Printable “Wuthering Heights” Word Find Puzzle

Here’s my word find for Wuthering Heights by Emily Brontë.

Simply click on the link below and either print, or save it to your computer and then print.  Enjoy!

“Wuthering Heights” Word Find Puzzle

Advertisements

The Phantom of the Opera – Movie 2004

This post contains an affiliate link.

Last night I watched my first film adaptation of The Phantom of the Opera.  Let it be said though, that this film is based on the musical from Andrew Lloyd Webber, not the original book.  If you’re looking for a movie that closely mirrors the book, you’re going to be disappointed.  If you want to know more about what I thought of the book, check out my book review.

Even though I’m not a huge fan of musicals, I sat through this one without a problem.  It was so well done that I was willing to put up with a ton of singing just so I could see the story played out.  Gerard Butler was an amazing Phantom and I thought that Emmy Rossum made a very believable Christine.  Their singing was a joy to listen to.

The look of this movie was absolutely magical!  The costumes and sets were perfect and added a wonderful richness to the tapestry of the story.  I thought the Phantom was a little too handsome in his role (when compared to how the book described him), but I’m not going to complain too loudly.  Apparently he’s extremely talented with prosthetics and hairpieces in this version.

As far as differences between the movie and the book, I hesitate to get too critical.  I’ve never seen the musical before, so I can’t comment on how closely this version resembles the original.  It definitely strays from the novel, but that’s what I expected.  There are many changes which push the story even further into the realm of fantasy and theatricality.  Candelabras being held by moving arms originating from the walls?  Oh, yes.

My biggest criticism of the film is that there are a couple of scenes which were shot in such a way as to make you dizzy while watching them (a fight scene and the mirror room).  That is a no-no for me.  If I wanted to feel motion sickness, I’d go take a ride on a roller coaster.

I recommend The Phantom of the Opera to all the ladies out there who enjoy a love story combined with a musical.  If that isn’t you, this movie might be a little over the top for you.

Possible Objections:

  • Brief view of a man’s nude backside (blink, and you’ll miss it)
  • 1 instance of the d-word
  • Some mild sensuality
  • A hanging which is a bit graphic

Rated: PG-13

Rating: 4 1/2 Stars

Until next time…

Lori

OTHER THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA POSTS:

The Phantom of the Opera by Gaston Leroux

This post contains an affiliate link.

Title: The Phantom of the Operaby Gaston Leroux

Premise:

The Paris Opera House is haunted by a phantom who seems to hold sway over all that happens there.  Unfortunately, the Opera Ghost becomes enamored of a young lady named Christine, who falls under the spell of the phantom — her “Angel of Music.”  Will Raoul, her true love, be able to save her from the phantom’s spell before tragedy strikes?

My thoughts:

I was already familiar with this story from having seen the movie, so reading this book was not an entirely new revelation to me.  Nevertheless, it was still enjoyable and worth my while.

The whole love triangle between Christine, Raoul and Erik is very intriguing.  These poor young lovers have to defend themselves against this seemingly omnipotent villain who will do anything to procure the lady he’s obsessed with.  I was struck with just how much genius Erik was blessed with.  Was there anything this man couldn’t do?  Any skills he didn’t have?  He seemed superhuman to me, and perhaps that was the author’s intention.

I’m going to be perfectly honest here and tell you that I wasn’t as impressed with Christine’s character as I thought I’d be.  She was a little too wishy-washy for my taste, never seeming to know what she wanted. While the author tried to explain her shifts in mood and intentions, it seemed like perhaps our heroine was a trifle simple-minded.  This was a girl who needed to get out of that darn Opera House, have a stroll around town, and start to think for herself.  A lesson to all the young ladies out there: Never let a man have control over your mind.  Ahem, back to the book.

The storytelling doesn’t flow quite as seamlessly as I expected, but that could be in part because of the translation from French.  Also, it seemed like there was a lot extraneous information contained in the book.  I think that I prefer the way that the movie took away some of those bits that didn’t seem to add anything to the narrative (to my mind).

