Jane, al enterarse de que Edward está casado, se siente en la obligación moral de irse de su lado para siempre. Mr Rochester intenta detenerla, pero consigue irse finalmente. Escena intensa donde las haya.
What the hell was that strong push at the begining?! He never abused her physically...he was regretful and caring, he changed only after she told she would leave him...but even then he wasnt violent with her..just hysterical
"Well, then, we'll simply go abroad and tell people you are my wife...who's to know any different?" "ME! I will know it! I would have to live with my own conscience and that would eat away at my soul...I am worth more than that." THIS. This is the whole essence of the story, and exactly what makes it so very powerful. Jane is a woman who follows her own conscience and makes a consistent effort to live in accordance with the principles which she believes will be best for others as well as herself regardless of what other people might think. (An example of this is her kindness toward Adele -- a girl whom other people might reject because she is illegitimate and because of who her mother was.) This is something which Rochester doesn't entirely understand in the beginning, even though he's doing something not entirely dissimilar from that by going against convention and keeping his first marriage a secret from the world (both literally and figuratively) so that he can find happiness with another woman. He doesn't entirely understand that Jane's principles are a major part of who she is and how she identifies herself. If she had gone against her own principles, she would lost a part of what he values most about her...and in so doing, he might indeed have found himself losing some of the affection he holds for her (which would have made her even unhappier, because she would have lost both her own respect for herself and his affection).
Yes this is why Jane Eyre is my favourite novel. She has everything against her at one point - no money, no family, no social standing, plain looks all during a time when all of these were of a huge disadvantage to a single woman, so one could understand if she did marry him at that point and STILL she says no to Mr Rochester. She had principles and standards and I agree this is why he loved her so much.
I think this scene is very well done. He is about to lose everything that he's been searching for, his only chance for the love and happiness he's longed for his entire life. She's slipping through his fingers, and he is desperately trying to cling to her. They both do a phenomenal job.
LMAO you're right he is waaay over the top and very miscast. He comes across as very violent, controlling and threatening to Jane. Not to mention certain scenes where he tries to display passion and longing but it instead looks lecherous (fire scene hand hold). I cringe watching this version because while Morton is fine and I actually like her as Jane, sadly Rochester is terrible. This scene made me laugh because in every version we wait for this scene but he'd just as sooner throw Jane down the stairs after the luggage and c'mon, no, the violent grabbing, berating bullying is way too much. Rochester is Byronic and not perfect and displays petulance at times but he's also playful and loving and tender with Jane. This guy is a second away from backhanding Jane LOL.
Love is ugly, real life is painful and neurotic. Hinds pitches this perfectly and his performance is ugly and heartfelt not soppy and romantic drivel that means by the end of the story when he is blind he has had time to grow.
Morte I agree with you to an extent but we have to remember that 'Jane Eyre' is a fully realized story and Rochester is not depicted this way in the book. I understand that Hind's performance comes across as ugly but it's not heartfelt in my eyes at all. The problem is that Hind's is trying to emote the passionate side of Rochester but he thinks yelling is the way to do that. Because of his acting choice with Rochester this becomes incredibly melodramatic and forced. That leaving scene is horrible because we are supposed to see Rochester's desperate passionate pleading with Jane. Hind's and the script plays it as Rochester bullying and grabbing Jane and saying crap like "that's it go on, go, you're like all the rest" First of all this type of dialogue is too modern and second Rochester is practically pulling Jane down the stairs and pushing her out the door playing himself as the poor victim and Jane as the witch breaking his heart. It's painful (in all the wrong ways) to watch. It doesn't even capture the tiniest essence of that famous scene. At one point, yes, in the book Rochester does threaten violence with Jane but he shows he could never hurt her by saying that it wouldn't matter because it's her soul he wants. He is passionate, heartbroken and desperately imploring Jane to stay with him. He is NOT berating, bullying and throwing Jane around. The point of the scene is that Jane is this close to cracking and throwing herself into his arms and agreeing to his plan but her spiritual resolve and self respect wins out and she has to pull herself away from him with torturous difficulty. Hind's plays Rochester too abusive and is miscast. I love Rochester portrayals and try to find redeeming feature even in the worst ones but Hind's just creeps me out with his lecherous and predatory depiction.
@@rochey1010 I think Hinds plays it perfectly, given Hinds own size and strength, which he is on the edge of losing control of, but does not. He does not hurt her.
