Wuthering Heights

Based off of Emily Bronté’s only novel, the film adaptation of Wuthering Heights in 1939 tells the unfortunate tale of two lovers, Heathcliff (Laurence Olivier) and Cathy (Merle Oberon).

The film begins dramatically, as a man caught in a storm stops at the mansion, Wuthering Heights, for shelter.  After a less than friendly greeting and shown to a room, he sees a woman outside.  He is told he just saw the ghost of Cathy, and Ellen (Flora Robson) an old servant recounts the tale.

Heathcliff was a poor boy, found on the streets and sent to become a servant at Wuthering Heights.  Cathy was a young lady of the house.  Their class differences that keep their love divided, mostly because Cathy has grown to an idea that she is supposed to marry a high class gentleman who can provide more than enough.  This only hurts Heathcliff, who genuinely loves Cathy.  For years she keeps Heathcliff at a distance, and seems to systematically toy with him, only to accept a proposal from Edgar (David Niven).  This sends Heathcliff out into a storm, to America.

Years pass, and it all seems well, even happy for Cathy.  Then Heathcliff returns, and with him all their old passions and resentments.  He buys Wuthering Heights, once a servant in the home, now its master and marries Isabella (Geraldine Fitzgerald), Cathy’s sister in law.  With Heathcliff and Cathy so close again, and yet so far away, strain and resentments of what they missed out on with each other rise until the very tragic breaking point, as one of them slowly dies.

If you are a starry eyed romantic, grab plenty of tissues.  This is a story of tragic love, where the downward spiral is the main event and the last half hour of the film will have you bawling.  However, if you are the cynical sort (like me) you may roll your eyes at all the shoulda-coulda-woulda that this great love story seems based upon.  The film portrays the love between Heathcliff and Cathy as a great potential, withered by petty ideals and snuffed out with tragedy to put it all into a sobering perspective.

That being said, I did enjoy the film.  The Oscar winning cinematography is splendid, smart and full of powerful moments.  Heathcliff punching through the glass is a heart wrenching moment, full of visual power.  William Wyler certainly deserved his nomination for best director, this being his second of eleven.  I personally did not care for Oberon’s performance, but that is probably because I despised her character.  However, Olivier and Fitzgerald’s Oscar nominated performances are spellbinding and had me hooked.

“You must destroy us both with that weakness you call virtue.”

Henry V

I don’t think I was the best audience for this film.  While I appreciate Shakespeare, so far in life I’ve gotten away with only a minimal study of a few selected works: Romeo and Juliet, Julius Cesar, Hamlet and some Shew on the side.  Literature lover’s blasphemy, librarians will now give me the stink-eye.  As I watched Laurence Olivier’s The Chronicle History of King Henry the Fift with His Battell Fought at Agincourt in France, which we will just call Henry V, I struggled to keep up with the dialog and kept some spark notes handy.  Let’s just say that the battle scene was a well welcomed break from my brain’s overload.

The film reads directly from Shakespeare, telling the story of Henry V’s life where he must overcome his wild adolescence, hanging out with scoundrels at the Boar’s Head Tavern, and rise to become a valiant king worthy of his people’s honor.  To do this, he leads his men to war against the French, but the odds are against them.  The night before battle, he disguises himself as a plain soldier to get to know his troops and how they feel about the imminent battle.  Alone, Henry laments his position as king, knowing that his leadership is a responsibility to his people that he is about to lead to a war not in their favor.

The beginning of the film starts with a look at London in Shakespearean time.  I don’t think it is quite to scale, but it is a great way to think about how much the London landscape has changed.  Everything was less congested with more open vegetation.  When I saw he Globe Theatre in my travels, there were no trees around, it seemed oddly placed between modern buildings with cars whizzing around.  It’s nice to remember the famous building’s roots.

The recreation of the Globe Theatre in Shakespearean time is just lovely and something the film world does not see again so well again until 1999’s Shakespeare in Love.  As the play starts on the Globe’s stage, we get a real sense of how interactive these plays once were.  The crowd laughs and plays along with the actors perfectly.  Even better, we’re shown what happens when it begins to rain on the open theater, the show simply goes on and those in the cheap seats close to the stage either tough it our or seek shelter.

