Heathcliff is shot&killed halfway though the movie&although I liked this version, it disappointed me somewhat because it was so different than the book!
However, the actors played the roles well---Calder-Marshall is beautiful and emotional&Dalton is a convincing Heathcliff!
He's shot and killed? It really irritates me that they make very poor adaptions of novels, and dare to give the original novels name, if they cant stay true to the story!
"Aren't you a little short for a Stormtrooper?"share
I loved this version until the ending was completely silly. It's like they just ran out of time so exploded Heathcliff. And that's the end of that!
But I think, as a movie, this one does pretty well up to that point. I'm still fond of the Ralph Fiennes, 90s one, but it delivers the story like a Power Point Presentation, you know, plot point, after plot point, after plot point, not really elaborating much in the middle.
I like Timothy Dalton's Heathcliff, for the most part. The acting is pretty convincing in this movie, and I like Anna Calder Marshell as Cathy. But, I felt in this version, they really didn't include enough of the sort of, "famous" lines, and the really important parts didn't seem like they had enough attention. I think if we cut the shoddy end off this one, and taped the second half of the 1992 (or whenever) one where the shoddy ending was, we'd have a very good Wuthering Heights!
I'm afraid I have to agree with the first post. They've completely changed the story! Heathcliff is not shot dead in the book, Catherine's child (Cathy Linton) survives and there is never any suggestion that Edgar is not the father. All that rubbish about Edgar 'waiting to see what colour the baby's eyes are' is completely fabricated. In fact the book dwells on how much little Cathy resembles Edgar and how Heathcliff hates her because of this.
The best that can be said for this film is that it was 'inspired by' Wuthering Heights or 'based on characters from' Wuthering Heights. The film is pretty good as a standalone piece.
"He murders his wife every night. Other than that, I think he's pretty harmless."
I agree that the ending in this film is silly and differs too much from the book. It's frustrating, because otherwise, the film and casting is perfect (that is, until the foolish end). But oh my, how Timothy Dalton was made for being Heatcliff. He looks in every way like him, and acts the charachter so well I fall in love with him. The film has in every way captured the devilish intensity of the book, by far the 1939version and the one with Ralph Fiennes and Juliette Binoche. This is why I prefer this version, the other ones seem lame, and it's the intesity and the fiercful feelings, that creates the whole story. And the actors here are fantastic.
share[deleted]
There are so many film versions of Wuthering Heights that I find it interesting that this one plays on a "What if...?" theme.
Except if they were going to skate on thin ice by changing the story, I do think they might as well have danced, and taken the "what if's" a bit further by exploring what else might have happened if events panned out differently.
~No practical definition of freedom would be complete without the freedom to take the consequences~
Granted, this version is different than the novel in some respects. However, you're overstating your case with "halfway"... Heathcliffe is shot and killed in the penultimate scene. That is, about 60 seconds from the end. That said, I also disliked the killing of Heathcliff but for another reason.
Up until that point I thought that this way of telling the story was a screenwriter's conceit and fully expected to see Mr. Lockwood turn up at the end revealing this whole movie to be a prequal to the novel. The shooting quickly dispelled THAT idea.
To me the greatest deviation from the original was the suggestion that Heathcliff was really the illegitimate son of Earnshaw Senior. That made several aspects of the original novel more understandable to me. And it's just the kind of thing Ms. Bronte may have wanted to write but feared would not be accepted at the time. The father's reason for bringing the child home. His seeming preference for Heathcliff over Hindley. Also, Hindley's initial antipathy was better motivated this way. The similarities in temperment between Catherine and Heathcliff could also be better explained. They were both their father's kids while Hindley may have favored the mother.
This speculation also made the relationship between Heathcliff and Cathy even more doomed.
I was however disappointed to see that Hareton was also done away with. To me that character has always represented some hope that things may return to normal.
To me the greatest deviation from the original was the suggestion that Heathcliff was really the illegitimate son of Earnshaw Senior. That made several aspects of the original novel more understandable to me. And it's just the kind of thing Ms. Bronte may have wanted to write but feared would not be accepted at the time. The father's reason for bringing the child home. His seeming preference for Heathcliff over Hindley. Also, Hindley's initial antipathy was better motivated this way. The similarities in temperment between Catherine and Heathcliff could also be better explained. They were both their father's kids while Hindley may have favored the mother.
This speculation also made the relationship between Heathcliff and Cathy even more doomed.
I think only one version, (and I think it is the one with Ralph Fiennes-comepletely ridiculous as Heathcliff by the way- he is far too cold in manner and lacks the passion, physical resemblance, and stature to the character in the novel) that starts more or less (the opening shows Emily Bronte walking the wild moors before she settles in to write the novel) with the framing story of Lockwood. The story of Cathy and Heathcliff in the novel is told to Lockwood in retrospect (I think by as much as 20 years or more) by Nelly Dean. As far as being faithful to the original characters, I think Timothy Dalton and Anna Calder-Marshall are about as good as it gets. They embody the savagery and passion of their characters' mutual obsession with each other, Cathy's and Heathcliff's self-centeredness, and lack of empathy for anyone but each other. Marshall also displays Cathy's ability to bewitch; there is a slight hint of evil in her eyes, especially at the end when she lures Heathcliff to his death (this is not true to the book).
Loved Ian Ogilvy as Edgar Linton as well.
I saw Heathcliff as the ideal lover when I first read this book as a girl. I have since come to view him as an obsessed stalker who certainly would have abused Cathy in time, had he been able to marry her as he did her sister-in-law, Isabella Linton.
I must disagree, I think Calder-Marshall had the emotional depth of a saucer.
share[deleted]