I was really captivated with the description of the Paris Opera House, and after I finished the book I sought out a little more information about it.  Just let me say that it is a fascinating building and well worth studying.  The pictures alone will blow your mind!

I recommend The Phantom of the Opera to those who enjoy a good Gothic novel or to fans of classic literature.  I don’t think that it would greatly appeal to the average reader.

Possible Objections:

  • Some violence

Rating: 4 Stars

Until next time…

Lori

OTHER THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA POSTS:

Jane Eyre: The Graphic Novel (Original Text)

This post contains an affiliate link.

Title: Jane Eyre: The Graphic Novel (Original Text) by Charlotte Brontë

Premise:

Jane Eyre has lived a largely loveless and harsh life, first under her aunt’s roof and later at the infamous Lowood School.  When Jane becomes a young adult she ventures forth from her stifled existence, ready for the next chapter in her life.  When she arrives at Thornfield Hall as the new governess, however, she has no idea the pleasures and pain that lie in store for her.

My thoughts:

I wanted to share just a quick note on this book.  It’s a graphic novel which is totally awesome, not only for younger readers, but also for Jane Eyre aficionados.  There is a whole series of these graphic novels based on classic literature, and I will definitely be reviewing more of them in the future.  Also of note, each title comes in at least three different text formats: Original Text, Plain Text, and Quick Text.  These come in handy for different reading levels, making the story accessible to people of all ages.

On to the story!  The story line was followed quite faithfully in the graphic novel version (with only a few minor changes), and this being the Original Text version, the dialogue was also quite faithful.  It’s fun to see the artists’ imagining of how the story looks.  Seeing their imagined facial expressions and the characters’ mannerisms, along with the dialogue, is just another fun way to explore the story of Jane Eyre.  I really enjoyed it!

The illustrations are nice, though for some reason they remind me of 1970’s illustrations.  Don’t ask me why.  Also, the book is divided into chapters, so that provides some good stopping points along the way and keeps the reading manageable for those who want to digest it in stages.

I recommend Jane Eyre: The Graphic Novel to young readers who want an easier introduction to the story, as well as to Jane Eyre fans.  It’s a fun way to explore a wonderful classical story.

 

Possible Objections:

  • some violence

 

Rating: 4 1/2 Stars

Until next time…

Lori

Jane Eyre - Graphic Novel - Original Text 2.jpg

The Quick by Lauren Owen

the-quick-wm

This post contains an affiliate link.

The Quick is the third book that I’ve read from my Thrift Store Fantasy Reading Challenge.  I was actually quite looking forward to reading this one because it involved old London and vampires.  I seem to have a hang-up on those two things.  Also, the cover of this book is really appealing.  I know that’s a silly reason to like a book, but there you have it.  I’m a silly person.

Generally, this book is about a young man (James) who goes to London to try his hand at writing and subsequently disappears.  His sister (Charlotte) becomes concerned and goes in search of him.  She discovers that there is a hidden underground vampire world in London which her brother has become entangled in.  The rest of the story is taken up by her trying to locate, free, and aid her brother.

There are many side characters who come in at various parts of the book.  For some of them we are given extensive or at least some background information.  Others simply appear and disappear without the reader really knowing who they are.  This was somewhat mystifying because some of the characters who are given extensive back story (Mould, in particular), don’t feature all that prominently in the remainder of the story, or their back story seems a bit irrelevant.  There are some characters who were intriguing and whose stories may have been very interesting, if the author had bothered to share them at all.  In particular, I would have liked to have known more about Burke, Liza, and the others associated with Mrs. Price.

The last part of the book was very disappointing, in my opinion.  It seems like it was a lame attempt at tying up the loose ends of Charlotte and Arthur’s lives.  There was no resolution, no satisfaction, not enough follow up with many of the characters, and no clear answer about what happened to James.  I was pretty upset with the way it ended.  It felt like a waste of time to read a book which had such a lame ending.

