After going through an intense reading phase at the end of the summer, my brain decided to switch gears suddenly and very dramatically — as it is wont to do — and became completely engrossed in period dramas. A quick reshuffling of my streaming subscriptions ensued, followed by the discovery of the free streaming app Tubi (thanks to an inexplicable determination to wreck myself by rewatching Howards’ End, a movie that makes me almost as mad as Atonement, do NOT get me started). This opened up some broad new horizons for my viewing pleasure, which somehow led to my decision to wade into the debate about which Jane Eyre movie is the best. A decision almost as inexplicable as my eagerness to watch period dramas that make me angry-sad.

I should probably explain.

In the Austen/Brontë fan wars, I am firmly Team Austen. Even during my angstiest teen years, I never liked the Brontë oeuvre. I couldn’t finish Wuthering Heights, only finished Jane Eyre because I skipped 2/3 of the book to read the last chapter, and never even started The Tenant of Wildfell Hall. It’s not that I categorically dislike tortured, even morally grey romantic heroes; I just don’t enjoy the so-called Byronic model seemingly favoured by the Brontës. Especially since groveling doesn’t seem to be in their heroes’ romantic repertoire, and it’s the only thing that can redeem Byronic tendencies in my book. (I read a comment on a sub-Reddit that the Brontës modelled all of their heroes on their alcoholic, opium-addicted brother, and that really stuck with me. Also, the real Byron was an extremely sh*tty boyfriend, just saying.)

My knowledge of Jane Eyre’s plot comes mostly from pop culture and social media, so I am definitely not au courant with the subtleties of the protagonists’ characterization, motivations, and so forth. As such, I am not qualified to make a pronouncement on which movie is the best adaptation of the book … but I am well-positioned, I think, to assess the merits of these movies as romantic period dramas, relative to each other. Needless to say, I am going to throw a lot of opinions about, and if you find some of them stepping on your toes, just remember: there are no wrong answers here. Feel free to make your case in the comments, but let’s have fun with it, yeah?

There have been a bazillion Jane Eyre adaptations over the years, but my period drama-watching schedule is very busy and can only accommodate so many side-quests, so I decided to limit myself to watching 3 of the 4 most recent adaptations, in chronological order. I tried to watch all 4, but Franco Zeffirelli’s 1996 movie is not available on any of the *many* streaming platforms I can access, and I refuse to pay extra to watch William Hurt emote Byronically. As it was, in the span of a week I watched: the 1997 television film, the 2006 BBC series, and the 2011 movie. It was … a lot. But also sort of fun, in a fever dream Groundhog Day kind of way.

Jane Eyre (1997)

Jane is played by Samantha Morton, who is very very good. I enjoyed her portrayal of the character the most in this movie; her Jane is clearly very intelligent and, though reserved, not meek. There is an impression of strength, alongside the innocence/naivete. Morton makes it clear that Jane comes to admire/love Rochester because he treats her like an intellectual equal. As this is a movie, there isn’t a huge amount of time devoted to their “courtship” phase, but the basis upon which it develops is made clear from the actors’ performance. Without (apparent) make-up, Morton is relatively passable as a “plain Jane”, which is more than can be said about the other actresses on this list. I only mention this because, as with Rochester, much is made of Jane’s physical appearance, including in her famous “poor, obscure, plain and little” self-description (which no version of the story I’ve watched fails to include). It is a personal pet peeve when obviously conventionally good-looking people call themselves plain or ugly. Morton gets a pass, just. She is helped, to no insignificant degree, by some of the drabbest costumes I’ve seen in any period drama.

Rochester is played by Ciaran Hinds, who is probably closest to Brontë’s vision of the character but not my personal favourite in this line-up. Hinds plays up Rochester’s gruffness, especially at the beginning of the story, but also does a good job conveying the character’s softer moments and his respect for Jane’s intelligence – definitely a case of the bark being worse than the bite. (Speaking of which, it’s worth noting that the dog playing Pilot in this adaptation is absolutely freaking adorable. Definitely a point in Rochester’s favour here.) However, the romance quotient for this Rochester is pretty low, imo. Forget sizzling chemistry; his thing with Jane seemed mostly a cerebral sort of affair. That may well be very faithful to the source material but doesn’t make for an especially sexy movie. I will say that the vibe of both leads matched each other quite well. Their love story didn’t set my world on fire, but it made sense for them, in the context of the story as shown on screen.

