Very well executed

Truly Dreadful Film

Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

This film should be banned, as the maker might as well have butchered heathcliff, with a set of knives in a slasher film. The casting is dreadful, the chemistry between the leads is non existent, and the result is a dull drab ugly drama. The story is so bastardised, that any resemblance of a romantic tragedy is destroyed, by the viewers increasing hatred of heathcliff as the film unwinds. The 1939 film is a classic romantic tragedy, offering sympathy for all the characters in varied ways, but this blames it all on the wretched heathcliff, and the extended version cut from the book, prolongs the agony for lovers of oliver and oberon's masterpiece. I would love to hang the maker of this depressing garbage.

its first virtue - it is a justice act to a splendid novel. because it translate, in right manner, the darkness, the storm of emotions, the force of meets between Cate and Headcliff in the inspired manner. the fight between them, the high tension, the violent desire for who the words are only masks are present in this special adaptation. the second virtue - Juliette Binoche and Ralph Fiennes. sure, the chemistry is an important ingredient but, more important, remains the sculpting silence. each scene is electrified. the dialogue is the clash who you imagine when you read the book. and this does it different by the other adaptations. maybe, not better. but different. and this could be seen as a form of justice act .

This is an unfairly maligned adaptation. True, if you judge it against more famous adaptations (e.g. the 1939 version), the first half of the film feels inadequate. However if you hold on in there, you'll get the second half of the book, revealing a plethora of themes Emily Bronte was exploring that are non-existent in the other films and revealing the novel's dark cruelty. Why previous adaptors chose to turn the film into a simple love story can be put down to sexism; had it been written by a man, the filmmakers would accept the brutal aspects of the book but of course a Victorian woman could never write such shocking things. For those who only know the story from previous adaptations or the brilliant Kate Bush song, it is a saga of hatred. Being rejected by his childhood love/adopted sister/soulmate Cathy Earnshaw (Juliette Binoche) when she chooses to marry prim Edgar Linton (Simon Shepard). Heathcliff vows vengeance on the Lintons by marrying Edgar's sister Isabella (Sophie Ward) and then also torturing Cathy and Edgar's daughter, Catherine Linton (Juliette Binoche- again!).The film's mistake is that it is too tentative in the first half. Director Peter Kosminsky still wanted to give viewers the conventional love story that they knew and loved so he made the first half quite gentle in order to mitigate the darker second half. Unfortunately it means that Cathy and Heathcliff's relationship is not tempestuous enough. The famous declarations- "I AM Heathcliff", "I cannot live without my soul"- are spoken quietly and demurely.Others have mentioned Binoche's excessive giggling, which doesn't convince me that she's seventeen but rather that she's under the influence. The criticisms of her accent is unfair; she has a clear French twang but it's hardly up there in the Hall of Bad Movie Accents. Fiennes' Yorkshire accent is far worse, sounding as if he'd learnt it through watching Postman Pat episodes. His initial niceness is overdone; Heathcliff is a gentle nature-loving soul who we cannot imagine why anyone would be so mean as to beat him as his adoptive brother Hindley (Jeremy Northam) does. Binoche is far too girlish as Cathy, who is essentially a tomboy and whose wild nature makes her identify with Heathcliff.Things only really get going when Heathcliff returns, allowing Fiennes to drop the awful accent. Kosminsky keeps the novel's framed narrative, with tenant Mr Lockwood arriving at Wuthering Heights and meeting Heathcliff and Cathy II, who he mistakes to be Heathcliff's wife. If you are unfamiliar with the novel, it may be best to locate a family tree as a handy guide. Don't worry though; Emily Bronte meant the family tree to be messy and confusing. That is why I think the double-roling of Binoche as mother and daughter works. It shows how Heathcliff sees Cathy everywhere and adds a perverse sexual tension as well. Binoche is much better as the daughter and Fiennes is stronger as older Heathcliff.One of the good things about the adaptation is its fidelity to the novel. Using much of the novel's original dialogue, we get a truer picture of Heathcliff's cruelty. It is hard to argue that Heathcliff isn't really that bad when he beats his wife, calls her an 'abject thing' and says she 'degenerates into a mere slut'. Fiennes refreshingly doesn't try to make Heathcliff sympathetic or gloss over his actions; rather he plays a torturer who is tired of tormenting yet unable to stop himself. Heathcliff could have left the second generation alone but instead he punishes them and plays with them like chess pieces.Whilst I do like the perversely seductive evil of Fiennes' interpretation (his performance here is what got him the role of Amon Goth in Schindler's List), like Olivier he is a little too refined to play early Heathcliff. We can never really buy him as savage; in the book, he is characterised almost like a creature rather than a human. This is why to an extent readers pity him. However Fiennes' Heathcliff is suavely evil.The inclusion of the second half of the novel is really what recommends this film and why fans of the novel should put it top of their list of adaptations to see. Bronte did not include the main characters' children to be cute or to drag out the story. It gives the story more impact, making the film a saga of one man's bitterness rather than a doomed love story. The film keeps the wonderfully atmospheric ending of the novel and shows through the second generation that the conflict may be resolved and that the things dividing Cathy and Heathcliff will not divide this second generation. Other film adaptations ignore this small ray of optimism and hence the novel is remembered as a big misery fest. First timers to the story may find themselves lost; Wuthering Heights is an odd tale even in the generic film adaptations. The relevance of the second half may not be instantly apparent to them and will certainly be confusing if they come to it with preconceptions of the story. However a re-watch brings new subtleties and nuances that aren't present in the other film adaptations (bar elements of the dreadfully dull 2011 version).Ironically in order to see the true nature of the story, you have to watch two flawed films (1992 and 2011). One day someone will get it right- hopefully the 1992 film has opened up doors for future films to tackle both generations.

