After seeing about 7 different adaptations of JANE EYRE, I always find myself coming back to this one. If you're protective of the novel, as I am, and desire to see a film that is very faithful to it, THIS one is the BEST.Best is not perfect, but it is pretty darn close. You can watch this mini-series with the novel on your lap and practically follow along scene for scene.Let's talk about the fabulousness that is Timothy Dalton.He was born to play Mr. Rochester. Physically, emotionally, the highs and lows of his personality--all done with sheer excellence. Every scene he's in becomes his own. Every word spoken is perfection. Sometimes he is handsome, other times not, sometimes he's amiable, other times not. It is that changeability that makes the viewer constantly deciding, "Do I like Rochester? Or do I not?" Jane never knows which version of Rochester to expect and neither does the viewer.When I was younger and first read the book and then saw this mini-series, I did not like Zelah Clarke's portrayal of Jane. Years later I have new appreciation for her. Timothy Dalton has a very strong presence as Rochester. Many actresses would be overshadowed by him, but Zelah Clarke holds her own in every scene they share.Aside from the excellent acting, which stays true to the novel's characters' personalities, this version paces itself out extremely well. I love that the hilarious "gypsy scene" is included. I love that you see the real development of the relationship between Jane and Rochester. But mostly, I love that the ending is not rushed. The novel's ending is one of the best ever written and this adaptation does it terrific justice.

I am taking into account that this was made in a time when cameras stayed still but they still and the ability to do a bit of good casting.First off, piece of advice, if your camera blurs in poor light, don't have candle-lit scenes.Secondly, considering how much of the speech in the book is utterly pointless you don't need to stick with it word for word. You can cut out a lot of the instances in which Mr. Rochester repeats Jane for a start.Thridly, If your going to cast a tall actor for Rochestor don't cast a short one for Jane. It doesn't work. All the shots had to be wider than necessary to fit them both in and the actors must have got neck-ache surely.And finally, when it comes to casting someone for the part of Jane Eyre their ability to act is more important than the way they look. I couldn't care less about that Jane Eyre, she was utterly pathetic, completely unlikeable and impossible to sympathise with.Watch the 2006 version instead.

Oh my goodness. I'm happy to see how much people loved this production. I also was transported. Won't bother to see the versions I have missed. Have only seen the William Hurt one, which I hated.Will not talk about T.D.'s fabulousness. Agree wholeheartedly. EXCEPT as one or two people noted, in the crying scene. Poor Timothy, I cringed during that scene. That was not crying. He tried. How hard it must be to do that. I wonder, are there any male actors who can actually burst into tears? I can't think of ANY man in any movie who has done it. But after seeing Emma Thompson nearly explode in Sense and Sensibility, now I know what is possible in a crying scene. I wonder if any man could pull that off. BUT he WAS fabulous overall, there is no doubt about that. Not ugly, of course, but he made himself very severe looking, which worked, and also, as others have noted, he brings Rochester's complex character, in all its variety, to life. But I cannot concur with the majority who praise Ms. Clarke unreservedly. Although I liked her very much for most parts of the series, in the love scenes she fell short, for me. In fact I felt quite sad and disappointed that the full, glorious potential of those scenes was dashed at the last moment. They could have been absolute perfection. Mr. Dalton was so fully, breathtakingly living those scenes -- but it seemed that Ms. Clarke, at certain moments, was passive and uninvolved. It did not seem to be a matter of reserve. I wondered if she was afraid to really respond to Dalton. I don't know what the problem was. My specific complaints are these: 1. In the scene where Rochester finally reveals his love and proposes to Jane, I did not see any changes in her expression to show the moment she came to believe that he was not mocking her. Yes, Jane in general has to carefully control her behavior, has to be reserved, but in this scene, where is the joy? Where is the wonder? Where is the light in her eyes as she realizes, yes, he actually loves me? 2. In the scene after the wedding, when Rochester has waited for her outside her door, she did not, I believe, convey the depths of the conflict the REAL Jane Eyre, out there in imaginary-person land, must have been struggling with. It must have been tearing her into pieces. It must have been strong enough to propel her out the door onto the moors with no food or money. I saw that she felt faint and out of breath and overcome with something, but it did not seem like love. It did not seem like an all-consuming communion that sprung from the depths of her soul, that was so strong that she simply could not overcome it as long as he was near. She had to remove herself from his presence to make them both safe (she believed), and her own physical safety meant nothing to her in light of this struggle. I did not see that love and I did not see that torment. Not in her. In Rochester, in Dalton, it was overwhelming. I wished she would give him back as good as he gave.3. When she returns to Rochester, after he is blind, and she touches his face, and kisses him, and says, "does this feel like a mockery? does this feel like a dream?" -- I just did not see the deep passion, relief, exultation, that, for the Love of God, SHOULD HAVE BEEN THERE! IF ONLY I COULD HAVE BEEN THERE TO HAVE DONE IT PROPERLY! Ahem.Yes, she has schooled herself to reserve, but in these moments, would her emotions not have run away with her? Would she not have had to burst out of the walls she so carefully constructed around her? Would she not have come to life? Yes, I say! In all her other scenes, she was just right -- but in these scenes -- her acting, her mien, her behavior was -- yes -- WOODEN!SIX WEEKS LATER:I wrote these comments in the middle of a major Timothy Dalton phase. It's over now. I'm tempted to delete this comment because it's really embarrassing. But I'll keep it for nostalgic value for now. And by the way, sometimes TD stands in one place and his arm hangs awkwardly at his side and he just talks and that is not good acting. Plus he doesn't talk like a real person. He's deCLAIMING all the time. But who notices when you're under the spell. Very strange.

I studied Charlotte Bronte's novel in high school, and it left me with a stunning impression. Here was a beautiful novel about a young woman's struggle to find love and acceptance in the dark times of Victorian England. This young woman was Jane Eyre, a poor and plain character with a strong mind and will of her own. Her story, which Bronte told through Jane's own eyes, was both sad and inspiring. As part of our study, we watched the 1983 adaptation of the story, and it blew me away. The mini-series not only made the effort to stay true to Bronte's original text and the essence of the story, but the actors who portrayed the characters were just great. Both Zelah Clarke (Jane Eyre) and Timothy Dalton (Jane's lover, by the name of Rochester) captured brilliantly the essence of their characters. I cannot imagine anyone else in their roles. (The other performances of Rochester in other versions such as the 2006 version lack the passion, energy, and tenderness needed to portray Rochester accurately. I say that Timothy Dalton comes out on top because he possesses all these characteristics in his portrayal of Rochester. Zelah Clarke not only looks like Jane Eyre, but she captures Jane's quiet, but firm and passionate nature brilliantly. She holds in her emotions, like the Jane of the book, at the appropriate moments in the story but allows her fire to come out in Jane's passionate scenes. The chemistry that Clarke and Dalton portray in their scenes together is also credible and true to Jane and Rochester's devoted relationship.) As well, the supporting actors also fit their roles perfectly, and the sets fit the Gothic nature of the story. I strongly recommend this version of the classic Bronte tale. If you have not read the book before, then you can watch this production as a faithful introduction to this beautiful story.