I love your description of the time between the guests leaving and the proposal. Also "good afternoon. I've come to rain on your parade" had me in stitches.
Congratulations JW, you got an old fart into Jane Eyre 😁 You can thank your exhaustive Jane Eyre Project for my curiosity. Excellent job! Watched the 1943 version recently and 1970 just now. Interesting factoid which you may have found out since this vid was uploaded - young Jane, Sara Gibson, also played young Ebenezer Scrooge’s sister Fanny in the musical Scrooge, also a 1970 release and my personal fave which I saw in the theater as a wee lad. Both Scrooge and Eyre share the same 60’s/70’s British production and sound design that I’m a big fan of - looks like it was shot on 16mm film, what appears to be natural light for indoor day scenes, day-for-night night scenes, and 99% of the audio dubbed. A weird aesthetic, yes, but I dig.
Haha, well, I bid you welcome to the world of Jane Eyre! :D I came to be quite fond of this version while doing the adaptation comparisons. It's got its quirks (like any other version, really) but it does some very nice things too and I appreciate it. I don't think I did know about young Jane being in Scrooge. Interesting. She was great here in the little screentime she had.
"No man ever won a girl's heart by dying for her, he won it by making the other poor guy die for her." Darcy Patton (see opening of Patton for context).
I recently watched this on Prime (wow, it was actually there) after this review and enjoyed it. Before, I had only seen part of a PBS production, and the parody on SCTV. So it was great to see this and get the complete, or at least a broad outline of the story. It inspired me to also watch The Changeling. Similarities include the house the Scott characters lived it (why so huge?) and both had Jean Marsh. Of course I'd like to see more of the Jane adaptations, such as the Czech one. Nicely done, thanks for this series.
Cool! It's interesting to hear the reaction of someone who isn't so familiar with the story and other versions. This one does some things differently, but I like it quite a bit and I appreciated it even more when I went through it scene by scene for my comparison series. Scott and York both have some really nice moments, and the music is lovely. Hope you get to check out some more Jane Eyres!
The problem with remastering the movie is that since the original negative had been lost, there's really very little anyone can do to remaster the copy that is in circulation since the defects were part of the master print. As a bit of inconsequential trivia, John Williams actually cites this score as his personal favorite.
You hit on the thing I found most bizarre in this version....the way the party just magically disappeared after Rochester delivered Mason to the Doctor, followed immediately by the proposal. There was one part of Scott's portrayal of Rochester that I found especially humanizing. It was while he was having Jane play the piano and he wipes tears from his eyes. Susannah York was far too old and pretty to play Jane, IMO. Scott was also too old, but physically he was an excellent Rochester (certainly the most unattractive!).
I really like your review of this movie and I think it is one of your funniest. Susannah York was around thirty years of age when she played Jane Eyre and the maturity definitely shows. It is very weird that they hired a thirty year old actress to play a character who is supposed to be eighteen, but nevertheless I think she did a really good job in the role. Some of the dresses she wore made her look a little plain, but I actually think she was kind of pretty. Fun fact, a nickname of Susannah York's was England's Rose. I liked George C. Scott's Mr. Rochester a lot better than I thought I would although he is far from being my favorite. His age throws me off a little bit because even though he was forty two he looked older than than that. I find it really interesting that this film completely skips Gateshead altogether and opens with Jane arriving at Lowood. I wouldn't say I hated this change since I don't exactly enjoy watching Jane get tormented by her aunt and cousins, but on the other hand it just meant it left in more time to watch Jane get tormented at Lowood. Like 1996 this version has the dreaded hair cutting scene. This one was more heartbreaking to watch because in this one Jane was crying whereas in 1996 Jane was more brave and defiant. The music in this movie was beautifully done and even though it may have been dubbed I liked hearing Mr. Rochester sing. Since they completely scrubbed the Gateshead scenes from this film, the proposal did seem to come up rather abruptly. The ending scene did not appear to me to be as abrupt as other Jane Eyre movies, but Mr. Rochester 's reaction to Jane returning did seem kind of lackluster. It almost seemed like he would have been perfectly fine if Jane had just said she had come back for a short visit. Or maybe it was a pride thing and he didn't want to appear too eager. All in all I give this adaptation a solid C. I plan on watching the old black and white ones from 1943 and 1934 before moving on to the mini series.