Shoutout to Rupert Penry Jones who came out of nowhere in this movie, playing St. John Rivers. Clearly, I did not Google the cast in advance, or else I might have prepared myself better — though, I doubt anything could have prepared me for his dorky haircut. Penry Jones is a very attractive man, appropriately so since his character is supposed to be quite dishy, so I have no idea why they saddled him with such egregious hair. Anyway, his St. John has the vibes of an enthusiastic golden retriever, which I’m not sure is what Brontë had in mind, but whatever. It doesn’t matter that much, as this part of the story is pretty brief.

The overall look of the movie is, well, drab. The scenery, the sets, the costumes. It’s not gothic as much as genteel depression. But don’t get me wrong: I liked it a lot, especially for the performances of its 2 lead actors. On a scale of 1 to My Fave Period Dramas*, I give it a respectable 7.

Jane Eyre (2006)

Jane is played by Ruth Wilson, which required me to spend 4 hours pretending that Luther does not exist. It is a testament to Wilson’s acting chops that, for the most part, I managed to do so relatively successfully. I loved Wilson’s Jane, but I also don’t think she’s Jane Eyre, you know? She’s clever and spunky and not especially wallflowery — not to mention extremely pretty and damn near as tall as Rochester. I had a very good chuckle at the “plain and little” part of the famous speech, let me tell you.

Rochester is played by Toby Stephens who (like his mother, the late, great Dame Maggie Smith) takes to period dramas like a duck to water but is several magnitudes too good-looking for this particular role. When he moans about not being handsome, I was, like, “sir, have you looked in a mirror recently, because you sound very silly.” His Rochester is more cynical and bad-tempered than gruff, but he seems to get over it fairly quickly. Because this is a mini-series, there is more time devoted to the ‘falling in love’ part of the story — and it comes with plenty of heat. You definitely get the sense that this Rochester and Jane want to bang, not just exchange philosophical opinions. And they manage to squeeze in a fair bit of making out before the final act (no pun intended). It’s the sexiest version of the story, by a long shot.

And that’s even with accounting for the fact that we spend a good chunk of screen time with the Rivers subplot, which is dominated by St. John’s silly hat, dour expression, and complete inability to make anyone forget that Rochester exists and is (probably) brooding sexily somewhere. No offence to Andrew Buchan, who otherwise nails the character’s moral rectitude and almost-fanatical conviction. But whereas one could almost see Morton’s Jane be swayed by this version of St. John (on a cerebral plane, of course), there is no universe in which Wilson’s Jane would pick him over Stephens’ Rochester. Just saying. There is zero will-she-won’t-she tension here, which makes this part of the story feel like a real slog.

Overall, this series is quite lovely to look at — and, no, I’m not just talking about the 2 leads — and manages to marry pathos and romance without tipping into silly melodrama. It makes me almost like Jane Eyre … though I’m not sure how much credit I can give it as a faithful adaptation. But as a period drama, it’s an 8 out of 10.

Jane Eyre (2011)

Jane is played by Mia Wasikowska, for whom I have a rather big soft spot thanks to Crimson Peak. (Now that is a gothic drama done to perfection. The costumes! The sets! The bonkers plot! Tom Hiddleston waltzing! But I digress.) Wasikowska’s Jane is severely buttoned up, with sharper corners than Morton’s Jane and less emotionality than Wilson’s. She’s not exactly prickly, but that’s mostly because she externalizes very little emotion; her reserve borders on the repressed — but it’s hard to get a feel for what she might be repressing. This Jane is oddly bloodless.

Even more oddly, so is this Rochester. Considering that he is played by Michael Fassbender — known to set panties on fire the world over — this is probably going to be my most controversial opinion in this entire post, but I stand by it. Played by 2 very attractive people, this Jane and Rochester seem to develop only the mildest form of infatuation. With the exception of one scene (aftermath of the first fire-setting incident), it hardly seems like these two want to hold hands, much less pine endlessly after one another. I had heard so much about the chemistry in this movie, I was primed for a rip-roaring good time and was left thinking “wait, is this it??!?” Anyway, Fassbender’s Rochester is dialed-back and relatively tame as far as Byronic heroes go, which is not necessarily a downside as far as I’m concerned, but it does leave him at a disadvantage in a personality contest with the other Rochesters in this line-up.

