I love that Timothy Dalton uses hints of his native welsh accent, especially the r’s. It’s such a small thing, but it adds an extra facet to the character.
The best Jane to me. Small and cute but strong and calm. Just like in the book at first I thought she was plain and not very shiny but as the character developed I was drawn to her more and more and in the end I too fell in love with her. So yeah Clarke plays it so well.
I think 'small', 'plain' are the big parts of Jane. But she is the very brave and great woman. She is not weak like her 'seen' appearance. Her wretched fate didn't destroy her. And the actress did a great job. I like her quiet yet touching acting style..
They are both extraordinary. Two instruments that play in perfect harmony and create something beautiful and touching; his performance is rich and delicious; hers is subtle and many layered. The perfect characterizations of Jane and Mr. Rochester come to life!
I've just read the book and I'm obssesed with the story... and Timothy Dalton is just what I imagined Mr. Rochester would look like, he is just perfect
I must have watched this scene 50 times. Timothy Dalton is absolutely incredible here! And I'm amazed at how Clarke as Jane changes from scene to scene. She shows how her character evolves superbly!
I've watched bits of 3 or 4 other versions and can't sit through them because they don't compare to this adaptation. Kudos to the scriptwriter, who was so good at getting the essence of the novel and keeping the context of the times intact. The dialogue is wonderful and acted as if truly felt. The assumption that modern viewers can't handle colloquial speech in the more recent attempts at adaptation leave us with the equivalent of a badly written, badly acted grammar school play, like children who are reading lines without being aware of their adult significance. If I were separated from this version I'm afraid some cord of communion would be snapped and I should take to bleeding inwardly....Sigh.
😁These are by far my two favourite characters of this truly romantic, heartearming version of the Jane Eyre story. I keep coming back to them, and to this lovely scene.❤🙏✝️👍😇
2:43-2:52--Can I be Jane for those couple of seconds, please? Wow. Not only is Timothy Dalton a brilliant actor, but he looks like a great kisser, too. :)
Well I suppose you will have to live a life of hopeless misery for about 17 years and turn out as balanced and kind as Jane turned out , before you make it to a man with as rare a misfortune as Rochester hehe…
Oh God, is it possible to somehow live in this story? I'm obsessed and return to this and the 2006 version almost as if they're my REAL life; a dream life. A life without politics, the Wuhan virus, and all the other stresses of today. "But I always awake and find it an empty mockery." Wah!
@@zozox2 I think Edward Rochester would have been a total prick in real life. I mean, he consorts with hores and tried to trick an innocent young woman into ruination. Totally dishonorable. But maybe because people, especially women, were relatively chaste, they were more given to being declaratively expressive and romantic. If you read Beethoven's immortal beloved letter, it's kind of like how Rochester speaks in his most passionate "melodramatic" way. So maybe there was more romance, though its constancy might have been tenuous -- then as now.
I was captivated thru-out 1983 jane eyre; Timothy's stage training [ is clear] (and the cast) a period drama, performance with a gentle display of love to a person; the emotional, content is delivered (timing) of the story within a timeline predicated in systems of religious/legal concepts in intimate settings. In other words to have what he wants balanced against what she needs to reach a union that has heavy baggage. very well done/exquisite./mae
He is the best Rochester I've ever seen oh my lord. I don't love her Jane, but she did a pretty good job too. But I cannot get over this performance as Rochester it's so close to the book
С огромным интересом смотрю,когда в фильме звучит английская речь,хотя не понимаю её,но взволнованность артистов,страсть,нежность-это человек в состоянии понять, на каком бы языке не звучали слова. И Кларк и Далтон в слова любви вложили всю нежность, все тепло души.Фильм учит как надо любить по -настоящему.
Это точно! В оригинале фильм звучит прекрасно. В 83г. посмотрела впервые на русском, через 10 лет переехала в Европу - смотрела много раз на немецком и теперь в 55 смотрю на английском Из- за прекрасной игры актеров стала учить английский. Согласна с многими комментариями - у Далтона очень красивый голос!
Dalton makes Rochester sort of dreamy and you kind of get to love him, but when you think about it, he is a total ass. He tried to ruin an innocent young woman through deceit. She wasn't gonna go nowhere. He already had her in his house. But he almost ruined her for strictly selfish reasons. If he truly loved her, he'd have been more noble in his regard for her and let her be. But he was a selfish prick. And, seriously, I'm not really sure it's every man who'd be driven to "courtesans" out of "despair." That might be a hard habit to break. In real life, I wonder if they'd have had a horrible marriage. Really, he was was bad news for sweet Jane.
Kudos to the makeup artists. Now that is a scar that'll make an arrogant man hesitate to contact the girl he loves even though he's finally "free" of his first wife. The makeup artists did a great job here. This ain't no Captain Poldark; we're playing the big leagues with Jeoffrey de Peyrac here.
Я живу в России,но так же как и вы постоянно возвращаюсь к этому эпизоду,я не говорю по английски,даже фифти-фифти,но игра Зилы и Далтона,завораживает, они оба зе бест
+TheGummybears101 I don't think she was trying to make him angry...I think she was trying to make it clear that because she still loved him, she was happy to accept whatever place in his life that he was willing to let her have, even if it was simply one of friendship. He misinterpreted this and thought she was telling him that friendship was all she was prepared to offer. In all fairness, he probably deserved to be teased at least a little bit for everything he put her through...especially when he pretended that he was going to be marrying Blanche Ingram and had found Jane a new post in Ireland when he knew he wasn't going to do anything of the kind.
+TheGummybears101 There's an earlier scene (taken more or less straight from the book) which takes place the morning after the proposal and in which Jane asks Rochester why he pretended that he planned to marry Blanche Ingram. He admitted that he had done that in an attempt to make Jane jealous because he wanted Jane to love him as much as he loved her and he was trying to ascertain her feelings for him. It didn't work quite as well as he had hoped, because she wouldn't permit herself to let her feelings show due to her modesty, her morals, and her insecurities. It was only after Rochester upped the ante by pretending to find her another position in Ireland that she admitted her feelings....which gave Rochester the confidence to propose to her.
He'd already been burned once with his disastrous marriage to Bertha - in the prelude to her eventual madness, she acted very irresponsibly and callously (implying things like infidelity, gambling, wild/dangerous actions). Mr. Rochester, even though he was young and more naive/shallow, actually thought Bertha would care about him or at least be a true partner. He got even less than that when it turned out her family _knew_ she inherited insanity; he was mistreated on both sides. Once bitten, twice shy - not to say he thought Jane would go mad, but between Bertha and duplicitous people like Blanche, it became important to see how Jane really felt.
Lol no. But Rochester was expecting her to, I don't know, not play hard to get and run right back to be his wife (which she admits in the book she basically did but she's not going to tell him that). But they're both being careful and really, this is Jane's Very Convoluted Plan to get him to propose again. Basically this couple is the equivalent of two seven year olds calling each other names on the playground cause they like each other.
The surgeon Carter removed his left eye, leaving only a burn scar. The make-up artist did everything he could. Yes, and only in the 1983 version of Edward "made one-armed"
Geez, Zelah Clark is so TINY compared to Timothy Dalton! Not my favorite Jane Eyre production, but it's good, and there are parts I really like. But I prefer the 2006 version...and from what I've seen, the 1973 version with Sorcha Cusack and Michael Jayston seems VERY accurate to the novel...so I'm looking forward to watching the rest of that one.
yes i mean rochester is very cruel and abrupt but in this version timothy exagerates way too much😂 plus, in this version he pushes jane away when in the novel he actually begs her to stay bc he is so lonely
In the novel, the abruptness is often half-jokingly. And he frequently asks Jane if she minds (the 2011 adaptation shows this). However, his cruelty is supposed to be dissolved by the end scene as Rochester has proven he is good and kind; he tries to save Bertha from the fire and risks his life to do so. The issue with it on the screen has more to do with a lack of inner thought recorded as the reasoning behind it is lost. In the book, he is genuinely more kind but this end scene looses it
The actress of jane is faithful to the book, charlotte gainsbourg too ( too tall though) but cmon dalton is too attractive to play rochi. Orson welles was more faithful. Mia wasikowska and fassy were a nice couple though
Zelah Clark is physically the very ideal of Jane. But the actress sadly lacks. Her soul must be a cup which at first contains ice and agony. Then ice and defiance. Then some peace with growing ennui. Next after meeting Rochester, curiosity and growing love. We must see all these phases which Clark either lacks, or the director let slide. Lastly we must see the cup running over with love. All in a victorian restraint. None of this is however evident. I like Dalton, but I want even more from him.