Don’t get me wrong, the book has its strengths.  It is well written and flows fairly well within each scene.  (Though the way it jumps around between different characters and time periods is very disorienting.)  I liked the majority of the characters and their complexity.  I liked the diversity in settings and circumstances.  However, those things weren’t enough to overcome the sense I got that this was a wasted story.  When you spend the whole book waiting for some kind of resolution or closure to the problem, and that doesn’t come to fruition, it’s disappointing.

Maybe others wouldn’t be as hung-up about this issue as I am.  It’s hard to say.

Possible Objections:

  • Violence & gore
  • Some bad language
  • Mild sexual scene between two men

Rating: 2 1/2 Stars

Until next time…

Lori

Northanger Abbey – Movie 1987

This post contains affiliate links.

I’m trying to catch up with these movies!  The pile of Jane Eyre adaptations really threw me for a loop!  Well, today we’re talking about Northanger Abbey.  This version stars Katharine Schlesinger as Catherine Morland, and Peter Firth as Henry Tilney.

I was not wowed by any of the characters in this movie.  They all seemed lacking in one way or another.  Catherine was young, naïve and happy.  At times her emotions were not nuanced enough and came across as shallow.  Henry Tilney didn’t get a lot of screen time, and when he did it was difficult to discern his feelings and motivations.  I think they wanted him to come across as somewhat of an enigma, and in that they thoroughly succeeded.  Isabella Thorpe was silly, simpering, flirtatious, shallow, and constantly seeking flattery.  Her method of speaking was inane.  John Thorpe was creepy and lecherous.

There were a couple of characters whom I liked.  Elinor Tilney’s acting was natural, which made it a wonderful relief.  General Tilney’s character was strange, but well-played.  I like how Robert Hardy gave him a very distinct manner of talking and behaving.  He was more eccentric than forbidding.

This adaptation added a character who was a bit strange–General Tilney’s friend from France and her young servant.  If you watch the movie, you’ll see exactly what I mean about her being like a neon light stuck in a film about table lamps.  You just want to say, ‘Huh?’

The look of the movie was alright, but there were a few things that were off.  Look closely at the ball scenes–there is a profusion of tall feathers.  I think it was a little overboard.  You can also see the 80’s style enter into some of the hairstyles and clothing.  And please don’t get me started on the cheesy 80’s music.  Oh Mylanta–saxophone music and mermaid singing!  Are you kidding me?

The beginning of the film is rather strange–starting with Catherine’s daydream of a Frankenstein-like villain preying on a young, helpless heroine.  Catherine’s dreams continue throughout the movie, changing as she meets new characters.  They are melodramatic and feed right into her overexcited imagination, which has been fueled by sensational gothic novels.  The end of the film is not quite to my liking.  I take issue with Henry and Catherine having a make out fest before he has even proposed to her.  Not realistic at all.

In closing, I don’t recommend this film to anyone.  View it at your own risk and be prepared to laugh heartily or groan as appropriate.

I’m curious now to get my hands on an authentic gothic novel to see if they are really that sensational.  Let me know if you have any recommendations!

Possible Objections:

  • The d-word is said several times.
  • Mrs. Allen is shown sewing through her fingers in one of Catherine’s dreams.

Rated: NR

Rating: 1 1/2 Stars

Until next time…

Lori

OTHER NORTHANGER ABBEY POSTS:

Jane Eyre – Movie 1973

This post contains affiliate links.

I never thought I’d be so glad to be done watching Jane Eyre (though I discovered that there is still one version I haven’t seen yet). Last night I finished the version that stars Sorcha Cusack as Jane, and Michael Jayston as Mr. Rochester.

