This film had an awful lot going for it. A lot more going for it than many films get. It goes without saying that the film’s greatest asset is the fact that it is an adaptation of the Daphne Du Maurier piece, one of the finest novels of the 20th century, encompassing horror, romance, drama and great mystery into one incredible thriller novel. Then have that book adapted for the screen by Jane Goldman, who has proved time and time again her astounding capability for adaptation, with screenplays for Stardust, Kingsman and The Woman in Black. Add into the mix one of the most interesting and repeatedly successful directors of the past ten years, Ben Wheatley, who has made some of my favourite films of the past decade, such as the devastating Kill List, the hilarious Sightseers, the brilliantly complex High Rise and the great action thriller Free Fire. Then fill out the gallery of incredible characters with astounding talent - all but one perfectly cast - and surly you have a piece that is not just worthy of the original novel, but also defies comparison to the 1940 Hitchcock tour de force adaptation by standing as a separate stunning success. However, it is the unfortunate and regrettable result that this film is simply a lackluster adaptation of a masterpiece, tapping into some of its greatest moment with great relish, and completely bastardising others.

credit

For those who don’t know, the plot of Rebecca follows the second Mrs De Winter (who remains unnamed) as she becomes married to the handsome and devastatingly rich widower Maxim De Winter, still haunted by the death of his first wife, the titular Rebecca. Mrs De Winter is brought to Maxim’s grand estate of Manderlay, where she comes face to face with the sinister housekeeper, Mrs Danvers. The plot unveils itself as the ghost of the first Mrs De Winter refuses to stay in her watery grave. 
My excitement and anticipation for this adaptation really was strong and that was purely down to the choice of Wheatley and much of the casting choices made for the film. Armie Hammer is stellar and naturally charismatic as Maxim, bringing all the charm and dark inner torment that the role requires. The choice to make him younger didn’t affect the plot too strongly, but the choice for Goldman to keep so many of the references Maxim makes to his second bride being younger than him, just feel way out of place here and strike me more so as a blatant mistake on the writers part. Hammer is unfortunately thwarted by Goldman’s script multiple times, not being allowed to give some of Maxim’s greatest monologues and speeches in some attempt to increase the pace, but ultimately removing all depth of character. 

Kristin Scott Thomas is sensational as Danvers, bringing the right elements of doom and dread, as well as a similar perfect dose of inner torment and pathos. Scott Thomas is similarly thwarted by Goldman and her character has many of her most important character moments stripped (and dumped somewhere on Goldman’s floor I presume), as well as being lumped with the most mind-boggling change the script makes [see my spoiler P.P.S. at the end of the review, for those who have already seen it].
The rest of supporting cast round out the roles very well, with Keeley Hawes and Sam Riley both on top form, but Ann Dowd being a little too cartoonish for my liking. However, the loose link in this otherwise strong chain is Lily James as our Mrs De Winter. It is fair to say that I’m certainly not the biggest fan of James and often find that if she is not terrible in a film, she never brings anything that any other actress couldn’t bring better. Her performance in Rebecca is another fine example. She just brings nothing. Similar to my issues with her stage performance in All About Eve, there is just no transformation of the character, no arc. In one scene she is meek and in the next she is suddenly creeping around a doctor’s office to help her husband (a bizarre change made by Goldman to bring her more into the third act which ultimately makes the plot completely unrealistic and absurd). If I were a crueller critic, I would throw around descriptors such as ‘dull’ and ‘lifeless’, for James really is that wooden here. Before seeing the film I had the unfortunate sense that her performance would be the film’s biggest issue. I was half right. It’s a major issue, but unfortunately not the biggest.

credit

Wheatley’s touch is definitely present and leads to some wonderfully stark images and moments, but the experimental sensibilities of his previous work sometimes feel far too out of place here and lead to many scenes coming off as a little strained. Wheatley can certainly direct and does direct many stretches in the film beautifully; however, many dream sequences just seem out of place here, along with some CGI touches that really took me out of the film instead of bringing me into the world of Manderlay. All the CGI just made the film look cheap and completely undermined the grandeur that we should have felt whilst at Manderlay. Goldman’s script has a similar problem. At most points Goldman serves the text and brings the story to the screen with great capability, but there are many truly baffling additions that are intensely infuriating for any fan, and I presume will come off as similarly absurd for any first time watcher [I refer once again to my spoiler-based P.P.S]. The production design of Sarah Greenwood is stellar, but overall has a perpetuating sense of gloss that just leads to nothing feeling lived in. How can we feel the weight of the ghosts of the past, if every room looks as if it’s never been stepped in before?

credit

For me, however, the biggest fault of the piece lies in the hands of Wheatley and his editor Jonathon Amos, who bring the same high octane frantic montage style that Amos brought to Scott Pilgrim vs. the World and Baby Driver to what should by all accounts be a dark and brooding piece of suspense. The film moves at a painfully brisk pace. It works for the start of the film, by getting us to Manderlay swiftly whilst still developing and presenting very well the budding romance of James and Hammer. However, once the plot gets underway, there is simply no stopping it and the depth of emotion and plot that was allowed in the first brief section of the film is nowhere to be seen. Important scene after important scene fly by at a pace unparalleled to the sombre nature of the novel, leading to the plot seeming wholly melodramatic and absurd. The characters just aren’t given anytime to respond to what’s happening and the lack of breathing room also simply leads to a complete loss of tension and suspense. We needn’t worry during any moments of horror, for they are over before they have even started. This is also a major fault of Goldman’s script, who seems to take great pleasure in truncating scene after scene to overlap on top of one another. Although she still plays the greatest hits at certain points (“Last night I dreamt I went to Manderlay again”, as well as “I’m asking you to marry me you little fool”), she also seems to enjoy subverting moments and adding 2020 lens politics into characters that really now seem ridiculous due to it. The novel and its characters are a product of their time and, perhaps in different hands, a modernisation of certain elements may have worked, but Goldman’s efforts here certainly stray far from anything once could described as ‘worthy’.

-

An overly glossy, style-over-substance 5/10 adaptation of one of the greatest novels of all time. Any success of the film is down to the undoubted brilliance of the original text. This film brings nothing to the table other than changes which worsen the piece, on top of a generally baffling choice regarding adaptation. Add this to a breakneck pace that never lets the film breath or gain any suspense or tension and you have a repeatedly redundant adaptation of a masterpiece. A few great performances do make it worth a watch, but overall the film is just not as good as the novel, the film or either of the TV adaptations. Although comparison may be fruitless in art, if you are to watch a Rebecca this weekend (and I would never not suggest you do), don’t make it this one.

P.S. Was it an intentional choice to have this movie end with Armie Hammer in Egypt, with his next film being Death on the Nile? Am I supposed to now think that there is a Du Maurier/Agatha Christie cinematic universe? It may very well make Death on the Nile a little more interesting (although I doubt it if it is anything like Branagh’s previous glossy farce Murder on the Orient Express). Who actually knows if I will ever see a movie in the cinema again? What a miserable state our industry is in. I only have Mank to pull me through. God speed David Fincher, who would have undoubtedly made a better adaptation here than Wheatley.

P.P.S. [**SPOILER**] Mrs Danvers' cliff demise was one of the most embarrassing moments I have seen in some time. Danvers deserves better. Scott Thomas deserved better. And not to be too overly dramatic, but frankly Du Maurier deserved better.

-Thomas Carruthers