Jane Eyre

This movie's greatest strength is George C. Scott as Rochester. He is stern, abrupt, powerful, and playful - his character is fascinating and we can see why Jane becomes fascinated by him. Physically, too, he embodies the Rochester of the novel - large and athletic, not exactly handsome, but not exactly ugly, either. His performance makes this movie worth seeing.

The rest of the cast is competent, with special mention of the actress who plays Blanche Ingram. She plays that character with an important degree of authority to remind us of Jane's vulnerability.

I believe that anyone studying either the novel or the adaptations of Jane Eyre would benefit from watching this version.

I've read the book so many times and seen every version of Jane Eyre made and for me, George C Scott played the tortured soul Mr Rochester the best. One couldn't fancy Orson Welles, William Hurt was just a sap and Timothy Dalton melodramatic. George C Scott was as rough and gruff as Mr Rochester was supposed to be. When you first read of him, Jane is quite frightened - he has a large personality, makes a lot of noise and kicks things about. Gradually we see a softer side and soon you really want the guy to be happy. The set appeared right out of my own imagination and the creepy bit made me lift my ankles from below the sofa. The score is absolutely brilliant - oh those violins really get your heart pumping'. Ian Bannen is suitably slimy as St John (sinjin). Susannha York was a bit too pretty to be Jane Eyre but she tried her best. She was flavour of the month at the time and I can't remember what other actresses were around that would have been more suited. Jane was supposed to be VERY plain, and considerably younger than Mr Rochester. Nyree Dawn Porter played Blanche beautifully an sympathetically.

I have never seen a feature-length version of JANE EYRE which did Bronte's novel justice. To minimize her coming of age novel to a gothic love story strips Jane of her arc and the story of its coherence. This 1970 production suffers from rushing the story, cramming it in under two hours, as well as from a poor transfer. Susannah York and George C. Scott are both miscast-- York is too pretty and Scott is too subdued. That the two share no chemistry does not help.

The one ace the movie has is the John Williams music. Williams had been working in film and TV for about a decade at this point, and this is perhaps his first standout movie score. The love theme is gorgeous, prefiguring the more famous "Across the Stars" from the Star Wars prequels, and the music for the spookier scenes feels like an embryonic version of the mystery motif in the first two Harry Potter movies. But even apart from what he would do later, the music is just so perfect. Such a shame the movie is not of equal merit.

First, I doubt if I can give ANY version of Jane Eyre a 10, as every version I have seen so far puts too much emphasis on the part of the book involving Rochester and Jane (which is important) and not enough on her proposal of marriage from the vicar (which is VERY important to Ms. Bronte's theme)--this juxtaposition of plots is essential. It is mentioned in passing in several of the movies but never is allowed to have the prominence that it had in the book.

Now, despite this, I would say that this is my favorite version of Jane Eyre, though the Orson Welles and Joan Fontaine version of the 1940s is close to being as good.

George C. Scott is a great Rochester--very gruff, brooding and unattractive--as well as an incredibly fine actor. Susannah York is a stronger and spunkier Jane than Joan Fontaine's and I prefer the spunkier one. The only area where the 1940s version seemed better was in the back story at the horrible school where Jane was raised.

RELEASED IN 1970-1971 and directed by Delbert Mann, "Jane Eyre" adapts Charlotte Brontë's 1847 novel about the eponymous character (Susannah York) who becomes a governess of a French girl at a huge estate in northern England circa 1800 after an upbringing at a harsh religious orphanage. She slowly gets to know the surly, world-wise master of the estate, Edward Rochester (George C. Scott), and his curious situation. Eventually she meets a devout clergyman, St. John Rivers (Ian Bannen), and his two sisters. Can Jane escape the shackles of a pre-Victorian world ruled by men and legalism to find love?

While this version of the oft-filmed book was released to TV, it has the vibe of a theatrical release with great northern England locations, a superb score by John Williams and quality actors. The book was criticized as "anti-Christian" when it was published, but it's actually anti-legalism. Mr. Brocklehurst (Jack Hawkins) represents a poisonous form of dead religiosity at the orphanage while the seemingly unbalanced St. John Rivers represents a much more subtle and less extreme form.

The story's about Jane navigating the pitfalls of society and religion in a fallen world and, maybe, hopefully, finding freedom and genuine love. The locations/tone/themes are akin to "Sense and Sensibility" (1995), but with an anti-legalism subtext. Jane Austen's 1811 novel no doubt influenced Brontë's book. Both movies are worth checking out, but I slightly prefer "Jane Eyre." It's the perfect antidote to CGI-laden "blockbuster" drivel.

THE MOVIE RUNS 1 hour 48 minutes and was shot in North Yorkshire in northern England (Ripley Castle, Ripley; Pateley Bridge; Brimham Rocks; and Grinton). WRITERS: Jack Pulman wrote the screenplay based on Brontë's novel.

GRADE: B+/A-