Jane is a very passionate woman, yes...but I think it's important to remember that the book is written in the first person, which means that we're actually provided with far more insight into her personality and her internal struggles than most of the characters with whom she interacts directly in the story (with the possible exception of Helen Burns and Rochester). Jane knows who she is and tells us who she is even though she's not really free to share this with many of the characters in the story. After all, she is a governess -- and in the Victorian era, a governess was expected and required to conduct herself with the utmost decorum and propriety at all times. The book and therefore any adaptations thereof really need to be regarded within the context of the time in which it was written -- and in the Victorian era, no woman considered to be refined (such as the kind of woman who would either have been employed as a governess or who would have been educated by one) wore her heart on her sleeve. A governess actually held a unique and rather isolated position within the household -- she could not be on familiar terms with the servants because she was of a higher station than them, but she was not of the same station as the family who employed her and could not be familiar with them either. Jane's intimacy with Rochester would actually have been considered unorthodox and perhaps even somewhat scandalous by the standards of the time, especially considering how very candid he chooses to be with a much younger and very sheltered woman. A governess was also very vulnerable, as most women employed as governesses usually had no money and no family who could support them -- so she could not afford even the slightest whiff of impropriety. Frankly, I think Zelah Clarke does a good job of embodying Jane -- I agree that she could show a little more emotion in her private moments, but Jane is also someone who has learned to hide almost all her emotions from other people. Helen Burns had a great deal of influence over Jane as her first real friend, and her calm nature provided Jane with a role model as well as a foil for Jane's passionate nature. Jane in turn serves as a foil for Bertha Mason, who either cannot or will not govern her own passions and thus is treated (rightly or wrongly) as a madwoman. (It would be interesting to compare Bertha Mason with the unnamed female protagonist from the late Victorian short story "The Yellow Wallpaper" about a woman diagnosed with a "nervous depression" -- women in those days were widely regarded by society as being far more weak and fragile than they were, and what was viewed as mental illness in women back then may have been a reaction to the extremely rigid roles they were forced into.)
Exactly! Jane is a passionate, rebellious and independent woman, She is the opposite of women at that time (submissive, quiet). Zelah did a really bad job. Jane hid her feelings but everyone knews she was a passionate and rebellious woman (Helen, Rochester, St John, Mrs Reed,etc). That was her nature.
OreadNYC do you think the wife of Mr. Rochester was thought to be mad because of this? And her family is also just so crazy thought? and her inability to restrain lust, to demonstrate that a married woman should usually. and then in the open to change her husband, it is simply unacceptable! she did all this openly, not in the least shy people around. I very badly know English, excuse me.
I disagree. People often mistake yelling for passion. God knows that's the problem with the modern adaptations. And a lot of English literature seems to be about suppression of passion, which is dulled by the expectation that you live within your station. It's there, it's just that Jane has learned to keep a very tight lid on it in order to survive in a treacherous world for women. A governess in her station would have been very reserved, the little flashes of passion that sneak out are very tantalizing for Rochester. I thought Zelah was a wonderful acting partner for Dalton. I wish she had done more parts, unfortunately she dropped out of site pretty soon after this.
Honestly, I would have put her at 23-tops- watching it. It had been a while since I read JANE EYRE, so I really could not recall how old Jane was said to be, though I thought it was under 25 but older than 20, so the actress seemed fine to me. It just bugs me when people get mad about someone who doesn't look 15, being cast as Jane, so I joked that it was to combat how handsome their leading man was. ;)
Ah, okay. I had been thinking she was like 20-21 when she was hired to work for him and then about 22-23 when she returns. I haven't re-read the book in like...6-8yrs? I rather enjoyed the Fassbender/Mia W. version, it had more of the feel of the books, for me. Although I like this version as well, from what I've seen of it. Well, Jane is rather plain- so it isn't bad to be too pretty to play her. And good for you, to have that kind of strength of character and being steadfast, true to yourself!
She has a youthful voice, but Jane has had an extremely stressful life--I mean, she had to grow up fast under her circumstances in childhood and adolescence. This actress doesn't look too old to be playing such a character. If her appearance "ruined all the worth of the show" for you, it certainly didn't for me. I can believe Rochester falls in love with Jane because she IS mature for her age.
