Are you 65 now?

@@exploreexostanexoandsuperj8096Nah, just parents with an extensive Hitchcock collection. I think I was like 8 when they showed it to me.

Matthew Jaco wow at the age of 8 you can already analyze movies, good for You

@@exploreexostanexoandsuperj8096 things like that do give you nightmares as a kid. I think she means she sees a whole other level now.

Oliver's delivery, as always, is exquisite.

Judith Anderson. A terrific Australian actress. Played an English housekeeper in this movie, and also portrayed Big Momma Pollitt with a flawless southern accent in "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof" with Elizabeth Taylor. Check it out, brilliant.

Holy cow!!! Amazing!!!

Total agreement! All the cast members did a good job , but she took acting and this movie to another level. In fact, every time I this movie, she creeps me out, but I love it...haha. I also like Mrs. Hopper in the beginning. She played a snobby upper crust lady to the tee.

Perivale225 Mrs Van Hopper. New money. No class.

Someone already mentioned she played big mama and cat on a hot tin roof, and I also enjoy her in Laura with Gene Tierney. She’s so versatile.

at least mrs danverss is scary in the netflix one. this one felt like caricatures of old maid

@@angelabby2379 That's funny because I think the exact opposite! ahah One of the reasons I didn't like the netflix one is for Danvers' portrayal

@@essxsolo xD after watch 2 movies. the only thing i can conclude is the girl is afraid of a maid...and rich person can practically get away with murder. Especially when the accused person is the heir (the one with money). with the right connection they wouldn't even reopen the case since no one press charges or accusations 😳 except drunked pavell. yep doesn't make any sense on both. i would fire the maid right away and the movie ended

I liked both movies. Both have something that makes it unique ^_^

I agree. This movie is so great and so cool that they managed to get the perfect actors and the perfect setting and personnel all together to make a horror movie. The Netflix one is pretty boring.

Capodopera

@ Karlee Valentino.... I certainly agree with you...probably, my favorite actor, Laurence Olivier, and so very handsome!! 💜💔🥀.......

Sorry I can't agree with that; I always thought he was overrated!

I agree! Her vulnerability and innocence is irresistible, she's like a frightened angel. Of course the fact that she is young and beautiful doesn't hurt.

Agreed-she’s perfect in this role-heartbreaking.👍

My first Joan Fontaine’s movie was Jane Eyre. To me Joan Fontaine is Jane Eyre and Jane Eyre is Joan Fontaine

Yes, Joan Fontaine was just perfection in this. Just perfection.

Personally, I think she is overdoing the poor-little-mouse-act a wee bit. Nobody is THAT insecure and timid imho.

@juttapopp Read the book!

Rebecca was my favorite book at 16. I too thought I’d have sent Danvers packing. At 12 my fave was Little women, at 13, pride and prejudice at 14 Persuasion, at 15 Sense and Sensibility, 16 Rebecca. These remained my solace and joy through a lifetime. The movies were a joy to be revisited in various iterations. It like to see Rebecca remade with Colin Firth and Emma Watson or one of the Fanning sisters.

jutta popp she is supposed to be 19 or 20 . Very sheltered upbringing

jutta popp she and the husband were both emotionally insecure people

I,ve seen it 43 times more or less ... 🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩 etc.

I'm reading the book right now and I love it.

Perfect performance.

She won an Oscar for Suspicion a few years later playing a similar character...worth a watch if you haven’t

I love those French phones... so much so that you when I got my first stimulus money I bought me one. It's real nice!

🙌🙌

My Mom's too, I always remember watching it with her when I was a little girl ❤️

It's MY favourite as well: saw it around 43 times!!!! 🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩

Carol Matuszak I completely agree. I mean he thought she was a brilliant actress, which she was, no question about that, but not every actor can play every role. There is a screen test with the two of them and it was obviously the right choice to cast Joan. Not only was she three years younger than Vivien, she also meticulously embodies the absolute insecurity about this character. Vivien‘s whole demeanor would not have fitted the part she was much too confident and assured for this role. Her appearance as well would have much more fitted the part of Rebecca, a beautiful but distanced English rose with dark hair. But the second Mrs. Dewinter had to be the complete opposite of that. Of course Joan Fontaine was absolutely beautiful, but her beauty was more ethereal and not necessarily created through self confidence.