Unfortunately, I think he also loses in a personality contest with Jamie Bell’s St. John. At first, I wasn’t sure about the filmmakers’ choice to use the Rivers subplot as a framing device for the movie, but it does allow for that storyline to play out more fully than in the 1997 movie, which in turn allows St. John to play a more prominent role. And Bell wipes the floor with everyone else, charisma-wise. We all know how the story must end, but I won’t lie — there was a little part of me that whispered, “girl, maybe going to India isn’t the worst idea” because there was an intensity to Bell’s St. John that hinted at potentially interesting depths. Put him in a room with any of the other 2 Janes and, you never know, we might end up re-writing the story. But not this movie’s Jane; she and her Rochester match each other’s low-key vibes well enough to make a go of it, I guess. Which is a compliment, by the way, to the casting and also the lead actors’ choices. While, on the whole, I personally prefer the (sexy) dynamic of the Wilson/Stephens pairing, both Morton/Hinds and Wasikowska/Fassbender manage to create believable couples — i.e. couples who suit each other’s characters. Put differently, I can’t imagine mixing up any of these actors and getting a better pairing.

Back to the 2011 movie, visually it’s the most arresting; the cinematography is beautiful, creating an almost lyrical atmosphere. The ending, however, is almost entirely botched — rushed, abrupt, deeply unsatisfying. Overall, I give the movie a (generous, tbh) 7 out of 10.

And, finally, here are my deeply subjective rankings:

Favourite Jane — (1) Samantha Morton, (2) Mia Wasikowska, (3) Ruth Wilson

Favourite Rochester — (1) Toby Stephens, (2) Ciaran Hinds, (3) Michael Fassbender

Favourite couple — (1) Wilson & Stephens, (2) Wasikowska & Fassbender / Morton & Hinds (it’s a tie!)

Most Brontë-esque vibe — (1) 1997 movie, (2) 2011 movie, (3) 2006 mini-series (maybe, but what do I know)

Favourite overall viewing experience — (1) 2006 mini-series, (2) 2011 movie, (3) 1997 movie

With all that said and watched, Jane Eyre remains fairly low on my list of romantic period dramas that I would happily rewatch on a loop, because in the end, one can’t entirely get away from the source material and I remain, now and always, Team Austen.

And with that, the comment section is officially open for you to yell tell me nicely why I’m wrong about everything 😉

_{* Which include, but are not limited to, North & South, Pride & Prejudice (BBC series and 2005 movie), and Middlemarch.}

Details: vintage sweater, Ralph Lauren skirt, Coach bag (all secondhand), Mia shoes (retail)

Thoughts: I have been looking to add some brown to my sweater collection — at this point, the only part of the wardrobe where that colour isn’t (yet) represented — and this vintage chenille sweater was my first find. I love the colour and texture, plus it’s soft and cozy. Paired with this 90s RL silk skirt, it makes for a fabulous transitional outfit. My platform loafers are still going strong heading into their 3rd (!) fall season.

Details: Banana Republic dress, Sonoma belt, Canadienne boots (all thrifted), Icone shirt (swap), Coach bag (Poshmark)

Thoughts: As soon as I saw this vintage chocolate brown velvet mini dress, I had flashbacks to my teenage years. Appropriate since, according to the inside tag, this dress is from 1992. My 12-year old self would have TOTALLY loved this … but might have been too self-conscious to wear it. As it happens, my 44-year old self has no such qualms. I went all in for the 90s vibes, with tall, flat-heeled boots and this chunky belt that is, apparently, also making a comeback at the moment. Don’t buy the Urban Outfitters version; check out your local thrifts and get the original.

Details: Ralph Lauren sweater, Fossil belt, Ferragamo shoes (all thrifted), Zara pants (retail), GoGo bag (retail)

Thoughts: Not one but two new retail purchases in this outfit — that must be a record for me this year. I wanted a new belt-bag style, canvas crossbody because my daughter stole my old Herschl one, and sometimes I need a lightweight, easy-zip bag option for errands and such. I found this one at Winners, and it’s cute enough to dress up and down. I dressed it up a bit here, although this outfit still falls firmly on the “casual” side of my style spectrum. The pants are also new, current season Zara. I popped into the store recently to scope out the new trends — it’s one way to stay on top of things, and know what to look for at the thrifts — and unexpectedly fell in love with them. Specifically, with the silhouette. It’s a subtle barrel shape, which I love because it’s giving me a taste of that trend without being too overtly trendy, which makes them more versatile in my book. The dark brown colour is also perfect for my wardrobe, as I am slowly replacing black as my core dark neutral.

