55 user reviews
7.5
/10
| Average votes grouped by age and by sex: | |||||||
| Age: | 1-12 | 13-17 | 18-25 | 26-35 | 36-49 | 50+ | Total |
| Men: Votes: |
- 0 |
- 0 |
- 0 |
6.5 2 |
9.5 2 |
7.7 8 |
7.8 12 |
| Women: Votes: |
- 0 |
5 1 |
8.2 8 |
7.1 7 |
7 8 |
7.5 11 |
7.2 37 |
| Total: Votes: |
- 0 |
5 1 |
8.2 8 |
7 10 |
7.5 11 |
7.7 22 |
7.5 55 |
| Total includes those who didn't specify sex. | |||||||
Reviews from 1 to 50 (total: 55)
This well loved story was to me - dark and morose and not worth seeing. I wanted some lightness and laughter, not just hardship piled on over and over.
| 4/10 | book.boss@ - 36 reviews 26.12.2011 - age: 50+ |
How many remakes are there really. Anyways it was still good with good actors.
| 7/10 | shazjoao@ - 1723 reviews 12.9.2011 - age: 36-49 |
Not that good. They tried too much to be dramatic but weren't. Still good but not what I thought.
| 5/10 | freakylaurikiki.2@ - 11 reviews 28.6.2011 - age: 13-17 |
I agree with most that the cinematography is awesome, and at first I thought the flashback sequences were a fresh way of telling this story. However, after watching it, I have to say this version pales in comparison with a few others, especially the 2006 BBC production with Ruth Wilson and Toby Stephens. Too many key moments from Bronte's novel were cut out, and it impacted the film's breadth and emotion. Therefore I would not recommend this version, go with the BBC one, even if it is longer than a regular film, it is well worth it.
| 6/10 | mo.mustelid@ - 2 reviews 27.6.2011 - age: 36-49 |
Haven't read the book but I really enjoyed the movie. Wonderful actors and beautifully filmed.
| 7/10 | barrhavenmom@ - 30 reviews 24.6.2011 - age: 36-49 |
Very good adaptation. Emphasis on the end of the novel as opposed to earlier versions which lingered at the school. Great acting. All in all, a pleasant experience.
| 8/10 | klodio00@ - 159 reviews 15.6.2011 - age: 50+ |
A timeless story with twists and turns. I've read the novel, seen 4 movie versions as well as a musical and have never tired of it.
| 9/10 | teresa_j_pierre@ - first review 7.6.2011 - age: 50+ |
The movie wasn't bad however I felt there was a chunk missing especially the part of the clergy I remember reading this book when I was 15 but this character came off very creepy and controlling. In this he was totally toned down.
| 6/10 | darkchiles@ - 36 reviews 2.6.2011 - age: 26-35 |
This is a good rendition of the book supported by excellent movie making stuff like acting, costumes, photography screenplay, etc. Sure was a nice reprieve from movies that just rely on graphics.
| 7/10 | itishere@ - 153 reviews 18.5.2011 - age: 50+ |
I felt the relationship of the two main characters wasn't developed fully. The charaters did not feel real.
| 6/10 | comfortable49@ - first review 16.5.2011 - age: 50+ |
This movie was great, we really enjoyed it. However I still like the other actress (Charlotte Gainsbourg) better, as Jane Eyre.
| 8/10 | pantal@ - 68 reviews 15.5.2011 - age: 26-35 |
Great acting, cinematography,... I enjoyed this film so much that I rented the Masterpiece version from the library, which is also very good, but twice as long.
| 8/10 | hunn1@ - 3 reviews 14.5.2011 - age: 50+ |
Time and place were well depicted in this movie but I found the acting to be flat, with the exception of Judi Dench. She rarely disappoints. This movie was a true 6. Not bad but could be much better.
| 6/10 | comi2@ - 108 reviews 13.5.2011 - age: 50+ |
This movie does the book justice. I thought it was very well acted and the cinematography was beautiful.
| 10/10 | dannie2020@ - first review 11.5.2011 - age: 26-35 |
Got to go see a preview of it before it offically came out in theatres. It was fantastic, totally not what I expected at first! Acting was amazing and the music went well with the movie. Left the theatre very happy.
| 8/10 | leehotzie@ - first review 6.5.2011 - age: 18-25 |
Was expecting the Jane Eyre remake to repackage the story into a love story, but Fukunaga was able to make it into the dramatic, tragic and at times terrifying experience.
| 9/10 | lorigianotj@ - first review 6.5.2011 - age: 18-25 |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
It's just become a tired old story - and a little unrealistic for our times... plot devices like just when she's down on her luck she gets the fortune from the rich uncle - like that happens in real life!! Let's move on and create movies for TODAY!!
