Movie Review by Magdalen Aithne Arkwright
It's based on a novel published in the late 1930s, written by Daphne Du Maurier. It's 176 minutes long. It's done by ExxonMobil Masterpiece Theater in 2003. Note: some mature content.
The movie was impressive. If anything, it may have stuck even closer to the original plot than Hitchcock's film. It, too, compromised the ending and Rebecca's death, changing it for reasons unapparent to this reviewer.
The age difference between Maxim and our protagonist is made quite obvious. Because it was originally on TV, it is longer and so allows for more content. What more can be said? It is nowhere near the masterpiece that Hitchcock's film is, but it does portray the novel rather well. There were aspects to it that I preferred to Hitchcock's movie, but it did contain mature content. The beginning of the movie is rather sloppily put together so that some of the literary techniques and such are lost. Our heroine's relationship with Maxim as portrayed by the movie is not exactly the restrained relationship of the novel. Although our protagonist sometimes expresses her feelings that Maxim treats her like a child, they otherwise have a passionate relationship.
In this movie, the focus isn't so much on our heroine's emotional and maturing struggle. Unfortunately, although it sticks to the book in some places better than the Hitchcock film, it fails to stick to the feeling of the book. The language was rough and the physical passion was rather sickening.
My rating: 7 out of 10; M (see sidebar)
~Meggy
It's based on a novel published in the late 1930s, written by Daphne Du Maurier. It's 176 minutes long. It's done by ExxonMobil Masterpiece Theater in 2003. Note: some mature content.
The movie was impressive. If anything, it may have stuck even closer to the original plot than Hitchcock's film. It, too, compromised the ending and Rebecca's death, changing it for reasons unapparent to this reviewer.
The age difference between Maxim and our protagonist is made quite obvious. Because it was originally on TV, it is longer and so allows for more content. What more can be said? It is nowhere near the masterpiece that Hitchcock's film is, but it does portray the novel rather well. There were aspects to it that I preferred to Hitchcock's movie, but it did contain mature content. The beginning of the movie is rather sloppily put together so that some of the literary techniques and such are lost. Our heroine's relationship with Maxim as portrayed by the movie is not exactly the restrained relationship of the novel. Although our protagonist sometimes expresses her feelings that Maxim treats her like a child, they otherwise have a passionate relationship.
In this movie, the focus isn't so much on our heroine's emotional and maturing struggle. Unfortunately, although it sticks to the book in some places better than the Hitchcock film, it fails to stick to the feeling of the book. The language was rough and the physical passion was rather sickening.
My rating: 7 out of 10; M (see sidebar)
~Meggy
Huh. Interesting review. As an huge fan of the book and Hitchcock film I never could make up my mind if I wanted to see this version. Hence, it was really interesting to read your post. :D
ReplyDelete