@@rochey1010 Totally agree. He is way over the top and shows much more anger and entitlement than passion and desperation. Fassbender's performance is way, way better than this awful interpretation
Yikes. This would’ve been dope if they’d kept the original dialogue. The actor they chose for Mr Rochester in this adaptation is so spot on. Physically and emotionally he matches everything perfectly. But the writers or rather re-writers screwed up His character. He never would’ve cut Jane down like this. In the book he never hurled abuse at Jane, but rather, begged for her forgiveness and pity on him. And even made it clear that he COULD overpower her if he chose to “I could bend you with my finger and my thumb” but wouldn’t because of his true, deep love for her. Acting and actor phenomenal. Writing crap.
While the dialogue in the book didn't convey abuse, Rochester's behavior, at its core, was abusive. He was manipulative and attempted to trick Jane into doing something he knew she wouldn't want to do. He played with her feelings, mercilessly, and placed her in the position of being ridiculed, over and over again, by Blanche and his guests. He gaslit the devil out of her, making her mistrust her own instincts about what was going on in the house and even made her believe that Grace Poole was a mere nuisance and Jane wasn't in any danger. He didn't care how the truth was destroy Jane-- he only wanted what he wanted. Yeah, he didn't come out and say the things this Rochester did, but his actions, figuratively, screamed those things into her face. Rochester was an emotionally desperate and lonely man. When he finally found someone who could alleviate his loneliness and match him in passions and interests, behaved like a narcissistic a-hole. This is the version that comes closest to showing that truth and didn't hide them behind conventional fripperies. Sometimes, people fool themselves into believing that a person isn't really abusing or insulting them, because the abuser doesn't come right out and say how little regard they have for the needs of the abused.
@lacouerfairy.ES LA *JANE EYRE*. MÁS SOBERBIA QUE YO HE VISTO. NO LA SOPORTO. Y COMO ACTRIZ, DEJA MUCHO QUE DESEAR. EL QUE HACE DEL SEÑOR ROCHESTER HAY QUE DARLE DE COMER APARTE HORRIBLE VERSIÓN.
You know its just really fun to watch all the different productions of Jane Eyre that have been made and are available because you get to see each actor's interpretation of the source material.
Why is he yelling like this?What's wrong with him?This is not mr Rochester,that's an angry bully. Watch the particular scene portrayed by Timothy Dalton in the 1983 version, now he IS Rochester,Bronte's Rochester.
annetekoul have you read the book? Ciaran does a perfect job! In the book Rochester was temperamental and got angry easily. He was rude to everyone but Jane. That’s why he loved her so much because she made him be a better person.
@@anag7307 I've read the book plenty of times and i consider Hinds' Rochester a bully . Don't get me wrong, Hinds is a fine actor but not in this part. He overexaggerated the whole scene. Have you seen Timothy Dalton in the particular scene? He is perfect, just like Rochester jumped out of Bronte's pages!
It's strange how her plainness and coldness is perfectly how I imagined Jane in my head... but Rochester in this speaks none of the words from the book and so it throws me off.
Ele não estava sendo abusivo. Ele estava apenas desesperado. Coloque-se no lugar dele: pela primeira vez em anos ele vê a oportunidade de ser feliz ao lado de uma mulher que o ama com verdade e pureza e de repente ele vê essa oportunidade ser tirada dele de maneira injusta.
and I have to say it again and again... this is the best and most realistic version... the actors are fantastic... this is so well played, far from all the cheesy and clichéized versions there are... brilliant, to the very end... and so fulfilling...
Everything about this version of the scene bothers me - Rochester's abusive anger and childish taunts in particular - but I think the thing I dislike most is Jane's line "Help me to be strong". Jane Eyre is my heroine precisely because no man or woman in the world had authority over her conscience. Her strength came from within herself - she may have been physically fragile, but her faith and courage were unshakeable. She never would have asked Rochester or anyone else to "help her be strong".
I think she was asking God to help her be strong. In the book, while Rochester was frantically begging her to stay, she cried out "God help me" and pulled away from him. For the most part of this scene, I do not like any of it, but that one line I had perceived immediately as her asking God to keep her strong, which I kind of liked. Not the best adaptation, though. I prefer the musical version with James Barbour, the Timothy Dalton one, or even the Toby Stephens version.
Yes!! Anger is not passion. This Rochester is pretty ridiculous. I was scared for Jane in this scene. lol Mr. Rochester was passionate and could seem dangerous but he never called Jane names or manhandled her. Timothy Dalton is the best Rochester ever!! He was passionate and you could glimpse a dangerous side of him but you never felt threatened.
