Michael's leaves you cold.
pacemoy 5 months ago in playlist Jane Eyre 1983 5
Comment removed
MrVain63 5 months ago
@pacemoy The 1983 version of Jane Eyre is brilliant of course, but after seeing the new version today, the 2011 version, I think it might have been surpassed. Brilliant. Not saying the 1983 version will be forgot. would watch it til the cows come home. the 2011 film is superb.
BestSoapCharacter 5 months ago 5
OH I LOVE HOW HE IS CRYING!!! OHMIGOD!!!!! AHHHHHH!
KarliMarieRoberts 5 months ago
I fell in love with the 2011 version. I admit, it is a very short and missing a great deal of scenes with a very abrupt ending btu the actors playing Rochester and Jane had such a chemistry! I wish they had been playing in the BBC version....
1348577 6 months ago
Love when he says "You're an independent woman, a rich woman..." and then he pauses and continues with vulnerability and hope, "...A free woman?"
Even though this isn't my favorite version, I do agree with the fact that Timothy Dalton was made to play Rochester.
socertiger13 6 months ago 3
Jane has a history in teasing him...if you read the book,the whole month before the marriage she did that for dissipate the sexual tension.(and maybe not to submit at her hormones)now the situation is much,much more serious and her instincts are the best.he was wallowing for about 1 year and she snapped him for good ;isn't this L U V!?!?
BloodyLisBeth 7 months ago
Can such a man really exist???? Ahhhh but alas .....he can never be real!
anandarcy 7 months ago
@anandarcy At least we can dream of it :)
ZBELZUM 7 months ago
wot happened to Adele?
wincipoet 8 months ago
@wincipoet she was sent to school when Jane left, but of course she wasn't forgotten when Jane came back to mr. Rochester
mizzycool2 7 months ago
TD is fantastic at being manly and vulnerable in a split second. Rochester may have lost his sight and hand, but he didn't lose one bit of his masculine pride, which creates a tension between Jane and him that makes their relationship so dynamic. Yet, he is challenging her to grow and to lead a life she deserves, not to merely take pity on him and wait on him like a house nurse. He wants her but only as a full woman.
miapatagonia 8 months ago
i like this Rochester, but Toby Stephens is my fav by far.
Girl4Happiness 9 months ago 2
Aww. His Janet has returned to him.
RetroJenny 9 months ago 4
@RetroJenny That's right!!
Girl4Happiness 8 months ago
Mr. Rochester is not supposed to be handsome, but I suppose I do not really care, because Timothy Dalton is the perfect mr. Rochester. :)
AnneVanR 9 months ago 6
I love how quickly his head snaps in her direction when she says "down pilot." He still has the hope of Jane being there and now it's finally happened.
loyalfalconflutist 9 months ago 3
It's supurb acting by Timothy Dalton, knocks Stephen's and Hurt into a cocked hat. Best version by far, but it would of been interesting watching Timothy and Charlotte Gainsborough together in the parts.
barnabyfraser 9 months ago
@barnabyfraser Have you seen the 2011 version yet?
lionsscape 8 months ago
Timothy Dalton is so beautiful even as a blind man!
rarajean 10 months ago 6
Why is Jane all "I can build a house and you can sit in my parolour when you need company." Is she teasing him or something? Cuz I would've been all "MARRY ME!!" lol
TwilightLuvvverxxx 10 months ago 2
Timothy Dalton makes one "hell of a" anyone who he portrays! I agree! The Best Rochester, Heathcliff....geeze, since 1969, when Sir Peter O'Toole chose TD for his first role, in THE LION IN WINTER. Katharine Hepburn came in on her day off, to do her dialogue against him, in his first scene. That's over 40 years ago! Thank you, Sir Peter for seeing something in God's magnificent piece of work! Thank you for this~ Janet
Morgana888 10 months ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
Why does he say Janet??
NeedaKomboskini 10 months ago
Why does he say Janet??