Thanks! I remember I had fun filming it, plus I think I was starting to find my groove with the series. Haha, yes, the awfulness of Jane's childhood at Gateshead isn't exactly something you look forward to seeing, but it does have its place and there are some things that won't work so well if that part of her life is passed over. Great observations! I look forward to more. :)
Hi, Jerome and all, Like many others, I was also struck that Susannah York did not match the eighteen-year-old Jane in the novel, but this added to her intelligence and gravitas. On the other hand, Jean Marsh, (who plays Bertha in this film) is one of my favourite actors. She did a brilliant job in 'Willow', 'Upstairs and Downstairs' and Return to Oz', so. I was excited to see her portrayal of Bertha. The fact that she's only in one scene and has no lines was a bit of a missed opportunity in my opinion. A good retelling overall, though.
JW's description of this film is interesting to me because it is the only version (film or otherwise) of Jane Eyre I am familiar with. I need to read the book.
I can spend a whole night watching movies. I watched this one in the afternoon and tried really hard not to fall asleep but I had to give up and take a nap. That's how boring this movie was to me. And annoying! After the first hour I was just forcing myself to get to the end and trying not to fall asleep again. I thought time was passing really fast. I liked that they kept some details, and I enjoyed this Jane. Although sometimes she has an expression on her face that I think is out of character. Jane and Rochester conversations where just a big mess. And I didn't liked it when Rochester says that he loved Bertha as he loves Jane. This is totally wrong, am I right? A sentence I really liked was "You cannot love just God alone". The best part about watching this movie was watching your review afterwards. x) You made me laugh so hard! You even make the movie sound better than what I just watched. xD
He said what?? I don't remember that line! Yikes. Of all the JEs I've watched that were first-time views for me, this is the one that I most feel like I should go back and watch again. I can't seem to get motivated for it, though. I'm glad you got a kick out of the review! It was a fun one to make. :D
He says to Jane "I loved her once as I love you now" and then he stays there talking to Bertha, and he looks sad that he can't have a normal life with her. The way I see it, that's the story they've chosen for them in this version. But I hated that line.
@@PatriciaXara Correct, and that is SO NOT RIGHT! The whole point was that Rochester did NOT know or love Bertha when they wed. That was one of my biggest complaints about this version. But I've always remembered his attempt to converse with Bertha after the failed wedding. (I saw this when it was first aired in 1970, and that bit has always stayed with me).
I've met many seventeen year olds in my day that looked as old as Susannah York in this film. I also feel pretty confident that "Across the Stars" was an evolution of this piece th-cam.com/video/PZhK18qL3es/w-d-xo.html
Yeah, as someone who can look somewhere between 15 and 40 myself, I probably shouldn't be making that kind of comment... As I've been going through the film for the comparison series, I've found that her apparent age does seem to fluctuate. The actress they cast as young Jane also has a mature expression for her age. Wow! I never made that connection but you might be onto something there!
"Jayne Eyre", 1970, is a standard length movie that must compress a large and elaborate novel into a movie's formal confines, and so artful abridgment is necessary. Rarely is an adaptation faithful to the book but not on account of negligence. I do not judge an adaptation on its completeness but on its skill at portraying the artistic and emotional values of the original, because completeness is impossible except where the screen adaptation is the equivalent of a mini-series of many hours length. A short story or novelette is better suited to screenwriting, nonetheless, the script was skillfully crafted according to the scale. George C. Scott is excellent as Mr. Rochester, and few actors in 1970 could rise to his caliber. St. John Rivers is equally as good as well, but the part of Jane Eyre is dreadfully inadequate. Suzannah York is posing as a proper actress with glamorous conceits, a sorry feat that could pass in 1970 as professional acting, but Jane Eyre has no shimmering coiffure or thick cosmetic. York's lips are plump and pouty, and her haughtiness has nothing to do with a disadvantaged governess but is the affectation of an actress from the Sixties. Her smugness has no place in the person of Jane Eyre. She rallies a little, acting-wise, when she abandons Rochester's guests on their first evening, no doubt because the director scolded her brutally for her dreary performance. The younger and the older Jane Eyre are both guilty of reciting their lines verbatim without a stitch of talent or stirring humanity. When the titular character is not lovable or worthy of empathy, the remaining cast are wasting their time. In 1997 and in 2006, we fall madly in love with Jane Eyre which is the literary ideal and the saving grace of cinematic abridgment. This is a forgettable attempt.
