Rebeca

With such a great cast, I expected this to be a better movie. I don't know if it was a poor screenplay or muddy direction but the film felt hectic, choppy and melodramatic. I'm sorry to say I haven't read the novel by Daphne du Maurier, which has been such a perennial favourite that it has never been out of print, and, the Hitchcock version of the book won an Oscar in 1940. So, I'm going to hazard a guess it is not the source matter. It's too bad to have wasted the talents of Lily James, Armie Hammer and Kristin Scott Thomas (and a small role for Keeley Hawes). I give this film a 5 (off) out of 10. {Mystery}

The book by Daphne Du Maurier is amazing and a favourite, a masterpiece of suspenseful atmosphere and psychological depth. There are three versions of 'Rebecca' prior to this latest one from 2020, the best known one justifiably being the Alfred Hitchcock directed film. While the 70s adaptation with Jeremy Brett is the best version as an adaptation, Hitchcock's is my personal favourite. Even with inevitable changes to suit the code, it is superbly made, acted (Judith Anderson is unforgettable) and directed, true in spirit to the book's atmosphere.

Unfortunately, this version is inferior in nearly all those aspects. It does have its good things, but of all the four versions of 'Rebecca' it is easily the worst for me. Being the only one to not work, the other three are excellent and more. Visually and stylistically, this 'Rebecca' is mostly very successful. When it comes to the substance however, this film adaptation and standalone wise is a failure. Actually don't think one needs to have seen any of the previous versions or read the book to see how badly flawed the film is, a friend of mine also saw it with no prior knowledge of the source material or previous adaptations and disliked it too, highlighting the lack of atmosphere, shallow characterisation, erratic pacing, messy final act and Armie Hammer as particular flaws.

'Rebecca' (2020) has good things. It does look gorgeous, though in my mind the film would have benefitted from a darker look either in a Gothic or noir-ish sense. The film is exquisitely photographed and the settings have beauty and vivid atmosphere, especially in Monte Carlo. Apart from the yellow suit, the costumes are nice and Manderlay is a beautiful and atmospheric house if not quite the character of its own kind that the previous three adaptations achieved. Clint Mansell's score has parts where it is ominous and stirs the emotions.

Didn't care for the performances on the whole, but Kristin Scott Thomas is very good indeed as Mrs Danvers and there is a formidable quality that makes her very memorable. Sam Reilly's Favell is deceptively friendly but suitably manipulative, though could have afforded to have been more caddish.

However, Lily James and Hammer didn't do it for me in their roles. Actually like James as an actress, ever since her charming 'Cinderella', but she lacks the plain mousiness that is needed for the 2nd Mrs De Winter and comes over as too neurotic in her more haunted moments. Hammer is also too young (especially considering that there is meant to be a big age difference, without it the story dynamic doesn't work) and too handsome, personality wise he is like a bland uncharismatic cipher as well as jerk-ish even when Maxim's character writing darkens. The lack of chemistry between the two really hurts the film and too lukewarm romantic comedy-like instead of the conflicted one it ought to be. The characters are stripped of their complexity and become one-dimensional, the most interesting is Mrs Danvers easily but that is down to Thomas mainly.

Furthermore, the script could have flowed more and is too mundane with no spark. Some of it was awkward too. The direction is too constrained and tends to be pedestrian in the first half and then out of control and too reliant on a horror vibe in the second. The story is completely lacking in suspense and the omnipresent spookiness just isn't there, with the psychology of the characters being too muted. Likewise with the more mysterious elements in the story. The pacing is a mess too, it takes too long to get going and is too deliberate in the first half and then the final act especially becomes very rushed and jumpy. This part of the film is also far too melodramatic, the tone shift is not just completely uneasy and jarring but the second half feels like a different film altogether and in a schlocky horror way, not in a suspensefully psychological way. The ending is very tacked on and did reek of studio interference or of the writers not being sure how to end the film.

In summary, liked the style but the substance underwhelms. Very disappointing. 4/10.

How can something, so beautiful, so twisted and so disturbing, be so boring?

If you watched the original version of this film before watching this remake you will definitely prefer the old version directed by Alfred Hitchcock.

I won't complain about the lovely costumes and scenery, the gawkable high-end interiors or the attractive cast. Lily James' costumes are to die for, even the demure little blouses and tweed skirts she wears when she returns to Manderly with her dashing husband Maxim. If anything, the actors are TOO pretty, especially Armie Hammer. Yes, James' bobbed blonde hair is glaringly fake against her brown eyes and crisp dark eyebrows (seriously, WHY do they always make her a blond?), but at least the style is period appropriate and highlights her sensible wardrobe and English Rose prettiness. But Hammer's towering, hunky frame, chiseled face and big baby blues make him look more like a GQ model in a Ralph Lauren ad than a 1930s English Posho. His accent is passable, as is his acting. He and James both give perfectly good, if not masterful, performances. They have chemistry and I rooted for their marriage to make it. They make a nice couple. The problem is, they're in the wrong movie.

"Rebecca" is supposed to be a Gothic thriller, not a romantic adventure. Which is not to say it can't have a love story embedded in it. "Jane Eyre" is a love story, but Rochester is a genuinely dark character, and real danger looms (literally) above the heroine's head. Here, the second Mrs. De Winter allows herself to be cowed by Kristen Scott Thomas's (excellent) Mrs. Danvers, who, while disdainful, icy and manipulative, does not seem mentally unhinged enough to be truly terrifying. Even the house itself is just a large, old manor house full of portraits and servants standing at attention....remarkable to a young woman from a humbler background, but not to anyone who has watched other English period pieces. James' character is a fish out of water. Intimidated by her surroundings, especially the wing/rooms that belonged to her predecessor, yes. Unnerved by her husband's uncommunicative moodiness and sleepwalking, yes. But haunted? Driven to near madness? I'm not convinced.

The sinister sexual undercurrents of Hitchcock's version are also missing. They really only rear their heads when the talk and action turn to horses (sorry!). It seems that whereas Mrs. DW2 doesn't even know how to ride., the aristocrat Rebecca, as Mrs. D tells her in racy detail, could break any stallion. Ahem. So when Rebecca's dissolute Toff of a cousin (Sam Riley, very good) shows up and sweeps the young bride up onto a horse in front of him for an impromptu lesson, squeezing her thigh and tossing off comments like "just move with me" and "you'll be sore tonight" with (almost) comic creepiness, I was kind of delighted at the diversion. She almost seems more scared here than at any other time, and I don't blame her. Honestly, I think Riley would have been better cast as Maxim. Hammer's version is just too darned wholesome.

And speaking of shifts! (Again, sorry). About 3/4 of the way through the movie, there is a massive Info Dump and the train suddenly switches tracks, lurches off in another direction entirely and goes in and out of a few shadowy tunnels before almost unceremoniously dumping the viewer out at its destination, where I at least was left blinking in the sun. Twists and turns in a mystery are a good thing, and of course the end is supposed to be a surprise. But here, the characters turn on a dime. All at once she, at least, is almost a different person, their relationship transformed. She puts on a (gorgeous) tweed suit and does a whole Nancy-Drew-Goes-Noir bit for about five minutes, revelations come fast and furious, and......here we are! Wait, what? Where? The end, tacked on from the original, is satisfying in a way, but also random.

The movie is engaging and beautiful. No one embarrasses himself or herself. If you like the book, like period pieces and mysteries and lovely things, then watch it. But don't expect to be on the edge of your seat. This isn't one for the ages.