The Best Jane Eyre Movie?

Well, there will be as many different opinions on this as there are film versions of the story. Having said that, mine is without a doubt the 1983 miniseries starring Zelah Clarke as Jane and Timothy Dalton as Rochester.

Why? Well, at over 5 hours in length it is double the length of any of the other ones, and as such has time to really get into the details of the story in a way that the shorter versions simply can't.

Second, it's a BBC production and therefore very accurate to the book. Large parts of the dialogue are lifted verbatim from the novel, even some of the most dated language.

Third, the physical casting of Jane is especially good. She describes herself as "plain and little" and Zelah Clarke is very petite and very Quakerish in appearance. She's a very believable Jane.

Fourth, Clarke and Dalton have real chemistry together, which is key to making this unlikely romance believable.

My biggest criticism (and it's not much of a fault) is that Timothy Dalton is much too good-looking to play Rochester as written in the novel. He is supposed to be dark, brooding, rather wild-looking -- but not handsome. Well, Dalton does dark and brooding perfectly, but there's just no way he can play "not handsome". Impossible!

The 2006 Toby Stephens/Ruth Wilson version absolutely flies through the Gateshead/Lowood school scenes. They aren't very satisfying at all. And I'm one of those who thinks Rochester shouldn't be classically handsome. Toby Stephens is very good looking and when he smiles, he lights up the screen. That's not Rochester to me. They've also changed some of the dialog to make it more modern. In the book, Rochester says to Jane that she looks depressed and "another word will bring a tear to your eye." In the 2006 version, Rochester says something like, "It looks like you're going to cry." Ew! There are several instances of that. Ruth Wilson's Jane is good though. Oh, and Adele didn't cut it for me either. She was horsy and unattractive, instead of being the stereotypical ballerina from the top of a music box, which is how I always pictured her. This is my 2nd worst favorite version.

My first worst favorite version is the 1970 version. George C. Scott as Rochester. Double Ew! Need I say more?

I like the 1994 Orson Wells/Joan Fontaine version. (#3 on my list) It's dark and brooding (black & white will do that for you). Agnes Moorehead is Mrs. Reed, Elizabeth Taylor is Helen Burns, and Margaret O'Brien is Adele. Orson Wells is the perfect Rochester.

#2 on my list is the 1983 Timothy Dalton/Zelah Clark version. It follows the book so closely, and Timothy Dalton's good looks didn't get in the way of how I pictured Rochester. In 1983, my husband and I (yes, my husband!) waited in anticipation for this to be on as it ran its mini-series schedule. The only poor thing about this version is the production values. I believe it was filmed completely inside studio walls -- so it's much like a play. But it loyally followed the book right down to the love between Rochester and Jane, which makes it great.

#1 for me is Franco Zeffirelli's 1997 version with Charlotte Gainsborough and William Hurt. From Gateshead to Lowood to Thornfield to the marriage chapel to the Rivers' cottage, I felt like I was finally living and breathing the real Jane Eyre. The carriages, the moors and the atmosphere were just alive. William Hurt was a good Rochester (not great, but good) and Charlotte Gainsborough was appropriately plain as Jane. Some folks have said there is no chemistry between Jane and Rochester in this one, but I liked the subtle romance. I remember reading the book for the first time. The scene in the garden where Rochester tells Jane that it's as if there's a string going from his heart to hers -- it happily surprised ME just as it surprised Jane. Up to that point it was obvious that Jane was falling for Rochester, but Rochester for Jane? Who knew?? I guess that's why I like that Hurt and Gainsborough aren't overly emotional to each other. And as I said before the scenery and the sets puts this on top for me. (By the way, Anna Paquin -- coming off her great performance in the Piano -- was terribly wooden as the young Jane. But her relationship with Helen Burns was perfect. I cried when Helen died in this version.) Oh, and let's not forget the wonderful Dame Joan Plowright as the best Mrs. Fairfax ever. Just the right amount of ditziness and friendliness, but with the sad knowledge of the Thornfield secret. The friendship between Jane and Mrs. Fairfax is done very well.

The 1997 Samantha Morton/Ciaran Hinds version is just okay. (I guess #4 for me.) There are good parts -- the faithful dialog for one, however it moves along too quickly for me. The Reeds are very minor characters -- the Mrs. Reed deathbed scene is completely missing, and I didn't like the way that Ciaran Hinds' Rochester yelled at Jane so much. In fact, it seemed like everyone snapped at, rather than spoke to, each other. It was okay for Mrs. Reed to snap at Jane and for Mr. Brocklehurst to snap at Jane, but Mrs. Fairfax snapping at Jane? Rochester snapping at Jane? I don't think so.

I've never seen the 1973 Sorcha Cusak/Michael Jayson version.

Hope this helps.

I've read a couple of these threads, and I'm amazed that I've yet to hear anyone mention the Sorcha Cusack/Michael Jayston version. This one is my absolute favorite. As a BBC production (made for TV), it has a play-like feel to it and, at six hours running time, has plenty of time to flesh out all the details. Sorcha Cusack is suitably plain and, refreshingly, isn't as stoic as many of the Janes have been, most notably Suzannah York. Michael Jayston is PERFECT as Rochester: brooding and melancholy, with occasional angry outbursts, but he is also witty, occasionally good-humored, and always kind to Jane. What I appreciate most about this production is its adherence to the original text. I'm rereading the book now, and I'm amazed to discover once again that this version incorporates the dialogue almost verbatim. Jane's narration throughout provides added nuance that really fleshes out her character and motivations. I can see where the style of this production might not be everyone's cup of tea, but for faithfulness to the text, this is the one.

I know you don't have time, but I've seen three and I'd say you're better off watching as many as you can. Here they are all from what I know.

In terms of the entire full novel, you will want to wath the BBC version which someonw above me commented on. It's very close to the book. Be careful though. That was my first BBC movie and I wasn't expecting the home video quality which turned me off for a while. I like it much better now.

The next one I'd suggest more for the childhood would be this one with William Hurt. It does change quite a bit of what happens in her childhood, and her life at Mrs. Reed's is rather short, but you get a feel for the nastiness in the school even though it doesn't all happen that way in the book. My main problem with this one is the wander away from the novel in the last half of the movie.

The 2006 one that was just on Masterpiece Theatre in the US completely rushed through her childhood which angered me, but I felt that, for the most part, it was very good once she got to Thornfield. There are still some discrepencies, but they don't for instance, change when she meets St. John Rivers and take out most of her life on the moors.