Jane Eyre
Delbert Mann has one great lesson to
teach all television directors: camera placement is what makes
pictures, and pictures are what television is all about. You may
move your camera along lines of perspective obtained from Boys
Town (rectilinear there, but here on elongated diagonals),
and find surprising images without any effort (an easy quotation
from Giulietta degli Spiriti, for example). No amount of
set decoration or acting can take the place of the created image,
which defines the placement of objects and the status of
performers.
Mann's power to create pictures is, to me, literally
hair-raising. When Jane Eyre first emerges from her room at
Thornfield, the mere camera angle creates a sense of bizarrerie;
he cuts to the little girl at the river and whip-pans back to her
and Jane on the hill below the manor above them, so that in a few
seconds an extraordinary abridgment of elaboration builds up
fleeting, monumental images without ponderousness. His close-ups,
the mainstay of TV work, are portraits.
It sadly goes without saying that this is a summit to which
network television has not since aspired, and the Peeb not for
some time. But when you are able to impart Charlotte Brontė's
observation of social manners with a look or a gesture, merely by
placing your camera just so, it can't be a question of fiduciary
constraints ("It costs more to make a bad picture,"
John Huston said, "but we can make 'em that way.").
When you think how much the BBC spent on Vermeer sets for its
Shakespeares, you will laugh watching this.
It is, in fact, the most convincing and lifelike representation
of nineteenth-century life I think I have ever seen, as well as
being a great achievement of Seventies art. Each shot is, to my
way of thinking, more thrilling than the last, a gallery of vivid
images which I should like to describe in detail if space
permitted, but suffice it to say that they can go from formality
to intimacy in a trice by camera movement, and back again.
While Delbert Mann is quietly generating his masterpiece with a
sensible gravity of motion, you might not mark perhaps that the
composer whose work is put to the test as Jane plays it "a
little" at the piano is none other than John Williams.
I will put the candlelight scene on the landing against any,
including Barry Lyndon's. The first meeting of Rochester
and Jane is better filmed than in the 1944 version. Though I say
so, being an American, I do not believe I have seen a film more
quintessentially English. The camera imbibes its locations and
transmutes them into their sources and origins, as it were, which
is to say the cinematography is excellent.
There is a crucial scene where the rather ęsthetic Romanticism
of Rochester confronts the rationality of Jane, and Mann places
it among flowers and twittering birds in a long shot that zooms
to a two-shot, very nervously, and then to a close-up of Jane. It
is the only use of the zoom in the first Thornfield sequence (it
reappears as an echo at the parsonage, along with a
characteristic over-the-shoulder two-shot which spills over into
the final scene), it is repeated, it is artistically apt. Is it
necessary to point out that the mad scene is as simple as
Hogarth, with a hint of Munch (which prepares the Ibsenesque
parting that follows)?
The clear advantage of television which Mann perceives is the
tight fit of the image, so that a very precisely weighed
calculation of content and picture can be found to occupy a
different sense of expectations and fill a different sense of
time. Television is easily brought to the surface; the trick is
to allow it depth in a rhythm suitable to it. It is simply
possible to cover more ground faster with television, or the same
ground more fully, if you capitalize on its intimacy and avail
yourself of its resources.
Or so it seems to me, watching Jane Eyre. Television's
long iconoclastic subservience to radio was at last abandoned,
for the space of two hours, and decades of debt wiped clean.
The clearest evidence of the fortitude of Mann's technique is in
Jane's declaration to the parson, which is made against a hilly
background of verticals and horizontals that is a formulation I
derive from Whitman and Mondrian to fit such circumstances. But,
of course, love is blind.