The film quality is very good, especially when you consider how old it is.  There was something amiss in the look of the movie, however.  The 70’s intruded in clothing and hairstyles, and even some props.  In one of the scenes at Lowood, all of the girls are distinctly seen wearing dresses with long zippers down the back.  In the pajama scene when Rochester’s guests assemble in the hall because of the nighttime scream, the 1970’s take over.  The women’s robes are all shiny fabric and gauzy necklines.

The dialogue is mostly true to the book, however, there were a few parts that were added or changed.  If you’re looking for an adaptation that is most like the book, this would be the movie for you.  It is very long and hits on all the major points of the book, sticking quite faithfully to the original plot.

The characters were mostly well done.  Adele was charming and likable, and her accent was believable.  Rochester was surly, impatient, and commanding.  Jayston did a great job in his role as Rochester, and it was easy to see his interest in Jane throughout.  Cusack was a fairly good Jane, but I felt there was something lacking in her performance.  Maybe it was a flatness in expressing emotion at times.  For some reason, I was particularly gratified by the kitchen scene between Jane and St. John’s servant, Hannah.

There were only a couple of things that really bugged me about this movie.  The first would be Jane’s somewhat shallow evidence of her attachment to Mr. Rochester.  Nothing in her performance really made me believe that she felt strongly about him.  The second thing is very trivial.  For some reason I couldn’t take my eyes off of Sorcha’s eyebrows.  You’ll know what I’m talking about if you watch the movie.  It was a distraction to me.

Rated: NR

Rating: 3 Stars

 

Until next time…

Lori

 

OTHER JANE EYRE POSTS:

 

 

Northanger Abbey – Movie 2007

This post contains affiliate links.

Last night I got to watch my first adaptation of Northanger Abbey.  Felicity Jones stars as Catherine Morland, and JJ Feild as Henry Tilney.

I really enjoyed Jones as Catherine.  She did an admirable job of exhibiting the qualities that make Catherine Morland–young, naïve, romantic, overactive imagination, awestruck.  Feild was a wonderful Tilney.  He was likeable, playful, honorable, and looking for a young and unspoiled woman to love.

Northanger Abbey is a gentle parody of the genre of gothic novel.  In the movie we get to see Catherine’s gothic daydreams–full of highwaymen, cruel villains, helpless women, and mysterious old castles.  Her fevered imagination starts to have an effect on how she interprets real-life events, much to her own mortification when she suspects somebody of murder (but that comes later in the story).

In her everyday life, Catherine begins to get a taste of city life when she is asked to accompany her kindly neighbors to Bath.  There she meets Henry Tilney, whom she begins to like.  She also makes friends with Isabella Thorpe who is set on marrying Catherine’s brother (though only for his supposed money).  When Isabella’s brother believes that Catherine will also inherit a good deal of money, he tries to snatch her away from Mr. Tilney’s company and influence.  The final part of the movie has a quick ending and things end up well for both Henry and Catherine, as well as Henry’s sister Eleanor.  Although it was anticlimactic, it was satisfying nonetheless.

I think that this adaptation is a very fair rendition of the novel.  Since the book is relatively short and the plot fairly straightforward, it makes translating it to film a little easier.  Some of the dialogue was changed, but I don’t think it detracted from the story at all.  I would recommend this movie for teens and up because of some suggestive content.

 

Possible Objections:

  • Mr. Thorpe says the d-word several times.
  • Isabella is shown in bed, implying her having had relations with Captain Tilney.

 

Rated: NR

Rating: 4 1/2 Stars

 

Until next time…

Lori

 

OTHER NORTHANGER ABBEY POSTS:

Save

Jane Eyre – Movie 1970

This post contains affiliate links.

I watched yet another adaptation of Jane Eyre last night.  I promise I’m getting close to the end of them!  This one stars Susannah York as Jane, and George C. Scott as Mr. Rochester.

