Product Details

• Actors: Tara Fitzgerald, Justine Waddell, Andrew Lincoln, Susan Vidler, John Standing
• Format: Closed-captioned, Color, DVD, NTSC
• Language: English (Dolby Digital 2.0)
• Region: Region 1 (U.S. and Canada only. Read more about DVD formats.)
  
• Aspect Ratio: 1.33:1
• Number of discs: 1
• Rated: Unrated
• Studio: PBS
• DVD Release Date: October 25, 2005
• Run Time: 120 minutes
• Average Customer Review: 2.8 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (48 customer reviews)
• ASIN: B0009OL92K
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #58,022 in Movies & TV (See Top 100 in Movies & TV)
• For more information about "The Woman in White" visit the Internet Movie Database (IMDb)

Editorial Reviews

WOMAN IN WHITE - DVD Movie

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

101 of 111 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Impossible to Reconcile the Violently Negative Reviews with the Favorable Ones, October 5, 2005

By 

Richard L. Scheer (Beaumont, Texas USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The Woman in White (DVD)

I find it unusual that the reviews of this movie are so skewed at the very ends of the continuum of great to horrible. Whenever this happens, I am tempted to see the movie and judge for myself. That is what I suggest to viewers here. I have both read the book and seen the movie, and I, unusually it seems, like both. I obviously do not require pedantic faithfulness to the book in order to have a resulting good story.

It would take a lengthy mini-series to present this story as Wilkie Collins wrote it, and it is a magnificent book, in conception as well as in execution. It is written from the perspective of several characters in the book, and the differing viewpoints and their presentations are remarkably well done by Collins. The Moonstone may be the more popular of the two books, but Collins himself recognized the literary grandeur of The Woman in White, noting his authorship of it, not of The Moonstone, on his tombstone.

It would be immensely difficult, in my opinion, and probably would cost too much, to bring the book faithfully to the movie or television screen. This version is as good as we are likely to see, and, again in my opinion, this is a good version. If one has not read the book, and, as a practical matter, I think most viewers will not have, one will find this a compelling story, well told and uniformly well acted. Why should not those who have not read the book become familiar with Collins and this story and be entertained by it -- even if it is not entirely, or even largely, faith to the book? After all, there are many books that are not faithfully brought to production, but that does not necessarily mean that the story, as revised to fit time and pecuniary restraints of production, will not be entertaining. This story is.

So try it for yourself, even if you have read the book, and judge for yourself. Whenever I see such emotionally negative reviews, and when they are so intensely stated, resulting in so obviously distorted a view of the subject movie, I wonder if there is a reason, such as a somewhat narrow and tiresome attempt at display of learning (e.g., the reviewer, among few others sufficiently erudite, knows that this movie is quite different from the book), that accounts for the negativism, with no thought being given to the entertainment value of the movie, which should be the primary criterion of review.

35 of 41 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Tara Fitzgerald Fans Love it. Others Beware., July 26, 2001

By 

Tsuyoshi (Kyoto, Japan) - See all my reviews
(TOP 1000 REVIEWER)   

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: The Woman in White [VHS] (VHS Tape)

After watching the superb adaptation of "Moonstone," another entry in Mobil Masterpiece Theatre, it is a disappointment to find that this version of "The Woman in White" could not do the same job. From the first, there was two difficulties to be overcome. One is the casting of the two leading ladies, Marian and Laura, and as far as this point is concerned, this film is successful. Tara Fitzgerald is ideal for the strong-willed Marian, and Jusine Waddell fits in fairy-like personality of Laura though Simon Callow's Count Fosco is sorely miscast (and his speech sounds too British to me) Now the second problem comes next: how can you visualize the complex plot of the original book, which has more than five major narrators? The filmmaker tried to solve the problem by making the whole story as Marian's, and Marian's relationship with her half- sister Laura is stressed. The decision is not a bad one, considering the considerable Tara Fitzgerald's presence and her reliable acting.

However, in order to emphasize this point of view, the film introduces too many unnecessary changes that only distract the viewers (especially, those who had read the book). For instance, the hero Walter is "dismissed" from the country house being disgraced by a scandal instead of willingly leaving there as he does in the book. And Walter, unwillingly leaving her house, warns Laura, his love, against the danger that he believes is coming, but as no clue as to the nature of this danger is revealed, we are only left unconvinced about it. As if to justfy his words, this danger soon comes in the shape of Sir Percival and Count Fasco, and hurriedly their secret mission is implied and detected by the sisters, but as the film desperately attempts to stress this danger and the psychological warfare between Marian & Laura vs Percival & Fosco, the second half of the second film has totally transformed itself into different work, which is filled with gunshot, poison, a fall from a tower, and so on. Consequently, though many memorable moments of Collins' original book survive on the screen (such as an encounter with "the Woman in White," a meeting at boathouse, Marian's overhearing secrets in the rain, and burning of a local chapel), they had become only a disjointed series of set-pieces. And it is very strange that the famous scene in Paris is deleted from the ending!

