Jeanskynebu the audience applauded

Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

InformationRap This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

Ella-May O'Brien Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

HotToastyRag I've seen one other version of Emily Bronte's classic novel, the 1970 one, and I was so terribly bored by it, I completely forgot the story afterwards. Watching the 1939 version was like watching a brand new movie, and while I'd had a couple of plot points spoiled for me, I was quite riveted.For those of you who don't know the classic story, it's a period piece set in the 1800s, about a woman's love for two men and two lifestyles. One man is Heathcliff, a low-class boy she's grown up with. He's wild and free, and when she's with him, she feels the innocence and endless possibilities of childhood. The other man is Edgar, wealthy and belonging to a class she's always longed to be a part of. Choosing Heathcliff means a life of poverty, and choosing Edgar means exchanging fantasy for reality. Who will Kathy choose?While Wuthering Heights was honored by eight nominations during the 1940 Oscar ceremony, it had the misfortune to come out during the same year as Gone with the Wind, so it only walked away with one. While not compared to the great American epic, this is a very good and well crafted film. All the actors give their all and truly embody their characters, which is quite a feat since they've been seen in many, many other roles, so you could easily think, "Oh, that's Laurence Olivier!" or "Oh, that's the wife in 10 North Frederick!" Instead, they are Heathcliff, Isabella, Edgar, and Kathy. For Laurence Olivier fans, this is a must-see. Not only does he show off his fantastic, brooding acting chops, but he looks extremely handsome in this one, too! It's a very tough decision between him and David Niven-in a rare appearance without his mustache. The ladies particularly shine in this movie. Merle Oberon reminded me of Kate Winslet in her spot-on fickle portrayal of Kathy, and while she might seem irrationally cold at first, when she puts on the tears, you won't be able to contain your own. Geraldine Fitzgerald is fantastic and heartbreaking; after this film, I don't see how she was ever cast in a villainous role.If you've never seen a film version of Wuthering Heights, this is an excellent one to start with. And if you're not sure whether or not you'll like the story, here's a helpful hint. If you liked Pride and Prejudice but could stand with a little more gravitas to the story, you'll like Wuthering Heights.

lasttimeisaw A truncated screen adaptation of Emily Bronté's magnum opus, William Wyler's WUTHERING HEIGHTS concentrates on the torrid, toxic, fire and brimstone of Cathy and Heathcliff's love tangle within an audience-friendly running time (103 minutes) and squarely omits all the latter-half chapters of the novel. Introducing a frame story on a gelid, wind-blustering, snowy night with a spooky but tactfully off- screen phantom of Cathy, the film unspools 40 years back to recount the story from its jumping- off point when Cathy's father (Kellaway) brings back a recalcitrant urchin to Wuthering Heights and names him Heathcliff. An infantile knight-in-shinning-armor fairy-tale only exclusively exists on the pair's old haunt, Peniston Crag (a recurring sanctuary they wish they could stay there for eternity, and they will), their puppy love evolves into a forbidden affair when they reach adulthood, but is there any future between a lady and a stable boy? Oscillating between her immanent passion to Heathcliff (Olivier) and an unfading yearning for living in silk-stocking comfort, Cathy (an exotic-looking Oberon) is the one who balks, only if Heathcliff were an exiled prince-in-disguise and could reclaim his fortune and stature, a toxin produced by a girlish flight of fancy, which will later turn into her day-mare after she chooses to live the life of Riley by marrying her urbane suitor Edgar Linton (Niven, plays a thankless second fiddler). Heathcliff, returns years later, with an elevated status expunging the class discrepancy and covertly obtains the property in Wuthering Heights from Cathy's bibulous, debt-ridden and unwitting brother Hindley (a fop-looking Williams), but we are denied an explanation of the provenance of his sudden wealth. So he is back to exact his revenge, after receiving a cold shoulder from Cathy, who is startled by his reappearance and transformation but decides to let bygones be bygones, the rub is that Cathy is contently married, there is no tectonic incentive for her to change the status quo, not even their undying love, this is the final blow to an expectant Heathcliff, because Cathy's love is the only beautiful thing Heathcliff has ever experienced. Needless to say the outcome is internecine, but all players are game, Geraldine Fitzgerald owns her moment in her Oscar-nominated part as Isabella, Edgar's younger sister, poignantly shores up her transition from a pert maiden to a bitter, scorned wife after her epic failure trying to sow the seed of love in the most barren land of a man's heart. Equally Oscar-worthy is Flora Robson's loyal servant Ellen Dean, she is more than just the narrator, also the one who is present through the entirety of the melodrama and affectingly keeps her own counsel with sensibility in lieu of subservience.Although the story goes that they are not on friendly terms during the production, the two leads are well-matched in eliciting a torrential spectacle of emotional outpourings, often in tandem with the silver-clad grandeur of the film's spectacular setting and cinematography. Laurence Olivier receives his first-ever Oscar invitation (who excels in haughtiness and callousness so well so that when the tenderness throbs, his voice has an otherworldly tenor actually works to the advantage of the character) but Merle Oberon is snubbed in a competitive year (she is most astonishing in "I am Heathcliff!" epiphany and the final deathbed recollections, no make-up applied), which could be a good thing, saving her from an awkward rout to Vivien Leigh in a banner year for GONE WITH THE WIND (1939), who has been vying to star side by side with her then lover Olivier but to no avail. More than anything, William Wyler's film adaptation is a thoroughgoing specimen of how to grapple with the trying transposition from hallmark literature to celluloid screen, the knack is a time- honored maxim: you can't have your cake and eat it too, something must be given up, and all you need is an ace scissor-hand who knows how to winnow grist out of the sacrosanct urtexts.

