Brilliant and touching

It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.

I really wanted to like this movie. I feel terribly cynical trashing it, and that's why I'm giving it a middling 5. Actually, I'm giving it a 5 because there were some superb performances.

Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

It is no wonder this story has been so popular ever since it was written. It is the ultimate dream for lonely, shy and insecure girls! 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..? That some handsome and attractive man, rich and powerful, and intensely more eligible than even the most popular boy in school who was off-limits to oneself, should come and whisk oneself off - far away from monotonous jobs, mean bosses, gossipy and slutty work-mates, bad living conditions..? To some more glamorous life as the châtelaine of an old, mysterious mansion...The thing which is the most alluring, is the fact that the second Mrs de Winter at first cannot believe that she can compete with the first Mrs de Winter, who - seemingly - had it all: beauty, courage, many accomplishments and talents - and first and foremost the ability to manipulate others, to make herself popular with everybody. Exactly as the popular girls at school.But then it turned out that some people in fact had began to see through the first Mrs de Winter, not least her own husband, and that he really loved the second Mrs de Winter - because of her inner qualities that he was able to see through her shyness and awkwardness... No wonder this story was such a success! Of course, in reality it can never happen. The Rebeccas of this world win every time...This movie is a very good rendering of the story, better than even the Hitchcock version. First of all the three hours are needed to be able to include all the events from the novel. Also, it follows the novel very faithfully - except for the fire scene in the end, in which the producers must have become temporarily insane..? 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..? After all the evil that she had done..? To give the accident in the fire as an explanation to why Mr de Winter could not father children, is also very silly - and especially as it was not in the novel. There was no need for such an explanation. Maybe the couple did not want children - it is understandable if they did not want to bear the heir to the Manderley estate, as they could not themselves go back there. 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. The suggestion - which is also there in the novel - that the first Mrs de Winter is still in the house. Either as a ghost, or (this thought at least struck me when I read the novel) that she is not dead, but that she staged the accident and is keeping herself hidden somewhere in the house, to come out sometimes at night and make a disturbance in the house. Maybe to find out how fast Mr de Winter would remarry if she died..? There is no suggestion at all of anything like that in this version, and no ghostly atmosphere at all - the creepiness comes altogether from human beings.The interiors and exteriors are all quite right. 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. I had pictured the new Mrs de Winter as more insecure and nervous. 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. A 20 years older man when you are 20 is experienced and exciting - at least if he is handsome - but a 30 years older man in that age is a dirty old man...Diana Rigg is as scary as she should be as Mrs Danvers. The supporting staff is quite alright. The only actor I find entirely miscast is Faye Dunaway as Mrs van Hopper. She is still too youthful and beautiful there, for this role. The "thing" with Mrs van Hopper was that everybody should find her pathetic when she is laying herself out for Mr de Winter. Because it would be entirely impossible that he would want this fat old woman. 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 do see that this TV version of the wonderful Daphne Du Mourier book has those who both love and hate it. I personally did love it. I do prefer Hitchcock's film(one of my all-time favourite films) and the 1979 series, but this stands on its own. 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. It looks wonderful visually, Manderly is imposing, the scenery is beautiful and the photography is remarkably good. There is also a haunting, emotional score(especially the cello and orchestra theme) by Christopher Gunning, a tight script, a lot of interesting characters lead and supporting and, while slow, fluid pacing. The acting was mostly fine to me. 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. Other than Fox, my other complaint was the flashbacks with Rebecca. I can understand why they were included and they were interesting enough, but I much prefer it when Rebecca is mysterious and just omnipresent, it is more suspenseful that way. Overall, I loved it but I do prefer Hitchcock's and the 1979 series. 9/10 Bethany Cox

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. Even Manderley itself is dreadfully unimpressive. 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. There is no chemistry between the leads, despite the script showing them kissing passionately at a time in the book when he barely touches her. There's no romance between them, in fact their kisses seem awkward and forced, and a bit disgusting, given how much older than her he looks (not to mention his lack of sex appeal and passion) The script itself is terrible, deviating from the book, having her challenging him at a time when in the book, she can barely speak to him.If you love the book, like I do, don't bother with this. Watch the Hitchcock version, with its great acting, sense of tragedy and doom, deep romance and a script practically lifted from the book, instead.

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. I mean, it's a costume ball. She intended this to make everyone think, "Who?" and look to see. 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.