Jane Eyre - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Jane Eyre Reviews

Page 1 of 105
Super Reviewer
½ July 16, 2016
The production design and costumes are indeed exquisite, as well as the absorbing Gothic atmosphere. However, the film lacks passion and mystery, while the dialogue sounds incredibly cheesy and Wasikowska seems too apathetic for the role.
June 17, 2016
Fukunaga's film is dipped in naturalistic daylight and cool desaturation. At first, this aesthetic brings something to the well-known story of Jane Eyre.
The camera is a cold, observing eye. We watch these characters from an emotionally remote position in their specific environment. This treatment matches the yet subdued character of the protagonist; It does justice to the cold and loveless biography of the young, intelligent governess trying to move through a harsh life with integrity and self-respect.
But this condition is supposed to turn with her meeting Mr Rochester; somebody who makes her feel recognized and eventually loved. Yet the camera keeps on being a cold observant eye.
Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender are magnificent. However, only in isolaton; they don't work as a couple.
References to Mr Rochester's ugliness and Jane's plainness are deemed ridiculous by the actor's and actress' blatant beauty. These are beautiful people. And it does do something to the story. Due to the lack of indication that there is something happening to the souls of these characters the love story appears like this: Rochester loathes being in Thornfield for a well-known reason. Meeting Jane Eyre is a welcome and unexpected diversion, she talks back to him and she's obviously ravishing. Jane has never been with a man and is easily overwhelmed by masculine and handsome Mr Rochester's approaches. Now, these two fancy each other but cannot consummate because of convention. Jane is too morally rigid, so they will marry.
That these two could be soulmates is only asserted via words - but we never see or feel them connect on that level.
It's a shame that this should be so. The film is beautifully photographed. But the impact of the scenes is not well-balanced, not well done. There's a scene of Jane strolling around in the frosty garden, pained after she has heard that Rochester and Blanche Ingram might be romantically involved. This would have been a great potential of identification had we been given the contrast of Jane being pushed around harshly (which we see executed splendidly in the film) and - Rochester taking to her, touching her soul, lifting her out of isolation for almost the first time in her life (which we don't get to see). How painful to get a taste of what you need most and have it taken away instantly! Instead she ends up exactly as Mrs Fairfax feared: as an inexperienced, naļve girl who fell for a man of the world.
Rochester does not liberate her. She says she lived a full life at Thornfield, yet Jane and he rarely laugh together, their conversation doesn't take flight, the happiness they are supposed to mean to each other appears merely an illusion of two desperate persons.
The filmmakers don't go with the sucker punches of the story. The observant eye remains cold and distant. Even the fulminating proposal is subdued and accompanied by Fassbender's motionless gaze.
In one scene there's even sentimentalism, something a story like this, one should think, would need least.
The drama that ensues after the wedding is rushed just as the shallow reunion. And we're done. Hmph.
A cowardly decision of casting gorgeous people as plain/ugly characters, beautiful photography, the impeccable Judi Dench, capable leads with little chemistry and an underwritten (!) love story.

