Too opportunistic; too blatantly political. Mary wrote: "Greg wrote: "Mary wrote: "Greg wrote: "Cemre wrote: "I think a mini series done by a person who really understood the novel and doesn't shy away from showing the ugliness can actually work. It would be interesting to find out who wrote the first version of the screenplay, and how much it was changed to suit the studio suits. Jun 03, PM. Cemre wrote: "A. Umaz Non-white Heathcliff, animal cruelty and necrophilia are from the book though.
I've refused to watch that version, because it doesn't have the second half which is a sin, but if you're dis We never know for sure if Heathcliff touched Catherine's corpse or not. In the version he has sex with it. Also, I think it is clear from the text that Heathcliff was not sub-Saharan African. So I still contend the movie went overboard to its detriment.
As for not being complete - I think any movie viewed in a single sitting could never completely portray the novel, so for me that was the version's least sin. Mary wrote: "I agree, Jane Eyre is tamer for sure. There are some threads on GR talking about how awful Rochester is. I don't think he's so bad. He was wrong but his "sins" are understandable. Heathcliffe is a When I read Wuthering Heights, I was just so surprised at how non-romantic it was. Mary, I disliked Rochester a lot.
He treated Jane horribly, had a wife in the house all along who definitely needed mental treatment, proposed to Jane several times and she turned him down. Finally she relents and then at the wedding there just happens to be someone there who knew the truth. Wouldn't surprise me if Rochester planted that scene to torture Jane, just like he is torturing his wife.
I get that Jane would hate him for teasing her along, I don't believe for a second that she would go running to him and marry him at the end of the book. No way, she's too smart, strong, and she is rich anyway on her own.
But this is a guy's point of view. And when a book has been adapted for the screen multiple times, a strange layering occurs: each successive transformation is influenced both by the previous cinematic treatments as well as the original text. Every new adaptation now carries a heavier burden than before, and has to contend with a growing network of narrative and visual associations.
Translating this accurately into a film is a head-scratcher. While these attempts are often wildly different and vary in their success the less said about the California-set MTV adaptation produced in , the better , they contribute to our understanding of Wuthering Heights almost as much as the original text. Take, for example, the moors. But what makes the film unique, and not just another romantic drama, is the way cinematographer Gregg Toland portrays the moors as a fantastic spectacle of swirling fog, billowing wind, and hovering shadows.
His expressionist rendering of the world of Wuthering Heights would have a profound influence on all the film adaptations that would come after it, and remains the dominant pictorial representation of the story. Transplanting the setting from England to feudal Japan, the film can be described as a heightening of all that we know about Wuthering Heights. The moors are replaced by a harsh mountain setting that is equally fog-plagued, and the performances are muscular and discordant, punctuated by a haunting and minimal set design.
Next 10 best black-led historical drama like Detroit. Madilyn Ivey is a leader, writer, and film enthusiast based in Seattle, Washington. She was a hostess, a barista, and a book shelf. She is currently working as a freelance writer for Screen Rant. She is a graduate of the University of Puget Sound. Other works of Madilin Ivy. Madilin Ivy articles have been published Madilyn Ivey is a leader, writer, and film enthusiast based in Seattle, Washington.
Related Articles. March 15, Eg, Mrs Earnshaw was alive when the Master brought the boy from Liverpool. And it was so, so rushed.
And, dear me, the ages! Cathy and Heathcliff at least twenty-two and playing like children on the moors! They were supposed to be children in the book, that first time they intruded the Grange and Cathy was bitten by the hound! The setting though was nice, but that's about all. I realize it's a difficult novel to bring to the screen, but someone PLEASE do recommend a more faithful and lengthy version. I haven't seen every Wutherign Heigths adaption, but I have seen a lot of them and this one is at the bottom of my list for now.
What do you get when you strip a gothic novel of all of all of its mystery and ethereal romanticism? Turns out that the result is a rather tame and uninspiring drama. Ironically this one just comes across as more melodramatic without the proper framework to soften the heightened emotionality and the flowery language, especially as they're acted out by out by actors in their forties.
The result was downright hilarious at times when it wasn't plain distracting. There was nothing about this adaption that said Wuthering Heights to me, it could have been any old movie. It has none of the complexity or atmosphere of the book, and on top of that they saw fit to rewrite the characters to a point where they have little in common with their original counterparts.
Adaptions seem to have a hard time finding a good balance between Cathy and Heathcliff to make them feel like two halves of the same soul rather than allowing one to overpower the other; whether that's reducing Cathy to the innocent victim of Heathcliff's abuse mini-series or making Heathcliff childish and downright pathetic this movie. I haven't been able to find a perfect film adaption yet, but I wouldn't recommend this one. If you love the book or if you're looking for an adaption that captures it's spirit, I'd recommend the version with Timothy Dalton for the first generation, or the version with Ralph Fiennes and Juliette Binoche.
