The Worst Film Ever

Crappy film

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

Rushed and incomplete, yet compelling and interesting enough, this 1943 version of Charlotte Bronte's classic novel works as an adaptation only because of the actors who embody their respective characters with a fierce engagement. The film often reduces itself to rehearsing the major plot points of the novel without paying closer attention to what made characters like Jane, Mr. Rochester, Blanche or Mrs. Reed so memorable. As a result, the film has its shortcomings and could have used an addition of a few more minutes to its runtime, but thanks to Joan Fontaine and Orson Welles in the leading roles, as well as Elizabeth Taylor, Hillary Brooke and Agnes Moorehead in memorable supporting performances, Robert Stevenson's "Jane Eyre" is still worth watching - as long as you are familiar with the source material and don't allow this to become your first encounter with the story of Jane Eyre.

"Jane Eyre" starring Orson Welles, Joan Fontaine, and Margaret O'Brien is a gret film. It is a very powerful film and shows how poorly Jane is treated her whole life. I really enjoyed the cinematography and thought that this movie displayed that pretty well.Joan Fontaine played an exceptionally well role in the movie as Jane Eyre. She played the role of a girl who was treated poorly and had a bad life because back then that's how society was. I really enjoyed this movie because at first it seemed like it was going to be a bad movie and then it becomes a sweet and romantic movie and that really surprised me.

After a harsh childhood, orphan Jane Eyre (Joan Fontaine) is hired by Edward Rochester (Orson Welles), the brooding lord of a mysterious manor house to care for his young daughter.I was a bit worried that this film would be dry and boring, as I find many old novels to be a bit dry and boring. I am no fan of the writing of Charles Dickens, and I did not care for "Wuthering Heights". I do love Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, so maybe it is just the old English language...Either way, a great film here that almost seems more like a Universal horror picture than a romance. The script was written by none other than Aldous Huxley ("Brave New World") and the music was composed by Bernard Herrmann ("Psycho")... through in a great actor (Welles) and director (Robert Stevenson) and you have a strong picture.Unfortunately, Joan Fontaine gets all the credit for playing Eyre, and I think this is misguided. The young Eyre was a stronger, more interesting character than her adult counterpart. And yet, that actress (I regret I do not know her name) does not seem to have launched a career with this role.

According to IMDb, there are at least a dozen versions of "Jane Eyre", an obvious testament to the durable appeal of Charlotte Brontë's Gothic novel, but the 1944 version is the one to which I always seem to return again and again. Having played a similar "ugly duckling" role in Alfred Hitchcock's "Rebecca" four years earlier, Joan Fontaine is in her element in the title role and performs with her impeccable restraint intact. However, it's Orson Welles who generates all the fascination about this particular adaptation. Coming off of his twin masterpieces, "Citizen Kane" and "The Magnificent Ambersons", he is officially just the leading man here, and he almost overwhelms the film with his outsized performance as Edward Rochester, generating a brooding sensuality with his surly charisma and stentorian baritone voice. Even though he is not credited as the director (that was Robert Stevenson who later made "Mary Poppins"), Welles' distinctive filmmaking style is prevalent everywhere.From the gloomy ambiance that seems to whisper "Rosebud" to the heavy use of shadow, the distorted camera angles, the moody black-and-white cinematography from George Barnes who lensed "Rebecca", and the evocative score by Bernard Herrmann - this feels like an uncredited Orson Welles production. Adapted by an impressive group of writers - John Houseman, Aldous Huxley, Henry Koster and Stevenson - the story follows Jane from her desolate childhood as an orphan raised by an insensitive aunt, Mrs. Reed, through her lonely years at the Lowood Institution, a charitable school where she was a headstrong pupil whom the school offers to hire as a teacher when she comes of age since she would be a cheap hire. However, she can't wait to escape and leaves to become the governess to an excitable French child named Adele Varens, the ward of Rochester, a tortured, imperious man who lives as a near- recluse at his estate, Thornfield Manor. Jane immediately falls in love with the sullen Rochester, but to the manner born, she cannot admit this to him. He dallies with an avaricious socialite but eventually finds himself reciprocating Jane's feelings for him and proposes to her.In the middle of their wedding ceremony, it comes to light that Edward is already married to a violently insane woman locked in the tower of his estate. The rest of the Victorian-era story deals with how Jane responds to this most unfortunate situation which of course, means a lot of sturm und drang. During the prime phase of her lengthy career, Fontaine was at her most effective in conveying a coiled passion under a becalming veneer, and that's what makes her an ideal Jane. There are excellent supporting turns from Henry Daniell as Mr. Brocklehurst, the cruel headmaster of Jane's school; Agnes Moorehead, one of Welles' most valued Mercury Players, as Mrs. Reed; Margaret O'Brien sprightly as Adele just before her more memorable turn as Tootie in "Meet Me in St. Louis"; and Peggy Ann Garner genuinely spirited as the younger Jane. It's also hard to miss an unbilled Elizabeth Taylor, striking as ever at ten, as the doomed orphan Jane befriends as a child. The one flaw with the 97-minute film is the truncated ending which resolves everything far too quickly. But watch this classic for Welles' mesmerizing performance. It's a knockout.The 2007 DVD has a superb restoration and contains some solid extras such as two audio commentary tracks. The first is with Welles biographer Joseph McBride lending insight and O'Brien (she must have been around 70) providing personal recollections of the production. It's more interesting that than the second commentary track which has film historians Nick Redman, Steven Smith, and Julie Kirgo trading trivia about the source novel and the film. Also included are a musical-score- only track; an eighteen-minute, behind-the-scenes featurette, "Locked in the Tower: The Men Behind Jane Eyre", which has film historians and others discussing the production from various angles; a 42-minute U.S. War Film Department propaganda piece directed by Stevenson called "Know Your Ally Britain"; an interesting restoration comparison; and galleries of production stills, storyboards, and film posters. It's an excellent package for collectors of classic films.