I'm sure I'm the last one to have anything to say about this, but
THE NEW JANE EYRE
is bloody beautiful, to start, much like the newest Pride and Prejudice. Only less warmly lovely. The differences reflect the differences in tone, just as it should. A harsher, more glaringly lit beauty, with deeper shadows.
(
Read more... )
Comments 3
also I was having a hard time with Jamie Bell not being surly and punching Romans
so MAYBE WE SHOULD DISCUSS :D because obviously we had two totally different opinions. (Also Roxas and I are pretty smitten with the Masterpiece Theater adaptation so we may be biased).
Reply
Basically, I consider translating into a new media a retelling: if I don't think the magic of the original is there, I'm not going to favor a more faithful interpretation. And yeah, if you have a version you already like, that's different from me, feeling like the more revolutionary script format is giving it a new life. Who plays Rochester in the one you like? It may be one of the several I haven't watched, though there are several I have. (It is actual-factual-bear the most adapted book in he history of film.)
I find it academically interesting, too, to compare. I'm obsessed with how story works and often adaptations don't stand on their own as well. They're for fans who are going to follow it anyway...
This is a kind of technical start, because I'm getting wicked sleepy, but I DO wanna discuss! I am still so behind... t-t My mom wasn't feeling well so my first day off ( ... )
Reply
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0780362/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Eyre_%282006_miniseries%29
this is the version we like! he was shitty but appealing...and she was plain but charming and pretty (oh wtf she was in Suburban Shootout with T.H.?! DUH)...you're right, these characters have some real contradictory traits that must be a pain/delightful challenge for all actors involved.
Reply
Leave a comment