NeedaKomboskini 10 months ago
@NeedaKomboskini
I am guessing you haven't read the book... Rochester calls Jane "Janet" when he is being particularly affectionate.
dodgerkitty 10 months ago
@dodgerkitty OK, so you inspired me to actually read the book! Really like it :)
NeedaKomboskini 10 months ago
@NeedaKomboskini pls DO! it's my favorite book next to LITTLE WOMEN!
missyadams 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dodgerkitty OK, so you inspired me to actually read the book! Really like it :)
NeedaKomboskini 10 months ago
@NeedaKomboskini Because that is her real name and no one else calls her that.
Girl4Happiness 8 months ago
I wish I would meet such man in my life too.
wwwspb 10 months ago 3
Damn. She was all about Teh Sex in this reunion, wasn't she? She was all over her Rochester here...
That was one of the great, surprising things in this mini. You could tell that SHE was hot for HIM (and, duh, who could blame her?)
gutette1 11 months ago
How is it that Timothy Dalton is still so hot with a missing eye? o.o
panchelbel007 11 months ago 7
it annoys me that back then they pronounced "maria" as mariah. especially since its my name lmaoo.
mariaelisabella 11 months ago
I believe this version more than all the others, im sure its the actors.
FellowTownsman 1 year ago 2
Can you all stop trolling each other some people prefer it to be the book and others like when people give a personal interpetation. To each their own. All of them have something good about them just sit back and enjoy the version you like the best and stop debating you will be at it till the end of time.
sataniclu99 1 year ago 7
Mr Rochester of 1983 is the best!!!
EyreJane1979 1 year ago
I find nothing hideous about Mr. Rochester and I think he is very good Looking!
farranspointon 1 year ago
worst version, except for the one with George Scott. They follow the book too closely--if a movie follows the book so closely, what's the point of the movie?
shineyourlight55 1 year ago
@shineyourlight55 Oh my! What's the point of the movie? To watch the characters come alive, to cherish your favorite scenes, to relive the book with sight and sound. IMHO, that makes this the best version ;-)
pacemoy 1 year ago 23
@shineyourlight55 that's what a TRUE CLASSIC IS. IT STAYS TRUE TO THE BOOK.
ReflectedHeart 1 year ago 4
Ugh, he's so gorgeous. Possibly more so with the scar.
Hawkeyes711 1 year ago 6
4:18 God Dammit.
loyalfalconflutist 1 year ago
The best "Jane Eyre" ever!
IrochkaFred 1 year ago 6
@sporthorse10 but remember, mr rochester thinks he's dreaming and jane thinks he wants her to be his wife, in the book at least. Also, they were engaged at one point, so i would think they had a right to kiss, plus they were both overjoyed at seeing eachother again, because mr r thought she might be dead
rockurworldforever 1 year ago 3
Yuck...this version is so horrible!! Tim Dalton is great, but the actress portraying Jane leaves much to be desired! Ruth Wilson =Jane Eyre!!
seagirl1481 1 year ago
Comment removed
oranaise311318 1 year ago
@seagirl1481 yeah!! i don't like Jane in this version!! her acting didn't convince me at all!! Ruth is better
oranaise311318 1 year ago
@seagirl1481 Blah. Ruth Wilson = Pretty, blubbery girl, not plain Jane.
Elisabetta611 1 year ago
@Elisabetta611 ,
Ruth Wilson had all the talent to play Jane but was let down by an awful production,where they bulldozed over the language of the book, replacing it with a trite, and without interior, language. That version, as a result, lacked psychological/moral insights and entirely missed Jane's claim to autonomy (through ideas of self-respect),her wish to gain her own voice within a freely arranged web of human relations.This is what happens when you presuppose what needs to be explored.
MarthaDelios 1 year ago 2
wow, jane certainly has the talent to pick the wrong words with rochester^^
koppsr 1 year ago 4
i love how much he still loves her. separation didn't affect it at all.(sigh)!
mickeycrazy1 1 year ago 13
@tallbeauty1982
They are very different. 2006 is my favourite too, even if I miss the childhood there. But to be honest, Daltons' Rochester is truer to the novel and more fitting to the symbols and metaphores in the book. However, I don't think those aspects work on screen anyway.
Sandy Welch went for the psycology in the 2006 and that is awesomely done. And, at last, Jane Eyre is relieved :-) I think she has been quite missunderstood through the years.