Details: Bozzolo tee (retail), SmartSet dress, Ralph Lauren vest, Ann Marino shoes (all thrifted), Ralph Lauren bag (Poshmark)

Thoughts: Another very 90s outfit, featuring a mix of vintage and current pieces. Dark blue/navy is another neutral I am exploring this season. I love it paired with white as well as brown, both of which are core colours in my palette now. Other colour pairings I’m planning to try are navy/dark green and navy/dark red. Stay tuned.

Details: Reitmans tank, Ralph Lauren blazer, Liz Claiborne pants, Holt Renfrew belt, Ferragamo shoes (all thrifted)

Thoughts: Speaking of navy, white, and brown — here you go. I loved this outfit so much, despite the fact that my husband went around calling me captain of the Love Boat all day. He’s just jealous. Also, he mostly lives in sweatpants, so what does he know. Anyway, I continue to be obsessed with these vintage Liz Claiborne pants, and to wear them constantly. Luckily, my spill-free streak also continues. Hope I didn’t jinx myself just now …

Details: Calvin Klein tee and jeans, Donna Karan belt, Ferragamo shoes (all thrifted), St. John jacket (swap), Coach bag (swap)

Thoughts: The gamble I took with these bootcut jeans is starting to really pay off. I’m loving the silhouette and exploring its possibilities in different outfit formulas. Here, I paired it with this vintage knit jacket for a juxtaposition of ladylike and 90s minimalism which, I think, was quite successful.

Details: Ardene top (retail), Bianca vest, vintage coat, Do+Be skirt (all thrifted), Dooney bag (Poshmark), Mia shoes (retail)

Thoughts: Still playing around with leopard print and exploring its pattern mixing possibilities. I love pairing it with a lighter colour palette like this one — white/cream and browns. It appeals more to me than a pairing with black, which to me makes the leopard print look more stark and in-your-face. I enjoyed this layering moment, and specifically the addition of the suede vest as a middle layer. The textural contrast is very nice.

While my style has remained relatively consistent in recent years, subtle shifts are still happening all the time. That is the nature of any creative pursuit; it is not a sealed vacuum where everything remains perfectly static. Small changes can create a domino effect as well. Recently, I’ve found myself reaching for different jewelry pieces than in the past; more minimalist and classic necklaces and earrings, in particular. Think pearls, diamond tennis bracelets, simple studs and gold hoop earrings, and so on. (Along with watches, obvi.) It was not a conscious decision, and it didn’t immediately dawn on me that this was even happening, but once I noticed the trend, I also realized that it had a direct correlation to the shift in my personal style that led me to incorporate 90s minimalist and classic preppy influences into my outfits.

Naturally, the first thing to do was go through my jewelry collection and start pulling out older pieces that fit my new ‘mood-board’, most of which I hadn’t worn since the early 2010s — the last time I was into delicate, minimalist jewelry. I am very happy that Old Adina bought a few Tiffany pieces back in the day when their silver jewelry cost half what it does now; the designs are simple and pretty timeless, and while I was previously saving them for my daughter, I think I’ll be keeping (and wearing them) myself for a little while longer. Ditto for some other semi-fine pieces, like silver ball stud earrings, that I bought back in the days when I was trying to curate a collection of classic staples. I still subscribe to the concept that ‘nothing is truly timeless’, but maybe jewelry is the closest thing to an exception. I also began to look at the thrifts for a few items with which to update my jewelry collection. I bought a couple of choker-length pearl necklaces, and a pair of chunky gold huggie earrings. As it often happens, as soon as I started looking for minimalist stuff, it seemed as though all I could find was the opposite. I’m sure, with time, I’ll have more luck — such being the nature of thrifting.