Strangely, I thought that both York and Scott were a smidgen too old to be cast as Jane and Rochester.  She looks like she might be in her late 20’s or early 30’s.  He looks like he’s approaching his senior years.  At least it wasn’t a nineteen-year-old cast with a senior citizen.  That would have been even more unbelievable.  York was an okay Jane.  She was definitely reserved and seemed to operate on a different plane from other people.  There wasn’t much warmth or attachment that came through in her performance, though.  Scott was very abrupt and at times startling as Rochester (i.e. when he sends the glass flying off the table).  I appreciate his alternative take on Rochester’s character, even if it’s not how I would prefer it be played.  Overall, I didn’t emotionally connect much with Jane and Rochester.

Mrs. Fairfax was quite friendly and cheerful.  Adele wasn’t very remarkable.  Blanche was also too old and was not pretty (as is specifically stated in the book).  One pleasant surprise was that Ian Bannen played St. John Rivers (Waking Ned Devine).

Thornfield was old-fashioned, but not period.  The same can be said for the costuming.

There were dialogue changes, but I’m really getting used to that by now.  Also, the copy that I watched was missing clips of film in certain places.  I’m not sure what the deal was there, but it was too bad.

As far as the story itself goes, Lowood got a fairly long treatment.  It was a sinister place and really made you feel sorry for the girls there.  They did make up the part about Burns standing outside in the rain as punishment.  I noticed that there were several plot changes and things that were completely left out this adaptation.  Considering the length of the movie, however, I think they did an admirable job of telling a complicated story in a shortened timeframe, while staying true to the spirit of the book.  The ending was very sweet, though a little lacking in authentic emotion.

This was another version of Jane Eyre that I’m glad I watched once, but will not need to revisit again.  Check it out if you’re an Eyre aficionado!

Rated: NR

Rating: 3 Stars

Until next time…

Lori

OTHER JANE EYRE POSTS:

Save

Jane Eyre – Movie 1943

This post contains affiliate links.

This next film adaptation of Jane Eyre is from 1944.  The movie is in black and white which gives it a sort of somber feel.  Jane is played by Joan Fontaine, and Mr. Rochester by Orson Welles.

I would classify the overall look of the film as more old-fashioned than period.  Jane’s hairstyle is unique and definitely reflects the time period when it was filmed.  She is very demure and lacks the well-disguised vivacity that Jane possesses in the book.  Mr. Rochester is big and burly.  He is very stormy, almost too stormy.

This film portrays Jane’s childhood differently from other movies, with some portions of it being completely fabricated.  I’m not sure why this was done, except maybe to establish more sympathy for Jane.

While the actors recited their lines well, they seemed to be lacking emotion or sounded fake.  I also didn’t sense a great deal of chemistry between Jane and Rochester.

My other criticisms:

Miss Temple and Mrs. Reed’s daughters are completely missing.  Adele’s French accent is awful.  The excerpts read from the book are made up.  There are plot devices that have been made up, such as Jane going to investigate the tower herself, and Rochester and Blanche talking about money.  The garden scene between Jane and Rochester was disappointing.  Instead of Jane ending up with St. John Rivers when she wanders off, she goes to Bessie.  I don’t know why that was changed.  Finally, Jane and Rochester’s kiss was almost frightening.

I didn’t care much for this adaptation and won’t ever need to see it again.  Watch it if you’re a Jane Eyre fan, otherwise I’d say skip it.

Rated: NR

Rating: 1 1/2 Stars

Until next time…

Lori

OTHER JANE EYRE POSTS:

Northanger Abbey by Jane Austen

Northanger Abbey

This post contains an affiliate link.

Northanger Abbey is a relatively short and unique book by Jane Austen.  Though it’s not my favorite work of hers, I appreciate the wit and social commentary that went into it.  There are themes that are still applicable today.  In this story, Catherine Morland is a young lady who has no very special traits that would distinguish her from any other girl.  She likes to be outdoors; she dislikes serious reading and adores gothic novels; she is utterly naïve.

