Terrible! - Wuthering Heights (1992) Discussion

[–] Feanariel 17 years ago

I would not go as far as calling it terrible, but I do think it was a disappointing adaptation. The script wasn't very good, and I think Ralph Fiennes (whom I consider a good actor) was miscast as Heathcliff.

I agree that Jeremy Northam was the brightest point of this film.

-------
I'm a part-time genius. Today happens to be my day off...

reply

[–] snowbum780 17 years ago

I agree!!
It fell so short of the intensity and emotion of the novel, it's hardly worth watching.
It was poorly done, poorly acted, and poorly cast. And using the same actress for both Cathys was ridiculous! So obvious and stupid!

It lacked the dark and over dramatic scenes that made the book so powerful.

"When you mix up the letters for funeral you get 'real fun'! How much do you love that?" Billy, SFU

reply

[–] chillout_miss 16 years ago

definitly, it was too hollywoodised, and whyyyy juillet binoche, her changing accent made me cringe so much.
you cannot make a film about wuthering heights you can never capyure all its levels.
Match in the gas tank BOOM BOOM!!!

reply

[–] scn657 15 years ago

The film was utterly miscast - without that it would have been much better. Ralph Fiennes is a really good actor who had clearly read the book and was acting Heathcliff actually as he was written, i.e. as a very unattractive character - but that doesn't mean he wasn't miscast.

reply

[–] jannag 16 years ago

When I saw this movie for the first time I had really strong emotional experience. It was too short to capture all novel and develop all characters properly. But in fact it has all strong moments and dramatic scenses of the book there.Heathcliff's pain and cruelty was performed perfectly to me. Also atmosphere and country was captured emotionlally and music is stunning. So I really don't understand how someone can call it poor done or terrible and not at all that it was missing darkness of the book. I am not going to argue, everybody has right for opinion. Here is mine.

reply

[–] Montmartre1 16 years ago

I loved it.
I live in Yorkshire and have visited the Bronte home and the Yorkshire Moors nearby and found the film handsomely done.
It captured the spirit of the novel and the tragic characters.
The acting was superb and the music haunting.
Cheap? I don't agree.

reply

[–] TAMizabeth 16 years ago

I love it too. They're great together. The intensity is what makes it.

"You're maudling and full of self-pity. You're magnificent."
- Addison DeWitt in 'All About Eve'

reply

[–] Montmartre1 16 years ago

yay! so glad you liked it.
I think it's one of the best books ever written.
of course it is tragic--but great nevertheless.

reply

[–] TAMizabeth 16 years ago

The fact that it was written by a woman who lived in the middle of nowhere with little experience of the world outside of the countryside - how did she come up with that story and those characters?

The original film is good - but there's something about Ralph Fiennes that screams Heathcliff - his facial expressions, his tone - He is cold, cruel and unrelenting as the book writes. This makes the contrast of his passion for Catherine and his loss of her so powerful it tears me apart to watch.

"You're maudling and full of self-pity. You're magnificent."
- Addison DeWitt in 'All About Eve'

reply

[–] Montmartre1 16 years ago

you are so right. I agree completely.
I know! I went to the Bronte parsonage--don't live that far--about 30 miles or so and the house is small really.
the bedrooms (if I remember correctly) were tiny by our standards and they faced the Church graveyard.
the village is right near the moors and in Emily's day it was more or less on the moors.
when the weather is stormy (most of the time)! it is bleak and dismal.
she probably was so moved from the moodiness that this fantastic story came out.
it was writing from a tortured soul really, it had to be!
plus they were genuiuses at writing.
yes, growing up with a stern Father and no Mom (she died young)--an aunt--a narrow, narrow world and wow what writing.
did you know there were two older sisters? they both died in childhood, the one called Maria wrote at like eight years old!
the other elder sister attended an horrendous school and died from the treatment there really, anyway, in Jane Eyre the character who dies--Jane's friend at school (can't remember the name) is based on that elder sister!
pleasure to discuss this with you btw!

reply

[–] TAMizabeth 16 years ago

I've never visited 'Bronte Country' as they call it, but have always wanted to, I will eventually. Thanks for all that background info, now I can sound more informed in conversation if it ever comes up!
Living opposite a graveyard - hmm, I would say that might torture the soul!!!
Good discussion!