Yeah, it feels like they got Rochester all wrong her. There’s no question that Edward Rochester has a bit of a hot temper and has some seriously unhealthy tactics. He emptily threatens Jane with violence in his despair, he’s occasionally a manipulative bastard, but he *not* without self-control. He would *never* actually physically harm her, force himself on her, or belittle her in the novel. That is ultimately why I forgave him, and was happy when he realized he fucked up at the end with his deceptions after Jane came back. , While Rochester could be an asshole, he was *not* evil or outright abusive towards Jane. More mildly manic depressive with poor social/relationship skills due to his own cowardice over his own insecurities. Probably not someone who I would ever marry or date in real life myself, but definitely not without his appeal either. I still fell in love with Mr: Rochester because Jane did in the narrative of the novel, and it was clear why she did. This version feels like a parody or hate letter written by someone who clearly hates Mr. Rochester and Jane Eyre, and who completely and deliberately misinterpreted both characters.
Toby Stephens,Timothy Dalton and Michael Fassbender bring out the passionate,damaged and romantic side of Rochester I can't really see that in Ciaran Hinds I loved him as Wentworth in Persuasion I just can't see him as Rochester
I like the Dalton version, but Ciaran Hinds is the one that stays with me. He looks damaged, and needing to meet Jane from the beginning. And if he sounded drunk in the last scene, it was probably intentional. Rochester probably was drinking too much.
This is the most beautiful scene! This portrays how Mr. Rochester felt pain and the need of true love...The women loved him only for his money, when he was in search of true love.......Very powerful confession of love....
I absolutely *HATE* the way in which Rochester in this version of "Jane Eyre" attempts to gaslight and manipulate Jane by implying that somehow she is the one who's in the wrong for standing up for herself instead of acknowledging that what he did to her is not that different from what his father and his brother did to him. In the book, Rochester makes a point of telling other people that Jane is blameless and had no idea he was married -- and in his private conversation with Jane, he admits that he should not have lied to her as he did.
As much as I like this portrayal of Mr. Rochester, he is treading on full on physically abusive here. Edward is, without question, passionate and desperate, but he would never cut down Jane like this, especially when he claims that she only wanted to become mistress of thornfield, which was Edward’s own idea just so they could be together. I’m glad that others are pointing out Mr. Rochester’s unnecessary treatment, since you can’t liken his abuse with “passion.”
There is a distinction between being passionate and being abusive. Ridicule, blaming, bullying and manhandling are all I see from this Rochester. Hopefully no young girl thinks this is a loving way to be treated. Loving people don't act like this.This is abuse.Reread this passage in the book if you think this is an accurate portrayal. There Rochester straight away asks for forgiveness and blames himself. The whole thing is much kinder and remorseful in tone than this mess. And I love these actors in so many other things. Such a shame.
Well, this the most selfish version of this bastard I've ever seen and that's saying something! At least this version of Jane sort of stood up for herself. I still don't understand this story's appeal! Do we women really want to get treated like crap and still have hope that we can "fix" someone?
I like the version of the scene. Rochester here might be a tad over aggressive, but it's better than the 2006 Jane leaving part, which is too lovey-dovey.
Oddly enough, while this scene is a product of a major rewrite (likely due to the time constraint) it is actually very close to the book in spirits (much more so than most other versions). When Mr. Rochester realizes Jane is about to leave him he becomes volatile & abusive. Below are some passages from the book.
Too much modern terms in this dialog. Not like the book where she sneaks out of the house at night abs he is fraught with worry for her. This depicts him more selfish than he is. The 1983 version with Timothy Dalton is the closest to the book.
My goodness-- this Rochester is a demon lol! A bit TOO angry I think-- I think even the Jane Eyre in the book would have been terrified of this guy! I really like Samantha Morton's acting but her Jane is a bit too sarcastic ("I don't have a secret husband?!). I like the 1983 version of this scene the best, but as a whole, I prefer the 2006 version (and Jane Eyre happens to be one of my favourite books).
@strawberrysyrup9 Yes, you're right: In the book, she left Thornfield Hall without his knowing, but the good thing of this film- as I see- is the opposite: Edward sees her leaving the house. How could a man so passionate as him react when he sees that the love of his life is leaving him? IMO, Hinds makes a good performance of that moment. And yes, Rochester hasn't moustache in the book, but... Ok, Ciaran is adorable! :) Thanks for your explanation!
