My Cousin Rachel

I found this film frustrating as I expected a lot more. Had Hitchcock directed it, then in my opinion it would have been a great watch. The chemistry between the main leading actors was poor, and the script offered little, except to confuse the viewer. Unlike the classic Rebecca film, this was dull, slow, and complex, all because the longer it went on the less you cared.

Beautiful photography and quality actors are not enough to entertain , and in my opinion this film was such a disappointment. The director might have checked out other films on books by the author, and then no doubt made a far better job of this story.

Another reviewer on here said this might have been amazing with a Hitchcockian style of direction and I have to agree. The story has all the ingredients for a good slow-burn suspense mystery, but the necessary ingredients are missing from this adaptation-- namely tension or intrigue. The leads have no chemistry and the presentation of the material is just plodding and dull. The whole affair was so cold that the passion needed to make the behavior of the characters work was simply not there.

It's pretty but that's about all I can give it.

My Cousin Rachel is one of my favourite books. I was full of awe at how passionate and skilled Daphne du Maurier's mastery was. I was excited at the thought that a very skilled actress like Rachel Weiz will now bring Rachel to life. I was terribly disappointed. The movie left out key elements from the book, which is fine if the movie itself was intent on having its own direction. But it neither followed the book nor presented anything new. It felt like an edit of a better story. In the book, Du Maurier leaves us to make up our own minds whether Rachel was a murderer or not. Personally, I thought she was innocent. The movie doesn't present us with the same question. It tries but fails and instead presents us with a flat and annoying obsession from a young lad with a woman of the world. Rachel in the movie is not Rachel in the book. In the movie she's more obvious and boring. In total the whole movie is dull. Might entertain someone who didn't read the book although I even doubt that.

Poor orphan Philip (Sam Claflin) was taken in and raised by his rich cousin Ambrose. Ambrose is sent to Italy for the sun by his doctors and he marries his cousin Rachel Ashley (Rachel Weisz). Philip receives a hidden message begging for help but Ambrose is dead by the time he arrives. He suspects Rachel of foul play but soon falls head over heals for her. Despite his godfather Kendall (Iain Glen)'s protest, he gives the family estate over to her. Louise (Holliday Grainger) is Kendall's daughter.

Philip is an infuriating character. I would believe it if the story writes in a love potion from Rachel. He is a crazy concoction of reckless naivety, puppy love, and jealousy. He is a maddening character as the protagonist. It's well acted but they are not an appealing couple. It is beautifully filmed. It's a maddening tale of human fallibility.

A pretty but lifeless version of Du Maurier's gothic melodrama. I never thought I'd find myself saying this, but Henry Koster did it better. Mind you he did have Olivia de Havilland and a brooding young Richard Burton in the leads.