MsSilentia 1 year ago
Comment removed
rockurworldforever 1 year ago 4
Скажите, где можно скачать этот фильм на русском?
Yulia1208 1 year ago
@Yulia1208
cat-tv.ru (all versions)
val1ist 1 year ago
i love how he's so surprised that she's not revolted by his arm!
rockurworldforever 1 year ago 4
Oh, finally he called her Janet. I liked in the book how he called her that.
MsSarjen 1 year ago 7
where there only ladies where you been?
02997723 1 year ago 4
my faaaaaaave version of jane eyre. Awesome, but mr rochester yells 2 much, and wat's w/ the whole"LEAVE ME!!" thing, anyway?
rockurworldforever 1 year ago
I don't get why she still calls him, "Sir." humm
Songsmirth 1 year ago 3
The BBC definetely have the monopoly on Jane Eyre, the 83 and 06 TV versions prove that decisively.
Jo7welder 2 years ago 5
I've read Jane Eyre several times, i have the book, i've seen every Jane Eyre ever made, especially this one, and when Jane returns it makes me understand only 1 thing about women as a whole and that is i know nothing about them at all.
Bless them, wouldnt be without them.
chigaloo2 2 years ago 6
@chigaloo2
Charlotte Brontë herself fell in love with a married man and likely this story contains a lot of private wishes. It was probably a rare thing in those days for a woman to meet a man who expected her to be intelligent like a man. Not a thing to be easily thrown away.
MsSilentia 1 year ago
@chigaloo2 Yes, we are curious, complictaed creatures! That is our power!
Ellison1965 1 year ago
I find this part a little off..... Jane doesn't go and cuddle Mr. Rochester while she tells him she will be his companion. At first she kisses him, but then she thinks that Mr. Rochester might be angry with her, and that is when she offers to just be his companion.
After all, most housekeepers don't start kissing their "masters" while trying to get a job at their house..... that would be a bit disturbing indeed.
SportHorse10 2 years ago
She kisses him not because she wants try to get a job at his house ..... )))))
But because she loves him. Feel the difference! )))
Ksenija72 2 years ago 4
Ahh, that wasn't my point. I said that it is a bit weird that she offers to manage his house and such while kissing him. It's not how it is in the book. She's a bit shy when she seems him again, and that's why at first she only offers to be a companion for him.
SportHorse10 2 years ago
Ok. ) Perhaps the creators of the series had in mind, that she hastened to assure him of her love in this way: "I agree on everything." And about the "manage his house": Jane says so because she in embarrassment. It means:"I will help you in everything, regardless of whether you are getting married on me or not". She can not say: let's hurry and marry me ... )))
Ksenija72 2 years ago
Generally in this series a lot of strange things ))). For example, Jane said that spilled half a glass of water, when we clearly saw that this was not ))).
Ksenija72 2 years ago 2
Tiny details like that don't bother me. I just found some a bit weird, as it was not how it is in the book. If you want to make a movie out based on a great book, then why not follow every detail you can?
SportHorse10 2 years ago 3
I think it is impossible to follow every detail. Then all the film adaptation will be similar to each other. For us in fact interesting what director took from the book into a film, what not, where he made accents, as actors have coped with this interpretation of the book. Then we will have something to discuss ;)
Ksenija72 2 years ago 2
Not every detail. This is one of the best adaptations of the book. I just pointed out a little fault, as did you. :)
SportHorse10 2 years ago
I couldn't agree with your comments more, SportHorse10 - I also think this adaptation was faithful to the book on the whole, but somethings were a little off, like you said. For example here Rochester justs shouts at Jane 'Leave me!' in a sudden outburst of temper when she suggests being his companion... The thing is,
DebiMJ 2 years ago 2
that never happened in the book and he was overjoyed to have Jane back again, so this was a little unromantic and pointless in my opinion, even if the director was trying to show Rochester's hurt feelings etc.
