And the winner is…

How could I resist Imani’s expressive “OooOOoo”? The book is yours, Cinnimani, if you’ll just e-mail me an address I can send it to. (Sorry Wil, your Soldier of Fortune collection will have to march on alone.)

So, what did everyone think of part two of J.E.? Am I just getting to be an old fuddy duddy or was there far too much kissing? I really thought Toby Stephens was going to swallow Ruth Wilson. I nearly gagged when he spoke the line about wishing for a potion to make him more handsome. What were they thinking?!?

They certainly packed a lot of action into two hours but for some reason it wasn’t very compelling. Perhaps there was just not enough time to develop the characters; it takes a special actor to walk on, say a few lines, and give the impression of being a complete human being. The scenes with the dying Mrs. Reed were decent (thanks to Tara Fitzgerald), and St. John wasn’t bad, but the rest did not impress. Was it not absurd for them to film the supposedly dark, dank Ferndean Manor on a bright, sunny day? Or am I just being as grouchy as Mr. Rochester?

As for the book, I am nearly half way through and enjoying every single syllable!


10 comments on “And the winner is…

  1. Imani says:

    Oh no–zealous tonsil hockey and magical handsome potions? Were they making some adult version of “Shrek”?? Slash Harry Potter fan fiction?
    But this does not matter because weeeeeee! I won! Thank you, thank you and I shall send my address post-haste. (Cinnimani? I like that.) And yay for you enjoying Jane Eyre.

  2. Jill says:

    The thing that I was impressed by was the number of elements that remained in the script that other adaptations dismiss – such as Eliza's lecture to Georgiana.
    But yes, I might agree that there was entirely too much romantic play. After all, Jane was worried about keeping the man on a short leash once they became engaged.

  3. Sylvia says:

    Your cadeau will be on its way presently, Cinnimani.
    Jill–that's what I meant about them packing a lot of action into two hours. They kept many of the small details while neglecting some major aspects, like the short leash you mention. Lots of trees, not much forest.

  4. Wil Cone says:

    What!?! I didn't win? I thought for sure… πŸ˜‰

  5. Stefanie says:

    If you are an old fuddy-duddy then my husband and I will have to join you. We were astonished by all the kissing and intimate caresses. Jane is a proper girl and would never let Mr. Rochester do that! I was laughing at the end with Mr. R talking about how hideous he is and I could barely see the supposedly horrible scarring from the fire. It was all so disappointing.

  6. Sylvia says:

    Oh, and how did you like that second to last scene, which pans left as Rochester's hand slides down, down, down Jane's back? Ugh. And that last “portrait” scene was incomprehensible. Is this the same BBC that brought us Bleak House?

  7. Stefanie says:

    OMG yes! And there were two different scenes in which he was lying on top of her! The portrait scene at the end was weird. I know they were trying to bring us around to when she was a girl and not included in the family portrait, but it was so obvious and so happily ever after and just plain dumb.

  8. Sylvia says:

    Oh, I forgot about that first portrait, probably because it's not in the book! Argh.

  9. Cinnimani says:

    Rochester was lying on top of Jane?? Why didn't they just cast Sharon Stone as Jane Eyre and get it over with?
    (Ah ha.)

  10. Sycorax Pine says:

    I have to agree that (although I enjoyed the first half tremendous, and love Toby Stephens) the second of half was appalling. The ending was egregiously light-hearted.
    Like Jill, however, I did appreciate the inclusion of some favorite scenes from the book that normally don't make it into film/TV adaptations. I am thinking specifically of the wondrously strange fortune teller scene in the first half (although they did have to bow to visual necessity and not have Rochester cross-dressing).

Comments are closed.