Rebecca came out the year the Oliviers married, and I've thought for years that a portrait of Vivien as Rebecca should've been in the film (like the blue dress portrait of Scarlett in Gone with the Wind)- but slightly elongated, since I understand she was short.

@@billmurray4430 well.. as characters Blanche and the second Mrs. Dewinter couldn’t be more different in my opinion :D Sure Blanche has a vulnerability in her which Vivien Leigh portrayed perfectly but there are many different types and layers of vulnerability and these two cases are extremely different I would say

It really added to Fontaine’s insecurity since she is surrounded by well-renowned English actors and she’s still quite green of an actress.

2:06:55

@@SL-ze6su Thank you for the time!!

It's not given in the book either.

Daphne DuMaurier said she thought of her as a Daphne like herself as she wrote it but never gave her a name on purpose to make Rebecca the true main character- brilliant!

@@beautifulbrittany1868 Thank you for this explanation. At some point I thought it would be revealed that her name was also Rebecca. Obviously that didn't happen, so it was quite mysterious to me as to why the main character was never called by her name. This explanation is quite satisfying.

@@beautifulbrittany1868 I'm reading the book now and just realized her name is never given.

RR Rangel the closest we get to a name is when Maxim sends her a note after first meeting her and apologizing for his behavior and she remarks surprise that he spelt her name correctly on the envelope.

True but if not for Selznick we might have not gotten such an incredible film let alone faithful adaptation which Selznick insisted the film had to be, Hitchcock original script was complete different in comparison to novel was luckily rejected. The latter situation in regard to letter R agree was misfire idea by Selznick. In a way it was necessary evil they way the film panned out.

I'm watching it in quarantine too. And reading the book.

Glad they don't. There is talent among ALL & the diversity is great. It's the writers & directors

@@billmurray4430 And those who haven't read the book and don't know that The Girl's name is never mentioned there, are dying to hear it! But Beatrice seems to be struggling to remember it. It's so brilliantly done!

I disagree. I think she makes a perfect plain Jane.

Plain Joan

Mrs.G well I think that depends on the movie or rather the story it was based on or how they changed it :D Do you think the novel of Rebecca does not have certain messages behind it? I mean in the end Rebecca had to die because she was a threat to the social norms of the time/patriarchy itself. Her promiscuity and potential bisexuality could not be accepted. However, this were the 40s, classic Hollywood and there was a thing called the Hays Code so naturally there won’t be anything too controversial. Have you seen to kill a mockingbird or Casablanca? In many cases filmmakes had to find ways to express their political viewpoints by wrapping them in s story with a romantic setting, just to name one example. If you read between the lines you’ll find many films who have a deeper message.

@@heligolightly don't agree Rebecca died because she was bisexual. She was evil because she was hurting animals. Bisexuality had nothing to do with it. But I agree with the rest of your comment.

It's easy for a boring white karen twat to be "non political". You don't risk getting thrown into jail just because of whom you love. You don't risk losing your housing because of the color of your skin. It's easy for you to sit lazily not care about politics because politics doesn't affect you.

Still waters run deep is a proverb of Latin origin now commonly taken to mean that a placid exterior hides a passionate or subtle nature.

This is all loosely based on Jane Eyre.

Jane Eyre in the 40s was played by the same actress- Joan Fontaine!

Finally someone sees a parallel with Jane Eyre. The way I see it there are so many more parallels, that indeed it must be loosely based on Jane Eyre as InvincibleIgnorance says I suppose🤔😌

@@IndomitableT i find jane eyre is way more interesting. this one teases us and its almost like comedy

Yes, it's quite annoying how the music overwhelmes the movie (as it does in most old movies).

Yes lol

Yeah it hasn’t aged so well but I’d still take that over the boring delivery of the new version.

