Wuthering Heights (Hurlevent) - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Wuthering Heights (Hurlevent) Reviews

Page 1 of 1
November 27, 2014
This is quite a morose versions of Withering Heights but it is riveting, well acted, and all the people are beautiful though it doesn't help them much.
January 15, 2011
It is always hard to judge a modern-time adaptation of a historically-set novel one knows all too well. ‚Wuthering Heights‚? by Emily Bront√ę has always been one of my favourite novels, and ‚Hurlevent‚? (1985) by Jacques Rivette is one of the many (film) adaptations that have seen the light of day since the publication of the original (1847). This makes the viewing experience a special one, namely one of trying to compare all the details of both versions. Rivette stuck to the original in many respects. He changed a few names that do no work too well in French, I presume (like Roch instead of Heathcliff, Olivier instead of Edgar, and Guillaume instead of Hindley). Most other names were kept (close to) original. The historical setting has been changed from the late eighteenth-early nineteenth century to what I think is supposed to be the 1920s or possibly early 1930s. The only elements that give away the historical period is the fashionable clothing of the Lindon family and their pastimes (including gramophone records being played). The rural environment itself makes one think the clocks have stopped and never moved forward again: as far as I can remember, there aren‚(TM)t even any motorized vehicles on the farm (which perhaps wasn‚(TM)t usual in pre-war Western Europe). This provides the story with a timeless quality I never realized it had. Since the film lasts long enough anyway (130 minutes), the makers decided to stick to the first section of the novel only (forgetting about the next generations) to avoid unnecessary complications, which is good. As far as the acting is concerned, this was very good too, which cannot always be said of the typecasting: Heathcliff/Roch is way too blond and unmysterious: at first I thought Guillaume was Roch. His darkhaired, moody and passionate nature would have been much more befitting for Roch. I wasn‚(TM)t too happy about Catherine either: she is a plain, nondescript girl who doesn‚(TM)t seem the passionate type (although she plays it accurately enough). One does not particularly take to her, which is an opportunity missed. What‚(TM)s more, she looks far too 1980s (possibly because of the sexless, boyish haircut). The other characters (like H√ (C)l√®ne, the servant, and Isabella and her brother) are OK, although Joseph‚(TM)s bible babble doesn‚(TM)t seem to serve any particular purpose in this adaptation. ‚Hurlevent‚? is an adequate attempt to honour a legendary novel, but it doesn‚(TM)t score in all departments. I found it bearable, but no more than that.
February 25, 2009
This film was easily one of my favourites of Rivette's films. An amazing display of emotional turmoil where love is one endless toil and misery for everyone involved. Involvement is the underlying fuse, the cartridge is the people and the action, the revenge and the agony, all one potent mixture for mankind's withering. A starkly simple film with little in the way of mise-en-scene except in subtle varieties of light and colour that smoothens out the texture of this film.
August 27, 2008
At worst, the movie was passable. But if it were my introduction to Rivette's work, I would not be tempted to seek out other films by him.
July 5, 2007
It is my personal belief that there is no way to do justice to Emily BrontŽ's work in a movie.
April 10, 2007
I have heard it's good.
½ March 4, 2007
Remember watching this at school found it quite interesting
Page 1 of 1