cmattheiss-56431 When I watched this film there was something very unrealistic about the love story. After reading about the life of Emily Bronte who wrote it, then it all starting making sense- how could a slightly under 30 year old woman during the 1800s, who was probably a virgin, know the reality or obstacles of love... she couldn't and wouldn't. Also how could she permit a male character to be so abusive and mean to many around him as Emily most likely had this experience of men during her own upbringing, so she must have felt a soft place for these types of personalities no matter how abusive they might have been (the main male character in Jane Eyre is also somewhat abusive but softens as the story moves forward). Anything sensible about love in this story would have probably been influenced or transferred by Charlotte her elder sister, who did a lot of the editing for the book to be published and then re-published. Charlotte did not marry until much later in life but perhaps had more experiences with other's issues of love to be a bit more practical in her view than her sister Emily. People who find this story terrific would have to be somewhat emotionally immature or fantasy-like in their ideals of love. This is a melodrama and one far from being factual... When Heathcliff marries another woman and treats her like basically dirt, people seem to only admire his character for being this way because his heart bleeds for Cathy, therefore he is forgiven... Heathcliff's character is a sadistic narcissists. And in the end when Cathy is sick on her deathbed because she chose a life of riches and comforts with a man she did not love or wouldn't due to her lingering inextinguishable passion for Heathcliff, people feel sorry for her as well and forgive her for her shortcomings... Cathy is another narcissistic personality (histrionic) who was basically out for her own advancement and threw out her love for Heathcliff because of it to be able to use another man (not much different than prostitution really). Its a wonder why such a novel would be so popular among the mainstream as most people worship narcissistic personalities and give little regard or empathy to the the other characters who were treated poorly or hurt such as Cathy's husband or Heathcliff's wife because they are viewed as less important. I found the story too fantasy-like, not developed in its definition of 'true love' and the main characters too self-absorbed or selfish to really be liked. I was disappointed with this story and felt it was dark and a love story far from being applicable to real life. I found Jane Erye a much better film with a more realistic approach to romance and love, so I thoroughly enjoyed it. The only really positive thing I can say about this film is that the actors are good and the scenery is nice which captures a bit of old England, and the costumes well represent the time period. However, i would not base any ideas about real love coming from this story as it is just too make belief. All the Bronte sisters who wrote lived for years in a fictional world of their own and I would say this story is an example of that fictional world, so I hope people leave it as fiction.

elvircorhodzic The film is based on a pretty strange story. The scenario includes the first part of the story. WUTHERING HEIGHTS is a very serious drama imbued with painful romance and class topics. The atmosphere is extremely dark. I think that is an ambitious stage design pretty successful. About playing the most talked about and probably have "experiences" with sets contributed to the gloomy atmosphere. The film has love, but it is somehow wildly passionate and overlaps with contempt and hatred.Laurence Olivier as Heathcliff was not up to the role. However, his resistance and attitude are the direct perpetrators of his excellent performance. It was dark and ferocious character, described as a demon and ghoul. Olivier's performance is quite convincing. Heathcliff truly loves and exerts wild emotion. I personally was an impressive transition from gentle passion in violent. Hatred in the absence of love is manifested to all.Merle Oberon as Catherine Earnshaw Linton is a restless girl who must choose between wild love and class. She is able to give his heart, but also to break someone else's. It is perhaps a little selfish. She lived with the knowledge that her love depraved, and as such it lacks.Lintons are good characters and victims of tragic destiny. Niven and Fitzgerald are competent in their performances. Flora Robson as Ellen Dean is flawless in a supporting role. The film is an ambitious and ultimately good. The director's in dark atmosphere added elements of psychological horror, foreboding and tension. The tragic climax was inevitable. The plot is a bit slow and very depressed. Definitely gloomy experience.