***No spoilers***
This is the second film adaptation of Daphne Du Marier’s novel. The first was in 1952, starring Richard Burton and Olivia de Havilland. Unfortunately, I have never seen the 1952 version, so the modern remake is spared my usual complaint about remakes on this occasion.
It is an historical romantic drama, set in England and Italy during the early 19th century. Trying to avoid spoilers, I can only give a vague outline of the plot. A young orphan is taken in and raised by his cousin, living a comfortable life in 1830s Cornwall. Philip adores Ambrose, the older relative, who is exceptionally kind to him.
Ambrose decides to travel to Italy, to improve his health in the sunny climate. Philip is left in the care of his godfather, Mr Kendall, and his daughter Louise. She grows very close to Philip, and expects that one day they will marry. News arrives from Italy. Ambrose has fallen madly in love with a widow named Rachel, and they are married. She also happens to be a distant cousin of the family.
Very soon, letters arrive from Philip. His illness is becoming worse, and he suspects Rachel and her lawyer friend, Mr Rainaldi, of colluding to poison him. Young Philip is worried, so makes the long journey to Florence to confront Rachel. On arrival, he is devastated to discover that Ambrose is dead and buried. Rachel has left the country, and the lawyer Rainaldi tells him she has left everything to him, in accordance with Ambrose’s original will.
Not long after he returns to England, Rachel arrives at the family home in Cornwall. Philip is immediately smitten by the beauty of the older woman, and begins to lavish gifts and attention on her, much to the chagrin of Mr Kendall, and his daughter Louise. He tells Rachel he wants her to have the inheritance, as Ambrose’s widow, but she declines. Eventually, he forces it on her legally, along with the extensive collection of jewels once owned by his mother.
But he soon starts to become ill, with similar symptoms to those suffered by cousin Ambrose. Then he finds letters in a trunk of books left by Ambrose, and becomes convinced that Rachel is guilty. She stalls his concerns by becoming his lover, but the tension builds when she refuses to marry him.
That’s it for the story. I will say it has a satisfying twist that I suspected, but still enjoyed. Period detail is wonderful, and the casting feels just perfect too. Rachel Weisz as Rachel is simply lovely to look at, as well as playing her role to perfection. Sam Clafin is very convincing as the naive, love-struck young man, and the under-used Iain Glen strikes just the right note as the concerned godfather.
An exceptionally good film that I enjoyed much more than I expected to.
(For the information of UK readers, this should be available free on All4, the Channel 4 streaming service.)
Here’s a trailer.
Sounds very interesting. Thank you for the review, Pete! Now, i only have to find a proxyserver for getting into your national streaming. 😉 xx Michael
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is a first rate historical drama, Michael.
Best wishes, Pete.
(Thank you for all the reblogs too)
LikeLike
Reblogged this on OPENED HERE >> https:/BOOKS.ESLARN-NET.DE.
LikeLiked by 1 person
My granddaughter and I have been reading Du Maurier so I will look for this film. Thanks.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is on Amazon Prime, Elizabeth. A classy period drama that I think you would enjoy.
Best wishes, Pete.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks. I will look for it there.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’ve not seen this film… yet. I enjoy a number of Weisz movies primarily because they mostly have fit into my genre of interest. The Bourne Legacy back in 2012 was the last time I saw her on the big screen intentionally. In fact, I’ve watched that movie many times. I honestly tried to see if I could actually meet her during filming in Chicago of “Chain Reaction” when I was living there, but didn’t work out. Lucky man, now ex-Bond, Daniel Craig. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is very much a period (1830) drama; more period, than drama. But it is impeccably done, and she is wonderful to watch, Doug.
Best wishes, Pete.
LikeLike
Cute expressions when her mouth kinda dimples on the corners. 🙂 I rather am susceptible to her visual vulnerability. Oh.. some obsessions should be entertained. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Pete. I have been wondering whether I would enjoy this, it’s been on my wish list for a while.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I thought it was a classic ‘period drama’, Marina. But an above average one, in most respects.
Best wishes, Pete.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’ll have to read this book – it sounds interesting.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Daphne was a good writer, and this is a faithful adaptation, Stevie.
Best wishes, Pete.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have read some works of Daphne Du Murier but not this one yet. Do you think the movie adaptation is in YouTube?
LikeLiked by 1 person
The original film is apparently on You Tube, Arlene. It was made in 1952, and stars Richard Burton. The title is the same. This version is not on YT, but is on Amazon Prime.
Best wishes, Pete.
LikeLike
I watched the original quite a while ago…if its any help to anyone I have just downloaded it on Torrent Day 🙂 x
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for the tip, Carol.
