Change Your Image
vanyadolly
Reviews
Crooked House (2017)
Disappointing.
Perhaps my expectations were too high going in, but Crooked House is one of the Christie novels I've been looking forward to seeing adapted the most. While not altogether awful, this film left me disappointed.
Why is it that these modernizations try so hard to put the emphasis on needles drama, edgy characters, and artsy cinematography rather than the mystery when the mystery is inevitably what people tune in to see? The first act of the film is spent nearly entirely on side-stories that have little to do with the plot. It's as if they don't have faith in the source material's ability to hold the viewer's attention.
Far too much time was spent on the detective's irrelevant backstory and one of the most off-putting romances I've ever been subjected to, (like two cold, dead fish being knocked against each other,) while most of the suspects, and subsequently the mystery, are allowed to fade into the background.
If you're familiar with the book I'd suggest skipping this film. If you're not, the book is probably still a more enjoyable experience. If you're looking for a different spin on an old trope watch Gosford Park instead.
Wuthering Heights (2011)
Documenary Meets Art Film
Whatever story the filmmakers were trying to tell here, it had nothing at all to do with Wuthering Heights. I can't even review it as an adaptation because this film is as far removed from Emily Brontë's book as the moon is from a wheel of cheese. Sadly, it also made for a numbingly boring film experience in its own right. It was, for me, a colossal waste of time. Squandering the two hour runtime on pointless navel-gazing was perhaps the biggest crime when other adaptions have made do with less to wrap up the story of both generations.
I wouldn't say Heathcliff being black was true to the book, but in my mind it's neither more nor less wrong than Ralph Fiennes or Tom Hardy, who are about as far from 'dark' as anyone can get. It would have been a nice change if they hadn't insisted on changing the entire focus of the story because of it.
Viewers who enjoy pretentious art films with shaky camera work, lack of dialogue and gratuitous zoom-ins on random objects may get a kick out of this one, but anyone who came for Wuthering Heights better steer clear.
Wuthering Heights (1998)
A dull disappointment
I haven't seen every Wutherign Heigths adaption, but I have seen a lot of them and this one is at the bottom of my list for now. What do you get when you strip a gothic novel of all of all of its mystery and ethereal romanticism? Turns out that the result is a rather tame and uninspiring drama. Ironically this one just comes across as more melodramatic without the proper framework to soften the heightened emotionality and the flowery language, especially as they're acted out by out by actors in their forties. The result was downright hilarious at times when it wasn't plain distracting.
There was nothing about this adaption that said Wuthering Heights to me, it could have been any old movie. It has none of the complexity or atmosphere of the book, and on top of that they saw fit to rewrite the characters to a point where they have little in common with their original counterparts.
Adaptions seem to have a hard time finding a good balance between Cathy and Heathcliff to make them feel like two halves of the same soul rather than allowing one to overpower the other; whether that's reducing Cathy to the innocent victim of Heathcliff's abuse (2009 mini-series) or making Heathcliff childish and downright pathetic (this movie).
I haven't been able to find a perfect film adaption yet, but I wouldn't recommend this one. If you love the book or if you're looking for an adaption that captures it's spirit, I'd recommend the 1970 version with Timothy Dalton for the first generation, or the 1992 version with Ralph Fiennes and Juliette Binoche. Even the 2009 mini-series with Tom Hardy did a better job with the supporting characters.