Strangely enough, thrifting did end up contributing to my current jewelry line-up in a rather roundabout way. Having been sucked down the rabbit hole of thrift haul reels on Instagram, I ended up watching a bunch of videos of people unpacking jewelry mystery bags. Basically, these are large containers full of assorted jewelry that either didn’t sell as individual pieces on the thrift store floor (or showcase) or were never properly sorted and merchandised in the first place. I imagine that thrift stores get such large quantities of small accessories that they sometimes don’t bother to individual sort, price, and stock everything in the store. These mystery bags/jars/containers are usually transparent but sealed up; you can sort of see what’s inside but not really, and you can’t pick through them before you buy. I haven’t bought one of these myself in the past because I always assumed they’d be largely full of junk, and they’re not cheap — most start at $30 and go up from there — but some people are finding decent stuff, along with the junk.

Anyway, after watching these videos, two things happened. One, I started to consider buying one from my local thrift store. (Of course I did, I love mystery bags. My inner child delights in surprises, even as the adult hates the idea of wasting money and cluttering my house with junk.) I haven’t yet, but never say never. Two, I remembered that, years ago, I put aside a bunch of jewelry that I thrifted (or was given by people) for the purpose of upcycling. Remember when I used to make upcycled jewelry? It’s been a hot minute. Well, I went down into the basement to dig up my craft boxes and see what I had forgotten I had. And the first thing I found was … wait for it … a plastic bag full of miscellaneous jewelry.

Now, this wasn’t the typical stuff I was using before for upcycling. This was stuff that I got as part of larger lots, which was too nice to upcycle but didn’t suit my style at the time. And, boy, am I glad that I had the foresight to put it aside and save it — rather than donate or swap — because I found some pieces that are totally up my (current) alley.

This is practically identical to one of the necklaces I thrifted recently, except that the clasp is gold not silver. If I had found it first, I would have saved myself the extra $6, but it is what it is. It’s not a bad thing to have a back-up, and the pearls are actually slightly different colours also.

A slightly different take on pearls; less classic, but I like the dainty details.

This long necklace of faux baroque pearls and marcasite has no markings or stamps, but it has a nice weight to it and feels like good quality. Hard to tell if it’s vintage, but it’s definitely above your run-of-the-mill fast fashion.

I love the vintage vibe of this necklace. The beads are plastic/resin but from a distance they could pass for stones. In my book, knots between the beads are a sign of slightly better quality — plus, I think they help to make the necklace stronger/ less prone to breakage.

This teeny watch, featuring a mother of pearl face and marcasite embellished silver tone band, has bracelet-stack potential. I do need to figure out if I can take out a link or two in the band, as it’s currently too large for my wrist.

I am not 100% sure this beaded necklace is something that suits my current style, but it’s giving me 90s vibes so for that reason, I decided to pull it out and give it a trial run.

These little hoop earrings with interchangeable charms are just perfect. No notes.

Lastly, a couple of smaller pieces — a simple rhinestone brooch, and a silver-tone chunkier necklace. The latter is always nice to have on hand, as I have quite a few silver pendants that I can rotate through.

There were other things in my home-made mystery bag, which I’ve put back and tucked away for the future. If this has taught me anything, it’s that Future Adina will love to re-discover this little time capsule at some point. And I’ve made another one too … from all the pieces I decided it was time to edit out of my current collection. Having realized that change is afoot, it makes good sense to assess what no longer serves me fully and make room for the new by removing some of the old.

I started with my necklace collection; took everything out, looked it over, identified what I have not been wearing for a while. I made three piles: donate, offer to my daughter, put aside for the future. Here are the pieces that I’m moving out of my current rotation but keeping:

The long colourful necklace on the top left side is going to my daughter, but everything else is going into storage. I can see myself wearing these again — particularly the Alexis Bittar necklaces on the right — so they’re keepers.

I don’t wear chunky colourful statement necklaces very often anymore, but I did keep a few for the rare occasions that call for them. These ones did not make the cut, but I still like them a lot, and think they have potential to swing back in style for me.

I thrifted a lot of Stella & Dot pieces over the years, but as time goes on, I have been moving away from this style of costume jewelry. I already pared down my collection over the last few years, and these are some of the last remaining pieces that I don’t wear but am not quite ready to let go. I’m putting these in a separate bag, and will reassess next year whether I want to keep holding on to them or not.

This ended up being a long-overdue (jewelry) closet edit that brought some much-needed organization to my collection — a good reminder not to forget that accessories, like clothes, benefit from periodic review. Speaking of which, I really should tackle my belt drawers next … but I’m not sure I’m ready for the extra difficult decisions involved in that particular project 😉