| 5/10 | zdowney@ - 2 reviews 5.5.2011 - age: 36-49 - 2 replies |
You can either call this movie fresh or call it butchered. I opt for the latter. It starts in the middle of the story and is told in choppy flashbacks. If I didn't know the story already I would not have gotten much out of the story telling. It lacked a consistent timeline which resulted in very little character development for some of the characters and therefore no emotion for them, such as her relationship with Helen Burns. Also the director changed many of the important details of the story and only stuck to the book for the major ideas. Of all the versions I have seen this one strays the farthest from the book. Some of the greatest scenes had no power because of the changes in detail and the lack of care for the characters due to the choppiness. Plus, some of the most romantic lines were deleted. I have no problem with time lines that jump around, but they are usually done with stories that were designed to be told that way and therefore work. 18th century romances were not designed that way. Jane Eyre is a near perfect masterpiece just as it is which is why it has been re-told so many times. I would recommend you save your time and money and watch a better version at home curled up with popcorn.
| 3/10 | s_pamela31@ - first review 3.5.2011 - age: 36-49 |
This movie was extremely well done! It captured the dark romance the two main characters had really well. It was romantic, intriguing, and worth seeing!
| 9/10 | purpleberry6@ - first review 2.5.2011 |
Script, acting, direction, design, cinematography -- all fantastic. Not to be missed!
| 10/10 | kneepal@ - 12 reviews 1.5.2011 - age: 36-49 |
Mia Wasikowska as Jane Eyre was absolutely terrific. A very talented actress, possibly the next Cate Blanchette. Other than the UK TV version, this is my second favourite Jane Eyre movie.
| 8/10 | karen_lett@ - 361 reviews 18.4.2011 - age: 36-49 - One reply |
I have read the novel as a teenager, loved it. Watching the movie was great, brought back memories. Excellent movie, great performances by the actors. Mia Wasikowska is amazing. Beautiful cinematography. A classic!!
| 9/10 | greco64@ - 401 reviews 16.4.2011 - age: 36-49 |
Jane Eyre is my favourite novel, and no movie will ever capture its wide scope, so I always notice what's been left out due to time constraint. This version, however, did well in covering the basics and the performances, particularly that of Jane herself, were excellent. My only criticism is the end was too abrupt in relation to the novel, but I thought starting in the middle and showing her childhood in flashbacks worked very well on screen.
| 8/10 | dogloverto@ - 14 reviews 15.4.2011 - age: 50+ |
In brief: Spot on performances by two actors who have the potential to be legends. Sumptuous cinematography. The definitive adaptation of Jane Eyre.
| 10/10 | kaitlynmacinnis@ - first review 13.4.2011 - age: 18-25 |
The best version of Jane Eyre so far and there have been many. The acting was good and visually it was a stunner. I enjoyed it.
| 8/10 | peiffergreen@ - 77 reviews 13.4.2011 - age: 50+ |
Not my favourite version. Long with no believable chemistry. A bit too much moody atmosphere, even for a jane eyre movie.
| 6/10 | mennelli@ - first review 12.4.2011 - age: 26-35 |
A solid translation of an intense, melodramatic classic. Strong performances complimented the lovely cinematography.
| 7/10 | kelseisle@ - 96 reviews 10.4.2011 - age: 26-35 |
No chemistry between Jane & Rochester. And the movie was a bit too slow...
| 6/10 | camillemk1@ - 3 reviews 9.4.2011 - age: 18-25 |
A masterful adaptation of one of my favorite novels. Jane is played by an actress who embodies the character, Rochester is pitch perfect and the fire that glows between them is tangible. If you have never seen a version of Jane Eyre, and if you've never read the novel, I envy you the joy of discovering this masterpiece for the first time.
| 10/10 | ccheung@ - 5 reviews 9.4.2011 - age: 50+ |
I like the story of Jane Eyre, but somehow they managed to make this movie humdrum despite having such a good cast and excellent production values. It would have helped if they had just told the story chronologically instead of using flashbacks. Also there was not much chemistry between Jane and Rochester. Save your money and watch it on DVD.
| 6/10 | smvancouver@ - 17 reviews 8.4.2011 - age: 50+ |
The film is static and emotionless... too bad because it is a good story.
| 6/10 | mariannestenbaek@ - first review 8.4.2011 - age: 50+ |
Great cinematography that lends to the austerity of her life. Excellent acting that keeps the actors true to the time during which the book was written. A bit of a chick flick, but it was so well done, that it kept my interest.
| 8/10 | glegh@ - 72 reviews 6.4.2011 - age: 50+ |
Great adaptation of a classic novel: Michael Fassbender and Mia Wasikowska who respectively portray Mr. Rochester and Jane Eyre are fantastic and the cinematography is equally beautiful. Thoroughly recommended.
