After the first few minutes of REBECCA, I knew it was going to be great. I thought, "this may end up being one of the best Hitchcocks." But, as it turned out, I was wrong.
The plotline first deals with an unnamed heroine (Joan Fontaine) falling in love with and marrying rich and widowed Maxim De Winter (Laurence Olivier). Yet, coming home, to his estate, Manderly, she finds that the shadow of his former wife Rebecca still looms large, due partly to the constant reminder by the housekeeper Mrs. Danvers, played creepily by Judith Anderson.
Due to some odd preconception, I came to the film fully expecting Rebecca's ghost to show up mid-way through and begin to torment Maxim and his new wife, but in the end, it's not necessary. In a supreme show of wit, Hitchcock's screenwriter (or the original novelist, Du Maurier) makes, in a way, Mrs. Danvers Rebecca's tool; it is through her the couple are cursed. In fact, the great moments of the movie are the two scenes where Fontaine and Anderson are in Rebecca's room.
So, why is this not one of the great Hitchcocks? To be brief, the ending. After the first big twist, the film loses its magic. As Maxim himself mentions, Fontaine loses that "little lost look" that makes her so endearing, and her character rather melts away. For the climax, we could have stayed with her for one long, last suspenseful scene in Manderley, always suspecting Mrs. Danvers would do something horrible, which, in the end, she does. Instead, the latter part of the film focuses on Maxim as he learns the truth of Rebecca's illness, and then comes home to find Danvers has set Manderley on fire. It is up for his wife to explain the matter as the house burns behind them.
Excuse me?
This ending shows a total lack of knowledge regarding the writing maxim (forgive the pun) "show, don't tell." Now, I'm not blaming Hitchcock for this. It could've easily been Du Maurier's fault, or Selznick's, but it was certainly someone's. Here, for once, the middle of the movie is more memorable than the ending.
The plotline first deals with an unnamed heroine (Joan Fontaine) falling in love with and marrying rich and widowed Maxim De Winter (Laurence Olivier). Yet, coming home, to his estate, Manderly, she finds that the shadow of his former wife Rebecca still looms large, due partly to the constant reminder by the housekeeper Mrs. Danvers, played creepily by Judith Anderson.
Due to some odd preconception, I came to the film fully expecting Rebecca's ghost to show up mid-way through and begin to torment Maxim and his new wife, but in the end, it's not necessary. In a supreme show of wit, Hitchcock's screenwriter (or the original novelist, Du Maurier) makes, in a way, Mrs. Danvers Rebecca's tool; it is through her the couple are cursed. In fact, the great moments of the movie are the two scenes where Fontaine and Anderson are in Rebecca's room.
So, why is this not one of the great Hitchcocks? To be brief, the ending. After the first big twist, the film loses its magic. As Maxim himself mentions, Fontaine loses that "little lost look" that makes her so endearing, and her character rather melts away. For the climax, we could have stayed with her for one long, last suspenseful scene in Manderley, always suspecting Mrs. Danvers would do something horrible, which, in the end, she does. Instead, the latter part of the film focuses on Maxim as he learns the truth of Rebecca's illness, and then comes home to find Danvers has set Manderley on fire. It is up for his wife to explain the matter as the house burns behind them.
Excuse me?
This ending shows a total lack of knowledge regarding the writing maxim (forgive the pun) "show, don't tell." Now, I'm not blaming Hitchcock for this. It could've easily been Du Maurier's fault, or Selznick's, but it was certainly someone's. Here, for once, the middle of the movie is more memorable than the ending.
Top Box Office
- 1.$70.2M
- 2.$35.8M
- 3.$23.9M
- 4.$3.2M
- 5.$3.0M
- 6.$2.8M
- 7.$2.3M
- 8.$2.2M
- 9.$2.2M
- 10.$1.2M