For book-firsters and fans, it's impossible not to compare this 1997 adaptation with the 1940 Hitchcock classic. I have one gripe with the 1940 version, and that is the very big liberty he took in changing the climax, in such a way that changed the whole nature of the story. I like the book, so that was kind of a big deal to me and one reason I was interested in seeing the "new" version, which sticks closely to the book.
The plot is very simple: anonymous shy girl meets rich older guy--Maxim de Winter--and, on the spur of the moment, they get married to live happily-ever-after at his English estate, Manderley. Enter brooding housekeeper Mrs Danvers, who only adds to the young lady's fears that she can never be as beautiful, accomplished, and upper-crust as Max's first, deceased wife, Rebecca. Rebecca had died in a boating accident, and Max continues to be grieved by memories of her. His new wife, meanwhile, tries her hardest to emulate Rebecca, but things only go downhill from there...
I give this movie 3 out of 5 stars. The book, by Daphne du Maurier, is a brilliantly chilling, heavily psychological ghost story, yet very understated. It's a difficult story to film, I'm sure. Rebecca (1997), while an imperfect adaptation, is a costume drama I'd watch again.
The first thing we noticed while watching this was the music--wow! Composer Christopher Gunning has also written music for Middlemarch and Poirot; you can hear a very short clip of "Rebecca" here, but it doesn't do it justice at all. The theme totally sets the mood for the (moody) plot of Rebecca.
Another thing I loved was the settings/costumes. We guesstimated this takes place in the 20s/early Inter-War Period (the exact year may or may not be mentioned, I forget). Expect to see plenty of cute/interesting/bizarre 20s fashion, and classic cars, and dreamy English countryside.
Casting...oh dear, oh dear.
Geraldine James was very good as the heroine, but less awkward/naive than either the book or Joan Fontaine's portrayal. Maybe she is supposed to be easier to relate to?
Diana Riggs as Mrs Danvers was creepy. I don't remember book!MrsDanvers very well, so I can't say anything about accuracy. I seem to think that Mrs Danvers' creepiness is supposed to be more a figment of the heroine's perspective than anything else...time for a reread? In any case, I don't remember Mrs Danvers like a vampire sneaking up on people (I mean, really!).
Charles Dance is an excellent actor. He was brilliant in Bleak House and he's my dream casting for Professor Moriarty (it's a compliment!). However, he is simply miscast as Maxim de Winter. I like a good romance story, including a May-December one, but Max in this version is more grandfatherly than fatherly in age, and he doesn't look like a young fifty-something year-old, either. On top of that, the filmmakers decided to portray him with alarming mood swings, and altogether he comes across as a little bit psycho. Like Mrs Danvers, he makes the viewer feel uncomfortable. Yes, he is more gothic...no, he is not the charming (if melancholy) Max from the book.
This is a key problem. If we don't like Max (and I tried), then the story fails. His charisma is supposed to glue the story together; you are supposed to like him. He is supposed to make you care about Manderley, ask questions about Rebecca, and trust him. Unfortunately, I got tired of him, and for a while the heroine did, too (not good!).
Now, I did like being able to see/hear Rebecca. In fact, I wish she had had more of a role. While some viewers don't like her presence at all, I think that, sort of ironically, it makes sense for her to appear on screen.
Content-wise, there was a scene of violence (strangulation) that was not in the book.
Apart from that, the plot was very loyal to the book. And I really loved the ending in this version (not the very ending, but the "ending" before that). Without mentioning spoilers, I think this is one scene that benefits greatly from CGI--it's quite magnificently dramatic.
Some thoughts on the story itself (spoilery, in white): When Max finds out that Rebecca would have died of cancer in any case--is it supposed to be ironic and depressing, or is it supposed to help him feel he was meting out poetic justice? Also, I did not like the heroine's happy resignation at the end, in this version. I felt, in the book, she was more stunned/horrified by it all, by Max, even.
In summary...I'd recommend this version, overall. It is more-or-less plot-accurate and truer to the spirit of the book. The 1940 version is closer in its portrayal of characters/relationships. Watch them both!
0 comments:
Post a Comment