Lovesusti The Worst Film Ever

Teringer An Exercise In Nonsense

Lollivan It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Lachlan Coulson This is a gorgeous movie made by a gorgeous spirit.

hahnell Emily Bronte's only novel, Wuthering Heights, was declared difficult and scandalous by the few critics who read it. And shortly after it was published, she died at age thirty, in 1848. If she only knew how her novel would live on in the hearts of so many readers; she was far ahead of her time when it came to fiction dealing with human emotion and passion. It is one of my favourite novels of all time, probably what inspired me to become a novelist myself.So I was a bit sceptical about how this film version would work for me. The Olivier / Oberon version from 1939 was a mess. The story was almost unrecognizable. But this version is very faithful to Bronte's novel. Cathy and Heathcliff come to us in all their wild, pagan glory here. I highly recommend it.

aphrodisiaciix This movie is a waste of time and money for both the makers and the audiences, not to mention, a waste of talents on such big movie stars as Ralph Fiennes and Juliette Binoche.The characters are shallow and unable to demonstrate their complex emotion. Their relationships were never really get developed properly in a race-against-time script that compounding with the poor direction which certainly resulting in a horrible film that did not do justice to the book! Emily Bronte would definitely have reacted strongly against this travesty of literature.The inexperienced director (a small time TV-movie director) is inadequate for such a complex story. The poor script is insufficient for characters development. The cast is completely wrong for their parts.This must be a career low point for both Ralph Fiennes and Juliette Binoche.

Noirdame79 I love "Wuthering Heights" as a book and I enjoy comparing adaptations. What is it about this psychologically dark book written by a brilliant but ill-fated young mid-19th century parson's daughter that compels so many to read, watch and continually adapt it into films, or even write songs about it? Is it just the need to try to capture the essence of this fascinating yet somewhat repellent story about revenge, twisted love, greed and hatred? Or is a desire to top other productions, some kind of contest to come out the winner of the best interpretation of Emily Bronte's colossal (as described by her sister Charlotte) masterpiece? After coming across the 1992 Peter Kosminsky film these questions came to mind even more so than before. Promoted on the back of the DVD cover as the only theatrical movie version to cover the novel's entirety (if only skimming the surface, as completely would be impossible), for me this interpretation of the Bronte novel fell short in many areas and had a less than authentic feel. While the house representing the Heights is obviously fake and constructed specifically for the film, the locations, as appealing to the eyes as they were, did not seem to fit the description in the novel. Along with the usual grumbles (the actors being too old, the timeline for when situations occurred in the book), Ralph Fiennes, while undeniably a formidable presence in film, was miscast as Heathcliff - singled out by some as being too "refined" for the role, he comes across as being brutal but lacking the rough and uncouthness of Bronte's anti-hero - especially in the early sequences. Juliette Binoche, as lovely and competent an actress as she is, was undone not only by her French accent, but the fact that she was saddled with playing two complex and difficult roles - that of the elder Catherine (Cathy) Earnshaw Linton, and her daughter, Catherine Linton Heathcliff Earnshaw - undermines the movie even more. Was it done for budget reasons? The blonde wig she wears as the daughter is an irritating distraction, not to mention that the younger Catherine is not supposed to resemble her mother.Jonathan Firth as the sickly, annoying Linton Earnshaw is pretty much stuck with a thankless role as Heathcliff's effete son with the silly, and ultimately equally ill-fated Isabella (played by Sophie Ward). Edgar Linton (Simon Shepard) is even more weak and pitiable than in the book or any other film adaptation I've seen. But he still seems rather colorless (pardon the expression) and seems to be trying his mightiest to stay awake during the proceedings.Jeremy Northam as Hindley isn't seen nearly enough (add me to those who feel he should have played Heathcliff instead). Northam, Janet McTeer (as faithful servant Ellen "Nelly" Dean) and to a lesser extent, Jason Riddington as Hareton were the saving grace of this film for me. I don't know if the rest of the cast tried too hard or if the director did (or perhaps a bit of both?), but for me their efforts, while admirable, can't elevate the project to what they were trying to achieve. It does seem that Fiennes himself has less than kind words for this production - an unpleasant experience, one that almost turned him off of working on films.To look at, the movie is pleasant enough. There is a feeling of a tight budget regarding costuming, hair (wigs) and interiors, but the absence of staginess that often prevailed in many of the earlier BBC television productions is a plus, as is the music score and the interesting casting of Sinead O'Connor as Emily Bronte herself, taking over as narrator which in the novel was put to Lockwood and Nelly.I do feel that this interpretation of WH is overrated, and while it covers more of the book than the classic 1939 Olivier/Oberon picture and the 1970 Dalton/Calder-Marshall production, both of those earlier renditions (speaking for myself) were far more enjoyable and better paced. If you want to see a better depiction of WH (especially the second generation comprised of younger Catherine, Hareton and Linton), check out the 1998 and 2009 Masterpiece Theatre presentations. (I'd recommend the BBC 1978 miniseries if I had seen it but it's unavailability on region 1 DVD makes it difficult). While both of those made-for-TV projects take liberties, for me they captured the book better in many respects.

Kieran Wright OK, so I'm reviewing this compared to the 1939 and 1970 versions. For those of you who love the 1939 version, I'm sorry, but the soundtrack is just plain awful. That said, if you took away the soundtrack and applied a contemporary one, we may be talking about a serious contender.The 1970 version suffers from having a miscast Cathy, and as much as I admire Juliette Binoche, I have to knock a mark off for the same issue here, although that said, she really does her very best and aside from the French accent that is just about detectable, there is no doubting the passion she brings to the role.Ralph Fiennes is every bit as good as Olivier and Dalton. In fact, I would say his performance edges them out, possibly based on the fact that he has more scope to play with as this version is more faithful to the book. He really nails it, although funnily enough, at times he sounds like Leonard Rossiter; even that cannot detract from a powerhouse performance. Not since Peter Finch's Boldwood in 'Far From The Madding Crowd' has an actor been worthy of the words 'hotbed of tropic intensity', but Fiennes is most definitely worthy of that description.The music? Well, let's not mention the 1939 soundtrack again. The 1970 version was beautiful in terms of the score, but the 1992 version brings tears to the eyes and is more varied.This, in my opinion, is still the version to beat, and I loved the performance by Sinead O'Connor too...Seven years on, and I happened upon the soundtrack again today - it has stood the test of time. It just fits the mood and tone of the movie so well that it's genius. So from that point of view, in my opinion, Ryuichi Sakamoto should be regarded as one of the finest composers of all time. Since I wrote my original review, Ralph Fiennes has had huge success as Voldemort, but for me, he will always hold a special place as the definitive Heathcliffe. It's an absolute travesty that a Blu Ray is not available for this, although you can always download the HD version via Amazon or Apple etc.