Better than I remembered *possible spoiler*
I first saw this version of Rebecca 6 or 7 years ago. I've always passionately loved the 1940 film so--rather like Mrs. Danvers--I found the successor utterly unworthy. Having just watched it again, though, I found I enjoyed it a good deal more than before. The fact that it is nearly three hours (a 2-part miniseries on TV) allows it to incorporate more detail from the novel without the telescoping that the two-hour film necessitates. It can linger a bit more, for example, on the beauties of Monte Carlo. We also see in more detail how the important friendship develops between the new Mrs. de Winter and Frank Crawley. I also hadn't particularly noticed the evocative and beautiful score the first time I watched (strangely enough, since I am a musician) and was quite bewitched by it this time.
As for the cast, I remember having found Charles Dance curiously inert on my first viewing (especially remembering with pleasure his performance in The Jewel in the Crown). This time, however, I read it as typical English aristocratic reserve and was impressed by how his passion begins to show little by little as the story progresses. It made me less bothered by his being about a decade too old for the character. (Of course, Laurence Olivier in 1940 was about a decade too young!) I still slightly prefer Joan Fontaine to Emilia Fox as "The Girl/the new Mrs. de Winter" but I now think it's simply personal preference. Both are very good. The only truly bad casting choice is Faye Dunaway as Mrs. van Hopper. I am a Dunaway fan, to be sure, but she is simply wrong for this role. Mrs. van Hopper is supposed to be fat and generally physically repulsive, thoroughly provincial while she supposes she's worldly, and soon to be beyond middle-aged. In short, an obnoxious, insensitive snob without a single redeeming feature. Dunaway is still too young and glamorous to be convincing as this gorgon, and at times I wonder if she is, consciously or not, trying to make Mrs. van Hopper less obnoxious (in Hollywood talk, "give her more complexity"). The casting of this role in the 1940 film (sorry, can't recall the actress's name) was absolutely pitch-perfect.
But the glory of the 1997 version (besides the breathtaking locations) is the performance of Diana Rigg as Mrs. Danvers. Judith Anderson's 1940 portrayal is simply legendary and Rigg was wise not to imitate it. Each actress in her own fashion establishes a sense of quiet but menacing authority from her first appearance and this grows little by little over the course of the story. Thanks to the 3-hour timespan, Rigg is allowed a little more subtlety in developing the character, and more emphasis is placed on her advancing years and physical unattractiveness. This is helped by some truly creepy, shadowy lighting from time to time (though some might see this as less than subtle). In the 1997 version her would-be suicide--lying on the great bed, embracing Rebecca's lingerie as the bedroom burns around her--is both moving and appalling.
In sum, I still find the 1940 film the more compelling, but I've now come to see the 1997 miniseries as a worthy successor. Now if I can just get hold of the 1979 TV adaptation which some claim to be the best of all. I welcome all comments.
"Tell you what . . . the truth is . . . sometimes I miss you so much I can hardly stand it." --Jack Twist