Rebecca

Plot synopsis:
A naïve young woman (Joan Fontaine) is in Monte Carlo working as a paid companion to Edythe Van Hopper (Florence Bates) when she meets the aristocratic but brooding widower Maximilian "Maxim" de Winter (Laurence Olivier). They fall in love, and within two weeks they are married. The young woman is now the second "Mrs. de Winter."
Maxim takes his new bride back to Manderley, his large country house in Cornwall. The housekeeper, Mrs. Danvers (Judith Anderson), is domineering and cold, and is obsessed with the beauty, intelligence and sophistication of Maxim's dead wife Rebecca, the first Mrs. de Winter, preserving her former bedroom, the master suite, as a shrine. Although dead, Rebecca's presence is nonetheless pervasive - several things throughout the house - stationery, handkerchiefs, bed linens, even the master bedroom door - bear her ornate "R" or "R de W" monogram. As her closest confidant, Mrs. Danvers regularly comments on Rebecca's exceptional grace and style. When asked what Rebecca was like, Frank Crawley (Reginald Denny), Maxim's best friend and manager of the estate, absent-mindedly tells the new Mrs. de Winter that Rebecca was an exceptional beauty.
The new Mrs. de Winter is intimidated by her responsibilities and begins to doubt her relationship with her husband. The continuous reminders of Rebecca overwhelm her; she believes that Maxim is still deeply in love with his first wife. She also discovers that her husband sometimes becomes very angry at her for apparently insignificant actions. She also meets Rebecca's so-called "favorite cousin," Jack Favell (George Sanders), who visits the house while Maxim is away.
Trying to be the perfect wife, the young Mrs. de Winter convinces Maxim to hold a costume party, as he had done with Rebecca. She wants to plan her own costume, but Mrs. Danvers suggests she copy the beautiful outfit in the portrait of Lady Caroline de Winter, an ancestor of Maxim's. At the party, when the costume is revealed, Maxim is appalled; Rebecca wore the same outfit at the ball a year ago, shortly before her death.
Mrs. de Winter confronts Danvers, who tells her she can never take Rebecca's place, and almost manages to convince her to jump to her death. An airborne flare reveals that a ship has hit the rocks. Mrs. de Winter rushes outside, where she hears that during the rescue a sunken boat has been found with Rebecca's body in it.
Maxim admits to his new wife that he had earlier misidentified another body as Rebecca's, in order to conceal the truth. His first marriage, until now viewed by the world as ideal, was in fact a sham. At the very beginning of their marriage Rebecca had told Maxim she intended to continue the scandalous life she had previously lived. He hated her for this, but they agreed to an arrangement: in public she would pretend to be the perfect wife and hostess, and he would ignore Rebecca's private wanton lifestyle. However, Rebecca grew careless, including an ongoing affair with Jack Favell. One night, Rebecca told Maxim she was pregnant with a child that was not his. Laughing at Maxim's dismay, Rebecca proclaimed that the child, presumed to be a boy and legally Maxim's son, would thus inherit his beloved estate Manderley. During the ensuing heated argument she fell, hit her head and died. Maxim took the body out in her boat, which he then scuttled.
Now assured of her husband's love for her and not his first wife, the new Mrs. de Winter sheds the remnants of her girlish innocence. She begins to coach her husband how to conceal the mode of Rebecca's death from the authorities. In the police investigation, deliberate damage to the boat points to suicide. However, Favell shows Maxim a note from Rebecca, which appears to prove that she was not suicidal; Favell tries to blackmail Maxim. Maxim tells the police, and then falls under suspicion of murder. The investigation reveals Rebecca's secret visit to a London doctor (Leo G. Carroll), which Favell assumes was due to her illicit pregnancy. But the police interview with the doctor establishes that Rebecca was not actually pregnant; the doctor had told Rebecca that she was suffering from a late-stage cancer instead.
