"My Cousin Rachel" - BBC 1983 - Part 4
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 сен 2024
- The superb 1983 Masterpiece Mystery adaptation of Daphne du Maurier's "My Cousin Rachel." (To date, unavailable on DVD.)
Rachel - Geraldine Chaplin
Phillip - Christopher Guard
Rainaldi - Charles Kay
Nick Kendall - John Stratton
Louise Kendall - Amanda Kirby
Seecombe - Bert Parnaby
Ambrose Ashley - John Shrapnel
Giuseppe - Michael Mellinger
Directed by Brian Farnham, Teleplay by Hugh Whitemore.
![Megan Thee Stallion - Neva Play (feat. RM) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TpYTyAaTRts/mqdefault.jpg)
I find her subtle cruelty of not divulging her secret life with another man, say’s it all. She knew the young man was naive to life itself, yet she wove her web for whatever reason. I truly believe she was a heartless chameleon. There are people like her.
Yes, they are called sociopaths.
Go to London get the season, Mary....Mary 🎉🎉go to London, look go look England 🇬🇧
She definitely was about money, she made herself right at home and act like she owned the place from the beginning. She got what she deserved, nothing.
Predators like Rachael are everywhere...be careful whom you give your property & money to....thoroughly enjoyed the movie
Great finish! I've loved it all. Who knows what people hide about their real characters? I believe we all show to the world what we want them to see. Everyone keeps something about their nature private, I feel. Thx very much. Enjoyable few hours in Adelaide Australia on a lovely sunny quiet April afternoon. I'm so lucky to be here. 👇💜🙃
You still happy to be there?❤
Brilliant drama...here in the start of the winter in Cape Town and longing for simple and organized..not the chaos, homeless and destitution covid then no electricity , no jobs have brought to our city. Innuendo, gossip of jealous people, and isolation is a very good cautionary tale. Thanks for posting...
Walking around with a candle in your hand just to have some light.......thank God for electricity 😅
What a splendid production of one of DuMaurer's best works. Far superior to the American version. I was spellbound w/"Phillip" and "Rachel" -they're superb actors. Thank you for bringing this to us.
Had not heard of this movie or book but saw it was a Du Maurier and had to watch. Thank you!!
Helluva movie, great acting by all...classic English novelist, what an ending.
I read all the comments and thought they were all had really good explanations of what
happened, as to was she guilty or innocent. I guess for me I don't like movies that don't give me a satisfying ending. But was a well written BBC masterpiece.
I agree with you about the unanswered ending.
Masterful DuMaurier. Thanks for this splendid spine-tingler. Will l be able to sleep tonight? Kudos to all.
Fantastic program Brilliant acting . Thank for up loading this .
Yes, very well done indeed. And glad now I watched to the end.
The subtleties and twists lead to a very powerful narrative.
At the beginning of this final episode, I had no sympathy left for Philip, with his arrogance and unthinking assumption he could buy this woman... combined with her sophisticated manipulation of him. Not a lot of sympathy for her, either - but that was how it was presented. Maybe he learned something from all this...
Oh Philip, Philip, Philip, you silly boy.
Highgate Angel..... ha ha ha ha!
I think cousin Rachel new what she was doing. She played her cards well. I loved the entire chapters.
In this version it definitely makes Rachel look guilty. However, in the novel it's from Phillip's perspective. He's immature and rebellious, so it's hard to know for sure.
@@dougronald561This version does not make her look guilty. It’s faithful to the book, it’s seen entirely through Philip’s eyes, he is conflicted and veers between one opinion and the other, the ending suggests her correspondence was innocent and her last word was Ashley, she was in love with her husband. But we cannot be sure.
Wonderful movie. Thanks for sharing. 🙏🙏🏆
How can a young man in love loose all good judgement, even with all evidence in his hands.
You said it yourself. Love
What was the envelope full of poisonous leaves doing in her desk? Bewildering story.