Best wishes, Pete. x
LikeLiked by 1 person
The 1952 film is on YouTube. Thanks for the mention of it because I’d never heard of this being made into a film with Richard Burton before. One to watch at meal times! I love watching films having my meals.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I will have to check it out on YT, thanks. Burton got great reviews for his first film made in America. It helped his career take off.
Best wishes, Pete.
LikeLike
It’s a great book, which I have read, but haven’t seen either movie. Now I want to see it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is on Amazon Prime, so I have read. if you have that, it’s worth watching, Darlene.
(I would watch Rachel Weisz read the phone book, so admit to bias.)
Best wishes, Pete.
LikeLiked by 1 person
LOL She is an amazing actor.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’d like to see the film. For a comparison of the original and this remake:
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s a good link, David. I can imagine Richard Burton being very good in the 1952 version. I can also imagine Ms Weisz being better than Ms de Havilland in this one. 🙂
Best wishes, Pete.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Now I want to watch this movie. I have never heard of it maybe because I live in the U.S? I wonder if there is some way I can still watch it?
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is apparently available on Amazon Prime, if you have access to that, WB. Not on Netflix in the USA though. I watched it on ‘regular’ TV here.
Best wishes, Pete.
LikeLike
Thank you 😊 I do have Amazon Prime as well as Netflix. 😁😁
LikeLiked by 1 person
You have my attention!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Definitely worth a watch, Liz.
Best wishes, Pete.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for the recommendation, Pete!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have (strangely) seen Rebecca back in the day when it was on TV but not this version, glad you enjoyed it!
LikeLiked by 1 person
This isn’t ‘Rebecca’, it’s ‘My Cousin Rachel’! 🙂 🙂
It’s a completely different story, and set over 100 years earlier. 🙂
Best wishes, Pete.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah but everyone’s commenting about Rebecca and that’s the only one I’ve seen 🤣
LikeLiked by 1 person
Okay… 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
This should be fun to do, and watch!
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s beautifully filmed too, Pejj. Worth your time to watch it.
Best wishes, Pete.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I only saw the original which was very moody and quite apt in black and white. I remember it vaguely except the fire which I remember well. Was there one in the new version?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sure you’re not thinking of Jane Eyre? 🙂 🙂
No fires in this one, Carolyn. Except for the flames coming off Rachel Weisz!
Best wishes, Pete.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well when I thought about it I got confused but the film I saw was a 1940’s with Laurence Olivier and yes, there was a fire. But It does sound like Jane Eyre…I think I may be losing it…!
LikeLiked by 1 person
The 1940s film with Olivier is ‘Rebecca’. For some reason others are also mixing up the two tonight!
Joking aside though, I am sure you are thinking of Jane Eyre, probably the Orson Welles version.
(1943, with Jane played by Joan Fontaine, Welles as Mr Rochester, director Robert Stevenson.)
LikeLike
1940 Joan Fontaine is right with L Olivier. The house that was set fire by housekeeper Mrs Danvers was called Manderley.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The film is stolen by the housekeeper, Mrs Danvers, played by Judith Anderson. Love her preformance. I am pleased to hear it wasn’t Jane Eyre after all!
Now, getting back to My Cousin Rachel… 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks Pete. It is always interesting watching an original, then the remake.
If you haven’t already done so, take in a viewing of the 1941 Oscar-winning (Best Picture) “Rebecca” directed by Alfred Hitchcock, also based on the book of the same title written by Daphne Du Marier. Then, perhaps watch the 2017 remake?
Okay, now you’ve done it Pete 😉 – I have convinced myself to view three new films (new to me anyway), finally seeing the remake of “Rebecca”, the original 1952 “My Cousin Rachel”, and the remake.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The 1940s Rebecca was brilliant. The new one was so bad I couldn’t get through more than 20 mins of it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I won’t even bother to watch the new Rebecca. The original is wonderful. Sadly, I have never seen the original version of this film, but though Racel Weisz was perfect in this modern version, WN.
Best wishes, Pete.
LikeLike
I’m a huge fan of the original ‘Rebecca’, but won’t be bothering with the modern version. I already know how it ends, Chris! 🙂 🙂
Best wishes, Pete.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I remember seeing the 1952 version over 60 years ago with my Mother. It was too long ago for me to recall much about it other than my Mother loved it. Warmest regards, Theo
LikeLiked by 1 person
I would be happy to watch it, Theo. I usually prefer original versions. That said Ms Weisz is very alluring! 🙂
Best wishes, Pete.
LikeLiked by 1 person