第2个回答 推荐于2017-11-23
Edward Rochester called Jane his "faerie," his "elf," and accused her of "waiting for her people.... The men in green" the night she first encountered him. Indeed, in his adaptation of Jane Eyre he was not mistaken, for the entire production has a quality of magic about it.
If any actor or actress could be said to be born to play a certain character, that adage must apply to Timothy Dalton and Zelah Clarke. The chemistry between them as the two stars of this lavish BBC production is nothing short of magical: their relationship is alive with passion and the fiery conflict of two tormented souls imprisoned by Fate and the morals of their time.
The story is a classic one: Jane Eyre, an unloved orphan is sent to school, where she is educated in a strict, cruel manner, there growing to adulthood learning little of life in the world. When her only friend marries, Jane advertises, and is accepted as governess to the ward of rich, enigmatic Edward Fairfax Rochester. From their first meeting in Hay Lane, where Jane "bewitches" his horse, there is between them an unspoken bond of kinship that slowly blossoms into true love and devotion.
After what appeared to be a brief engagement to the Honourable Miss Blanche Ingram, whom all the county expects him to marry, Rochester mysteriously calls off his marriage plans, and proposes to Jane, the only woman who is his equal - who could be his best earthly companion. At the altar, however, it is tragically revealed that Rochester already has a wife, still living: he is forced by this revelation to lead Jane, and those who would judge him harshly, back to Thornfield Hall, where he unhesitatingly and bitterly shows them the lunatic his father, without Edward's prior knowledge, arranged for him to marry.
Realizing her position is now untenable, Jane flees, nearly dying of hunger and lack of shelter, before she is befriended by a clergyman and his two sisters. It is subsequently found that Jane is related to this family, as their mother was Jane's father's sister. When their uncle dies, leaving Jane his entire fortune, she divides it equally among the four of them, and prepares to lead a close and affectionate life within the small family unit.
It is St. John Rivers, the clergyman, who unsettles Jane, by offering her marriage, and requesting her to accompany him to India, where he has decided to make a new life for himself as a missionary. Believing Mr. Rochester lost to her forever, Jane finally and reluctantly accepts his proposal, only to psychically hear Rochester's voice calling to her.
Abandoning St. John, Jane rushes back to Thornfield Hall, where she discovers, to her great horror, it had burned nearly to the ground. The innkeeper, a former butler at the house, informs her that Rochester was nearly killed in the fire while unsuccessfully attempting to save the life of his lunatic wife, who, it was later learned, had set the blaze. While he did not die, Rochester lost his left hand and eye, the right eye being so badly inflamed as to render him almost totally blind.
Jane hurries to Rochester, at a remote piece of property, where she discovers him broken down and dispirited, believing Jane to be forever lost to him, and suffering from the physical punishments God has inflicted upon him for trying to fly in the face of morality. They are reunited, and after he proposes again - now a man free to do so - they are married.
This 239-minute production is incredibly faithful to the novel, differing in but few, minor points: it is practically stated in the movie that Rochester is the father of Adele, whom he refers to as his ward, while in the text, the question of fatherhood is left open; Adele's mother, a French opera dancer, is alluded to be his only mistress, while Bronte lists three; the passage in the Bible St. John reads before Jane tentatively accepts his proposal of marriage is different (and quite improved); then, most significantly, is Jane's end narration. Here she states, "Edward regained the sight of one eye just before our first child was born." In Charlotte Bronte's novel, the line is, "just before our first son was born." This sensitive change from "son" to "child" completes the love story, becoming the finishing touch which makes this production truly immortal, and all-inclusive.
The supporting cast is excellent: the locations capture the feel of the early 1800's, drawing the viewer into the bleak, grim world of Lowood Institution, then into the splendor of Thornfield Hall. But the uniqueness of this Jane Eyre, that which sets it apart from any adaptation that went before or came after, are the performances of Dalton and Clarke. Despite the fact that she is not "plain," and he is handsome, the two actors lend their bodies and voices to the characters, making them real beyond a shadow of a doubt. Every moment they are on screen together is arresting, from their initial contact, to the end credits.
Several scenes that stand out come to mind: Jane has just saved Rochester from being badly burned, most likely fatally, and tells him she must return to her room. He holds onto her hands; every time she attempts to pull away, he makes as though to let her, then reneges, finally compelling her to use the ploy of saying she hears the housekeeper stirring. One can readily imagine the resolve of Zelah Clarke's Jane melting, and Rochester never letting her go.
There is a beautiful, poignant moment when Rochester first proposes to Jane by baring his soul to her, allowing her to look, not into his eyes, but into his soul, where he reveals not the worldly exterior and the miseries with which life has saddled him, but the true, pure being beneath. When she accepts him, they embrace: their magic and love are palpable. Here, indeed, are two kindred souls uniting. It is a moment of beauty rarely captured by any two actors, and causes the events that follow almost too tragic to bear.
There is the delightful scene after Jane must ask for a leave of absence, and Dalton "gets the giggles" twice, the second time after accusing Jane of being "niggardly." It is a professional and magical moment, watching Clarke struggle to maintain a straight face as they continue, with Dalton grinning mischievously for most of the remainder of the scene. Again, when Rochester must confront Jane after his previous marriage has been exposed, the deep, abiding sadness of his youth, the moral depths to which he has fallen are heart-rending. Jane's refusal to go away with him (specifically chronicled in the book to emphasize the correctness of this decision) just barely holds up here, for you cannot believe Dalton's Rochester would eventually fall out of love with Jane for becoming his mistress, rather than his wife.
Throughout the entire production, the viewer identifies with both the main characters, feeling their hopes, aspirations, confusion, jealousy, and eventually, their love. Had the movie not provided us with a happy ending (despite the Gothic penalty Rochester is forced to pay for attempting to break the rules of morality), viewers would be compelled to demand Dalton and Clarke reprise their roles for a re-shoot. Never were two characters meant more for each other; never have two actors captured these sentiments so beautifully and so sincerely.
Thus, Jane Eyre is a classic story, enduring both as a novel, and as a film adaptation (or, in this case, video), presenting a rare instance of allowing the reader to lay down the novel and move from the printed word to vivid, arresting performances, or, in reverse, to go from this exquisite production to the book with no disappointments in either interpretation or content. If anything, the novel becomes more "visible," moving and unique, for now the reader will irrevocably see and hear Zelah Clarke and Timothy Dalton in their masterful and passionate living and breathing characters of Jane Eyre and Edward Rochester.本回答被提问者采纳