DebiMJ 2 years ago 4
@DebiMJ
Yes, a little pointless )
Ksenija72 2 years ago
He shouts at her 4:31. This is contrary to the book. This is not just a detail. This is a profound misunderstanding of what happened with Rochester, when Jane was not with him. Misunderstanding of what happened not only with his BODY (he is blind cripple now) but of what happened with his SOUL (true repentance and humility before God). He loses the light in eyes, but gets true light in the soul. Such a person would not scream. Return Jane is God's blessing and mercy to him. Did he reject it?
Ksenija72 2 years ago 7
It is, at least, a misunderstanding about what pity means in chapter XXXVII of the novel:
«[...] you have an affectionate heart and a generous spirit, which prompt you to make sacrifices for those you pity [...]. I suppose I should now entertain none but fatherly feelings for you: do you think so? Come - tell me.
«[...] I am content to be only your nurse, if you think it better.
«"But [...] you must marry one day."»
Rochester sees pity as good thing; but he wants more from Jane...
mendoncacorreia 2 years ago 2
he wants more from Jane?
Yes, Ok! But this does not mean that he should yell at her!
"I WANT MOOOOOORE! GO AWAAAAAY! " :)))))
Ksenija72 2 years ago 2
He can SAY this with sadness, with pain, with regret, with humility, and with secret hope to hear something more from Jane, than a pity...
But he can not to YELL: "LEAVE me!"
Ksenija72 2 years ago 4
I completely agree with you!
mendoncacorreia 2 years ago
Rochester's temper tantrums are inventions of the producers (or of Timothy Dalton's). The real Rochester is stern but never ill-tempered.
8Glumdalclitch 2 years ago 13
It's not a temper tantrum, it's the right reaction of a man who is being pitied when pity is the thing he least needs. People with a physical disability are often patronised and treated like retarded children, which is what Jane does when she states her intention of being his nurse. But Rochester is exactly the same man he used to be: he is blind, not stupid. Therefore his angry reaction is absolutely realistic.
beignet58 2 years ago 3
Why is he calling her Janet instead of Jane all of a sudden?
Skarsgirl 2 years ago 2
Throughout the novel, he calls her Janet at random times.
kawaii2525 2 years ago 24
@kawaii2525 I wish my name was Jane!!! Why God? Why?
KarliMarieRoberts 5 months ago
Janet is the pet form of Jane.
natkretep 2 years ago 6
@Skarsgirl janet is like a mini jane like piglet get it? its like a pet name
supernoahman 2 years ago
He called her that occasionally throughout the book. I took it as a nick name he gave her.
Tennyoakana 2 years ago 2
Love when he calls her Janet and his references to her as a fairy...
KDRainstorm 2 years ago 43
Brilliant performances and version, now whenever i go back to read the book i naturally see Tim and Zelah as Rochester and Jane.
j0andc0 2 years ago 7
In 2006 we had at last a very good Jane. They spoilt the book, though... Rochester was also riqht but the script was not Brontë's book. A pity.
reinadegrillos 2 years ago 11
Oh, yes... that one ought to go down in history books for the most neurotic acting!
theblacksister 2 years ago 4
this is what love it. it makes peoples feel crazy.
gaoh123 2 years ago 4
why he shout: leave me?
why he can't be happy?
i prefer 2006 version..
LOLbaby000 2 years ago
i hate that he always yells S:
rosa1221 2 years ago 4
he is passionate..plus you have to think of what he went through when Jane left him..once she's with him again, it makes sense he couldn't contain his emotion. It's just his way.
minxb89 2 years ago 8
that's either a big man or a small woman. Love it.. he makes one hell of a handsome Rochester.
Daphneej 2 years ago 38
oh yeah. Handome, and sexy.
willowminadots 2 years ago 4
@Daphneej I agree! Best man for the character since Orsen Wells.
orlandobabe 11 months ago
I am going to take a big leap and say that I did not like this version as much as the 2006 version with Toby Stephens and Ruth Wilson. I think that if that movie had had the script of this movie it would have been perfect, but to me it still stands as the best. Toby Stephens as Rochester took my breath away.
