The Squeee banner with lots of pictures of things I enjoy


Currently Reading

From the Past

Films on the to-do list

  • Black Widow
  • Chimes at Midnight
  • Den blomstertid nu kommer (backed!)
  • Jojo Rabbit
  • The Killing of a Sacred Deer
  • Last Christmas
  • MIB: International
  • Remember Sunday
  • Shazam! 2
  • Spy Guys
  • Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri
  • Wonder Woman: 1984

Jane Eyre (1970)

TV film review: Jane Eyre (1970), directed by Delbert Mann

Running commentary!

During the credits at the beginning, we see a coach driving through the countryside, and finally pulling up at Lowood Institution. Who needs Gateshead? Lowood is awful – ice in the water where the girls wash in the morning, bullying teachers, coughs and misery and an over-zealous Mr. Brocklehurst. Bravo! I’ll forgive you for Jane looking like she’s a lot older than 10.

Helen Burns is wise and ill, she dies, cut to adult Jane by her grave. Red-headed and far too pretty Jane. And far too old as well, what is she, 30?! Like Grease all over again! And she’s too tall. And her dress looks wrong – buttons on the front? That sort of collar? In the 1830s? The bannisters and clothes and setting just look as if they’ve been lifted from a 1960s spaghetti Western, not from a dreary old England. What’s with Grace Poole’s cheffy style hat?

Mr. Scrooge, sorry, I mean Rochester, has a strange accent. Parts are very American. “Miss Eyrrrrre”… bah. At least his trousers aren’t baggy. Takes too long for Jane to answer the handsome question. “You’re no prettier than I am handsome” – eh, say what? Susannah York is beautiful, George C Scott is… Scrooge. (That’s what I thought even before looking him up on IMDb only to find out that he has actually played the part of Ebenezer Scrooge!)

He doesn’t wake up from her vigorous shaking, but when a couple of drops of water spill on him, he wakes up? WTH? Waving the candle about looks like someone’s tracking them with a torch/flashlight. Jane’s nearly as tall as Rochester as well, so yeah, too tall was correct. Well, that’s one post-fire bed scene that wasn’t smouldering, even though it tried. It very nearly made me fancy this Rochester though, so it must’ve had been good in some way!

The rest isn’t too engaging. Part of the problem might also be that the copy I haven isn’t very good, I should try and find it on DVD, really. Some costumes feel too modern and out of place, Scott is more soft-spoken than Hinds, but he doesn’t do the character justice. He’s okay, especially where he’s talking to Bertha after the wedding – showing the tender side, but the rest… There’s no real passion there, no real angst. There’s no real fight in Jane. She’s a passionate character, ever since childhood, but where’s her feisty spirit?

The interesting thing is that both York and Morton makes comments that she (Jane) will not be in his bed if he has a wife. A part of me says “hah, they’ve already been in bed together!” and I think there are people who are of the same opinion. The kind of characters they are and how they react, they do seem to have been up to something before the wedding. (Holy crap I just felt an overwhelming urge to write fanfic!) It’s an interpretation that was made blatantly obvious by Sandy Welch in the 2006 version, in the flashbacks Jane has after she has left Thornfield. Interesting. Very interesting.

I’m liking Ian Bannen as St. John Rivers. No Mr. Fluffy here. He’s pious and cold, although… woah, hugging?! Where did that come from? Okay, so he’s trying to be Mr. Fluffy but he fails spectacularly. He talks of marriage and learning to love, but he doesn’t know what it means. Told you, budding sociopath!

They’re into talking about God a lot. There’s even a scene where St. John Rivers is preaching in a church. “You can’t love just God alone!” cries Jane and returns to a burned-down Thornfield. Oh, and Pilot looks like a big, brown Great Dane or something. I preferred the ’97 Pilot. Fwuffier.

You don’t have to have your eyes closed when you’re blind, Rochester… In fact, ’tis a little bit silly. And he’s too old as well! Or at least he looks too old. And it doesn’t end with Jane saying that he regained his sight so he could see his first-born. It finished with her leaning on him on a bench in the park at Fearndean. Huh.

Nice landscaping in the garden and at Fearndean (a place they visit twice or more over the course of the film) but over-all, I’m not taken by this version at all. It’s just off. Characters aren’t what they’re supposed to be and neither are the clothes. Thornfield looks okay from the outside but looks strange on the inside. No, I much prefer the other versions. Even if they do have moustaches.

Traxy Thornfield

A Swedish introvert residing in Robin Hood Country (Nottingham, UK) with a husband and two cats. She's an eager participant in tabletop and play-by-post roleplaying, woodworking, photography and European travel. Will get a novel out one of these days, if she doesn't get too distracted along the way.

4 thoughts on “Jane Eyre (1970)

  1. I’m about halfway through this version right now and am thinking about just shutting it off. I wanted to see if anyone else had watched and reviewed it. You definitely hit all my major complaints: too old, not historically accurate, no chemistry, no passion, no intellect….BLECH!

Leave a reply - comment is free (sort of)

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: