Customer Reviews

Masterpiece Theatre: Wuthering Heights (2009)

5 star:		(45)
4 star:		(17)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(7)

 

 

Director Coky Giedroyc provides the newly thrice-spliced Masterpiece Theatre with a two and a half-hour remake of Emily Bronte's Gothic classic, "Wuthering Heights (Signet Classics)" that adequately depicts the passionate love/hate relationship made famous by Catherine Earnshaw and Heathcliff for readers since 1847.

I have not had the pleasure of rereading the novel for a few years, but this adaptation seems remarkably true to the overall spirit of the story. It includes the two generations of Earnshaws and Lintons most noticeably removed from the 1939 film version starring Lawrence Olivier as Heathcliff and Merle Oberon as Catherine (Wuthering Heights 1939 Classic Black and White with Original Theatrical Trailer (Import, All-Region)). The non-linear time sequencing of the film's plot mirrors the timeline of the novel; the only real difference here is the absence of the novel's first person narrators, Mr. Lockwood (Heathcliff's tenant) and Nellie (housekeeper of both Wuthering Heights and Thrushcross Grange). Giedroyc's version employs a third person technique in both the flashback and present day storyline to retell the Earnshaw/Linton history rather than rely on the biased comments of Bronte's storytellers.

Lockwood's absence also means the sequence of events revolving around the apparition of Catherine's ghost does not move the plotline. Instead the opening scene treats us to a vengeful Heathcliff, manipulating his sickly son Linton's marriage to the second generation Catherine, daughter of Edgar and his love. In fact, the entire aspect of the supernatural is not touched upon in the film as intensely as in the novel. Heathcliff yearns for his dead companion, and participates in a ghoulish digging up of Catherine's corpse. In a fantastic feat of cinematography the audience is privy to two vantage points: Heathcliff's vision of her--young and fully fleshed as if alive--and then the gruesome reality seen from behind Heathcliff's back--Catherine's decomposing skull. This film emphasizes the real and the gritty rather than the ethereal.

Similarly, it includes some passionate and psychologically intense moments that add carnality to the overall telling of the story that fits well with and enhances the wild emotions portrayed by Bronte. Heathcliff and his Catherine consummate their love on the moors; Edgar desperately makes love to Catherine in their marriage bed and Heathcliff commands that his wife not look at him as he takes her after their impromptu elopement. Somehow these moments add drama and needed adult content and motivation to what the other adaptations skirted around. When Heathcliff realizes that his woman has slept with Edgar, his anger boils over with helpless indignation. He wants revenge and after witnessing his closeness to Catherine, the audience sees him more as a jilted second choice despite his accomplishment; the face of the gypsy orphan still stares back at him.

Not that actor Tom Hardy resembles a gypsy in any way. His incontrollable mop of dark brown hair flops annoyingly onto his face; it definitely could use a trim or a ribbon holding it away. Nevertheless, he does the character of Heathcliff and the Byronic hero justice; he most decidedly reigns supreme in the scenes in which he participates. His passion seems almost Pilate-controlled from a steel core that is both practical and functional within the constraints of his world. However, like the novel's character, he loses himself frequently with a cynic's paranoia that lashes out with the intent to destroy whatever is in its path.

Cathy, on the other hand, as portrayed by Charlotte Riley has a feral beauty that aptly suggests the novel's heroine. However, Riley's Catherine has been "de-bratted"; the novel depicts Cathy with a nasty selfish streak while this Masterpiece Presentation shows us a confused child/woman that indeed does what she chooses but then seems at odds with the results.

Isolation plays a big part in Bronte's novel. However, this film fills the screen with an assemblage of others that makes the entire presentation more real. Rather than just the dire foursome and their progeny, villagers, church-goers, barroom card players and fighting children add authenticity to the period and in comparison more starkness to the actual footage shot on the moors.

Bottom Line? The 2009 presentation of "Wuthering Heights" created for Masterpiece Theatre Classics smolders with a raw sexuality and practical strength that will probably not please most purists. Nevertheless, the film's team put together a good adaptation that brings the feel of the novel to life without imitating other film presentations of the past. Recommended.

Diana Faillace Von Behren

"reneofc"

This adaptation is a fresh rendering that focuses on the complex passions of the two main characters. As a former college professor, I found it difficult to engage my students in reading the novel instead of Cliff's Notes. I think this film version of the novel would definitely inspire those not used to reading 19th century lit to attack the novel with new eyes. I say fresh rendering because the torrid love/hate relationship between Heathcliff and Cathy is the core of the film. It is also about abandonment, including Cathy's. The film is not burdened by the triple narratives of the book. The novel is a Gothic one, but the film dispenses with the supernatural elements that would seem distracting if included. Heathcliff's plea to the dying Cathy to haunt him so they can still be together, Cathy's plea that he let her die in his arms,imagining that she would be tossed out of heaven for loving him too much, the etchings on the wooden wall reading Catherine Earnshaw, Catherine Linton, Catherine Heathcliff, all of these hint at the resignation of the lovers that their lives together are doomed.