"You're maudling and full of self-pity. You're magnificent."
- Addison DeWitt in 'All About Eve'

reply

[–] Montmartre1 16 years ago

it's a pleasure!
perhaps one you will visit it, you'll never, ever forget it if you do!
my husband and i took a walk on the moors and there are places that the Bronte sisters held dear. even a stone "chair" that Charlotte often sat on near a stream.
here's a link you might find interesting.
there is a place called Top Withens with ruins there--and ruins in Emily's time that some think was her inspiration for the story.
I've been there and it's fascinating. they were tough women, believe me, because the walk (and they did it all the time) is excrutiating!
as a matter of fact, they would have walked from the parsonage (through the village) over TO the moors--me, I got out of a car parked AT the moors!
lovely discussing this with you!

reply

[–] TAMizabeth 16 years ago

How cool - I can imagine becoming consumed by the atmosphere which is something I would love to experience. While I think about it - the musical score for this Wuthering Heights version is beautifully haunting. My god I don't know how fans of the story couldn't love it!!!
Thanks for all the info!

"You're maudling and full of self-pity. You're magnificent."
- Addison DeWitt in 'All About Eve'

reply

[–] Montmartre1 16 years ago

so welcome!
the music is fab, and you know what? I have the DVD--and I'm going to watch it later and just drift off in a darkly romantic mood.
Nearly forgot (stupid) I have it!
take care, it's been a pleasure! truly!

reply

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Hemiola_78 15 years ago

I cringe when people obsessively compare a book with a screen adaptation.
Why?! Because I'm one on of those who think a film is (or at least should be) an artistic statement in its own right, not an appendix to a novel or a promotional video clip.
Consequently I don't care if Emily Bronte's Heathcliff is 100% Ralph Fiennes's Heathcliff, any more than I care if Mario Puzo's Vito Corleone is better than Brando's. I sit, I watch, and if I'm thrilled that's what I take home with me, not comparisons. I actually found THIS Heathcliff intense, dark, obsessive and haunting and - as somebody who experienced once a great love turned into hate - quite identify myself with him up to a certain point.

On a funny side note, no two visions of Heathcliff seem to be identical, although people (obviously) have read the same book. Who can say for certain what Emily Bronte's vision was, and what she would have though of Ralph's performance?

You all those great anonymous intellectuals [cough, cough], stop dismissing other people's work!

reply

[–] kraisins-1 14 years ago

Interesting prose. If I understand you correctly, you dislike this film because you dislike adaptations of books in general.

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] zetuh_tsd 14 years ago

I totaly agree with you bsglstlvr.
I could not feel that the actors realy lived through their characters. And there are some wierd changings of scenes-the ones regarding moving in/out of the castles.
And that Hitchcliff was awful.
That book needs a high class movie.
I'll like to see Jhonny Depp (remember the barber?) or Banderas(i can remember him in Original Sin when he puts so much force and passion in a phrase: "Whore! Liar! Thief! Don't you see? Don't you see that I cannot breath without you? I cannot live without you? Don't you see that? Don't you see how much I love you?") as for Cathy-a native british actress is a must have.

PS: sorry for my english is not language.

reply

[–] Noirdame79 14 years ago

I wouldn't call this film terrible, but I think it was disappointing in some respects (more so than in the other adaptations I've seen) and I think it's overrated. Ralph Fiennes did a more than capable job as Heathcliff, but he didn't have the dark, brooding gypsy quality. One film reviewer described him as being "too refined" for the role - and I agree. Fiennes himself seems to dislike this production and found filming it to be a very unpleasant experience.
Juliette Binoche just didn't come across as a Yorkshire lass. I do think she made an interesting Cathy nonetheless, despite the lingering French accent. Having her portray the younger Catherine was a huge mistake - was it done for budget reasons? She's supposed to resemble her father Edgar, not her mother. Binoche seems to have played both roles the same way. I just couldn't connect with the characters (I am in agreement that Jeremy Northam should have played Heathcliff rather than Hindley, he certainly is closer to the phyiscal description of the former). As the adult Hindley is too briefly seen, the only other person I found myself interested in was Hareton. Having said that, I've seen the role played better.

