IMDb-BEWERTUNG
4,1/10
1165
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Füge eine Handlung in deiner Sprache hinzuTwo lovers engage in a passionate but thwarted romance in this modern adaptation of the classic novel.Two lovers engage in a passionate but thwarted romance in this modern adaptation of the classic novel.Two lovers engage in a passionate but thwarted romance in this modern adaptation of the classic novel.
- Regie
- Drehbuch
- Hauptbesetzung
- Auszeichnungen
- 1 Nominierung insgesamt
Fotos
Christopher Masterson
- Edward
- (as Christopher Kennedy Masterson)
Katherine Heigl
- Isabel Linton
- (as Katherine M. Heigl)
Michelle Deliz
- Cate's mother (painting)
- (Nicht genannt)
Empfohlene Bewertungen
1Oedi
I was skeptical when I first saw the Calvin Kline-esque commercials, but thought I'd give it a chance. So I've watched it, and all I can say is bleh. This movie was so bad. It's rare that I hate a movie this much. Watching this flick reminded me of those funny scenes in Altman's "The Player," when the writers pitch their bizarre ideas to producers. I'd like to know which MTV producer decided that an hour and a half long music video adaptation of Bronte (but this time Heathcliff's name is Heath and he's a rock star, and Hindley's name is Hendrix) would be a good idea.
Even that might not have been so bad, had they not gotten every other aspect of the film so horrible wrong as well. The direction must have been "you're lonely, pout for me." I laughed out loud during all the "serious" scenes and was bored throughout the rest. The camera work was jagged and repeatedly reminded me that I was watching a bad movie trying to be edgy. My theory is that the sound guy got bored and went down to the beach for a few beers with his boom -- all I could hear in half the scenes were the waves. And in the other scenes, I wish that's all I could hear. And speaking of sound, what they did to the Sisters of Mercy song "More" is absolutely inexcusable, then again, it's inexcusable what they did to Bronte.
On the bright side, there was one entertaining scene -- specifically the moment when Johnny Whitworth licked Katherine Heigl's face -- and if you can tell me what that scene had to do with all the rest of the story more power to you.
Even that might not have been so bad, had they not gotten every other aspect of the film so horrible wrong as well. The direction must have been "you're lonely, pout for me." I laughed out loud during all the "serious" scenes and was bored throughout the rest. The camera work was jagged and repeatedly reminded me that I was watching a bad movie trying to be edgy. My theory is that the sound guy got bored and went down to the beach for a few beers with his boom -- all I could hear in half the scenes were the waves. And in the other scenes, I wish that's all I could hear. And speaking of sound, what they did to the Sisters of Mercy song "More" is absolutely inexcusable, then again, it's inexcusable what they did to Bronte.
On the bright side, there was one entertaining scene -- specifically the moment when Johnny Whitworth licked Katherine Heigl's face -- and if you can tell me what that scene had to do with all the rest of the story more power to you.
For anyone looking for the "I Will Crumble" song , it was originally done by Hewitt Huntwork and it's easily downloaded! I liked this song a lot, along w/ Erika Christensen's part on "More." But I must say that I wished they would have spent a little more time on character development...it seemed as if Mike Vogel's "Heath" was extra intense for no reason, whereas in the book you really got to see why Heathcliffe and Catherine felt like one person...when "Kate" was talking about that in the Linton bedroom, I didn't think it was very believable based on what had been shown...it definitely could've been better...but this "I Will Crumble" song is still in my head...it is such a pretty song and it wholly encompasses the relationship of Heathcliffe and Catherine...if only MTV could have portrayed that w/ Heath and Kate, who ended up just looking like unchaperoned, lust-filled teens
i was excited to see this movie because i had seen the commercials for it throughout the weeks but once i saw it, it was a disappointment. i never read the book but i'm sure that the book has to be better than this poor adaptation. is it so wrong that i cheered at what happened to cate at the end of the movie?
What an empty and lack lustre rendition of the classic novel. I do wish people would stop messing about with classics when they clearly have no idea of the real intention or point of the original. This version is no different. I felt that the Ralph Fiennes version is much worse though as the casting of Juliette brioche as Kathy has got to be the worst casting decision EVER...anyway back to this version. It aims to make the story relevant to a contemporary setting and in a musical style. It succeeds in both but high art it is nit. Throwaway viewing for a rainy day maybe...The direction was average and the editing abysmal. Worse than the old Quincy. Deepak Verma does a great turn as Hindley and is in fact one of Britains wasted talents. The part of Heath was played with great charm and belief and I think that the casting is the strongest point of this project. Although a more talented director would have made better use of the facilities he had. Its clear that he was a director for hire and didn't instill the project with the passion that it deserved.
MTV does the Emily Brontë novel in a beachy rocking take on the material. One day, Cate and Hendrix's father (John Doe) brings home their new adopted brother Heath. Cate (Erika Christensen) and Heath (Mike Vogel) would fall in love. Hendrix (Johnny Whitworth) is an angry young man who hates Heath. When their father dies, Hendrix takes over and drive Heath away. Cate has a car accident and is rescued by wealthy neighbor Edward (Christopher Masterson). Edward's conniving sister Isabel (Katherine Heigl) schemes to break apart Cate and Heath keeping Heath to herself. Cate would marry Edward. Heath becomes a rich rock star and his return causes havoc.
The acting is laughable for the most part. Erika Christensen is the only good part of this movie. Mike Vogel could be a passable douche but he's a horrible Heath(cliff). He overacts in every scene yelling and screaming. He just doesn't have the charisma. The production is acceptable for a TV movie. The music ranges from uninspired to horrible. The movie aspires to be so much more but ends up being a weak young adult melodrama. It's an experiment gone wrong.
The acting is laughable for the most part. Erika Christensen is the only good part of this movie. Mike Vogel could be a passable douche but he's a horrible Heath(cliff). He overacts in every scene yelling and screaming. He just doesn't have the charisma. The production is acceptable for a TV movie. The music ranges from uninspired to horrible. The movie aspires to be so much more but ends up being a weak young adult melodrama. It's an experiment gone wrong.
Wusstest du schon
- VerbindungenRemake of Stürmische Höhen (1939)
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsland
- Offizieller Standort
- Sprache
- Auch bekannt als
- Wuthering Heights, CA
- Drehorte
- Produktionsfirma
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Budget
- 3.500.000 $ (geschätzt)
- Laufzeit1 Stunde 30 Minuten
- Farbe
- Seitenverhältnis
- 1.78 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen
Oberste Lücke
By what name was Wuthering Heights (2003) officially released in Canada in English?
Antwort