When Catherine’s close neighbors go to Bath, she is invited to accompany them.  She enjoys her introduction into city life, and meets a man whom she comes to admire.  His name is Henry Tilney and he has a sister, Eleanor, who befriends Catherine.  Catherine is invited to stay with Eleanor for a visit at the family’s home–Northanger Abbey.  The visit is encouraged by Henry and Eleanor’s father, General Tilney, because he believes Catherine to be a good match for his son.  When he finds out that Catherine is in fact not rich, he kicks her out of the house to make her own way home.

Woven throughout this narrative, there is almost continual irony used to criticize social norms.  We also see Catherine coming of age as she falls in love with Henry.  Finally, Austen comments on the silliness of being obsessed with gothic novels and all of the flights of fancy that ensue.

If you’re looking for an easier way to ease into reading Jane Austen, this would be the book to start with.  I highly recommend this book as a fun, quick read in the classical literature genre.

Rating: 4 1/2 Stars

Until next time…

Lori

OTHER NORTHANGER ABBEY POSTS:

Save

Jane Eyre – TV Mini-Series 2006

This post contains affiliate links.

Here is the most recent film adaptation of Jane Eyre that I have watched.  This one is quite long, as it was originally a TV mini-series.  It’s kind of a plus that it’s so long though, because it gives more time for the story to be fully developed.

Toby Stephens stars as Mr. Rochester and Ruth Wilson as Jane Eyre.  I think they are perfect for their parts–Rochester a bit weathered and surly but still magnetic; Jane young and plain, but attractive nonetheless.

There are two aspects to this rendition that will be glaringly obvious to Jane Eyre fans.  They took a lot of free license with the dialogue, and they capitalized on the gothic aspects of the story.  In regards to dialogue, there are countless lines (sometimes almost entire conversations) which have been changed from the book.  I think that the changed conversations still helped establish the spark and connection between Jane and Rochester, but I believe the original dialogue did that also.  I’m not sure why they changed it, unless it was to try to modernize the conversation a bit.

I was quite impressed with how well they brought gothic elements into the movie.  There were plenty of spooky scenes, almost shocking images (Rochester’s bed on fire, for one), a sometimes cruel and dominating male love interest, and the young (seemingly) helpless heroine.  It’s a strong element in this version that I haven’t seen in others.  For that reason alone, you should check it out.

As far as acting, I think that Rochester and Jane were very good.  He was sufficiently gruff and moody, and followed the book a bit better in showing his unfeeling torment of her.  (I have to confess though, I think they went a bit overboard in this version with how despicable he acted towards her.)

Jane was quite interesting–both young and innocent, and wise beyond her years.  She showed the proper amount of reserve, but was willing to share her mind when asked.  I also enjoyed how she stood up for Adele.

Jane and Rochester have some really great chemistry in this movie.  Unlike some other versions, this one does a great job of showing Jane falling in love with Rochester.  It’s good to see the attachment grow on both sides.  Two of my favorite scenes between them are when she asks him for leave to go visit Mrs. Reed (such fun and affection), and when Rochester tries to convince Jane to stay (the bed scene).  That last scene is very intense.  Finally, once they reunite at Jane’s return, this movie gives that whole episode a much more satisfying treatment than any others I’ve seen.

Possible Objections:

  • Mr. Rochester says a couple of rude epithets.  Nothing major, just not appropriate for kids.
  • Bertha says the b-word in Spanish.
  • There is a scene with Rochester’s wife Bertha that is very inappropriate.  Not for young people, even though you technically can’t see anything.

Rated: NR

Rating: 5 Stars

Until next time…

Lori

OTHER JANE EYRE POSTS:

Save

Jane Eyre – Movie 1996

This post contains affiliate links.

Here we go again!  I watched another Jane Eyre movie adaptation last night.  This one stars William Hurt as Mr. Rochester and Charlotte Gainsbourg as Jane.  It can be difficult to compare the different movie adaptations to one another.  Where one is weak in a particular area, another is strong and vice versa.  I’ll start off by saying that I thoroughly enjoyed this rendition.