I disagree with you on this one. I felt absolutely no chemistry between the two, hardly any relationship at all. Also I thought Susannah York is completely wrong for the role. I looked it up, and she was over 30 in 1970, which actually might be part of the quality you like in her, but for me it just added to the wrongness.
Hm, I was kind of surprised by your comment because I would have said I also didn't think the leads fit their roles particularly well or had much chemistry to speak of. But I just rewatched this review and I guess I forgot how positive my initial reaction was, or at least how much better the movie seemed to me compared to my very low expectations. It's interesting how my first impressions have faded over time or been overtaken by the superior versions that followed this one.
I've been on a Jane Eyre kick recently, watching clips of all the series and three movies (1943, 1970, 1997), and I like 1973 and 1983 best, since they are closest to the book. Orson Welles also had a lot of Bronte's words to say, which are well worth saying and show the relationship between the two. Anyway, I was interested to see your series since I've been doing kind of the same thing, and I agree with you on many things.
I figured you must be doing something like that, and I've been enjoying reading your comments as you watch the different versions and compare your reactions to mine. :) I agree, 1973 and 1983 are the closest to the book and the most satisfying in that respect, especially if the book is your favorite version of the story (as it is mine). I'm thinking of revisiting the Jane Eyre films soon, this time comparing interpretations of key scenes. I hope that will be interesting, especially for diehard fans.
Do you know which version actually has the scene at Lowood where Miss Temple has Jane and Helen to her room to get warm and have something to eat? I do remember seeing that somewhere. Also, do you know where I can get the 1973 version without paying somewhere between $30 and $60?
The 1973 version is the one that includes that scene. As far as buying it goes, I don't know where you can find it for less than $30. The current prices on Amazon are awfully high, and there don't seem to be any cheap listings for it on eBay either. It's too bad that it's become so rare and pricey, especially since for many it is a favorite version.
I love your description of the time between the guests leaving and the proposal. Also "good afternoon. I've come to rain on your parade" had me in stitches.
Congratulations JW, you got an old fart into Jane Eyre 😁 You can thank your exhaustive Jane Eyre Project for my curiosity. Excellent job! Watched the 1943 version recently and 1970 just now. Interesting factoid which you may have found out since this vid was uploaded - young Jane, Sara Gibson, also played young Ebenezer Scrooge’s sister Fanny in the musical Scrooge, also a 1970 release and my personal fave which I saw in the theater as a wee lad. Both Scrooge and Eyre share the same 60’s/70’s British production and sound design that I’m a big fan of - looks like it was shot on 16mm film, what appears to be natural light for indoor day scenes, day-for-night night scenes, and 99% of the audio dubbed. A weird aesthetic, yes, but I dig.
Haha, well, I bid you welcome to the world of Jane Eyre! :D I came to be quite fond of this version while doing the adaptation comparisons. It's got its quirks (like any other version, really) but it does some very nice things too and I appreciate it. I don't think I did know about young Jane being in Scrooge. Interesting. She was great here in the little screentime she had.
"No man ever won a girl's heart by dying for her, he won it by making the other poor guy die for her." Darcy Patton (see opening of Patton for context).
Excellent!
I recently watched this on Prime (wow, it was actually there) after this review and enjoyed it. Before, I had only seen part of a PBS production, and the parody on SCTV. So it was great to see this and get the complete, or at least a broad outline of the story. It inspired me to also watch The Changeling. Similarities include the house the Scott characters lived it (why so huge?) and both had Jean Marsh. Of course I'd like to see more of the Jane adaptations, such as the Czech one. Nicely done, thanks for this series.
Cool! It's interesting to hear the reaction of someone who isn't so familiar with the story and other versions. This one does some things differently, but I like it quite a bit and I appreciated it even more when I went through it scene by scene for my comparison series. Scott and York both have some really nice moments, and the music is lovely. Hope you get to check out some more Jane Eyres!
I remember watching this movie when it first aired ... it was a TV movie so the production values were less than a theatrical film.
The problem with remastering the movie is that since the original negative had been lost, there's really very little anyone can do to remaster the copy that is in circulation since the defects were part of the master print. As a bit of inconsequential trivia, John Williams actually cites this score as his personal favorite.
Ah, very interesting! Thanks for that information!
I was having trouble remembering the Jane Eyre score, so I looked it up, and, wow, it really is lovely.