dtunlimiteda 2 years ago 3
I agree - if only 2006 had been more faithful to the book - the two of them had wonderful chemistry - they teased each other and Stephens played each nuance so well
belcst 2 years ago 13
I saw 1996, 1983 and 2006. I like 2006 the best, and it's a tie between 1996 and 1983. TD was a great Rochester on the agressive part, but I thought he lacked the darkness R is supposed to display. Also, I couldn't stand ZC as Jane, and I didn't see the chemsitry between them. But it was close to the book. 1996 was too short, and felt rushed, and the chemistry was also a bit lacking. 2006 despite being further from the book, showed a dark/humorous R which is IMO what he's supposed to be...
agneskenya 2 years ago
and finally, 2006 also managed to make me feel the same emotions as when I read the book, whereas none of the other versions did, despite the fact that they took a lot of liberties in that last one. I totally saw why they loved each other, and it wasn't clearly shown in the other versions.
agneskenya 2 years ago 6
Michael Jayston (1973) is the best Rochester, from my point of view. But Dalton does supremely too. Only a little overacted for my taste in some scenes. Prabably not his fault (but the director's).
reinadegrillos 2 years ago 8
I like them both equally - their interpretations are both so amazing.....
theblacksister 2 years ago
Daltons the best and most complete Rochester, the 83 version is the best, Zelah's an excellent Jane and is growing on me all the time. Brilliant, one of my favourite period story's.
j0andc0 2 years ago 9
I also find Zelah very good as Jane, and Timothy Dalton is of course brilliant as Mr. Rochester: lol
Annacathalicia 2 years ago 6
I like it better in 2006, cuz he grabs her hand when she speaks.
nobodycares456 2 years ago 4
That was such a moving moment.
mybandrox123 2 years ago
Rochester, why so serious?
Gah, he's not that angry in the book.
tomatoherb 2 years ago 6
Hiding such a fact as that he is married to a mad woman has affected his temper and mood...perhaps even made him a bit mad too...lol
Annacathalicia 2 years ago 6
настоящий книжный Рочестер.Далтон сыграл замечательно,никто с ним не сравнится.В такого мужчину невозможно не влюбиться,чего не скажу о Тоби Ст.
mona9442 2 years ago 7
Yes, Toby Stephens is the best Rochester and Dalton the second. Unfortunately the 2006 version is too short.
13ma98 2 years ago 6
I wonder if he means "hideous" more in terms of his appearance or behavior?
quo33 2 years ago
auntdj111 Oh yeah! I agree. I love Timothy.
777Temida 2 years ago 3
When I re-read the book, I only can see Clark and Dalton as Jane and Rochester. Other versions are great, but 1983 is the best by content and performance.
amdurg 2 years ago 16
I think the 2006 version is more emotional and alive than this one...
But I guess the 2006 version is actually largely inspired but this one too.
VenustrengHT 3 years ago 15
I was actually scared when he yelled "LEAVE ME!!!"!! loool
Majda311288 3 years ago 7
I love it when people compare Rochesters! My personal opinion is that Toby Stephens in the 2006 version is the best. He is handsome...enough, but not HOT. His acting is great, not too much, but not too little. He is dark and brooding. Timothy Dalton is second. But sometimes he's too over the top, but I love the emotion he puts into the character. Hinds and Hurt too old. Rochester is only 20 years older than jane which makes him 38. Orson Welles in the 1944,very good. has dark brilliant eyes!
dtunlimiteda 3 years ago 11
Is he hideous?!
HECK NO!! lol
XxXTwilightFan001XxX 3 years ago 5
xD He is to die for!
AkiraChan24 3 years ago 12
I love this part - the whole movie! Thank your for posting!
NightingStar22 3 years ago 9
To me this is the best version, this one and the 1973. Does anyone know where I could find it?
EDM9121 3 years ago 5
amazon has it <3
AranelAilini 3 years ago
you can look up Jane Eyre 1973 on here and you can find scenes from that one!
RachelG1979 2 years ago
I wish to find love like this between these two people;)))
k1a2d3r4i5 3 years ago 64
lol me 2
theamazing56 3 years ago
@k1a2d3r4i5 We all do, sometimes we wait a life time for it.
orlandobabe 1 year ago
Even when Dalton plays a mutilated and blind Rochester, he shows a TON of emotion and passion.
