This Masterpiece Theater version of one of my favorite books finally made its way to the top of my queue. Here you go: Jane Eyre (the 2006 Masterpiece Theater version).

Plot: Well, it's Jane Eyre. If you're familiar with Charlotte Brontë's book, it follows the novel very closely, so you know the plot. For those who don't know, Jane Eyre is a young orphan, raised in a loveless home and a harsh school. She grows up and goes to work as a governess for the ward of the moody Mr. Rochester. She befriends her employer and captures his heart, but is troubled by dark secrets from his past. Don't worry though, happy endings eventually come to those deserving. This is an 1847 love story, with all the standard trappings of a good Gothic romance.
I think it's a good sign for any romance movie/miniseries when Zach is asking that I wait to watch the last episode with him, because he wants to see it too. He usually plays on the computer as I'm watching "my movies" (this is a prime example of one of "my movies"), so for him to be drawn into the story so much, it's a very good testament to how strong of a production this is. Just sayin' :)
The only other version of Jane Eyre I've seen is the 1983 version (the one with Timothy Dalton). I liked that one very much, but this one definitely surpasses it.
The leads in this version are great, a very important consideration, as the leads definitely drive the story. To compare, the leads here are like properly casting Darcy and Elizabeth - no chemistry, no story. Ruth Wilson is attractive, but not showily pretty, and that is one of the things about Jane - she is constantly described as plain. Wilson might have been a little shorter, since Jane is also frequently described as tiny, but I think that's just splitting hairs, seeing how well she did with the part. She has a very expressive face, beautifully showing both Jane's passionate nature and strict self-control. And Toby Stephens is becoming one of the actors I'm watching more and more (first saw him in one of the newer "Poirot"s). He's arguably a little too handsome for Rochester, who (like Jane) is regularly described as unattractive or ugly. Still, not a bad downside to have, right, being too handsome for a part? He plays the part very well, though. Moody, smitten, depressed, playful, secretive, Stephens makes all of Rochester's faces very real. And, as a purely trivial side note, he's got a good smile when Rochester does smile ;)
They also did a good job building up the secret in the north tower. It could have been built up a little more, in my opinion, but I think that's because I had no idea what was in the tower the first time I read it, and my imagination ran wild over what could possibly be secreted away there.
The miniseries itself could have been longer, I think, had they decided to expand out certain sections of the novel. The time with the Reeds and at Lowood School is relatively short, and the time with Mary and Diane and St. John could have been a bit longer, just for a more solid feeling of closure, but let's face it - the part of the story everyone loves is the section between Jane and Rochester. The miniseries spends most of its time there, and for good reason. I wasn't too concerned about the glossed-over time at the Reeds and at Lowood, because she was so horribly treated at both, and it just made for a draining, irritating read. It explains a lot about her character and how she develops into "Jane Eyre" as we know her, but for entertainment value, it does drag a bit long in the book. I didn't miss it in the miniseries. ;)
Personally, though, I'd like to have seen a little more in the time after she left Rochester, but partially too because I liked her discussions with St. John about love and marriage. It wasn't badly treated; I just really liked those sections of the book. One of those priorities in marriage things (like comparing the different marriages in Pride and Prejudice) - the passionless fond feelings with her friend St John, a good man but one she does not love and vice versa; or the passionate love with the wilder, darker Rochester. By focusing more on the Jane-Rochester romance, they cut the time for those comparisons. Not that the result isn't entertaining; just pointing it out.
I'd also have liked to have seen a little more time spent on the resolution. Jane returns, and then it cuts ahead 5 years to the full happy ending. But there's not really much dialogue to show just how happy the happy ending is. You can tell if you know the story, so it's there to be appreciated, but it would've been nice to have been clearer. Just for those of us who like closure :)
Beautiful scenery, of course. Masterpiece Theater always does well on that, and as it's a pretty section of the country anyway... Wins all around!
Also, just as a random side note, have you checked out the
Masterpiece Theater website? In addition to information about the cast, etc., there are notes about the production, behind the scenes discussions, forums. And that's true for most of their programs too! Yay, PBS!
Another random side note, Toby Stephens (who is growing as an actor I like) is one of the sons of Maggie Smith, one of my absolute favorite actresses. How had I not heard this??
Overall: 5 of 5. Best version of Jane Eyre I've seen so far (I know I've only seen 2, but still!). Some parts were kinda glossed over, but it is what it is. Definitely shelf-worthy!
And as a nice bonus, a wallpaper someone made for the movie. I thought it was well done You can find more over at
Fanpop, but this one was an especial favorite. :)