| 9/10 | cle@ - first review 5.4.2011 - age: 26-35 |
I was charmed by the first 3/4 of the film. I liked the way they played with the timeline, and I liked most of the characters. But I missed the passion. There is less sexual tension than the book, and the book is pretty straight-laced. The ending lost me. It seemed like an anticlimax. But if you like Jane Eyre, you should see this. It's much better than it could have been.
| 7/10 | jsottawa2001@ - 45 reviews 3.4.2011 - age: 50+ |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
I love reading and film and have never been provoked to write comments on a site but felt so strongly that this film was flat, lifeless and boring that I needed to share my thoughts. The lead acting was completely devoid of expression and feeling to the point where it was absolutely unrealistic that any love story should develop between the characters. The romance that followed implausible, uninteresting and passionless. There was little by way of story development and an absurd excess of wistful staring out of windows. The one scene where Jane actually expresses herself reads as adolescent and somewhat cheesy - the lack of chemistry between the character is what really stole the scene. I'm all for subtle acting and nuanced, intelligent writing but I sincerely can't believe I made it through the whole movie, it was so boring.
| 1/10 | brooketaylorcorcia@ - first review 3.4.2011 - age: 26-35 |
Spellbinding and beautifully acted. Entirely satisfying.
| 9/10 | trauttc@ - first review 3.4.2011 - age: 50+ |
Missed some of the great lines of the book, missed the anguish of her heart in leaving her dream behind in Mr Rochester and willingly going into the valley of the shadow of death. Captured the dark sorrow of Thornfield Hall, captured Mr Rochester's repentance with reformation that he had said in the book was the only way for a new future for him.
| 8/10 | lori@ - first review 2.4.2011 - age: 50+ |
Little slow but very well done. Nice story and good acting. Overall a very well done and enjoyable movie.
| 7/10 | ringwormraider@ - 4 reviews 1.4.2011 - age: 26-35 |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
I found this an enjoyable movie while I was watching it. Its pace is slow but not boring. I don't remember the story from the book, but found that the movie possibly grossed over too much. At beginning of story, not much was shown as to how Jane developed friendship with another organ girl. So there was not much dramatic impact when that orphan girl died. In the middle of movie, a stranger appeared, was wounded quite severely, and then the wife of Rochester appeared in just one single scene, all without much build up to those events. Even Rochester and Jane Eyre only had a few scenes together before they fell very much in love. Jane did appear intelligent, but she always looked so bland that it became hard to imagine that Rochester would grow to love her so much. The ending seems a bit soap opera-ish and a bit of a fairy tale, no doubt delighting the female audience. Despite my comments, the film was well made and directed, and watching it was a pleasant experience. The actress who plays Jane looks like a young Gwyneth Paltrow, but without any cheerfulness whatsoever (not that Jane Eyre should be a cheerful character) Sometimes I strain to hear some of the dialogue, and likely missed some of the cleverness of the language.
| 7/10 | ekchan@ - 12 reviews 31.3.2011 - age: 50+ |
Very closely with the book. The actress's acting skill is amazing. But it is bored on film.
| 7/10 | canary28185@ - 137 reviews 31.3.2011 - age: 18-25 - 2 replies |
Great movie! Cinematography is austere but captivating. Acting is symbolic of the genre.
| 10/10 | alexandre.dasilva74@ - first review 29.3.2011 - age: 36-49 |
Powerful, haunting and exquisite acting capturing the tone and essence of the times and the novel.
| 9/10 | wyouens@ - 2 reviews 28.3.2011 - age: 50+ |
I felt like this movie was poorly executed and there was so much potential and they just jumped way to much and it felt like certian parts of the movie was missing. There was no build up to the romance it felt rushed. I was disapointed and it did no justice and I felt like the start of the movie was confusing.
| 6/10 | tinker_toes101@ - 12 reviews 27.3.2011 - age: 18-25 |
Really enjoyed this movie. All the performances were very well done.
| 9/10 | cauliflower18@ - 2 reviews 27.3.2011 - age: 26-35 |
Beautiful cinematography, but the telling of this tale seemed a bit lacking. I just don't think 2 hours is quite enough time to tell this story properly without hacking it to bits. The actors were great, but really needed more time spent developing characters. If you want to see a great adaptation, see the 2006 BBC version.
| 6/10 | ms.fifi.la.fleur@ - 2 reviews 27.3.2011 |
Note: User reviews posted on this page are personal opinions of our readers. We are not responsible for their content.
Click to see more reviews:
[1-50]
[51-55]
Did you see ''Jane Eyre''?
Terms and Privacy Policy under which this service is provided to you.
© 1996-2013 CinemaClock Canada Inc.
