© William Ahearn 2007
“Last night I dreamt I went to Manderley again,” was
once one of the most well known opening lines in English fiction in the middle
of the 20th century. Daphne DuMaurier’s Rebecca, published
in 1938, was a major success in several mediums as it ended up being adapted
for TV, the stage and a radio play version. Hitchcock would do three films
based on the writings of Daphne DuMaurier, “Jamaica Inn,” “Rebecca”
and “The Birds.” Ramblings about the other two films are below.
“Rebecca” would be Alfred Hitchcock’s first Hollywood film
and it is one of the few Hitchcock movies that earned its reputation as an
excellent film. It has the best performance by an actor – Laurence Olivier
– and the best performance by an actress – Joan Fontaine or Judith
Anderson, take your pick – of any Hitchcock movie.
While some have considered Rebecca a romance novel and some
a murder mystery, it is actually a study in jealousy. That’s how DuMaurier
described it, although marketing departments have targeted various audience
segments with book covers that range from those found on bodice rippers to
those that could be put next to the paperbacks of Henry James.
To me, it is one of Hitchcock’s best films. The performances
are focused and restrained; the cinematography is tight and the story moves
right along. There is one serious reservation that I do have and it is critical
to the story and understanding not only the characters, but also the entire
intention of DuMarier’s novel. And that is, of course, the manner of
the death of Rebecca. In the film, Max explains to the second Mrs. DeWinter
how Rebecca fell and struck her head during an argument in the boathouse.
In the book, Max shoots Rebecca three times. The shooting is acceptable in
DuMarier’s world because Rebecca’s death was the result of a carefully
crafted suicide. That the second Mrs. DeWinter would accept either cause is
a given as long as the result is the same. And that is what makes Rebecca
more than the typical murder mystery. Knowing how Rebecca dies is not the
spoiler some would think it is as knowing about the sled in “Citizen
Kane” (a film that owes a great debt to Hitchcock’s “Rebecca”)
isn’t going to ruin that film.
“Rebecca” is a nice piece of work and one of
Hitchcock’s best.
“Jamaica Inn,” on the other hand, is a flick
that buckles more than it swashes. This one of the orphan girl gets sent to
live with distant relatives not knowing they cause shipwrecks on the coast
to rob, murder and plunder stories. Oh, yeah, and she falls in love with a
bad guy who is really an undercover hero. Even Charles Laughton and Maureen
O’Hara (right before they did the wonderful “Hunchback of Notre
Dame”), can’t save this mess. “Large barges of arrrrgghhh,
you’ll be swinging by the King’s rope before teatime,” pretty
much sums it up for me. Not having read the DuMaurier book, I can’t
tell how faithfully the book is followed. Give the book a shot and forget
this film. It’s odd that this film was made just before Rebecca and
was Hitchcock’s last film in England until he returned to do “Frenzy”
in 1972.
“The Birds” is another prime example of everything wrong
in how Hitchcock makes films. Based on an atmospheric and almost sinister
story by Daphne DuMaurier, “The Birds” becomes another blond ice
queen redeemable bad girl (Tipi Hendren) being saved by a decent man. Evan
Hunter, who wrote the script, was never one of my favorite writers (although
Ed McBain is) and he utterly butchered the story. (If there is a good word
that I can say for Hunter it is that he was fired from writing Hitchcock’s
“Marnie” because he refused to write the despicable rape scene.)
DuMaurier’s story is a subtle building of tension and doom. Once again
Hitchcock ignores the nuance and goes for the cheap and shallow. “The
Birds” is just a silly overwrought film with bad special effects and
a story that goes nowhere.
(Tipi Hendren and Alfred Hitchcock had a rather bizarre relationship
that I won’t go into here. Google can find it for you and the only reason
it becomes vaguely interesting is because Hitchcock cast Hendren in “Marnie”
and one can only see that choice as some form of retribution. “Marnie”
– it also stars Sean Connery – is the story of a control freak
sadist who intentionally becomes involved with a thief. While this may be
the opening of cinema noir if played one way, it becomes a sick and
pointless psychodrama that suggests that marital rape is a perfectly acceptable
behavior modification tool. To see how far Hitchcock has sunk as a filmmaker,
contrast the foxhunting scene in “Marnie” with the foxhunting
scene in “The Farmer’s Wife.” “The Farmer’s
Wife” is a silent film romantic comedy and the visual language is stunning.
The foxhunting scene is a marvel of choreography. In “Marnie,”
it’s a cardboard cut-out that insults the viewer. “Marnie”
is a dreadful, ugly film with bad effects and silly psychological pretensions.
The feminists had a field day with this film and they were right on the money.
Obviously, this is not based on the work of Daphne DuMarier and she had nothing
to do with this mess. Just want to make that absolutely clear.)
If you’re a fan of suspense, murder and the macabre –
and what DuMaurier fan isn’t? – you’ll want to see Nicholas
Roeg’s classic “Don’t Look Now.” It’s available
on a wide-screen version on DVD and this is how Daphne DuMaurier should be
handled. Venice is so alive in this on-location film and Donald Sutherland
and Julie Christie turn in some of their best work. Based on DuMaurier’s
short story of the same title, it expands the narrative without violating
it. If you’re a DuMaurier fan, see “Rebecca” and “Don’t
Look Now.”