More Reactions to Wuthering Heights 2009 (II)

The second installment of Wuthering Heights 2009 will be broadcast in the US next Sunday, January 25 on PBS. Several newspapers publish reminders:

MASTERPIECE CLASSIC (9p.m., WNET/13) - In the second installment of "Wuthering Heights," Heathcliff (Tom Hardy) returns as a rich man after a long absence. (Newsday)

Heathcliff returns to his childhood home as a rich man in the conclusion of "Masterpiece Classic: Wuthering Heights." (KCET, 9 p.m.) (Los Angeles Times)

In the opener, we saw the early stages of a promising love between Heathcliff - the handsome Gypsy, adopted by a rich man - and spirited Catherine, the girl next door. It all went sour after the dad died; now the story plunges toward its inevitable conclusion. (Mike Hughes-Gannett News Service)

But the first episode is still generating positive and negative feedback (read our review of the whole series here).

MOSTLY POSITIVE:
The Egalitarian Bookworm (Chick?):

I don't think this is the definitive version by any means, (I wonder if there can be a definitive version of such a slippery novel) but I felt that it had a lot going for it. This "WH" was more than watchable, it touched on almost all the crucial themes, moods and characters, and made the book feel relevant. Most importantly, the emotions I felt while watching the film recalled the emotions I felt when I first really learned to appreciate the book: horror and grief at Heathcliff's unfair lot as a child and young man, anger at Cathy's betrayal, sickening regret mixed with perverse fascination as Heathcliff embarks on his campaign of revenge, and a weird mix of hope and disinterest in the fate of the younger generation, who fall so much under the shadows of their larger-than-life parents. It made me go back to my lit crit and think about the book in contemporary contexts, and for that I am thankful. Also, there was a lot of sex, which I may have mentioned.
All in all, well done to the folks at ITV. (Read more)

Aye Captain:

I really suggest watching it because it is excellently done, not at all cheesy, and way, way, WAY better than the other Wuthering Heights Movie. It even makes the book seem better. (Emily Ruth)

anonymous on BrontëBlog:

Wow! Tom Hardy was a thunderous success as Heathcliff, to say the least! He completely embodied every aspect of a handsome, brooding, lost soul - all the while making me root for him! Great job Mr. Hardy!

anonymous on BrontëBlog:

Wow from me, too! At this moment, I have only seen the first 2 hour installment on PBS and I am enthralled, and having not read the book, will be doing so in the very near future. I watched certain scenes again on the PBS website and there is much to gain from viewing more than once. The acting is strong and, at times, heartwrenching and believeably real. I have known people with the personalities of these characters and I find the connections in this adaptation electrifying to watch. Tom Hardy's portrayal of Heathcliff is extremely satisfying and I have come to the quick conclusion that this is an extraordinary actor with a full career ahead of him; his subtleness in his movements expressing emotion in scenes of tenderness bring me back to my own remembrances of such all-consuming passion of new found love, and his pure, raw, and hard emotion in scenes of pain hit the heart with an intense blow without fail. It is easy to understand how Heathcliff's feelings of abandonment from childhood shape his life throughout times of love and times of bitterness and I applaud the actor for allowing the viewer to feel some empathy for even a small amount of Heathcliff's life of turmoil.

fleurfairy on PBS Discussions:

[T]his production is very raw and dark. I think it's the most like the novel as any version. Let's be serious, the film makers today are not going to cast teenagers for these roles. It is simply outside our modern sensibilities. They have to put Bronte's writing in context with our world. I thought the casting is spot-on, especially Tom Hardy as Heathcliff. He is dark, savage, angry, and very brooding- exactly how Bronte described him. I like Charlotte as Cathy. She is not the melodramatic brat that Merle Oberon played her as, but she does have her moments of fire and passion. Scratching Hindley in the face was a definite example of Bronte's Cathy! There's never going to be perfect adaptations of classic novels. I think America's been waiting for "The Great Gatsby" version for decades! But this WH is as good as it gets in my opinion.