The coroner renders a finding of suicide. Only Frank Crawley, Maxim, and his wife know the full story: that Rebecca told Maxim she was pregnant with another man's child in order to try to goad him into killing her, an indirect means of suicide that would also have ensured her husband's ruination and possible execution.
As Maxim returns home from London to Manderley, he sees that the manor is on fire, set ablaze by the deranged Mrs. Danvers. The second Mrs. de Winter and the staff escape the blaze, but Danvers is killed when a ceiling collapses on her. Finally, a silk nightdress case on Rebecca's bed, with a beautifully embroidered "R" - Rebecca's proud emblem of ownership - is consumed by flames.

Tags: gothic, melodrama

Review:
Mr. Dance is an excellent actor and he gives a very good performance as Maxim.
Diana Rigg portrays Mrs. Danvers rather as a tragic character than as a villain.
I found Charles Dance to be a much more believable Maxim de Winter, with some definite sex appeal that was lacking in Olivier's portrayal.
Emilia Fox was perfectly charming as the 2nd Mrs. de Winter, managing to come across as shy and unsure of herself without appearing too passive or neurotic.
As has been stated in other reviews, the romance between the two was far more believable and realistic in this version.Diana Rigg gives quite a different portrayal of the creepy Mrs. Danvers than Judith Anderson did, and I found Rigg's more humane and pathetic (although still sinister) housekeeper more three-dimensional.
The supporting characters are also good, and I even enjoyed Jonathan Cake's scenery-chewing portrayal of Jack Favell.All in all, a great effort, well worth watching..
I thought this was marvellous, and that Charles Dance as Maxim, Emilia Fox as The Second Mrs De Winter, and Diana Rigg as Mrs Danvers, were note perfect - but that's before I saw the 1970s version with Jeremy Brett, Fox's mother Joanna David, and Anna Massey.However, this 1990s version runs a close second.
It isn't as involving to watch, and Dance has a certain dryness that perhaps does not work all through the piece - but the cast do well (including Faye Dunaway as Fox's chaperone).
Set pieces are excellent, there's beautiful scenery, and a tight script, and all this is good.You rarely see watchable literacy adaptations of this quality, and this version of 'Rebecca' does not really disappoint.
On the whole, I think this "Rebecca" is very good - and stands its ground along side Hitchcock - not as a comparison, but as a different approach.
I do believe the British version (with the honeymoon scene) may have been shown originally on Masterpiece Theatre, but in the US release DVD, it (along with a couple other scenes I like) were cut.
First of all, I enjoyed the old classic version of the 1940s REBECCA with Laurence Olivier and Joan Fontaine and I have seen it over 100 times in my lifetime.
However, I find myself very captivated by this 1997 version by Masterpiece Theatre and with its great actors, the assemble cast, the music score, the filming location and the more detailed storyline, which is simply superb and very well done.
I believe the 1997 version is the best version of Rebecca, second to the book.
Further, I have seen ALL the versions of Rebecca and have read the book by Daphne Du Maurier and can actually comment in good faith that this is simply the best adaptation with more details about the characters that you don't see in the 1940s version.
With this superb 1997 adaptation, you are able to see a more deeper version of both Max and the second Mrs. DeWinter's characters played by Charles Dance and Emilia Fox. You see that they are in love in this version whereas in the Hitchcock version, it's not so obvious.
You also get a better sense of Mrs. Danvers' character who you almost feel sorry for in this adaptation.
Additionally, you'll see a few glimpses of what the beautiful Rebecca might look like.I believe this 1997 version of Rebecca stands alone as a great love story and great mystery that will keep you captivated..
The acting was just as good as the previous versions and the photography was the best, far better than most theatrical movies.
I especially liked the young Emilia Fox as the new Mrs DeWinter.
Charles Dance was very well cast as Maxim, not as stuffy as Olivier.
I found Diana Rigg a bit over the top, but the supporting cast were very good, especially Faye Dunaway.
