Wuthering Heights (1970/American International/MGM Widescreen w/Pan
& Scan side DVD + 2012 Oscilloscope DVD)/Young & Wild (2012/Sundance Select/MPI DVD)
Picture: C+
& C-/C+/C Sound: C+ Extras: D/C+/C- Films: B-/C+/C
Relationships
are not always easy to portray in the moving image and now we look at three
attempts to deal with them, including two different versions of a literary
classic…
Emily
Bronte’s Wuthering Heights has been adapted plenty of
times and two things strike me about all the adaptations so far: they either
fail or partly succeed and they tend to have more differences between them than
you might imagine based on a single book.
We have reviewed several versions, add two more here and hope to cover
all of them eventually (many are still
not on DVD, let alone Blu-ray) including my coverage of the underrated 1992
version at this link:
http://www.fulvuedrive-in.com/review/533/Wuthering+Heights+(1992)
It deals
with several other versions and now, we look at two DVD releases of two of the
more noteworthy versions: The 1970 American International British version MGM
issued a few years ago on DVD in both Widescreen & Pan & Scan on a
flipper DVD and a new 2012 version from Oscilloscope on DVD (also issued on
Blu-ray) that are two of the most naturalistic versions made, but have their
own limits.
American
International picked up the film in an unusual move for a studio known for
genre and exploitation films, but I am glad they did and it is now owned by MGM
through their Orion catalog ownership and has a very young Timothy Dalton in
his first lead role as Heathcliff, very effective an done of the best actors in
the role. Anna Caulder Marshall is Cathy
and the director is Robert Fuest, also here in a change of pace from the
eccentric film work that includes the 1960s TV classic The Avengers, the two Dr.
Phibes films, The Devil’s Rain
and Last Days Of Man On Earth aka The Final Programme.
All bold
visuals, eccentricities and genre tendencies by all involved are left at the
door for one of the best versions of the novel that does not always get the
credit it deserves and also manages not to be very stuffy in the process. It may not outdo the 1992 version, but it is
up there and really deserves new credit and rediscovery. Dalton
was always more than just a striking face; he could always act and was of
Shakespearian caliber from the start, though most know of him only from his two
James Bond films.
He is in
character deeply the whole time, holding his own against a great cast including
his co-star, Harry Andrews, Hugh Griffith, Judy Cornwell, Pamela Brown, Julian
Glover and his young counterpart for potential stardom who also did not become
as biog a star as he deserved to be, Ian Ogilvy (almost James Bond a few times
himself, becoming The Saint in the late 1970s).
Though slow in parts, I liked this more often than not and when it gets
good, it is like you are spying on the events going on. If you missed this version, catch it.
The 2012
version by Director Andrea Arnold tries to bring a female perspective to the
tale to some extent, yet Kate Bush and Pat Benatar have nothing to worry about
because sometimes this version is more about creating new, subtle differences
(not the least of which is making Heathcliff a black male with two actors,
which actually gives us a new sense of the other, but also can be lacking and
makes for an ironic comparison to Jamie Foxx’s work in Tarantino’s Django Unchained, as well as having a
Shakespeare feel of its own at times) and rejecting widescreen for a more
personal approach.
However,
it also wants to make a sad sense of nothingness a part of the narrative and in
this, it succeeds. Sometimes, she is
saying things only she knows the meaning of, other times nothing and sometimes
tells the tale well. The mostly unknown
actors are just fine, but if the idea is to reject the Hollywood and similar adaptations overt the
years (extending to TV, the last time the story was done black style) then she
does not succeed. This is not Italian
Neo-realism, nothing strongly political, nothing innovate and nothing
surprising, save it is competent and yet another unique entry in the long list
of serious adaptations of the book worth a look. I wanted more, but it is what it is and am
glad it found some fans, which it will more after this home video release. To refute one critic however, the film does
not drag or bring the story or book into the 21st Century because a
classic book does not need anyone’s help when it is a book this well
known. Still, recommended with
reservations.
The 1970 Heights has no extras, but the 2012 Heights has an essay set to images form
the film by critic David Fear that gets wacky when he starts making
overgeneralized attacks against critics who note the Heathcliff is a black male
in the film and calls them names. This
is lame behavior, especially from someone who writes for Time Out New York and obviously
has some eliteness issues. This is the
kind of ignorance that has spawned quote whores and is embarrassing, even when
he makes a few good points. We also get
an Original Theatrical Trailer.
Marialy
Rivas’ Young & Wild (2012) wants
to deal with some of the same young lady issues as Heights, but in a much more
graphic way as religiously oppressed Daniela (Alicia Rodriguez) is a
sex-obsessed gal who is sick of the preaching, lying and pointless of the world
around her, so she keeps seducing and having sex with as many young men as she
is attracted to as possible. This leaves
her somewhat empty, but now that emptiness is accompanied by a new phenomenon
which helps her and hurts her at the same time: social media on the Internet.
Unfortunately,
the film gets too wrapped up in the Net aspects, the sex aspects are comical
and serious, though their graphic nature (including lesbian sex) works against
the comic intents and the film, becomes too self-amused despite its boldness
and a few good moments where Rivas is onto a character study before allowing
said moments to be interrupted by banality or repetitive Net text.
The
director co-wrote the screenplay with Camila Gutiérrez who claims this is
partly autobiographical. I believe some
of it, but some other aspects just do not always ring true. See it for yourself and decide.
A trailer
is the only extras.
The
anamorphically enhanced 1.85 X 1 image on the 1970 Heights has the best color of the three releases, though it seems
muted a bit versus what it should be, meaning MGM needs to get this one out on
Blu-ray. It is also far better than the
horrid and & scan 1.33 X 1 butcher-job on the flipside of this disc. Director of Photography John Coquillon (Witchfinder General, the original Straw Dogs, The Changeling) makes this a very naturalistic-looking production
that is as visually impressive as any version of the film ever made, including
that 1992 version covered above. The
1.33 X 1 image on the 2012 Heights
(lensed by DP Robbie Ryan) goes overboard to be natural to the point that shaky
camerawork, though we get some nice shots and the bold choice of making this
narrow-vision, but it sometimes becomes too subconscious of itself and that
holds its back. It too should look
better on Blu-ray, which is also available.
That leaves the anamorphically enhanced 1.85 X 1 image on Wild is a mix of repetitive pseudo-PC
images and live action that can be choppy and sometimes makes human flesh tones
and the body seem plastic and fake-looking, so the eroticism does not always
come across as intended.
The lossy
Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono on the 1970 Heights
and lossy, dialogue-based Dolby Digital 5.1 on the 2012 Heights and Wild are
about even with good professional recording for the most part, but nothing to
write home about in the way of sonics.
Music is also fine across the board, though fans of Michel Legrand’s
score on the 1970 film will want an isolated music track in stereo.
- Nicholas Sheffo