You hit on the thing I found most bizarre in this version....the way the party just magically disappeared after Rochester delivered Mason to the Doctor, followed immediately by the proposal. There was one part of Scott's portrayal of Rochester that I found especially humanizing. It was while he was having Jane play the piano and he wipes tears from his eyes. Susannah York was far too old and pretty to play Jane, IMO. Scott was also too old, but physically he was an excellent Rochester (certainly the most unattractive!).
I really like your review of this movie and I think it is one of your funniest. Susannah York was around thirty years of age when she played Jane Eyre and the maturity definitely shows. It is very weird that they hired a thirty year old actress to play a character who is supposed to be eighteen, but nevertheless I think she did a really good job in the role. Some of the dresses she wore made her look a little plain, but I actually think she was kind of pretty. Fun fact, a nickname of Susannah York's was England's Rose. I liked George C. Scott's Mr. Rochester a lot better than I thought I would although he is far from being my favorite. His age throws me off a little bit because even though he was forty two he looked older than than that. I find it really interesting that this film completely skips Gateshead altogether and opens with Jane arriving at Lowood. I wouldn't say I hated this change since I don't exactly enjoy watching Jane get tormented by her aunt and cousins, but on the other hand it just meant it left in more time to watch Jane get tormented at Lowood. Like 1996 this version has the dreaded hair cutting scene. This one was more heartbreaking to watch because in this one Jane was crying whereas in 1996 Jane was more brave and defiant. The music in this movie was beautifully done and even though it may have been dubbed I liked hearing Mr. Rochester sing. Since they completely scrubbed the Gateshead scenes from this film, the proposal did seem to come up rather abruptly. The ending scene did not appear to me to be as abrupt as other Jane Eyre movies, but Mr. Rochester 's reaction to Jane returning did seem kind of lackluster. It almost seemed like he would have been perfectly fine if Jane had just said she had come back for a short visit. Or maybe it was a pride thing and he didn't want to appear too eager. All in all I give this adaptation a solid C. I plan on watching the old black and white ones from 1943 and 1934 before moving on to the mini series.
Thanks! I remember I had fun filming it, plus I think I was starting to find my groove with the series. Haha, yes, the awfulness of Jane's childhood at Gateshead isn't exactly something you look forward to seeing, but it does have its place and there are some things that won't work so well if that part of her life is passed over. Great observations! I look forward to more. :)
Hi, Jerome and all,
Like many others, I was also struck that Susannah York did not match the eighteen-year-old Jane in the novel, but this added to her intelligence and gravitas. On the other hand, Jean Marsh, (who plays Bertha in this film) is one of my favourite actors. She did a brilliant job in 'Willow', 'Upstairs and Downstairs' and Return to Oz', so. I was excited to see her portrayal of Bertha. The fact that she's only in one scene and has no lines was a bit of a missed opportunity in my opinion. A good retelling overall, though.
I didn’t hate this one either, I appreciated the scene with Rochester & Bertha after the wedding too.
JW's description of this film is interesting to me because it is the only version (film or otherwise) of Jane Eyre I am familiar with. I need to read the book.
Yes please read the book. Passion!
'' She wasn't a stunner '' That made me chuckle a bit :). Was that a bit of a British accent too? Lol
Great review.
I can spend a whole night watching movies. I watched this one in the afternoon and tried really hard not to fall asleep but I had to give up and take a nap. That's how boring this movie was to me. And annoying! After the first hour I was just forcing myself to get to the end and trying not to fall asleep again.
I thought time was passing really fast. I liked that they kept some details, and I enjoyed this Jane. Although sometimes she has an expression on her face that I think is out of character. Jane and Rochester conversations where just a big mess. And I didn't liked it when Rochester says that he loved Bertha as he loves Jane. This is totally wrong, am I right?
A sentence I really liked was "You cannot love just God alone".
The best part about watching this movie was watching your review afterwards. x) You made me laugh so hard! You even make the movie sound better than what I just watched. xD
He said what?? I don't remember that line! Yikes. Of all the JEs I've watched that were first-time views for me, this is the one that I most feel like I should go back and watch again. I can't seem to get motivated for it, though. I'm glad you got a kick out of the review! It was a fun one to make. :D
He says to Jane "I loved her once as I love you now" and then he stays there talking to Bertha, and he looks sad that he can't have a normal life with her. The way I see it, that's the story they've chosen for them in this version. But I hated that line.