It is mentioned in Alfred Hitchcock's masterful version of the book, by Dame Judith Anderson.
Now, in context of the film, it was definitely closer to the book than Hitchcock's version (which you can blame David O.
The lighting and photography do nothing to set the suspense and sense of dread in Manderley that is supposed to be the lingering spirit of Rebecca, very unlike the book and 1940 movie.
The acting was pretty much all excellent and solid but Charles Dance as Maxim was VERY different.
Emilia Fox as "I" was good too.If you liked the book Rebecca see the Hitchcock version also and compare the two.
Charles Dance is an absolute heart throb and young Emilia Fox's acting is outstanding!
Fox and Rigg are also perfectly suitable for the role, while Fontain is too tall (and too beautiful and maybe a bit fatter than a little girl as the role is) and the other Mrs Danvers is too young.
But I think the scene in bed in Dance's version(when Maxim was telling the truth of Rebecca) does harm to the elegance and reserveness of his.
If Charles Dance hadn't been the perfect, slightly crotchety, dashingly attractive and aristocratic Maxim de Winter, I wouldn't have even given this 2 stars.
But beyond that ...I think my main problem is with the Emilia Fox as the second Mrs. de Winter.
She seemed colorless, insipid and wimpy and lacked what I'd always believed was an essential sweetness which originally attracted Max. Occasionally the chemistry between Fox and Dance was good, especially the marriage bed scenes, but overall the direction and performance created a second Mrs. de Winter that made little sense to me.Also, Diana Rigg's much-touted performance left me cold; although, to be fair, in both her case and Fox's, I suspect that a large part of the problem was in the script and direction, which tended to be cadenced and lingering to the point where it seemed contrived to me.And, sigh, at a certain point Frith's villainy became a bit over the top, and he habitually hit the same note again and again, the same facial expressions, the same sneer, the same smarmy charm, all of which was very effective in his first scene, but didn't wear well with repetition.Essentially, I spent most of the movie, a retelling of a favorite story of mine, checking my watch to see how much longer I needed to endure it..
I have not yet seen this movie, but my sister and I are reading through Rebecca right now, and I'd like to explain to those who misunderstood: Mrs. De Winter had herself announced as Caroline De Winter because she was dressed as that lady (the lady in the painting)and acting that part.
Caroline is not her name; the point is that you never even know what her name is.I have seen the old version of this movie, and in my opinion and that of my sister, as we read the book, Laurence Olivier is absolutely the definitive Maxim De Winter in every way..
This production has no romance, no mystery, no suspense, and no atmosphere -- all of the things that made Hitchcock's version a masterpiece.The only thing that makes this film watchable is Diana Rigg's new take on the character Mrs. Danvers.
I found her to be the only believable character in the production -- different than Judith Anderson's interpretation nonetheless, but well done.If you've never seen a film version of Rebecca, watch the Hitchcock version instead of this one..
When I found the Alfred Hitchcock version, I didn't agree at first with how harsh Maxim always seemed, but the movie really did the book justice, the setting and lighting.
Over all I'd say watch the Alfred Hitchcock version if you want beautiful settings and handsome actors that get to the core of the characters..
I've always rather enjoyed the earlier version of Hichcock's thriller, "Rebecca," having read the novel, and so I borrowed this one from the library to see what was different.
Emilia Fox is pretty good, but Charles Dance seems much too old to be Maxium - and the ladies complained how plain and uninteresting he was, whereas Max was always said to be a very handsome man.
I do see that this TV version of the wonderful Daphne Du Mourier book has those who both love and hate it.
The story is more faithful(if not entirely) in tone to the Hitchcock film and the romance possibly broader, and is dealt with in an atmospheric manner and is just as suspenseful as the previous two versions.
Charles Dance might be too old for Maxim and I did find Jeremy Brett more believable, but I did in a way find him attractive and thought he captured the darkness and angst of the character quite well.
