Les hauts de Hurlevent

One of the finest romantic films ever filmed, this 1939 Samuel Goldwyn production rates with many - including myself - as being the most beloved version of Emily Bronte's haunting novel. Although it stops at chapter seventeen and the ending is seen as a bit trite by some, it's a brilliantly enacted, finely mounted production with beautiful photography and authentic period detail set-wise. Merle Oberon is well-cast as the selfish, vain and rather shallow Cathy. What makes her character so intriguing and interesting is that no matter what happens to her materially, she has an undying love for the gypsy-blooded heathen named Heathcliff. Laurence Olivier, never a great success in films prior to this, gives a brutally honest account of everything Bronte's Heathcliff should be: proud, bold, vengeful & darkly brooding -a tortured soul in general. Wyler's guiding hand is patent throughout: it was Olivier himself who gave credit to the meticulous director in teaching him the particular ropes of screen acting: it shows! Lady-like Isabella is well-played by the Irish Geraldine Page, while Ellen, the long-suffering servant is played sympathetically by the fine character actress Flora Robson. David Niven, ideally cast as the milquetoasty Edgar Linton, actually had a clause in his contract which freed him from having to do crying scenes! A timeless masterpiece of the "haunting" love story genre, this was Goldwyn's personal favourite of all his films.

"Wuthering Heights", based on the novel by Emily Bronte, gets a first rate treatment from its director, the genial William Wyler. The adaptation was done by Charles McArthur and Ben Hecht, two of the best writers working in the Hollywood of that era. The great cinematography by Gregg Toland makes it visually stunning. Alfred Newman's music score plays in the background, making this film a classic that will be cherished by movie lovers.

Some comments to this forum express their displeasure in the adaptation one sees on the screen. Most people forget what a task it must have been to get the essence of the Bronte novel in a cinematic form, something the adapters did with elegance and charm.

The cast that was assembled for "Wuthering Heights" is a dream come true. Presenting the young Merle Oberon in all her beauty makes one almost fall instantly in love with her. Ms. Oberon had a fantastic presence, which translated in probably her best work in films.

The dashingly handsome Laurence Olivier as Heathcliff, creates the right chemistry against Ms. Oberon's Cathy. Mr. Olivier was at the pinnacle of his career. He responds well to Mr. Wyler's direction. His Heathcliff shows a mean streak, but over all, Olivier gives an impressive performance.

David Niven is excellent as Edgar Linton, the man who wins Cathy's heart with his kindness. Flora Robson does also an outstanding job as Ellen, the housekeeper, who serves as the narrator. The young and beautiful Geraldine Fitzgerald makes a brilliant Isabella.

The rest of the players are equally wonderful, Donald Crisp, Hugh Willimas, Leo G. Carroll, Cecil Kellaway, made contributions to the movie.

Ultimately, this film is a love story doomed from the beginning. This tale of the passion between the lovers in the moors is a perfect way to lose oneself in the magic of the movies.

SPOILERS Out of the cinematic versions of Emily Bronte's incredible tale, this 1939 version is one of the furthest from it. However, as a piece of cinematic art, it is the finest, a shining example of Hollywood craftmanship made at a time when so many classic movies were being churned out. Producer Sam Goldwyn said it was the best movie he ever made. It's certainly director William Wyler's best film, and that includes Ben Hur. While Bronte's novel is a lot more than just a love story, this almost reduces it to being just a love story. Never mind, because as a love story, this film works wonderfully. Like almost all great love stories, it's gloriously romantic, emotionally intense and ultimately incredibly moving.

The controversial decision to miss out almost the entire second half of the book allowed the filmmakers to concentrate on the Heathcliff/Cathy love story, and Laurence Olivier and Merle Oberon both have incredible chemistry and strengh in their performances. No, they are not Bronte's characters, especially the film's version of Heathcliff, who here is FAR too nice, but are definitely one of the greatest of Hollywood's cinematic couples. This is especially notable in the scenes set on the moors, where we are definitely in that Olde Hollywood romantic never never land where the music soars and passion had to be, and was, encapsulated in a kiss. Olivier is impressive delivering some of Bronte's lines, of which there are a surprising amount, and the film does follow the book's plot very closely, it just tones down the darkness.

There are many superbly done sequences- the incredibly atmospheric opening where a traveller arrives at Heathcliff's house, all the scenes on the moors, Cathy's speech to Nelly "I AM Heathcliff", and of course, more than any other scene, the death of Cathy. As Heathcliff takes the dying Cathy to the window to see the moors once more and she finally dies virtually standing up, all the while while Alfred Newman's love theme plays and plays. This is one of the moving and also one of the most beautiful and artistic deaths in Hollywood history, all the more powerful for actually being comparatively understated by Hollywood standards of the time. Only those who had read the book or knew of the missing second half would know there was more in the story to come, in the context of the film the tale seems complete. Some don't like the final scene of Heathcliff and Cathy's ghosts wondering in the snow, but it is actually closer to the book's actual ending than most seem to admit. It's also one of the best tearjerkers ever, period.

