MovieChat Forums > Jane Eyre (1996) Discussion > The 1983 BBC version

The 1983 BBC version

posted 20 years ago by TamLinsLady
12 replies | jump to latest

Hi, I live in Britain and have just found out that the BBC adaption of Jane Eyre with Timothy Dalton is being released on DVD in its original uncut form on April 19th. But I can't find it on Amazon.co.uk only on Amazon.com. Does this mean that it's not getting a British release? Please help. I relly love this version and would love to see it uncut and on DVD as my video version is practically worn out.

Angel or father, friend or Phantom? Who is it there, staring?

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JackieBlu 19 years ago

The '83 version was the best ever made.

[–] Skylark24 19 years ago

I bought my copy of it today and I loved it!! Dalton makes a great Rochester!

[–] amiNotAwake 19 years ago

Timothy Dalton is the best Rochester and the BBC version is the best!!!

[–] kat63 19 years ago

Can't agree. After seeing Michael Jayston in the 1973 version which is superb, something is sadly lacking from the 1983 version.

[–] Dogma_wb 19 years ago

Commmon !! Dalton is a sex on legs in this version. Dont you want just be there in place on Jane ?!!!!:o)

[–] aiu 19 years ago

Dalton is a handsom actor indeed, but he lacks depth and mystery in my opinion (which are some of Rocheter's fundamental features). I agree with the previous post that Jayston's performance in '73 version is infinitely superior. Personally, I could not see in Dalton's portrayal any of the "strong original mind" of Rochester that Charlotte Bronte talks about.

[–] kat63 19 years ago

Totally agree with the last post. I'm not disputing the fact that Tim Dalton is a handsome guy and a good actor, but we're talking about an adaptation of Jane Eyre the novel. Rochester is not actually meant to be a handsome and young character which is mentioned many times in the book. I've always found the casting of Tim in the role really strange. I think if you cast a handsome actor as Rochester it's a bit of a cop out as he doesn't really have to take on the character he just looks good so people will love him. Michael Jayston isn't made up to look particularly handsome so the quality of his acting really shines through and makes you realise why Jane falls for him. Dalton's version tells a nice love story but Jayston's version for me is actually a portrayal of Rochester and all the complexities of the character and the 1973 version is a real true adaptation of the book which is acted out beautifully. For me they're just 2 completely different things.

[–] kenzie2 18 years ago

I agree, I've just watched the 1973 version and it is wonderful. Michael Jayston is exceptional as Rochester, he doesn't have to be as handsome as Tim Dalton in the role to be the best Rochester ever.

[–] kandgking1 18 years ago

Although I adore Timothy Dalton as an actor, I agree that he wasn't the best choice for Rochester. He has the "moody" aspect of the character down pat, of course, but not the eccentric part. Still, he's lovely, so I'll watch him in anything.
I haven't seen the 1973 version, but I did see the 1996 version. I detested it! They destroyed a splendid novel... but I loved William Hurt's portrayal of Rochester. He's the only thing I liked about it.

"Two minds. One thought. Only half a wit."

[–] tiskertabell 18 years ago

The version where Samantha Morton plays Jane Eyre is beautiful.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]