I actually found the weak link to be Emilia Fox, I do have huge affection for Joan Fontaine in Hitchcock's film and I also much prefer her mother Joanna David as an actress so I may be biased, but Fox for a character as shy as the second Mrs De Winter seemed too beautiful, elegant and dare I say wan.
The supporting cast are even better, Faye Dunnaway is always a pleasure to watch, and Jonathan Cake is a suitably smarmy Jack, but top honours go to Diana Rigg as a sinister yet also humane Mrs Danvers.
This two-part TV adaptation of the famous Daphne Du Maurier benefits hugely from a pitch-perfect piece of central casting: Charles Dance as the mysterious Maxim de Winter and Emilia Fox as his new wife.
I wasn't bothered: there are enough interesting supporting characters (the friendly gardener, the mad fisherman, the caddish acquaintance) to keep the attention hooked, and the sumptuous locations make this a delight to look at.The nature of the mystery kept me guessing right until the end, and it helped that I hadn't read the novel or seen any of the other adaptations (including the famous Hitchcock film).
It also goes without saying that Diana Rigg makes for a masterful villain as Mrs Danvers, putting memories of her pin-up days long in the past.
Only Faye Dunaway's fruity acting as Mrs Van Hopper kept you awake.Charles Dance looks too old as Maxim de Winter, almost a cradle snatcher as he woos young, inexperienced and rather plain Emilia Fox and swiftly marries her, only months after the death of the first Mrs de Winter.When he brings his new bride to his mansion, Manderley, she is overburdened by the hovering spectre of his late wife who was beautiful and well liked especially by the demented housekeeper Mrs Danvers (Diana Rigg) who adored her.Max just sulks in the background as the new, young Mrs de Winter can do no right.
However the truth about the first Mrs de Winter soon comes to light and Max has to reveal his dark secret.The second episode was much better than the first as we gets to the kernel of Daphne Du Maurier's story but then it is also Jonathan Cake's turn to ham it up.Dance and Fox have very little chemistry together and the whole thing looks a little too old fashioned even for 1997..
Oh I wish I were Emilia Fox. Charles Dance as Maxim De Winter captured my heart- I will dream of him as he romanced this young lady with love and romance.
I have of course seen the '42 Olivier version as well.My verdict on this version ('97) is that everyone is wonderful except Charles Dance.
He's all freckled and spotty and not the slightest bit attractive.That being said, I have no idea why all the film versions skip (at least as far as I have noticed) the -- to my mind-- crucial scene in the book when the narrator finally tells Mrs. Danvers that she doesn't much care what the former Mrs. DeWinter would have done because SHE is Mrs. DeWinter now.
This is after the "You should be the one who's dead" in Rebecca's room/shipwreck/Maxim's confession scenes.It may be that one version includes this, but I don't recall seeing it...Anyway, Charles Dance?!
I have always found Lawrence Olivier's portrayal of Maxim de Winter to be distant and forbidding, which detracted from the Hitchcock version of Rebecca, although that film has so much to recommend it.
This lovely, warm adaptation is blessed by Charles Dance who makes Maxim a much more attractive man worth fighting for and Emilia Fox is a wonderful actress, even at this young age.
I saw this when it was originally shown on TV in 1997, and have just seen it again - I think I liked it better this time.
In some ways I prefer this version to the Alfred Hitchcock production but overall I think the old movie adheres closer to the book.
Charles Dance and Emilia Fox are very believable as lovers, very sweet love scenes.
Charles Dance puts Maxim De Winter to shame.
She is not at all evil or sinister like the Mrs. Danvers in the book.
Even in the credits the actress Emilia Fox was said to have played the "Second Mrs. DeWinter".
I don't know why she was not credited as Caroline.I thought this movie was very well done, and even better than the original version with Joan Fontaine.
Diana Rigg played an amazing role as Mrs. Danvers.
