Les Hauts de Hurlevent

Out of the four versions of Wuthering Heights available on DVD {1939, 1971 and 1992 being the others}, this is the closest to the book. It's far from being a perfect adaptation, the definitive version is still to come. Of course the 1939 version is artistically far superior to any of the others, but it's the least faithful adaptation. Both this version and the 1971 version stopped virtually half way through the story. The 1993 one did attempt to tell the whole story, but was somewhat stuffy and lacking in the intense emotion required. This TV movie, shown in two parts, is far more successful in telling the whole story, and certainly does not lack for emotion.

There are a few changes {maybe one day we will be able to see Heathcliff and Cathy first meet the Lintons as children rather than adults} and the first part of the story is rushed. There is the odd unnecessary touch, such as seeing Heathcliff semi-rape his wife. Generally,though,it's pretty faithful, does most of the great scenes in the book well and even adds a few details from the book that were not in the other mentioned versions at at all, such as Heathcliff tying up Isabelle's dog, or Heathcliff throwing a knife at her. Orla Brady is as close to the Cathy from the book as one can get, and while Robert Cavanagh is visually not an ideal Heathcliff, he really shows the evil of the character like few others.

Despite all this, this modestly produced version still manages to have a great deal of the required emotion, and despite Heathcliff's nastiness the filmmakers still manage to make one almost feel his pain and torment. The ending is beautifully done, aided by some very John Barry-like music.

It's not the perfect adaptation, but it will certainly do. However, a message for the next person to film Wuthering Heights- make it a lot LONGER!

This is the most accurate version of "Wuthering Heights" I have ever seen. More people have seen the 1939 version with Laurence Olivier, but this one has its own appeal: it sticks to the story. The movie itself was sometimes painful to watch, but it's a painful story, and I still couldn't turn away. Robert Cavanaugh made a perfect Heathcliff; he was loathsome, but you also took pity on him. Orla Brady was lovely as the torn heroine (if you can call her a heroine). As a side note, the music was beautiful! It made me want to cry. I would definitely recommend seeing this film, especially if you are a Brontë fan. You won't be disappointed!

I find that this 1998 Masterpiece theater TV version follows the novel of the same name pretty faithfully. One who has never read the novel may find the action moving too quickly, so that the flow of the movie may seem slightly abrupt or choppy. However, the movie is only 2 hours long, which is probably why they had to cut out parts of the book and take some liberties with ages and certain details. That does not detract too much from the enjoyment of this movie, which despite its choppiness, has excellent acting, beautiful cinematography (the landscapes are breathtaking), and a wonderfully wrought out, bitter plot which focuses on three generations of two families who are intimately interlocked with each other. Heathcliff definitely comes off as the cruel, embittered man he is in the book, and it's great to see a TV movie capture the personalities of all the characters so well. Highly recommended movie.

Unjustly slated on its original TV broadcast 7 years ago, this adaptation of Emily Bronte's classic Gothic romance of the Yorkshire moors has something of an Irish feel (thanks to the casting of Orla Brady as a spunky Catherine, and Robert Cavanah as a brooding and menacing Heathcliff).

This Heathcliff is not the romantic hero we saw in the Olivier-Oberon version in the 1930s; he's bitter, tiresome, grotesque, unsympathetic, and yet his great love for Cathy shines through.

Matching the novel pretty much chapter for chapter, this version does more with the last third of the book that most other attempts have - the understanding between Hareton and Catherine comes through much more strongly. It also muddies the waters slightly with respect to the conflict between Heathcliff and Hindley - although we can see why Heathcliff acts as he does, this version doesn't necessarily excuse him.

This Wuthering Heights is uncompromising, dark, and violent. This possibly contributed to its fate at the time, as the acting is largely fine (including Ken Kitson as Mr Earnshaw, Ian Shaw as Hindley, Matthew MacFadyen as Hareton, Tom Georgeson as Joseph, and Polly Hemingway as Nellie). It represents a decent attempt to get Emily Bronte's vision on film - it doesn't work, but it comes very close.

I turned this on thinking we were going to get the 1992 film version with Ralph Fiennes and Juliet Binoche; instead it was a new low key TV version made for LWT and PBS with a British cast and production crew. `Wuthering Heights' has been filmed at least 10 times in English alone, there is not so much a definite version as one for successive eras, and the various versions each tell us something about the periods in which they were made. This version is not exactly post-modern, but it lacks romantic glamour. It's still a tale of wild, hopeless love but we get more of the pain than of the rapture. We also get the full story, not the truncated tale of the 1939 Hollywood version (a fine movie of its period). Here, Heathcliff and Cathy, doomed lovers, are redeemed by the happiness of their children.

The mostly unknown cast are fine and the locations fitting, though I don't think `Wuthering Heights' itself was meant to be quite so pokey; the Earnshaws were meant to be minor gentry, not peasants. Ghosts are always difficult to film convincingly but these ones are well captured. I'd like to think people will still read the book but the reality is most will just see a film version. It's a powerful story and this is a reasonable `no frills' rendering.