Playing a black widow goes along with her playing the hateful and cruel teacher in one of the Jane Eyre movies. She has the persona to play such roles so it seems.
Yes she is so convincing in all her acting parts.a sign of a professional talent
Thank god for Fast-Forward!
i so agree.......the storyline was good but da acting was so droll......
Haley Krauss I wanna to do it but, I didn’t 🤗
It was very slow moving... very unnecessarily slow moving.
Between the 1952 classic and the 2017 remake, which performance was better?
Cuz I understand if you hate this version
She was wicked .. why let him on and than not want him? She was ruined financially and could loose her Villa in Italy. Phillip was good to her .
Too good to her
I enjoyed the movie, was impatient to see each of the 4 parts...i like the ending, glad she didnt "get Phillip" too. And im happy he got back his inheritance
Especially for the sake of the tenant farmers.
O dear, can a young man be so foolish, little wonder trust funds are set up.
All I kept thinking was, 'the foolishness of old men, and young boys'. Lol
Oh, how I hate movies that leave you with no answers at the end!
After watching the Olivia du Havilland version, I found this BBC one a slower pace, and much prefer the black and white version.
Very suspenseful!
Philip is prettier than all the females in this movie.
Jasmine Crawford 👍👍🤣🤣
Carol Conny 😂😂😂😂
😊 Agree
Jasmine Crawford he didn't have to sleep with producer
@jasminecrawford…. thank you for the laugh! 😊 x
From Wikipedia - “The critic Kate Kellaway wrote ‘DuMaurier was mistress of calculated irresolution. She did not want to put her readers’ minds at rest. She wanted her riddles to persist. She wanted the novels to haunt us beyond their endings.’ The Observer, 15April 2007. “Daphne’s unruly passions.”’
I’m sorry some found the film draggy.
I loved every minute, every turn of events, every unexplainable thing. The dry leaves with seeds exposed the whole thing for me. Perhaps not..🩶
jamesrouillardj …. If indeed ‘DuMaurier did not want to put her readers’ minds at rest,” well she got me! Considering I watched the film mostly using fast forward, still …! Cheers! X
I have watched two versions of this story now. In either one you can't really decide whether 'Cousin Rachel' is deceitful, money hungry and rotten or misunderstood. Does the writer of the book mean for it to not have a clear conclusion to drive us crazy wondering about it?
+David Copperfield Yes, I think the ambiguity is deliberate, although as the book is in part a study of obsessive behavior (on Phillip's part), I am inclined to give Rachel the benefit of the doubt, as that makes the ending all the more tragic - an innocent woman killed rather than a murderer punished.
+David Copperfield Daphne du Maurier deliberately left it up to the reader to decide Rachel's guilt or innocence. It's up for debate. I just wonder why anyone would have an envelope full of poison seeds! I wouldn't trust the woman!! Lol!
+callasite55 I think it's quite clear that Rachel is a poisoner/murderer- but we are meant to think that by returning Philip's family jewels and by dying- albeit accidentally- she is redeemed. Was her remorse due to love?
She admited she used a poison to cure him of that fever he had... So that could've been reason enough to have it in an envelop.. Did i miss what she spent all that money on? Was she sending it out to italy???
She was covering her debts- she was what today we would call a shopaholic. And since when does poison cure fever? She cured him alright...
Jane Austen’s heroine Catherine Morland (Northanger Abbey) would have freaked on this flick. As an early (age 17) Janeist, l first read Northanger in grad school (ignoring my concentration, which was History) & so followed with Ann Radcliffe’s “The Mysteries of Udolpho” (1794). Fast forward would have been welcome then! But l slogged through its not quite 700 pages - which read more like 7,000.
In this production DuMaurier’s novel catches the flavor of Northanger & Udolpho without Udolpho’s length.
Well, well done! Thank you no end for airing this. Now to find my copy of Daphne’s novel…
What goes around comes around!
