3:35 - poor Mrs. Fairfax be like “WTF?” I loved this moment in the book-and many like it-where Jane and Rochester are speaking a language only the two of them understand.
Intense eye contact after rhetorical question 'no tale of woe?' Fassbender's eyes catching that fire light and Mia having this mini-shock as she realises she's revealed more about herself in those few seconds than she has in the last few month.
I like how Rochester plays mind games with her in this scene. He casually gets her to admit how her parents died before she knew them and how her cruel aunt neglected her. Then he says, "No tale of woe?" which can be interpreted as him saying "So you do in fact have a tale of woe Ms. Eyre."
@@oolala53 I think the scene was very well acted, but I honestly prefer the book and BBC version of the unfolding of events. Rochester finds out about her family situation right before she goes to take care of her aunt as she's dying. It does two things: first it shows the reader that both characters know very little about each other, and second, it lends urgency to Rochester trying to keep her there. The threat of family ties that might keep her away from him forces him to act decisively.
I love the actress,she is a perfect Jane Eyre.She is shy but bold and she has the perfect face and expressions of a young lady of the 19 th century.Rochester is less good from my point of view but Jane eyre is one of the best.
I feel this is the best Mr Rochester you find in all the movies so far. He doesn't look scary like frankenstein like the previous Movie's Rochester. But he maintain the same arrogance, authority and the vulnerability, of the Rochester character which is in the book. I absolutely love both the main characters, Mrs fairfax and Adele in this movie. They not only great in their acting but also have the correct soul within them to do justice to Bronte's timeless book.
Such a beautiful scene, and amazing acting from Mia and Michael, full of nuance. Love the book. For me this is the best film adaptation, by far; it captures the spirit of the novel, the depth and the atmosphere - pure poetry.
I agree absolute pure poetry; the music the lighting the acting the cinematography. I just wish it could have been longer, it was too rushed and did not give time for the characters to develop. I also wasn't that keen on the casting of Jamie Bell (who I love as an actor) but I didn't feel the authority from him.
I love Michael & Mia, I think this version of film so beautiful, dresses, scene and candle lights to make it more gothic. Thank you for uploading, I m Jane Eyre big fan x
This one is a nice movie, and I love the actors, but it's too nice and pretty for my taste. The adaptation doesn t give enough credit to Rochester's fierce, unpredictable, even cruel, character. In that respect I prefer the adaptations starring Toby Stephens and Timothy Dalton.
The book purists will say he is too handsome but they’re the same people who love Dalton best 🤷♀️ Face it, Hollywood just isn’t going to cast ugly people
I love that moment when he look at her after he asks: "No tale of wall?" He sees everything in her eyes, they can understand each other from the very beginning!
I have watched all the versions of Jane Eyre. And I think the best Mr Rochester is Michael Fassbender. Such a great actor. And Jane and Mrs Fairfax also do justice to the role. Love the movie.
chrishanthi gunetileke yes the best in acting...though not quite as he is depicted in the book...Michael’s Edward is too pretty...but it is the most powerful and convincing. And they definitely have the chemistry...
In the end, the actors are not the ones who decide the character's personality. If the director didn't want Rochester to be rougher and wilder in his version, Fassbender can't be blamed.
While Jane Eyre is far from a novel about fluffy unicorns and pretty rainbows, or a particularly healthy romantic relationship until the end of the novel, it’s not without its appeal. You can see why Rochester loves Jane, and for all his faults, you can ultimately see why Jane loves Rochester. They both challenge each other intellectually, both love the supernatural, and both have this deadpan sarcastic sense of humor. Rochester is pretty much the classic Byronic Hero in the novel. He’s kind of broody, deceptive, somewhat manipulative, mildly manic depressive, moody, somewhat narcissistic, occasionally seemingly sinister, and kind of morally backwards. However, he’s *far* from the evil spawn of satan that so many contemporary feminazi literary critics try to make him out to be. Would *I* personally date or marry someone like Mr. Rochester in real life after they almost successfully duped me into a bigamous union, then attempted to coerce me to run away with them to Italy to go get married bigamously there without the law following us, even if they genuinely loved me and convinced themselves that they only had good intentions? LOL, *no way,* and I wouldn’t expect for anyone else to do the same, But within the context of *Jane Eyre,* I think Jane is pretty perfect for him once he starts being honest with her and learns to put all those cowardly and toxic self-destructive relationship patterns behind him. His love for Jane, his remorse, and his atonement are what ultimately redeems him. He *does* genuinely love Jane and he *does* have good intentions, or at least, he convinces himself he does, but he fucks up because he’s a coward. Yes, he lies, manipulates, and attempts to dupe Jane into a bigamous union, but *why?* Not to hurt her, but because he is a coward with no self-worth and too much power in the relationship who feels unworthy of her love. I’d say his biggest flaw is his own cowardice. Still, his flaws are actually on the lighter end of the spectrum for classic Byronic heroes in comparison to others. There’s Heathcliff, who was just a bitter, creepy, and vindictive asshole from beginning to end. There’s Erik/the Phantom, who haunted the opera house, deceived and stalked Christine, sought revenge when she rejected him, and tried to force her to marry him by threatening to kill her fiancé. Frankenstein’s creature fought with his creator over a woman. Victor Frankenstein tried to play god by creating life, then cast away his first creation because he was unattractive. Rochester’s not that bad by comparison. I don’t know...Wasikowska and Fassbender seem a little too dry and serious as Jane and Rochester for me...