This movie devotes a much larger part to Jane’s childhood and really establishes her character before she enters adulthood.  We can see from the beginning that Jane has spunk and thinks for herself.  You’ll find yourself rooting for her and hopeful for a better future as she embarks on a new chapter in life when she leaves Lowood School.

I believe that Hurt’s portrayal of Mr. Rochester is my absolute favorite of all those I’ve seen.  His acting is superb–there’s nothing forced or awkward about it.  His Mr. Rochester is moody, teasing, tortured, quite likable, and totally mesmerized by Jane.  It is easy to believe that he has finally found a woman whom he respects, admires, and recognizes for the superior character that she is.

Gainsbourg does a great job of finding that careful balance between the quiet and reserved Jane, and the plainspoken and independent Jane.  There are scenes where she is quite reserved, and others where her affection and other emotions shine through.  It’s a tough character to play and I think she did well.

As far as Jane and Rochester go, I think the actors had the necessary chemistry to make the love interest believable.  The garden scene was very good, with both showing the proper emotions to convince viewers.

This version of the movie struck me as having very strong supporting characters.  The young Jane (Anna Paquin), Aunt Reed (Fiona Shaw), Mr. Brocklehurst (John Wood), Mrs. Fairfax (Joan Plowright), and even Adele were all played very well.  They added a bit of extra sparkle to the movie with their great acting.

The only real criticism I have for this version is that they took a lot of free license with the part of the story that concerns Jane’s removal from Thornfield Hall.  Jane doesn’t experience quite the privations that she does in the book.  Also, St. John’s character is altered quite a lot, and he only has one sister in this version.  I’m sure they wanted to simplify this part of the story because they focused more on her childhood, but I miss it.

I think you’ll enjoy this movie a lot if you’re a fan of Jane Eyre.  It is a very compelling love story, which is really what the book is all about.  They got that part right!

Rated: PG

Rating: 5 Stars

 

Until next time…

Lori

 

OTHER JANE EYRE POSTS:

Jane Eyre – Movie 2011

This post contains affiliate links.

I have decided that in addition to reviewing books, I’d also like to use this blog to review movie adaptations of books.  To that end, Jane Eyre is my first movie review.  I believe this is the second time that I’ve watched the version that features Michael Fassbender and Mia Wasikowska.  I’m not going to give an extremely detailed breakdown of the movie and all the pros and cons.  I prefer to talk lightly on whether or not I liked it, if there were any glaring errors, etc.  I’d rather you come away with your own ideas from the movie, than be overly influenced by mine.

First, I like the look of the actors they chose to portray Mr. Rochester and Jane in this version.  I know that sounds silly, but if I don’t think “Jane” and “Rochester” when I look at the actors, I’m not going to enter into the story as readily.  I really enjoyed Fassbender’s portrayal of Rochester, though he wasn’t quite as dark and brooding as in some other adaptations or the book.  He didn’t seem to be quite as tortured as he should have been.  Wasikowska’s portrayal, I’m not quite as sure about.  I did enjoy her performance, but it seemed to be lacking something.  There seemed to be a flatness to her character at times, and a general lack of emotion.  I also thought that the chemistry was a little lacking between Jane and Rochester, which is of course one of the main ingredients that makes the whole plot believable.

There were a few bits that I noticed had been changed from the book, but I’ve come to expect that in screen adaptations.  It doesn’t bother me too much.  Unfortunately, there were some scenes left out that I think would have added to the story, but there may have been time constraints.  One thing I thought was quite clever in this adaptation, was that Jane’s story alternated between present day (once she had left Thornfield), and her past (beginning with her childhood).  I think that was an interesting way to tell the story.

Overall, I enjoyed the movie and would recommend it to Jane Eyre fans and those who enjoy a good love story.  I don’t think you’ll be disappointed, as long as you go into it allowing it to be its own version of Jane Eyre.  🙂

Rated: PG-13

Rating: 4 Stars

Until next time…

Lori

OTHER JANE EYRE POSTS: