afterthoughts: jane eyre(s).

*watching movies in a theater really is an engrossing experience. i was entranced by this film and kind of sad when it was over because i wanted to see more. i don't go to theaters much anymore, so it was fun to feel the magic of the experience again.
*when i grow old i want to be judi dench. (or helen mirren, but for the sake of this writing i'll go with judi dench.)
*the film has many beautiful sequences that made me think of an anthropologie catalog. i kind of hate to use a commercial comparison like that, but i thought of anthropologie several times as i watched jane walk through gardens and forest in gorgeously corsetted plaid and plain dresses. it turns out the director is also a cinematographer. this is one of his first feature films and i'm excited to see more from him. i love how he brought the visual elements from his cinematographical background to directing this film.
*there are at least 22 film/television adaptations of jane eyre, including versions made in china, india, and mexico.
*the script for the 2011 film was adapted by a woman. this is only the second film version i could find that was adapted solely by a woman. a 1997 version included one woman on the three-writer team. the 2006 bbc mini-series was also adapted solely by a woman.
*i loved the styles within the film. mia wasikowska's hairstyles were amazing, and for some reason i was struck by the look of the women's bare eyelashes. and mia wasikowska is simply striking.
*i like the name jane even more now. my previous experiences with jane eyre left me wanting. i saw the 1996 version with william hurt as an introduction to the story. when i finally tried to read the book years later, those were the actors my mind's eye conjured. gothic lit is hard for me to get into and i actually gave up on the book halfway through because i wasn't enjoying it.
*i think seeing the posters from some of the film adaptations was very interesting, especially after finding out which versions were adapted by women and which ones by men. it's also funny to think that these films all tell the same basic story--would you ever guess that from their posters?
i would choose the 2011 version (7) purely on poster aesthetics: the simple, elegant font; jane as the main image; rochester as a part of her dress, as an element she chooses to make a part of herself. i am a bit curious to see orson welles (2) as mr. rochester, and that poster is the most intense. i'm not keen on the male dominance in posters 3 & 5. i suppose the male stars (george c. scott & timothy dalton) were the main draw for those versions, but it still seems wrong to have the namesake of the film in miniature compared to her male counterpart. plus what's with the ugly font on poster 3? that said, it's interesting that the 1934 version (1) has the stars in equal places, as does the 1996 (4) version.
based on the posters, which version would you choose to see? do you have a favorite film/tv version of jane eyre?