About time they found the most appropriate actors to play the lead roles. no offence to the dashingly handsome Timothy Dalton and others actors who are other people's favourites.
I love it, this is the best version of Jane Eyre. Both are perfects for the movie. The scene, the moments close of the fire, the views, all the personages, when she runs into the land, the rain. Please climb all the movie. My english is very polite yet.
The perfect Mr. Rochester is Toby Stephens. Jane Eyre 2006. And the perfect Jane Eyre is Ruth Wilson [2006] They both captured it so well. The chemistry, the portrayal of the characters - It's perfect.
Well, I was watching this and there was something wrong about Mr. Rochester... I couldn't figure what... Then I suddenly realized he's younger than I am now :D Anyway, I think 2011 Jane Eyre is really a good one.
I think this Rochester just seems depressed, cranky and sad. Has none of the fire of the book Rochester or dalton version.. She s a very good Jane. More open and easier Read than book Jane who Hides her feelings so well that Rochester has to resort to tricks and twisted mind games to uncover them. 1983 is best.
THEY FORGOT THE BEST PART OF THIS SCENE! R:*sees Jane staring* Do you think me hansome, Jane? J:No, sir. And he's just like: 😐 k, then... Then she's all: shiiiiiiiittt....
"no tale of woe" because he feels the same way. and everyone thinks they do. but they dont feel that way. and its true in a way. their only tale of woe is that they fell in love with eachother and jane is proud and he is controlling.
The perfect Mr. Rochester is Toby Stephens. Jane Eyre 2006. And the perfect Jane Eyre is Ruth Wilson [2006] They both captured it so well. The chemistry, the portrayal of the characters - It's perfect.
Eric Viola by "her people" he means elves. In the book he says that she is a witch who conjured some ice-crusted ground, so that's why he fell down from his horse. and of course she has elves as helpers. and then she says that there is no more elves in England.
Rochester actually points out that Jane is exceptionel in that she does not ask for pity, even though she has a tale of woe. She is strong in character and mind. Love the two leads Michael Fassbinder is one of Englands best Character actors, and Mia Wasikowska plays so understated, both beautifull and plain at the same time. But my favorite adaption is the 2006 with Ruth Willson and Toby Stephenson.
I like both equally. The BBC one can explore some things in dinner details but I think both are wonderful adaptions and both sets of actors are good choices. And I love the music in both.
Jane Eyre, An awesome classic love story. Jane is definitely for today far to submissive, but Rochester was not only the man she fell in love with, but he was also her employer. He had a dark secret, but in the end they got married and did get children. It is a pitty that he became an invalid. A wonderful and sad story.😢.😉.
I guess he had to loose his "status" above her . A well built ,strong man is more desirable more attractive . It's a pitty he was blind and injured. If you think about it there were so many incidents with Berta why on earth didn't he move her somewhere else or got a man or another woman to keep Berta in her chamber.The man should have taken some action after all those incidents .
Adele adores Jane Eyre and her struggle. And just really wanted to be in France with her dad's or Grandads people. But Mr Rochester hates the slave trade, and hates women. Because he has a drink, drug and sex addiction.
I feel like Michael Fassbender was really miscast in this version. He looks way too soft and way too young for Rochester and he just doesn't have the fire or personality that the character is supposed to have.
Kitty Grimm Michael playing Mr Rochester is life changing for me lol. But seriously, after I watched this and reread the book i start seeing Mr Rochester as Michael and he was just so hot in my head 😂❤️
+TheLeaveTaking That's just it, though. It's not not supposed to be subtle because Rochester's character is anything *but* subtle. In the book, he's full of fire and passion and he uses his sense of humour to hide his self-loathing for what he's done to the women in his life, namely Jane and Bertha. Toby Stephens played that perfectly in the 2006 BBC miniseries, but Michael Fassbender lacks that passion, which is a shame because I know he can do better.
Kitty Grimm Fair enough... I still like it, though. Maybe the director wanted to have it that way; more subtle, rather quiet, as is the rest of the movie.