I know there was a big to-do over this being the first theatrical version of WH to include the second generation and pretty much cover the whole novel (not entirely as that would be impossible), but it really moved too fast for its own good. It should have been presented as more of an epic for those reasons (since when WH is produced for TV, it is often presented as a miniseries, giving the story the chance to include more detail and establish the plot).

The locations, costume and music score were very good, and having Sinead O'Connor introduce the film as Emily Bronte was an interesting choice. But I have to say, off all the adaptations I've seen so far, this one is the least effective one for me.

reply

[–] juniperjoline 10 years ago

Totally agree! The movie was laughably bad. It was stagey and stylized--was this a choice made on purpose? It looked extremely low budget, everyone in bad makeup and looking like the cover of a Harlequin romance. Juliette Binoche plays both Cathy and her daughter, just changing her hair color. The pacing was all wrong; it rushed straight through the first part, where Cathy and Heathcliff are children together and share a bond, and suddenly the actors are 35 years old when they're supposed to be adolescents. The characterization of Cathy was ridiculous--she is not "a wild slip of a girl" but an angelic woman. There were a few strong scenes by Binoche and Fiennes, but every line was delivered in the exact same husky whisper. The funniest part of the movie is when young Cathy asks, "Am I like my mother?" and Nelly replies, "I see more of her in Hareton." They use the exact same actress but we are supposed to think they don't look alike! We had to stop it; I couldn't stand watching it all the way through. Watch the Olivier version, not this one!

reply

[–] jingizu_z 10 years ago

You said: "...The characterization of Cathy was ridiculous--she is not "a wild slip of a girl" but an angelic woman".

Huh? Have you ever read the book? Cathy was selfish, spoiled and spiteful. She and Heathcliff deserved each other.

Catherine didn't ask if she LOOKED like her mother, but whether she was like her in personality etc.

IMO, this is the best adaptation so far.

reply

[–] umiryuzaki26 10 years ago

Having not read the book, I thought the film was pretty good in it's own merit. Sure, having Juliette Binoche play both Cathy and Catherine made no sense at all (moreso as Heathcliff barely notices it, what was even the point?), but her and Ralph Fiennes (damn, did I hate Heathcliff so much it still bothers me seeing the poor guy in other roles) performances were outstanding. I recently saw the 2011 BBC adaptation and, while Kaya Scodelario portrayal of Cathy may be truer to the book, she (and the actress who played her as a teen) left me cold. Whether you love her or hate her, Juliette Binoche's Cathy gets under your skin and IS one of the driving forces of the history, not just a glorified witness. I just feel the general acting in this movie was more raw and desperate. It helped set the mood, and the hauntingly beautiful score did the rest.

*shrugs*

reply

[–] Falconeer 8 years ago

Absolutely agree; this version is pathetic. It is lauded as the first filmed version to present the "entire book," as previous versions seemed to ignore the novel's second half. So what do they do? They chop out the first portion instead. Yes, Catherine and Heathcliff are children for exactly 6 minutes! By the time they are peeking in through the windows of Thrushcross Grange, they are fully grown adults. Apparently the idiots that filmed this cinematic miscarriage didn't realize the importance of Catherine and Heathcliff's childhood on the Moors; you know...where they GREW UP TOGETHER? So you are watching a little girl and a boy with light brown hair and chalk white skin (Heathcliff) and then you blink your eyes and viola! You have Juliette Binoche and Ralph Fiennes, who were both absolutely horrendous in their roles. The very idea that they would cast two HUGE movie stars to play these two iconic figures is just offensive and sickening. As a longtime fan of the Bronte classic, this film infuriated and depressed me, with it's tacky Hollywood approach. No, this film is vile and never should have seen the light of day. Thankfully we have the British version with Tom Hardy to look to if we want to see the story told right. And to anyone who thinks THIS movie is an acceptable adaptation of the book; you either haven't read the novel, or you simply have no soul...or taste, for that matter.

Fabio Testi is God

reply