In this version is was great that they actually showed Rebecca, even though it was just her eyes and mouth, but it added to the mystery..
After reading the book I was interested in seeing the different versions of Rebecca.
Charles Dance is a brilliant actor but one is forced to wonder who on earth cast him as a romantic lead?)I was expecting a good film, but this movie was disappointing in every aspect.The characterisation was poor and the writing was dull.
The scenery is beautiful and Diana Rigg makes Mrs. Danvers a real person instead of a cardboard villain, but it's not enough.
I read the book by Daphne Du Maurier, and after loving it so much, I decided to watch this latest adaptation.
Charles Dance as Maxim de Winter surpasses all expectations one might have (and isn't too bad to look at either!).
In this version, he portrays Max as more romantic (perhaps more so than other adaptations), something which adds a touch of realism and allows for a different perspective of his character.
Emilia Fox as the second Mrs. de Winter is refreshing and plays her character with the perfect amount of insecurity over the haunting presence of Max's first wife, Rebecca.
Fox also presents her character as nothing but loving and dedicated towards her much older husband, with passion and romance that helps justify many a scene in this version, presented very aesthetically and with realism.
Remaining supporting cast of Faye Dunaway as the pleasantly extrovert Mrs. Van Hopper and Jonathan Cake as the wild living, slightly devilish cousin of Rebecca, Jack Favell, are perfectly suited to their respective characters.
Who did not wish for something like this (minus Mrs Danvers of course!) to happen, when one was in the same age as the new Mrs de Winter..?
The Rebeccas of this world win every time...This movie is a very good rendering of the story, better than even the Hitchcock version.
In the novel Mr de Winter was not there in time to try to save Mrs Danvers, and even if he had been - why should he..?
Maybe Mr the Winter wanted his line to end with him, after all the tragedies.I miss one thing in this version though: the eeriness, spookiness.
Emilia Fox is good in the role as the second Mrs de Winter, although maybe a bit too cheeky towards Mrs van Hopper in the beginning, before she new that she would be able to quit her job.
Charles Dance is quite right as a mysterious, debonair lord of the manor, of course, but I find the age difference (which is about ten years larger than between the characters in the novel) a little off-putting.
But in this movie, at that point I thought that they would be quite well-matched - and that it was instead strange and wrong that he should start to form an attachment with a young and innocent girl...All in all, this is a very good production of "Rebecca"!.
I wanted so much to like this version of "Rebecca." I had seen both the Hitchcock movie and the 1979 Jeremy Brett/Joanna David/Anna Massey version, and read the book countless times.
A new version with another talented cast seemed like a great idea.Unfortunately it didn't work.
Charles Dance is nobody's idea of Maxim de Winter.
The Hayes Code of the 1930s and 1940s said "good guys" couldn't deliberately do bad things, so the Hitchcock version's key plot change was a concession to Industry Standard.
Or did they decide that the book, which had been a classic and a commercially viable success for almost 60 years, needed improvement?VERDICT: If you haven't read "Rebecca" by Daphne du Maurier, this may seem like a serviceable, if not very thrilling, story.
Maybe we should do it again and not watch anymore Brit TV until they give us a proper version of "Rebecca.".
Watch the Hitchcock version instead.
Totally miscast - Emilia Fox is too confident, beautiful and elegant to play the plain, awkward, painfully shy second Mrs De Winter.
Charles Dance is too old to play Max De Winter (he's supposed to be 15 - 20 years older then her, not 30) and he lacks any sense of darkness or anger.
Only Diana Rigg, as Mrs Danvers comes anywhere near creating a character similar to the book.The directing is of the 'point and shoot' variety, with no subtleties.The one trick, with Mrs Danvers and the light, is lifted straight from Hitchcock.In fact the whole thing has no sense of mystery or doom or tragedy.
Watch the Hitchcock version, with its great acting, sense of tragedy and doom, deep romance and a script practically lifted from the book, instead..