Even the mini-series with Tom Hardy did a better job with the supporting characters. I also wanted Joseph a bit less clean-cut than he was in the film.
I thought Heathcliff should've been played by a non-Caucasian instead of a Cavanah with heavy bronzer. However he looks wild enough, just not attractive enough for me Haerton WAS hot, which was what I wanted, and his troll-deep voice was suiting and funny at times as it was so fitting whether intentional or not. This was tolerable for Hindley, Nelly, Edgar and Isabella, because Nelly's in her later years and their looks usually don't change, Hindley disappears for college to return older, and Flora and Crispin look young enough to pass off as teens.
The adult actors for Heathcliff and Catherine were just a little too old to come in the bird nest scene. Now the pace: This film starts a little boring.. But if you have read the book, you will find the movie is slow-moving in some places but flies past some parts a bit too fast. I wish they had just kept the same pace. If setting is important to you, you won't be disappointed. The relationships between the characters were pretty well portrayed, for example Catherine-Heathcliff was quite sweet.
The rating 6. Cathy was just a bit too quick to get into it. GenevieveBowie 21 May As a big fan of wuthering heights, i was ready to give this film a chance. But i have to say, i hated it. Robert cavanah is not right for heathcliff. More importantly, this film does not follow the book. Cathy and hieroglyphs loveis more sexual in the film than in the book, and shows lust rather thanlove.
The wuthering heights with Ralph fiennes however is an amazing film. Ralph fiennes plays heathcliff exactly as i imagined him. Juliette binoche pulls Cathy and Cathy's daughter off very well. Horton is portrayed perfectly too. Being an avid Bronte fan, especially Emily, I have seen every single adaptation of their novels.
While most screen adaptations prove to be rather disgraceful, there are some "gems" which, though not equaling the original source, turn out to be masterpieces in their own right. Such is the case with this wonderful TV adaptation of Wuthering Heights. It follows as closely to the book as possible, and takes great pains to bring the characters and their world to life, and succeeds with flying colours. Robert Cavannah and Orla Brady are near perfect in their portrayal of the two star-crossed lovers Cathy and Heathcliff, and David Skynner, the director, does his best to emulate the chaotic atmosphere in which their love blossoms in the novel.
But the most enjoyable part of the movie - and indeed of the novel - is the allusion to the post-Heathcliff Wuthering Heights epitomised by the union of Hareton and Catherine Linton.
This is a dark, dreary, passionate and compelling adaptation - probably the most stirring, and definitely the most faithful to the original - for it shows why we love and continue to love Emily Jane Bronte's masterpiece! I most strenuously recommend it to every Bronte fan - Victorian world doesn't get bleaker than this!
LittleSwallow 19 August I find that this Masterpiece theater TV version follows the novel of the same name pretty faithfully. One who has never read the novel may find the action moving too quickly, so that the flow of the movie may seem slightly abrupt or choppy.
However, the movie is only 2 hours long, which is probably why they had to cut out parts of the book and take some liberties with ages and certain details. That does not detract too much from the enjoyment of this movie, which despite its choppiness, has excellent acting, beautiful cinematography the landscapes are breathtaking , and a wonderfully wrought out, bitter plot which focuses on three generations of two families who are intimately interlocked with each other.
Heathcliff definitely comes off as the cruel, embittered man he is in the book, and it's great to see a TV movie capture the personalities of all the characters so well. Highly recommended movie. Sarah Smart is just about the best Cathy ever, and played the same part in a modernised version of the story entitled "Sparkhouse" on BBC1 Sept 8th She looks right, sounds right, and has the right temperament for the part - wilful, wayward and fiery. She has the look of Sarah Miles - and could be her daughter!
As someone who has created a website on Wuthering Heights so had to read and re-read it many times, paragraph by paragraph, I was very impressed by this version ITV has not a great reputation for historical drama in the UK. The house itself looked like a farmhouse rather than a mansion, the minor details such as hair colour were generally accurate, the acting was excellent. Somehow Orla Brady didn't feel right to me as Catherine although she's a fine actress but Sarah Smart was perfect as the younger Cathy.
Being two hours rather than a movie's 90 minutes allowed more of the novel to be used and I was constantly thinking "Yes, I remember that from the book". Until Andrew Davies produces the definitive 'Wuthering Heights' as he did for 'Pride and Prejudice', this is probably the best around. I've read the book "Wuthering Heights" many times and it's my favorite love story, so passionate and real. So I wanted to see an appropriate film version to this wonderful book. And I must admit, that this film completely catches the spirit and atmosphere of the book.
I think it's very difficult to play the leading roles, especially the complicated Heathcliff's character. It's very hard not to make Heathcliff too human and otherwise not too savage. He is not a romantic hero and it's hard to show his vulnerability and passionate love for Catherine and his dark, cruel and vengeful nature at the same time.
0コメント