Most people read the book and are than disappointed when they see this. It's therefore best to see this first, and to appreciate it as one of the great Hollywood love stories, before THAN reading the book. Yes, the book is still better, but than most books are.

Being a classic film buff, I had the chance of being introduced to this film by chance one late evening when it was being aired on TCM. I fell in love with the movie, and when I was told that it would be required reading over the summer, I was ridiculously happy. As many have noted, the 1939 adaptation of "Wuthering Heights" is, more or less, merely the first volume of Emily Bronte's beautifully and powerfully written classic -- focusing less on the detail of Heathcliff's wrath post Cathy's death, but moreso on the sheer complexity of Heathcliff and Cathy's relationship (the scenes at Penniston Crag of them among the moors and heather are not in the book because Bronte had to stick to Ellen's point of view -- it was nice that we could finally have an in-depth look at the tumultuous relationship between Cathy and Heathcliff). While characters are omitted (Frances, Hareton, Linton and the baby Catherine), it still retains much of the very nature of the novel. (If you will recall, many parts of "Gone With The Wind" were changed and characters removed in the process of transferring Margaret Mitchell's masterpiece into a screen epic. After all, this is Hollywood.)

The cinematography is divine (very much worth its Oscar), perfectly capturing the very essence of the bleak, chilling, haunting Yorkshire Moors that Bronte described in her book. Laurence Olivier is, in my opinion, a very fine Heathcliff. Indeed, in the book his nature is more animalistic and devilish, but Olivier superbly exhibits what Heathcliff is all about -- dark, brooding, and terribly bitter. Even at our first introduction to him, we know by the tone of his voice that something is very, very wrong with this man and that something is very, very off in that household. Olivier expresses Heathcliff's wildness and devilishness through his voice, stance and through his facial gestures, rather than so much in other physical ways. Merle Oberon is remarkable as Cathy -- a much more dark and exoctic beauty than Isabella whose good looks are very wholesome and pure (perhaps to match the darkness of the gypsy stable-boy Heathcliff), and capturing the duality of personality that is Catherine Earnshaw -- part of her wanting to love a wild, evil, wicked stable boy... the other part longing to be part of a higher society. Particularly coming to mind is her scene in the kitchen with Ellen and that marvelously disturbing death scene -- her eyes wild. (I do wish they would have left in the part of the book where she refuses to eat and begins hallucinating -- Oberon could have performed it so well.) Also to be noted are the stunning performances of David Niven and Gerladine Fitzgerald as the long-suffering Edgar and Isabella Linton (respectively), their lives made miserable by Cathy's selfishness, vanity and greed to be part of a higher way of living, and by Heathcliff's undying love for Catherine and his course of revenge and destruction. Flora Robson is also wonderful as Ellen Dean, narrator of the whole sordid story.

Someone mentioned that this film (by focusing on the love story and by the ending, I suppose) tried to say that Heathcliff and Catherine were perfect for each other and could have, eventually, found true love. I disagree, wholeheartedly. I believe what director William Wyler was trying to say here was that Heathcliff and Catherine were not good people. Cathy was right when she said that she and Heathcliff's souls were made of the same basic fiber -- they were both greedy and selfish (he wanted her passion for him to be as deep as his passion for her and she wanted and if he couldn't have it, no one else deserved to have it, and God forbid those around him feel any kind of love, compassion or humanity; and she didn't even really know what she wanted, except to be part of the upper crust and to rise above what she had lived through when Hindley became master of their house) and because of that, their love could have never meant anything BUT tragedy. They could never have found happiness together because they were not happy people. But they could find love in death -- because in death, they could be what they really were all along -- children; mere children forced to grow up all too quickly with the death of the man who cared deeply for them, thus forcing Hindley to become head of the household. There would be no Hindley in death. And as children they were good together -- as children, Cathy, wicked as she was at times as a youngster, could restore hopes of prosperity to Heathcliff's dark, bitter soul. They were, as children, more or less all one another had. And so they could go on, as children, without a care, happily picking heather and being King and Queen on the moors.

You've GOT to see this movie.

Great literature enriches the soul. The Brontes created great literature because they invented so much of what it means. They invented ways of observing the soul that hadn't already been mined by Shakespeare. If you want a great film that celebrates, explores, exploits Bronte, you can't escape the reality that you'd have to stretch film the same way Charlotte stretched perspective.

Didn't happen here. Olivier seemed good enough at what he knew (stage acting) but that isn't bendable to great experiences in film. Never was.

But you might want to watch this for another reason. The dialog and acting are ordinarily conceived. But the cinematography is extraordinary, from the very special Greg Toland. Greg DID stretch cinema in the way we mentioned. His greys have depth. When he photographs the heath, we feel the atmosphere as if the mist had emotion.

The interiors of the house are magnificent in design. And Toland's lighting and framing are so haunting.

This film is why Orson Welles wanted him on "Citizen Kane." You need to watch it to see where much of the disembodied ghost-observer comes from. With Toland, Cathy defines what we see and how.

But the actual story? Go read it instead.

Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.