This Rochester is quite the bully. I'm not sure where the directors were going with this, but this adaption is really bad in my opinion. This Rochester doesn't understand her reasons and is truly childish.
That's the point. In the book, he threatened to rape her because he was too childish and passionate to listen and understand. This is not a pretty or a comfortable scene and that's why it's good and accurate.
@@JudeLove.1 Idiotic. Projecting 21st Century on 19th. He never gets close to threatening rape. Not even necessary to cover up in the Fire Scenes except to keep warm, because he never comes close to a physical seduction. The whole thing is a story of conversations. His respect for her is one of his main attractions, treating her as a person, not an inferior employee.
Liike all the men don't. The director made up his caracter natural to my mind.This version is the most exact. And no doubt Mr Hinds is very charismatic and convincing. His masculine charm is exquisitive saying nothing of his own faults!
@audreyhepburn652 well..i hope i'm not wrong.. i've read this book years ago and it's one of my favorites but i don't recall there being such a scene, i suppose she left without his knowing it... and mostly because he would never accuse her of being like blanche ingram and marrying him for his money - that made the difference, he knew that very well.. this is what especially annoyed me in this version, though i have not seen it completely ..(ok, his moustache persuaded me too:p )
He's very close to what I imagine book Rochester to look like: dark, brooding, unconventionally handsome and irresistible for women who don't care about blonde blue eyed heroes. His acting is very good, some changes to this script and we would have the best scene here. Rochester loses his mind in the book, she's even afraid he's going to rape her at one point.
The more I watch Mr Hinds, the less I like his interpretation. There is no undercurrent of love in this scene. I would have liked the passion better if I could have seen it. All I see here is entitlement and anger. Nothing to suggest he is tortured because he loves her. I think it's easy to say 'oh yes he does', but if you had not read the book and watched this scene you couldn't guess it.
No offence to those who like these actors and this version of Jane Eyre but the only way I can describe it is pathetic and ludicrous. The "Rochester" in this version used his anger to substitute for the lack of "chemistry" between the two actors, he left out the emotions of pain and angst altogether and his screaming only hurt my eardrum. The actress was expressionless and she gave the viewer the impression that she was only too happy to be leaving an abusive lover like Rochester. She did not portray the feelings of pain and betrayal that other versions portrayed so well.
I'm very fond of this Jane. She's lovely and subtle. She's what I imagined Jane to be. I also liked Zelah Clarke and Mia Wasikowska in the role as they seem to reflect Jane's innocence in a similar way to Samantha Morton. In this version, however, I do not seem to like Rochester. He's too agressive... Rochester is not supposed to be serene but he certainly isn't this furious either.
No puedo imaginar que una mujer esté tan tranquila al lado de un loco lleno de ira. La interpretación me parece muy exagerada por parte de él, da miedo realmente. No parece que esté enamorado si no que no tolera que lo dejen. Y ella, demasiado pasiva, como representaban a la mujer en el siglo 20, pasiva, sumisa, sin voluntad. Jane Eyre era diferente a las mujeres de su época.
Yeah this scene is a bit over the top considering that if there's somebody who should be angry should be Jane and not Rochester, she was lied and almost forced to be a mistress, and this scene doesn't exist in the book. However, I believe this shows Rochester's angst disguised as anger,. - and yeah in the book he kinda threatens to hurt her, I don't know about rape her, but certainly the "will you hear reason? because if you don't, I'll try violence" phrase is not to be taken lightly.
Wow ... well I wouldn't mind to leave THIS Rochester! That's an extremely *toxic* man, who constantly yells at people and accuses Jane of hypocrisy! Like WTF? The Rochester in the novel was *never* like this. He wasn't an abusive, choleric guy. He was moody, but rather calm and gloomy ... and in this scene he was *begging* Jane to stay ... out of despair, despite the mistake he made ... not yelling at her for being an - assumed - pretender! Jeez ... how masochistic you have to be or feeling inferior to fall in love with a man, who has such a character? This Jane just abases herself. Nope. This version angers me. Only Ciaran Hinds acting is good ... not the characterization of Rochester.
my favorite Mr Rochester with all his passion even in his anger, but for me Jane is like a robot , so cold, Ciaran hinds is very good, i love too timothy dalton, but Ciaran is ....particular
@Ru0508 Hahaha, thank you! Yes, JE is my favourite book ever, and I have the necessity of seeing every version I find of it. The only thing I need nowadays it would be that Alan Rickman played Mr. Rochester. Oh, I think I could die of happiness!! I've read WH one time. And JE... 13. Does it say something to you? lol
I like the idea of the scene but I can't bring myself to like Ciaran Hinds in it. He comes off more Brocklehurst than Rochester to me. Too much anger not tempered with enough fear and despair. And... the mustache. WHY?!
