Going to Manderley again was always likely to be a challenge. Any director and screenwriter taking on Daphne du Maurier’s great Gothic novel were bound to be haunted by Hichcock’s classic 1940 version.
I don’t think remakes of classic works should always be avoided – it’s interesting to see a great work reinterpreted for another generation, and also a mini-series can include a lot which had to be missed out of a film. Plus there’s the interest of seeing another angle, someone else’s take. However, for me the 1997 ITV version of Rebecca directed by Jim O’Brien and scripted by Arthur Hopcraft doesn’t quite work. I love the first hour or so, but feel as if after that it starts to go wrong and the romance ebbs away.
Emilia Fox, in her first major role, seems just right as the second Mrs de Winter – shy and quiet but ready to stand up for herself at key moments. She’s different from Joan Fontaine but has the same kind of spirit. However, the age gap between Fox and Charles Dance as Maxim is massive – he was 50 to her 22 – and I think that is a problem at times in this production. He does get the mercurial nature of this character, charming at one moment and turning on his wife with violent sarcasm the next – but must say I found it much harder to warm to him than I do to Olivier as a tortured handsome hero.
Spoilers beneath cut
Also his version of Maxim often seems to be nastier – snobbish and sneering, whereas with Olivier there seemed to be more genuine love for his wife underneath it all. Looking at the bullying demeanour of this Maxim, I found myself sympathising with Rebecca’s defiance - but then, Daphne du Maurier said she was always sympathetic to Rebecca, so maybe this brings out something that is there in the book.
This version is set in the 1920s, slightly back in time from the 1940 film. From the start, this production sets out to make the most of the big difference between 1990s TV and 1940s Hollywood - the use of colour. Since this version can’t compete with Hitchcock’s moody black and white and looming shadows, instead its colours are as vivid as possible . The title sequence, with the blue sea lashing the rocks, and the early scenes in the south of France have a sort of dream intensity which seems just right for the heroine meeting Maxim and falling in love. (This mini-series is something of a Jewel in the Crown reunion, as Jim O’Brien directed episodes of that series, which starred both Charles Dance and Geraldine James, who plays Maxim’s sister in this version of Rebecca – and one of the most striking things about Jewel in the Crown was its beautiful use of colour.)
However, I was quite startled that there was no opening line “Last night I dreamt I went to Manderley again”, and no haunting opening voice-over – so you don’t get the feeling of the whole story being recalled by an older and sadder Mrs de Winter which is there both in the book and in the Hitchcock movie. In this version, the famous line comes almost at the end instead.
It’s a while since I last read the novel, though it is a favourite of mine – but, from memory, I think these opening scenes, and the mini-series as a whole, may well be more “faithful” to the novel than the Hitchcock version. Instead of dramatically meeting at the edge of the sea as Fontaine and Olivier do, this Maxim and his future wife are brought together by the interfering Mrs Van Hopper – played by Faye Dunaway in a surprising piece of casting. Dunaway is a delight to watch in the role, but as she is only a few years older than Dance and still so beautiful, it’s hard to feel that there’s anything ridiculous about her making a play for him.
The couple’s initial relationship has more time to develop and I did enjoy the opening scenes in France. Once they get back to Manderley, though, things start to go wrong, as it seems as if everything is spelt out too much and there isn’t enough uncertainty and menace.
I do like Diana Rigg as Mrs Danvers most of the time, but there are moments where she seems to go a bit over the top – and Jonathan Cake seems downright hammy at times as Jack Favell. There are also flashbacks where we see bits of Rebecca’s face and hear her voice – ok, you never see her altogether, but it’s enough to damage the sense of mystery.
Maybe the real problem with this version, though, is that when you dramatise the whole story, with Maxim revealed as a murderer who elaborately covered up his crime, it’s hard to feel much sympathy for him. I found myself hoping his wife would tell the police! In the 1940 film the Hays office insisted on changing the ending so that Maxim is innocent – which takes away the climax of the story but maybe improves the romance, because it means there isn’t the same violence there in his character. (Similarly, I think the Olivier version of Wuthering Heights is far more romantic than later versions which are truer to the book and make Heathcliff nastier.)
