O Destino de uma Paixão

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.

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.

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.

This film needs restoration. It is so dark in some places you can't really see anything. George C. Scott is flat and wooden; no emotion. Susannah York is too old for the part. The movie is too short. With all that said I still rate it a 7. Give it a try but lower your expectations.

... but not quite. The 40s version had the mist and the overacting of the great Mr Welles - this has a fabulous cast, particularly Scott and York who are both superb, but just falls short of the magic of the creaky old b&w version. This one has its moments a-plenty though and is well worth tracking down. A definite 8 out of 10.