I am appreciative of the inclusion of carnal scenes, implicit and explicit, that are merely intimated in the novel. Heathcliff and Cathy tearing each other apart on the crag where they had earlier "lay with each other" and Heathcliff's anguished lovemaking to Isabella where he attempts to feel Cathy's body instead of his wife's. "Turn your face away," he tells her.

I thought the actors wonderful. Tom Hardy's embodiment of the brooding, obsessive Heathcliff is remarkable and the newcomer playing Cathy very good despite shrinking a bit in Hardy's tour de force.

Purists will probably not endorse this version, but it is far and away the best film to capture the essence of the novel, the raw, violent passion between the lovers which is the lynchpin of the story.

Before watching this movie, I had never read the book or seen any other movie versions, and had no idea what the story was about. I didn't know what I was missing all these years. It inspired me to actually read the book. There are some differences between the book and movie, and some things have been rearranged, but the overall theme of Cathy and Heathcliff's love for each other, is powerful in both the book, and this movie version. It is not a happy story, and I felt so sad at the end, but I still loved it. It was so realistic to me I had to remind myself that it was based on a fiction novel, and these were not real people. I also enjoyed the music, and felt it set the overall mood. I think all the cast were perfect in their roles, and I can't imagine anyone doing a better job as Heathcliff than Tom Hardy. Charlotte Riley plays Cathy and is such a natural beauty that it is easy to believe the undying love that Heathcliff has for her. I would have loved it to be longer, to include some things from the novel that were left out, and I didn't see the need to change the way Heathcliff dies, but overall I loved it. It is sad and haunting, and yet I have watched it several times. It deserves five stars and more!!

While the book offers a treat for your imagination, the film delivers its own delights. I will definitely watch this again to see the characters, costumes, and scenery, which kept me fascinated throughout. The plot twists and turns its way towards a dramatic ending, and left me wanting to see more period films. It's definitely worth your time to watch this movie.

This is by far my favorite adaptation of the story and Tom Hardy was an outstanding Heathcliffe.

This is without a doubt the worst adaptation of Wuthering Heights that I have ever seen. The acting doesn't even deserve to be called mediocre. Charlotte Riley is horrible as Catherine. She failed to portray the selfishness, vanity and mercurial nature of the character in the book. Cathy in the book was wild, even after her return. She was prone to temper tantrums and even went so far as to hit Edgar on one occasion. That was not shown in this adaptation. In this Catherine was static, simpering and in some places just seemed plain ignorant. Even in those rare moments when Riley seemed to be trying to display the arrogance of Catherine the performance fell far short. Whoever wrote this script even managed to ruin Cathy's most important speech. That speech was the very reason Heathcliff ran away in the first place, in the book. When he heard Cathy say that it would degrade her to marry him. Yet in this movie Heathcliff heard none of that, Cathy didn't even say it. He ran away without hearing a word of Cathy's confession to Nelly. And they actually had the audacity to change that essential speech which was, in many ways, crucial to the whole tormented existence and doomed love of Cathy and Heathcliff. As I said, it's the reason Heathcliff ran away in the book. They didn't even show how Cathy reacted when Heathcliff left and that was a great disappointment.

The writers for this adaptation saw fit to remove important factors from the book and replace them with unnecessary drivel that never happened, it was just a product of their own imagination and what they thought should be the story. Wuthering Heights is a masterpiece and a classic; it did not need the changes these writers gave it. They took away from the dark tragedy of the book. Heathcliff and Catherine lacked the feral, passionate and, some might even say fatal, obsession that was portrayed in the novel. I saw no chemistry between Charlotte Riley and Tom Harding at all. It was like watching a pair of cardboard cutouts. Painful to watch. Indeed, this was actually so agonizing to watch that I had to leave the computer for a while and only came back when I felt I was ready to endure another dose of sheer torture. The only reason I watched it to the end was because I kept hoping for some redeeming quality on both the part of the script and the actors. There were none. And also because I felt that, however horrible this movie was, it would still be unfair to rate and review it without at least giving it a chance. Well, I gave it a chance. It was horrible. I regret that it took up 2 hours of my life that I shall never be able to get back.