@@johnwheatley5641 How well do you think the shit movies being made now will hold up 80 years from now? Styles of making movies change over time like everything else. I think this film holds up very well.

You're exaggerating but yes music was used to emphasize or illicit an emotional response. That's how films were made for decades in Hollywood and there were many great composers of film scores such as Franz Waxman and Alfred Newman to name just two. Just as you don't wear the same style of clothing people wore in the past styles of movie making change and whether or not it has changed for the better is subjective.

Releases Oct 21st. I wouldnt hold my breath. Hitchcock directing, Selznick producing and Olivier and Fontaine......that's a tall order to top. The film is preserved in the Library of Congress

@@SciFiGirl007 I didn't say top. I didn't even say equal. I said do justice, which, I think, is an achievement level that allows for imperfection. I certainly think the fact that this movie is in color whereas the original was in black and white is an advantage. Also, there is the book as source material that is senior to Hitchcock's film. Both these elements create space for reinterpretation of the material rather than just mimicry.

I'm defiantly going to watch the new can't wait for it to come out!!!

it was so bad

The new movie was awful

I would too, even though this one is pretty well done for its time!

@@kellenyt5574 Oh, agree. It's amazing.

@@cookie_dough_hangover well you're in luck because Netflix has a remake in the works right now. It's supposed to be released this yr.

@@trawlins396 no way!!

@@trawlins396 Really? I can't wait.

I had a feeling the original movie was better, so here I am haha

It was not bad. My wife never watches old black and white movies but after seeing the new version she's eager to discover the Hitchcock one.

Me

It's just you, the whole film is terrific. The first part of the film is the happiest though.

@@BartholomewSmutz I could not disagree more. The first 20 minutes of the film presents the viewer with an extremely profound view of life, one in which there is a sort of beauty and elegance underneath the sadness and evil of the world. It tells us that, maybe even the sadest of people only want to be loved are cared for. It shows us the sadness underneath the gentility and elegance of upper class life, then underneath that, the human desire to be loved. From the opening scene we see the consequence of not being loved, death. It is opening like that of Shakespeare. But half way through the film, when it is revealed De Winters didn't actually care for his wife, it almost entirely breaks the sensation from the first 20 minutes as we realize there actually was no desire to be loved undernath his sadness, and him meeting the girl had a whole lot less meaning then we originally thought. I am not obligated to argue whether or not there is a desire to be loved inside of the human spirt, as I am not in the profession of philosophy, however what I can say is that this moment completely breaks the theme of the film, and leaves us with a far less realized, far less compleing theme of betrayal and justice. Again I am not under the obligation to say which theme is more true than the other, however the later has far less build up and is far messier. It simply turns the film from a true peice of art, to something simply of entertainments sake.

Nope! The version you are describing is faithful to the book. He's honestly pretty indifferent and at times outright cold to her in the book up until near the ending

Their relationship is not supposed to be seen as an ideal romance, and I don’t know what to tell you if that’s what you got out of the films. du Maurier wrote the novel as a study of jealousy: a parallel of her husband’s affair with another woman. Maxim is completely intended to be what you saw in this film, a cold, brooding man who infantilises and patronises the narrator. He sees her as a girlish companion, someone to drown out the horrors of the past, but not someone to actually fall in love with. Yet the narrator eats it up; she’s a young woman with no family, no money, and no home, and now this famous rich man is treating her like she’s worthy of his attention. You can see why she falls for him (and just how problematic their relationship is).

@@sleepingredwolf That's a very good point. Their relationship is shallow and problematic on both ends and mostly happens out of desperation and naivety.

Well, you really don't need to "tell me" anything at all. My comment is just an observation. Yes, DUH, their relationship is not an "ideal" one, I am not an idiot, and that is CERTAINLY not "what I got" out of this film, or any of the MANY other versions of this story I have watched.

"Subtitrat", I guess, means subtitled, in the Rumanian language.

@@franciscojavierestrada7179 Correct.

There is also a Mama's Family spoof episode of this. It's one of my favorite eps 😂