Edit (24/01/09):
The Globe and Mail:

Another swaggering attempt to capture the intensity and Gothic longing of Emily Brontë's novel (some PBS stations began airing it last week, some start tomorrow), this one is big on visual oomph. More important, though, is Tom Hardy as Heathcliff. He's superb, all primordial rage and venom. Charlotte Riley has the largely thankless role of Cathie - it's very difficult to make the character credible today - and Burn Gorman is a good, despicable Hindley Earnshaw. It's still phenomenally intense, to the point of lurid, and female-centric as all get-out. (John Doyle)

MOSTLY NEGATIVE:
Romancing the Tome:

1) Where the heck was Mr. Lockwood? The best part about the novel is how eerily it begins, with this traveler showing up at W.H. on a cold dark night and discovering both the motley crew residing within as well as the curious graffiti marks on the bed panels in Cathy's former room. Instead of that intriguing start, we got to meet the second-generation upstarts in some random supplemental scenes...an immediate snooze.
2) Tom Hardy was not my Heathcliff. Sorry, he just wasn't sexy-swarthy enough. Granted, we DID start to warm up to him once he returned with the spiffy haircut and the raging dose of 'tude, but that doesn't make up for the fifty-or-so minutes we spent feeling weirded-out by him and wondering why Cathy was even attracted to him in the first place.
3) Cathy could have been a bit more of a spitfire, but all-told, Charlotte Riley was acceptable, albeit a little too modern-looking. (Especially in the one scene where she was lying on the ground with him wearing a knit cap that made her look like a hipster Brooklynite circa 2006.)

mysterywriter08 on PBS Discussions:

This modern depiction of "Wuthering Heights" fails to capture the passion between Cathy and Heathcliff. I have seen other movies made of this story from the performances of Lawrence Olivier and Merle Oberon to the Ralph Fiennes, Juliette Binoche version which is my favorite and then a PBS version some 12 years ago which was better than the one they had last night. Certainly the episode last night was more outwardly sexual but the actors fail to deliver the emotional desperation that these actors should have had The landscape was not utilized enough. I have been in that area of England and I know how dramatic a landscape it can be. Last night's episode fails to touch the beautiful brooding isolation of that terrain. That sort of place should be in your soul and what I saw last night were a wooden performance by the. actress who played Cathy. I wondered if she ever read the book? Let me give you an example: Cathy's brother floggs Heathcliff and she just sits there with her sister in law. No emotion -no nothing. Tom Hardy as Heathcliff was passible I supose - certainly he has a n attractive streak but lets face it, he was no Ralph Fiennes. All the actors looked to clean, well fed and healthy. I just did not see the realism. Even that skeleton that was lying in the coffin looked like some sort of medical teaching model. Give me a break.

Sheila Lanz-Jimenez on PBS Discussions:

This adaptation is even worse than I expected. While I was watching it I thought that it should have been titled, Very Loosely inspired from from the novel by Emily Bronte. The woman that plays Nelly in this production is much too old. She is supposed to be the same age as Hindley. The actor that plays Hindey is very miscast. I could go on and on, but this is defintely not the way that Emily Bronte wrote these characters.
It seems that most of the adaptations of this novel do not want either Cathy Earnshaw nor Heathcliff to be like the way that they are characterized in the book. Heathcliff is not a romantic hero. In the book he obsessed by Cathy. He is both mentally and physically abusive to Isabella and Cathy Linton. A character who behaved like he did today would be either locked up in jail or in an asylum for the criminally insane. Cathy Earnshaw is a spoiled, petulant, selfish person and at times abusive to Nelly and Isabella. She wants not only Heathcliff but her husband too. They are not a likable duo and deserve each other.
The only romantic couple in the novel are Cathy Linton and Hareton.
The two characters, Cathy Earnshaw and Heathcliff, are almost always changed to make them more likable. A good example of this is the oldest version starring Merle Oberon and Lawrence Olivier. Most productions only do part of the book. This production is an other example of the "Harlequinization" of so many classic books.
If that is what you like you are in luck.

More opinions on the PBS Discussions board and Barnes and Noble Book Club. Precisely, in this thread on the B&N board you can leave a question for Peter Bowker, the screenwriter of this adaptation:

Masterpiece and BN.com give you direct access to Wuthering Heights screenwriter Peter Bowker. Post your questions now, and Bowker will answer Jan. 19-30, 2009.

Categories: Movies-DVD-TV, Wuthering Heights