Let's see, all in all, how did this adaptation butcher the book? There are so many ways that I can scarce remember them all.

- Though they did show all three generations, the early childhood life was poorly done. For all the time they gave to it you'd think they could have been more accurate. Instead they drastically changed it and only threw in a few lines from the book (at the wrong time I might add) as if thinking that that would make up for the liberties they saw fit to take

- Catherine displayed far more compassion in this that she did in the book. The Cathy in this book seemed like a completely different person entirely, I just couldn't relate her to the Cathy of the book. Like when she dismissed Nelly from the room. In the book she basically attacked the woman and Edgar, too. In that moment she reverted back into the wild girl of the moors, a girl who felt caged and restricted, until she finally exploded and took out her aggression on both Nelly and Edgar. That didn't happen in this adaptation. We got to see none of Cathy's pent up energy and frustration. In the book she was akin to a caged animal - trying hard to perform for the people around her yet unable to completely contain her true nature. Her volatile personality was terribly diminished in this movie.

- Heathcliff lacked the sinister, yet somehow compelling, charisma that he had in the book. His dark allure was gone in this. And I won't even get into the inaccuracies that the character had to endure at the hands of both actor and writers. There are simply too many. I will only say that in the book, despite his twisted and vengeful nature, he was still a character that I loved, and still love. He was interesting, he was compelling and he was fascinating. In this he just seemed brutish and wooden.

- I won't discuss the sex scenes. I will only say that they degraded the story. They should never have been added.

- As for the ending. All I can see is 'You can't possibly be serious'. It just shocked me. It went completely against the spirit of the book. To say more would be to ruin it for anyone who still wishes the watch this travesty, but far be it for me to give away any spoilers.

My final word? This doesn't even deserve one star, but alas, I was not able to give it zero. I suppose I'll just have to be satisfied with one. My advice would be to watch the 1992 adaptation of Wuthering Heights instead. Ralph Fiennes made a far better Heathcliff and Juliette Binoche at least managed to capture the essence of Cathy far better than Charlotte Riley.

I believe this 2009 adaptation captured the essence of Emily Brontë's novel better than the 1992 adaptation. However, the 1998 is still my favorite. However, I am NOT saying this adaptation was very different from the 1998. (In many respects, the films are nearly identical. Most of the same scenes are shown in each adaptation.)

None of the adaptations could be considered true miniseries where the novel is acted out in entirety. (I an certain many people would find that boring.) Therefore, I am not writing this review as a critique of how well this film or any other film can substitute for reading the novel. What I am saying is that I think the 1998 Masterpiece adaptation is better in telling in the story.

My Main Reasons:

1.

While this adaptation is slightly longer, I don't really think it developed minor characters any better than the 1998. (It does possibly develop Joseph's character slightly more but not Nelly's.)

2.

Some scenes in the 1998, for example, Heathcliff hanging a dog by the hook or trashing Thrushcross Grange after Linton's death showed Heathcliff's hate, grieve, etc. better than the alternative gambling scenes in this 2009 film.

3.

The conclusion of this film is a letdown. The 1998, and even the 1992, end better than this film. In this adaptation, I feel I am being led to think, "Now Heathcliff is dead and can be with Catherine" rather than focusing in Catherine II's future and happiness.

FINAL THOUGHTS:

I am not saying I do not recommend this film. Certainly, for someone who loves Emily Brontê's "Wuthering Heights" and enjoys watching film adaptations. this individual can probably find something in the film he or she likes. I know that the film was interesting to watch once, if not simply to compare with previous adaptations.

However, for the adaptation I would most like to watch MORE THAN ONCE, the 1998 adaptation (not the 2009) is my choice.

One might also try Youtube for Wuthering Heights (1978), which is the most loyal adaptation and not currently available in Region 1 media markets.

I often struggle with movie adaptations of my favorite novels, but this rendition of Wuthering Heights is a beautiful, tragic film. The actors give striking performances, and the scenery is breathtaking. I would be hard-pressed to find anything I dislike about it. Be forewarned, though: I was taken with the book itself, before seeing the film; my appreciation for it stems from the earlier love of the novel. Not to say that it can't stand alone, simply that I love it for slightly different reasons.

I've read the book, I've seen nearly every television and film adaptation of the book, as many as I can get my hands on. This is by far the best and I can't wait to own it!

This is a good adaptation of a timless favorite, not the best adaptation, in my opinion, but a creditable offering. The lead characters, who of course constitute the story, do a good job. The potrayals,score and the visual effects are wonderful. I recommend this movie. I don't think that you will be disappointed by this offering.