OMG--I've overheard arguments between lovers in the dorms that were better than this one. It was too, too pedestrian, not filled with pathos and the sere realization that something important was being lost. Yes, Broklehurst at his worst, and oh, yes, that infernal horrible ugly mustache.
Well, in all fairness, I believe that Charlotte Bronte in the book does mention that Jane's personal private portrait of Rochester has "whiskers" which back then was a term which people used when a man had a mustache and/or a beard.
@Mozggg Yes, I know, I know, but he wasn't when he played Colonel Brandom in 'Sense & Sensibility'. I mean, Jane Eyre is an old story, and I think someone could think about that option some years ago. By the way, Alan Rickman is more than WONDERFUL. He keeps playing Snape with 64 years, and Severus dies with 38...
Lots of comments about how unlikable a Rochester Ciarin Hinds is - but that's the whole point. All the other adaptations portray him as a gruff but sexy heartthrob. Honestly, if I met a Rochester-type today I'd be pretty repulsed by first impressions...
ValBlanc19 But you also have to remember that Jane is 18-19 and Rochester is nearly forty. I wouldn't exactly find a man like that handsome. I think Rochester was probably decent-looking (not like some Adonis or anything XD), and Jane didn't really find him attractive because he wasn't the best looking (but not bad looking) and was old enough to be her father.
This guy is a scary overpowering Edward! WTH? I don't like him in the role at all. He is just too overbearing and nothing like I imagined Edward in this scene at all! Just my opinion
@rockurworldforever Really? I don't believe that. Ok, it's not the same scene than in the book, but I like it. It's another way of vision. And I can see his sadness, his helplessness because she's gonna leave him yes or yes. Ciaran Hinds is soooo passionate, and I love him for that, because Mr. Rochester is passionate too.
Il avait caché sa femme car il avait peur qu'on découvre qu'elle était mentalement dérangée. Il aurait pu demander l'annulation de son mariage dans de telles circonstances. Il a préféré tout cacher aux autres et à Jane en lui mentant à propos de sa situation. S'il avait été sincère tout aurait pu être différent...mais il est toujours sur la défensive ne voulant pas se montrer vulnérable par peur d'être rejeté par Jane...l'ironie c'est que Jane part justement à cause de tous ses mensonges accumulés...
I TRY to like this version, I really do. Hinds looks the part and he has passion in spades, but every time I come to this scene I have to give up. It's truly awful. No nuance, no shade, just shouting.
I agree. I wouldn't say that Hinds was miscast exactly -- he certainly looks the part (Bronte describes Rochester as having a face which is too square to be considered handsome) and he has a good feel for Rochester's rather rough and abrupt manner. I liked the scene after the fire VERY much. However, Hinds blew it in this scene and went WAY over the top. I do understand what he was trying to do -- in this scene, Rochester is desperate and very nearly at the limits of his considerable control with the result that Jane is afraid FOR him but also becomes a bit afraid OF him as well. In fact, in the book, Rochester threatens to use violence at one point if Jane refuses to listen to him...but he doesn't lose control of himself. Hinds unfortunately turns it up to eleven in this scene -- his version of Rochester DOES lose control and acts out the violence which is only threatened in the book. Rochester is a very passionate man, yes -- but at least in this scene, Hinds turns him into a petulant and volatile and abusive man whom Jane would probably be advised to stay away from even if he weren't married.
@Ru0508 I like this version too. I've read both stories and sincerely, I like Heathcliff, but Mr. Rochester has something... different. He has something wild inside, but also something refined and polished which Heathcliff hasn't got. He's all wildness. The mixture of feelings makes Edward extraordinary and special. Maybe Hinds was inspired by Heathcliff to play this scene. I don't know.
i'm not sure that is how their departure happened in the book. i have the book read till where she finds out about Bertha and wants to leave but i honstly don't Rochester behaved like this in the book, he's rude but funny at the same time. and what i saw here is just so cruel and unjust for them to present the character of him like that!! he's far more better then this...so this shit was so cringy that i couldn't bear to watch!
