| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 717.1 | the old version is the best | BABAGI::KRISHNASWAMY | | Tue Dec 06 1994 13:02 | 24 |
| I did watch this on TNT, at least a part of it and I could not help
agree that it did not sustain much interest to continue watching on. I
have a copy of the Olivier/Oberon version in my collection and it's
impossible not to compare or contrast this sorry production with that
masterpiece. Although perhaps this film did not utilize the tremendous
acting range which Fiennes seems capable of [ he was marvellous in
Schindler's list ], it surely deserves to be panned as you rightly
point out. The old Wuthering Heights movie had a certain gloomy aspect
about it right through the movie, perhaps heightened by the fact that
it was filmed in black and white. Olivier is marvellous in certain
scenes, especially the scene where he humiliates his former "master".
The love scenes between Olivier and Merle also had an undertone of
sadness about them as the viewer instantly realizes from the setting
that this love will exist only as a fantasy, will never become truth
and this forms the central theme of the film, with Olivier moping by
the fireplace, waiting for his phantom love to come to him. He could
never possess her in life, but is unwilling to let go even after she's
dead. This obsession in Heathcliff's later years is shown to the viewer
to slowly develop in the film and thereby, it achieves a significance
and impact, that cannot be ignored. The end is almost an anticlimax as
everyone more or less expects an end of that sort.
Well, so much for TV anyway.
|
| 717.2 | Really? I can't believe it! | SWAM2::SMITH_MA | | Tue Dec 06 1994 13:50 | 3 |
| What a surprise...another botched remake.
MJ
|
| 717.3 | | MARVA2::BUCHMAN | UNIX refugee in a VMS world | Tue Jan 03 1995 14:20 | 9 |
| Didn't the 1939 version have a somewhat different ending from that of
the book? I remember a reviewer saying that it was given an optimistic
twist because Hollywood couldn't bear a totally unhappy ending.
> This was at least as annoying as having a Robin Hood who sounded
> Texas/Oklahoma!
How about one from Brooklyn, a la Costner ;-)
Jim
|
| 717.4 | 1939 vs. 1992 | SMAUG::LEHMKUHL | H, V ii 216 | Tue Jan 03 1995 15:49 | 31 |
| The 1939 version took great liberties with the text of
the book. They simply lopped off the whole story
of Catherine Linton and Hareton Earnshaw. Actually,
I found it rather hard to watch after all. Too much
posing for beautifully lit closeups. Olivier over the
top as ever.
While the 1992 version is more faithful to the book, it
is stodgily so. It's as if the screenwriter had a copy
of the novel online and simply cut her way through the
book until what was left was 120 minutes long (or
138 minutes or whatever).
I don't think the ending was Hollywoodized, but now
you make me doubt my memory, so I'll have to go look.
As I remember it, Catherine Linton and Hareton
Earnshaw get together in the end, thwarting Heathcliff's
revenge on Edgar and Hindley. I don't think Bront�
wrote anything about the ghosts of Cathy and
Heathcliff being reunited, if that's what you mean.
For all its faults, it DOES have the superb Ralph
Fiennes, whose looks are heartstopping and whose
acting talent is simply stunning. The scene immediately
after her death where he curses Cathy and begs her
to haunt him had me holding my breath. (a lot of alliter-
ation from a literate Lehmkuhl).
[� la Costner, precisely! His accent is some hybrid of
his Southwestern youth and Californian adulthood;
there's no Brooklyn in there that I can hear.]
|
| 717.5 | | TOHOPE::WSA038::SATTERFIELD | Close enough for jazz. | Tue Jan 03 1995 18:58 | 28 |
|
re .3
The 1939 version (my favorite film, btw) did have an ending that was added
on during editing. Wyler filmed an ending where Heathcliff's body is simply
found frozen to death on Pennington's Crag. Goldwyn couldn't accept such a
downbeat ending and had another ending filmed. It has two stand in's for
Olivier and Oberon walking off into the clouds hand in hand with "Catherines
Theme" swelling in the background. Wyler hated it but couldn't do much about
it.
re .4
The 1939 version did end the story at Catherines death, so did the early
seventies British version. A wise move I think as this '92 version shows.
The story really takes a nose dive after that, slow moving with little
entertainment value.
I do like the '92 version second only to the '39. Excellent cinematography
and music, well acted. I liked Olivier's Heathcliff better than Fiennes',
not necessarily because of the acting (I think both did fine jobs) but
because of the interpretation of the character. Fiennes' may be closer to
the novel's but so what? I thought Olivier's worked better as a film
character. A personal preference.
Randy
|
| 717.6 | Quite right | SMAUG::LEHMKUHL | H, V ii 216 | Wed Jan 04 1995 15:36 | 13 |
| Sorry, I thought the "ending" question was referring
to 1992, not 1939. 1939 was definitely cosmetically
corrected by Hollywood. 1992 is very true to the book,
for whatever that is worth.
In the book Heathcliff is found dead in his
bed chamber, eyes wide open, the window casement
flapping in the breeze. There IS in fact a bit about
a shepherd boy and his flock terrified at having
seen the shades of Cathy and Heathcliff together on
the moor.
Chris
|