Jane Eyre

Jane Eyre’s life was no bed of roses. She raised herself from an orphan thanks to a good education to a person who can handle her own explosiveness and, as if by design, her first job also gave her the love of her life. But the path to love was not without its issues. Jane had to go through renunciation, the test of condemning shallow characters and had to deal with lies and rejection. And, as chance would have it, the heroine, tested by life, ended her story by finding security and was married to the right man. But lest hearts should weep, mighty fate intervened so that Rochester had to pay with his own sight for his first false marriage. (26/07/2012)

Old-fashioned English romantic dramas aren’t the kind of genre that I would go after, but the good reviews drew me to the cinema (it’s not that there are that many good films this summer to let this one pass :-D), and I don’t regret it. It’s a brilliantly made film that managed to hold my attention. Rather than romantic, as in romance, I felt it was more romantic as in romanticism, because the romance itself doesn’t work so well, but the gloomy atmosphere of the English countryside was wonderful. Fukunaga could have a go at horror for his next film, when it comes to scares, he managed some interesting things in those scenes. (29/07/2011)

Why "only" three stars? The problem is with the actors, specifically the central couple. I didn't believe in Michael Fassbender's Rochester one bit. I don't know, maybe he's too much of a "pretty boy" for the role, maybe it's something else, but he wasn't nearly as cold and inhuman as I imagined him to be and as portrayed in the book, and I got the impression he got the role mainly because of his current popularity and not based on any casting. I kept thinking about Ralph Fiennes and what he did in The Duchess. That's kind of how I imagine Rochester. And then there's Mia Wasikowska - she's suitable for the role of Jana and plays it well, but I don't think she and the aforementioned M.F. go together at all and I felt minimal (no) emotion from their scenes together. That’s really too bad. Otherwise, the film is well shot, especially the "preconceived" camera makes beautiful pictures, but it didn't save me from boredom. Even Dario Marianelli didn't do much this time. (05/02/2012)

An exquisite Victorian romance, perfectly in tune with the current formal and aesthetic trends of modern filmmaking. Raw cinematography, zero pathos and spare dialogue passages, where everything is focused on editing, the actors' facial expressions and overwhelmingly unspoken emotions. Very modern yet period-accurate and full of the traditional values we love so much in these tales of fate from yesteryear. You'd almost want to say that these cinematic affairs were left in the dust somewhere in the late nineties, but thankfully that's not true, they're still around today, they're just far fewer and of a good quality. (09/09/2015)

Extreme romanticism via an atmosphere à la Gothic horror. Simply gestures instead of speeches. Courting by the fireplace through verbal exchanges that make Nadal versus Federer a boring watch. It’s hopes of being movie theatre experience of the year are dashed by the emotionally chilly ending where gestures gave way to speeches and other maladies very familiar in most adaptations of the classics of Romanticism. (30/07/2011)