@@PatriciaXara Correct, and that is SO NOT RIGHT! The whole point was that Rochester did NOT know or love Bertha when they wed. That was one of my biggest complaints about this version. But I've always remembered his attempt to converse with Bertha after the failed wedding. (I saw this when it was first aired in 1970, and that bit has always stayed with me).
Speaking of Wuthering Heights, have you done a review of the book or any of the films?
No, not yet. I plan to do a WH video sometime early next year.
I've met many seventeen year olds in my day that looked as old as Susannah York in this film. I also feel pretty confident that "Across the Stars" was an evolution of this piece th-cam.com/video/PZhK18qL3es/w-d-xo.html
Yeah, as someone who can look somewhere between 15 and 40 myself, I probably shouldn't be making that kind of comment... As I've been going through the film for the comparison series, I've found that her apparent age does seem to fluctuate. The actress they cast as young Jane also has a mature expression for her age. Wow! I never made that connection but you might be onto something there!
@@Weiselberry I've had a difficult time figuring out your age at the time you were doing the Jane Eyre reviews (or now!)
"Jayne Eyre", 1970, is a standard length movie that must compress a large and elaborate novel into a movie's formal confines, and so artful abridgment is necessary. Rarely is an adaptation faithful to the book but not on account of negligence. I do not judge an adaptation on its completeness but on its skill at portraying the artistic and emotional values of the original, because completeness is impossible except where the screen adaptation is the equivalent of a mini-series of many hours length. A short story or novelette is better suited to screenwriting, nonetheless, the script was skillfully crafted according to the scale.
George C. Scott is excellent as Mr. Rochester, and few actors in 1970 could rise to his caliber. St. John Rivers is equally as good as well, but the part of Jane Eyre is dreadfully inadequate. Suzannah York is posing as a proper actress with glamorous conceits, a sorry feat that could pass in 1970 as professional acting, but Jane Eyre has no shimmering coiffure or thick cosmetic. York's lips are plump and pouty, and her haughtiness has nothing to do with a disadvantaged governess but is the affectation of an actress from the Sixties. Her smugness has no place in the person of Jane Eyre. She rallies a little, acting-wise, when she abandons Rochester's guests on their first evening, no doubt because the director scolded her brutally for her dreary performance. The younger and the older Jane Eyre are both guilty of reciting their lines verbatim without a stitch of talent or stirring humanity.
When the titular character is not lovable or worthy of empathy, the remaining cast are wasting their time. In 1997 and in 2006, we fall madly in love with Jane Eyre which is the literary ideal and the saving grace of cinematic abridgment. This is a forgettable attempt.
I disagree with you on this one. I felt absolutely no chemistry between the two, hardly any relationship at all. Also I thought Susannah York is completely wrong for the role. I looked it up, and she was over 30 in 1970, which actually might be part of the quality you like in her, but for me it just added to the wrongness.
Hm, I was kind of surprised by your comment because I would have said I also didn't think the leads fit their roles particularly well or had much chemistry to speak of. But I just rewatched this review and I guess I forgot how positive my initial reaction was, or at least how much better the movie seemed to me compared to my very low expectations. It's interesting how my first impressions have faded over time or been overtaken by the superior versions that followed this one.
I've been on a Jane Eyre kick recently, watching clips of all the series and three movies (1943, 1970, 1997), and I like 1973 and 1983 best, since they are closest to the book. Orson Welles also had a lot of Bronte's words to say, which are well worth saying and show the relationship between the two. Anyway, I was interested to see your series since I've been doing kind of the same thing, and I agree with you on many things.
I figured you must be doing something like that, and I've been enjoying reading your comments as you watch the different versions and compare your reactions to mine. :) I agree, 1973 and 1983 are the closest to the book and the most satisfying in that respect, especially if the book is your favorite version of the story (as it is mine). I'm thinking of revisiting the Jane Eyre films soon, this time comparing interpretations of key scenes. I hope that will be interesting, especially for diehard fans.
Do you know which version actually has the scene at Lowood where Miss Temple has Jane and Helen to her room to get warm and have something to eat? I do remember seeing that somewhere. Also, do you know where I can get the 1973 version without paying somewhere between $30 and $60?
The 1973 version is the one that includes that scene. As far as buying it goes, I don't know where you can find it for less than $30. The current prices on Amazon are awfully high, and there don't seem to be any cheap listings for it on eBay either. It's too bad that it's become so rare and pricey, especially since for many it is a favorite version.