Not the best version of Emily Bronte's masterpiece, on their own terms of the ones personally seen so far the Laurence Olivier and Robert Cavannagh get that honour. None of the adaptations are bad, even my least favourite the 2011 film and while there is a lot wrong this film adaptation isn't a bad one either. The main problem with the film is that it's very rushed which is why the supporting characters(the Lintons in particular, it did affect Simon Shepherd as Edgar too as there is very little sense of meekness which is a huge part of the character) don't get enough time to shine properly with a come and go vibe and why some of the second half felt jumpy narratively. If the film was longer than it was it would have helped. The ending is also far too abrupt and bittersweet and Juliette Binoche did seem too shallow and classy to start with, the giggling was indeed too much. The film is a stunner visually though, the photography is very fluid, the costumes are true to period, most of the make-up and hair is fine though Heathcliff's hair is far too straight and greasy and with the locations you can really feel and smell the atmosphere of the Yorkshire moors. The script is literate and emotional, the famous lines that are included are very well delivered and the story for the first half at least is coherent and respective of Emily Bronte's writing. With it too there is a real sense of broodiness and tragedy. That it included the events after Cathy's death is most laudable. The acting is good enough. Binoche's acting is much improved and she is every bit the self-centred and spiteful Cathy, even without make-up too she is astonishingly pretty. Her chemistry with Fiennes is intense and moving, the scenes on the moors are beautifully done. Janet McTeer stands out in support, Jeremy Northam doesn't have enough screen-time but he plays the tormentor-to-tormented character of Hindley to a tee and Jason Riddington is a charming Hareton. Sinead O'Connor does a lovely job as Bronte herself. The two best assets are the music score and Ralph Fiennes' Heathcliff. The music is hauntingly beautiful with the brooding moments having a shade of melancholy, of all the Wuthering Heights adaptations only the Timothy Dalton version has a better music score. Heathcliff could have been more of a tortured soul here but Fiennes give a truly powerful and often scary- you wouldn't want to mess with or be in the same room as him- performance, but he does bring a humane side too. In conclusion, far from perfect but like the Timothy Dalton version when it's good it is great. 7/10 Bethany Cox