ZaraSahana 3 years ago 25
i love how they stuck to the book...he was handless...but many films do not include that part and that is very important...
bexlovesashley 3 years ago 47
Love timothy he is a great actor for Rochester. He rolls his Rs so nicely. I think Jane is a little soft spoken in this version, i much prefer her in the 1996 version. But Timothy is handsome we all agree. Rochester is supposed to be ugly...I like the 2006 rochester just a bit better. This movie is just like the book with every line.
dtunlimiteda 3 years ago 13
Oh, how could she just leave him like that without even a goodnight kiss??? Especially since they had been separated for a year. If I were Jane, I would have sat on his lap and kissed, embraced & caressed him for hours. Maybe that was inappropriate back then, but love transcends time & customs. Oh well, my imagination will have to do...
margaretregan 3 years ago 13
I think Jane did the right thing to leave Mr. Rochester not knowing whom she had been with. To make him just as jealous as he tried to do her with that messing with Blanche. It is a form of pay-back, you know. :-)
domramalaja 3 years ago 13
Humph! The wickedness had not been taken out of her, wherever she had sojourned!!! [lol]
mendoncacorreia 3 years ago 6
At that point she was not sure if he even wants to marry her again. I think she was afraid of spoiling things.
galinaqt 3 years ago 7
Maybe so, but she should have at least kissed his cheek or something similar.
margaretregan 3 years ago 2
I agree. May be it is a cultural thing. Not in every culture people hug or kiss each other when they meet or leave. BYW I saw your comment on Hurt's version. The last scene he was like a creature from a horror movie. I had hard time to get rid of his image. 96th adaptation is only a notch better than 06. It doesn't have any passion. He neither looks neither plays book's character.
galinaqt 3 years ago 6
Hmm... I think somehow I could JUST agree with your arguement over Hurt's portrayal. He had good posture, and his hair was shaggy (so that gave him something of a wild look), but overall he didn't really measure up to Rochester as portrayed here by Timothy Dalton.
daydreamerjane 3 years ago 9
T.Dalton is the best Rochester. I only think that appearance of Hinds is closer. Rochester should not be drop dead gorgeous.
galinaqt 3 years ago 8
You know I wonder if that has to do with this idea of modern acting. People may say that acting from the old Hollywood until the 80's was more cheesy or more dramatic, but I will take that over this new almost non emotional acting that doesn't even pull you in the way those actors did
TVwriter23 2 years ago 11
I fully agree with you here!
mendoncacorreia 2 years ago
I AGREE!!!
bexlovesashley 3 years ago 3
To me, Zelah will always be ~~~~Sweet Jane~~~~.
korn5015 3 years ago 9
The way he says "fatherly feelings" which such disgust is cute.
iridescentblue 3 years ago 14
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I wonder why Mr. R never blamed Jane for what happened to him. If she agreed to go to France, he would be out of the house during the fire.
galinaqt 3 years ago
You find the answer to your doubts near the end of chapter XXXVII of the novel, when Rochester says: "Jane! [...] I did wrong: I would have sullied my innocent flower - breathed guilt on its purity [...]"
mendoncacorreia 3 years ago 4
I think it was related to trying to marry her and not making her a mistress. I may be wrong. I think Hinds generally looked like book's description - not handsome, strong, black hair, around 35.
galinaqt 3 years ago 2
It was related with making her a mistress - and (to make matters worse) through a faked marriage.
I think Jayston looks far better than Hinds: Michael looks much more like Arthur Nicholls than Ciarán.
mendoncacorreia 3 years ago
I find Hinds incredibly sexy, just something about his bearing and voice and face. He may not be "pretty" but he is magnetic.
auntdj111 2 years ago 8
So glad someone has finally posted this scene...thanks so much!!!
margaretregan 3 years ago
I can see that something wrong with Mr. R eye, but he still manage to show anger,suprise and all other feelings.
galinaqt 3 years ago
It wasn't in the book, but it was very powerful dramatization when he asked her to live thinking that she is pittying him. When he was healthy on the contrary he begged her to stay.
galinaqt 3 years ago 4