To be fair, the suspence and revenge drama is performed pretty well, so if you don't know the original story, you will be drawn into it. But if you remember the thrilling development of the Wilkie Collins classic, you might feel different way.

9 of 9 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars This can be enjoyed as a movie inspired by Wilkie Collin's work, not as an adaptation, April 23, 2008

By 

Z Hayes (TX, USA) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (HALL OF FAME REVIEWER)    (TOP 50 REVIEWER)   

This review is from: The Woman in White (DVD)

If you are a purist or someone who cannot bear to see a favorite book chopped up when translated onto the big screen, then this movie will offend your sensibilities. However, if it is taken as a movie inspired by Wilkie Collins' The Woman In White, or as a very loose adaptation, then one might perhaps enjoy it, as I certainly did.

The story here [I am not going to compare it to the novel for there are many liberties taken with it in this movie version] centers around a pair of half-sisters who share a very close bond with each other - Marian [Tara Fitzgerald] is poor, and her sister Laura [Justine Waddell] is rich due to an inheritance from her mother. They both live with their decrepit eccentric uncle, Mr Fairlie [Ian Richardson] who has engaged a tutor for the girls, a Mr Walter Hartright [Andrew Lincoln] who immediately forms a close attachment to Laura. However, this attachment doesn't go very far for Laura is engaged to Sir Percival Glyde [James Wilby] who simpers and appears eager to please.

Amidst this setting, enters a mysterious character, a woman in white who appears at first to Mr Hartwright as he is walking to Mr Fairlie's estate at night, and then to the sisters. She turns out to be Anne Catherick [Susan Vilder] an escapee from an insane asylum who seems mentally unstable but passes cryptic comments that pique the interest of the sisters and Mr Hartwright. She alludes to a secret about Sir Glyde, but when confronted, he offers up convincing excuses.

The plot gets more complicated and events turn more sinister when Mr Hartwright is sent off packing by a scandal involving a servant, protesting his innocence all the way. Laura marries Sir Percival, and when Marian goes to the Glyde estate to await them after their honeymoon, she is greeted by a wan and taciturn Laura, who seems fearful of her new husband. Matters get worse when a sinister figure called Count Fosco [Simon Callow] arrives as Sir Percival's guest and after that events take one malignant turn after another. It is left to Marian to put the pieces of the puzzle together and get to the bottom of things, all centred around the woman in white, Anne Catherick and her cryptic remarks.

The story as it unfolds here is riveting - the plot is well-written [if you stop comparing it to the novel, and provide for the time constraint, where the 500+ book is squeezed into a 2 hr movie] and the acting is above average. Though Tara Fitzgerald is a bit too pretty to play the role of Marian, she is very convincing in her role as the determined, and bold sister who attempts to solve the mystery despite all odds. Justine Waddell who has made a career of playing period roles, from the tragic Tess in Tess of the D'urbervilles and also in Wives and Daughters, is also convincing as the naive and trusting Laura. I also thought Susan Vidler's Anne Catherick to be intriguing and well-portrayed, conveying a truly tragic and sad character. Adie Allen's servant turned housekeeper turned mistress of her own home, Margaret Porcher was well-done indeed, convincingly portraying the transformation of her character from servile to malignant.

The men are not altogether memorable, and I feel that here it was a bit of a letdown for the character of the Count especially. He was a truly malignant character in the book, yet here we don't really see that development all that clearly, and Simon Callow seems to be a bit insipid in his portrayal of the ruthless Count. James Wilby is oily enough as Sir Percival Glyde and Ian Richardson is actually quite a scene stealer in his portrayal of the decrepit, fussy uncle. But on the whole, it is the female actors who bring depth to the story.

The sets are wonderful, and the cinematography is well-done. The lighting and other technical elements serve to heighten the atmosphere, providing a lush and suitably sinister backdrop to a gothic story of suspense and evil.

I liked this retelling of the classic and though it does not do justice to Wilkie Collin's masterpiece, this is definitely a movie that can be enjoyed on its own merits and taken as an inspired take on the classic tale.