Here's my wish: Jane Campion as director and Paul Giamatti as Mr Rochester. Too good to become true?
June 8, 2016
Mia Wasikowska was shallow and flat as Jane Eyre. No depth to her character which did this rendition such a disservice.
½ May 23, 2016
Really nice version of Jane Eyre. Well executed and the romantic vibes were strong.
May 21, 2016
Darker and more uncomfortable than I remember the book. Nicely directed and played and not bad northern accents.
April 13, 2016
I remember the book displaying the miseries of Jane Eyre much more than the film did. I would have liked to see more of this. It was a little bit touching but not engaging enough.
½ April 11, 2016
I found this movie confusing at times and at other times emotionally overwhelming. I also didn't like Janes decision when she found out about his secret. I mean he loved her despite her position financially and in society yet she couldn't do the same? What a dumb move on her part to run away. I liked the gothic and eerie style, cinematography and acting of this movie but it felt like it could've been a bit deeper and better. I didnt think the romance was developed enough. Also I kept hoping for some kind of love scene with Michael fassbender alas. The ending was a bit meh and cut short.
½ April 2, 2016
Una nueva versión de este clįsico, Cary Fukunaga cumple su trabajo con creces.
March 15, 2016
First, the positives: this adaptation is beautifully filmed in Derbyshire; I liked the emphasis on St John Rivers (Jamie Bell), a character often overlooked; and young Romy Settbon is wonderful as Adele. Unfortunately, Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender, while both good in the lead roles, never quite set the screen alight, either separately or together.
February 27, 2016
A classic love story and not a chick flick! The acting and cinematography were top notch. I have to admit to watching more than once.
February 8, 2016
With a cast this spectacular (Mia Wasikowska, Michael Fassbender, Judi Dench), this adaptation of Charlotte Brontė's novel of the same name should have been a slam dunk. Unfortunately both script and score have abandoned what made the book special in favor of saccharine sentimentality.
February 1, 2016
Lavish, superbly directed and haunting - this adaptation understands editing, that not all of Brontes classic novel would have worked. A classic through and through.
January 29, 2016
If you love Jane Eyre, you'll adore this adaptation. The chemistry between Jane and Rochester is palpable. Usually, the actor who plays Jane is too old. In this movie, she is the perfect age. Rochester is brooding and volatile and perfect.
½ January 23, 2016
Beautiful acting and compelling story. I loved that it was so real and human. It wasn't fantastical. The main characters were ordinary people.
January 7, 2016
Rich, beautiful and superbly acted adaptation of Charlotte Bronte's classic novel.
½ December 7, 2015
Stunning, atmospheric, passionately performed, elegantly gothic, and perfectly matches the novel by Charlotte Bronte. Plain Jane, FIERY heart.
A few lulls in the Jane character, but ready to forgive w so much more going on here.
The director meticulously touches on each important detail from the eponymous novel, and is visually and emotionally satisfying.
I did my high school thesis on this novel, and never wanted to see a typically uninspired movie version - I somehow had a feeling I should see this version, and it paid off in spades!
I love this one, it's brilliant in scope, passion, feel, eloquence, and truth.
4.5 of 5
November 4, 2015
This movie is beautifully rich with Gothic atmosphere and visual eye candy. Fukunga has a talent for framing scenes and shots.. unfortunately she lacks the skill to direct her actors properly.. Mia woefully miscast as Jane. Don't get me wrong, she looks the part, but she lacks the fire and passion Jane has in the novel.. Jane was serious in the novel but Mia just plays her cold and unfeeling, not one whit the character i have adored since childhood. It doesn't help that Fassbender delivers a bland performance as Rochester.. he is better than Mia but he plays it waay too serious. Rochester is serious in the novel, but he had energy, he had wit he had a sense of humor as shown by his teasing of Jane. This is the man who disguised himself as a gypsy woman to play a prank on his guests. He has a dark and brooding air which Fassbender doesn't have in this movie. he like Mia plays it cold and serious and it results them having zero chemistry and walk from scene to scene stiffly and make the wonderful wit and charm in the dialogue bland and lifeless. They don't make the relationship believable which leaves the movie flat and fairly tedious to sit through. the only time i ever saw them as Jane and Rochester was "farewell" scene when Jane leaves him which is probably one of the best in any adaptation. I don't blame the pair for this, many a great actor has stumbled and faltered from bad direction. i also have the same problem with the child playing Adele.. bless her, but again, she is too serious. where is the frivolous lively little girl who loved to dance? Not here apparently

Is there nothing to enjoy in this version? Well like i said, this movie is gorgeous to look at and is rich with atmosphere. Judie Dench is wonderful in the role of Mrs Fairfax. And the Farewell scene like i said is probably one of the best in any adaptation..

Overall, this adaptations is beautiful eyecandy, but it lacks the substance that makes Jane Eyre so enjoyable. it tries too hard to make it serious and dark which leaves it lifeless and bland and that in turn makes it loose the charm, mystery, beauty, and occasion sweetness of the original story.. Diehard Jane Eyre fans will enjoy one or two scenes and the general movie going audience who are not familiar with other adaptions or the book may enjoy it.. But if you want a passionate, visually beautiful adaptation's with life in them, i'd recommend either the 2006 BBC miniseries starring Toby Stephens and Ruth Wilson or the 1983 version starring Timothy Dalton.

Until next time

Masked Hatter
½ September 24, 2015
Nailed it. I haven't read the book nor seen any other adaptations, but I can't imagine another delivering a more interesting, sad, and compelling take. Wasikowaska steals the damned show. Eat ur heart out Fassbender.
Page 1 of 105