A new big-screen version of Rebecca is said to be in production starring Ralph Fiennes and Juliet Rylance – so it will be interesting to see if that version can make the killer more sympathetic.
I saw this years ago and I really need to go back and watch it again to compare it to the Hitchcock version. I could also do with a bit of a re-read as well. I didn’t know about the new film version. Ralph Fiennes?!?! That ought to be really interesting. I’m looking forward to it!
Hi Teresa – I’ve been trying to find out something about this projected new version with Ralph Fiennes as Maxim, but it all seems a bit vague. The Wikipedia entry on ‘Rebecca’ says a new version is in production, citing this page from the Chichester Festival Theatre – http://www.cft.org.uk/cft-productions_talents.asp?tid=369
but I don’t know when the Chichester page dates from, and there doesn’t seem to be anything definite about it anywhere! I really hope it comes off – I’d love to see Fiennes as Max.
I agree with much of what you’ve said. Certainly this version of Rebecca doesn’t get it right in most ways. It’s overlong, for one thing, the snail pace dynamic practically turgid. And Charles Dance is too distant to ever seem “obsessed” with his first wife or anyone else for that matter. There should be, I feel, some passion involved which never seems the case in this 1997 Rebecca; Dance isn’t haunted, not even by his own “mistakes”; too bland. And despite the attempt of the director to make a “gothic romance”, it’s more cliched silliness than suspenseful foreboding. If it had been purported to be adapted from a story by Colette titled “Ennui”, I should have believed it more.
Thanks for commenting – my memories of this have now faded a bit, but I think I liked the mini-series more than you do, although I agree with you that there are a lot of things which don’t quite work. I still prefer the 1940 movie.
I have seen only the 1997 movie, and it has immediately become one of my favourite ones. I watched it right after finishing the book, and it seemed to me that all the actors in the movie played their roles brilliantly!
Dear Beatrice and her husband, kind faithful Frank, all the servants.
Mrs Denvers and her cold smile. Mrs van Hopper is unforgettable. Even though it is absolutely not the character described in the book, she brings a lot to the film. She is silly, funny, you want to pity her, and you feel, why Maxim dislikes her so much. Her every move, every glance is just right!
Emilia Fox is so natural, so innocent. Her every gesture is childish and truthful. She represented second Mrs. de Winter very close to the impression, made on me by the book.
Charles Dance. When I read a book, I did not like Maxim at all! He was brutal and cold and he treated her very bad. But I completely and absolutely fallen in love with Maxim by Charles Dance. There is so mush passion and tenderness and love in their relationships. He is an absolute aristocrat who is ready to do everything for the sake of his estate and the reputation of his family. He is absolutely adorable in this movie.
Thank you very much for visiting and sharing your thoughts on this production, Valeriya – sorry to be slow in replying, but I have only just got back from holiday. It sounds as if you like this production more than I do, although there were a lot of things I did like about it. I do agree that Emilia Fox is perfect as the second Mrs de Winter, and also pleased to hear you enjoyed Faye Dunaway as Mrs Van Hopper, although I agree she is nothing like the character in the book!
If you read the book, the age gap between Maxim and the second Mrs. De Winter is quite accurate. While I love the Hitchcock classic, this is truer in some ways to the novel. I always found Olivier and Fontaine so close in age that it wasn’t always convincing when Maxim indirectly took on this father-husband role but in this new adaptation, it works.
Thanks very much for commenting, Rachel – I have read the book several times but not for a few years now. I found the age gap seemed a bit large to accept on screen, but take your point that it is true to the novel – also agree that Olivier and Fontaine seem close in age in the Hitchcock classic, though that is the version I love best.