With my less than fluent Shakespeare, I found time to really appreciate the visual details put into the film.  Today, most people will scoff and laugh at the painted backdrops of castles and the English countryside, but it is a valiant effort within a production studio during 1940’s wartime.  In fact, due to metal rationing for the war, most of the weapons are made of wood and painted sliver.  Even the chain-mail is just silver yarn knitted to resemble a chain-mail pattern.  It’s rather ingenious and I would not have known otherwise if I hadn’t researched.

Olivier’s Henry V was meant to be a moral booster for the British and even received funding from the British government.  In the end, Olivier was awarded an honorary Oscar for his achievement in bringing Shakespeare’s play to the screen.  Today, I would suggest this film to Shakespeare buffs, those who enjoy the play Henry V or Laurence Olivier.  If you’re interested in the Globe Theatre, there are some real gems in the beginning and the end of the film, but you’re more likely to be entertained by Shakespeare in Love.

“We few, we happy few, we band of brothers.”

Rebecca

Based off a novel by Daphne Du Maurier, Rebecca is the story of a widower, his new wife and the memories of the old wife throughout their mansion.  When we meet the girl (she never has a name until she becomes the second Mrs. de Winter), she is a traveling companion to an aging woman.  In Monte Carlo, she meets Maxim de Winter.  He was gazing over a steep cliff, possibly thinking about jumping.  The girl cries out, making sure he doesn’t and from there on, they meet daily and enjoy each other’s company.  When the girl suddenly has to leave, she goes to tell Maxim goodbye and he proposes marriage.  So away they go, to his enormous mansion, Manderley.  But throughout the entire mansion are reminders of his previous wife, Rebecca, who drowned just a year ago.  The creepy staff members still do everything just as Rebecca wanted, even keep her room in the forbidden West Wing just the same.  With the expectations of living up to become the next Rebecca, the new Mrs. de Winter starts to go mad.  But what’s truly maddening is the wonderful twists and turns Hitchcock expertly adds along the way.

This is Alfred Hitchcock’s second film nominated in 1940, and his only one to ever win the category.  That being said, it’s one of his most different films.  The suspense that he’s so known for is not as present, but instead eerie feeling of self doubt are amplified.  One funny reason this is done so well is that while filming, he told Joan Fontaine that the entire staff hated her because she got the role and Laurence Olivier’s girlfriend had not.   That horrible little lie helped her become more shy and unsure of herself both on and off camera.  Yes, just another wonderful example how Hitchcock treated his actors like cattle.

Though both Olivier and Fontaine were nominated in their best acting categories, the most enjoyable performances is by Judith Anderson, who earns a supporting role nomination in playing the main house servant, Mrs. Danvers.  She was Rebecca’s closest friend and prides herself in keeping the mansion just as Rebecca liked it.  She’s wonderfully creepy in the most quiet and subtle ways and seems to glide around the house, popping up at the most unexpected times and sabotaging the new Mrs. de Winter’s every attempt to do something right.

One thing I could not over look, is how many similarities Rebecca shares with Citizen Kane, nominated just the following year.  The stories are night and day, but they both probe the lives of a wealthy man in a ridiculously huge mansion.  At one point, both their wives in their respective mansions are unhappy.  And, well I hate to give away endings, but those images are extremely similar as well.  I’ve often wondered what asshole didn’t vote Citizen Kane for Best Picture, but I guess you can’t have two films with so many similarities winning for two straight years.

There are so many reasons to see Rebecca.  If you’re like me and love Alfred Hitchcock, it is a must see.  If you’ve ever read the novel by Daphne Du Mauier, see how it compares.  If you were ever as outraged at the loss of Citizen Kane, see if you share my new theory.  And of course, if you love creepy movies with a great unexpected twist by a master of suspense, do yourself a favor.

“Please promise me never to wear black satin or pearls… or to be 36 years old.”