This is my second BBC series I've watched and I realized that the stories endings are sad and gloomy and not complete!!!
I find this television version vastly inferior to the 1952 film with Richard Burton and Olivia de Havilland in the leads (Richard Burton was alleged to have been Daphne du Maurier's first choice to play Philip Ashley). Geraldine Chaplin's faux-Italian accent (not to mention her acting and appearance) is not convincing. I find Olivia de Havilland's flawless English quite believable - as a highly educated upper-class woman who is half-English, I think it quite logical that Rachel would have spoken impeccable upper-class English with no trace of an Italian accent.
+James Vaughan - I couldn't agree more, James. Geraldine Chaplin would never have have gotten the chance to do so much as a TV commercial for a dishwashing detergent, if her father hadn't been Charlie Chaplin and her mother, Oona O'Neill, the daughter of America's great playwright Eugene O'Neill. Connections, however, never have been, and never will be an adequate substitute for talent . Other than Chaplin's wooden acting the production suffers from an insufferably slow pace. The fellow who plays Phillip is far better than Chaplin, but Alas! he is no Richard Burton.
+Hyramess Hiram's Well said! Richard Burton was the perfect gothic hero or protagonist for du Maurier's very gothic story - Christopher Guard's level of acting seems more suited to a television soap opera ("Days of Our Lives"?)
I like Guard's portrayal of Philip- he's supposed to be a callow, naive, boyish character and thus susceptible to being taken in (possibly) by the more worldly Rachel. Burton was certainly magnetic in the film, but it didn't seem to me to be the right reading of the book's character. The film is more "Hollywood"- this series is more pared back. Plus O de H's accent was pure mid-Atlantic rather than flawless English.
phoebephoebo .sydney I disagree with everything you said, but that's OK :-)
This version deleted two key events that were critical in the book. The landscaper tells Phillip that no one should walk away n the bridge because it cannot carry weight. Then later when Phillip says goodbye to Rachel as she goes to see progress n the landscape, he says take care as if he is going to warn her about the bridge. Then Rachel says what does he mean. Phillip seems to change his mind about warning her about the bridge and tells Rachel to take care of the sun. That warning sounds absurd.
sick characters...
Anyway, I quiet enjoyed this version. Thank you very much have posted it.
@mariel.8006 . How I wish I could say the same thing! x
The woman was a guilty as sin. Why come to her dead husbands home when she had a villa in Italy? Why keep the secret of her correspondence with Garinaldy and his being in England from the boy? Why sleep with the kid? And why go to the lawyer after she had the will in her hands, certainly she could read English. She wanted to know how binding the conditions were because of her Italian lover. She was smart and had done this twice before. No she was guilty alright and paid the price for it.
Boomer1949 s
In the book, she doesn't sleep with him, however, does allow him on his birthday to kiss her "everywhere" while frolicking in the garden... The ending kept true to the book, the writer leaves it to you. I didn't pick it up in this movie, but Ambrose and her had a miscarriage and was told by the doctors that she can't have children, which was the reason for her change in demeanor, her change in person and her turning to her childhood friend, Rinaldi who knew her all too well and she derived more comfort from him, which, naturally, made Ambrose suspicious, however, he was lost as to how a woman thinks, behaves, her emotional needs etc, as the book clearly brings out he was quite "anti-female" (bachelor for life type). I believe when she got to England and met Phillip that she wanted closure of all she lost and craved, even more, attention as she could never have the life of what was expected of a woman in her time, to bear children etc. As for attention, she didn't know when to stop and got herself in a pickle, once again, hence Rinaldi felt he needed to rescue her from destroying, not only herself but the ones she loves. Like Mr Kendall said, "There are some women, good women very possibly, who through no fault of their own impel disaster."
because it is a movie and the writer may and can do what they want
Boomer1949 iii
I think she was a black witch, those poison seeds and terrible illnesses for control are the proof. But she was also struggling to do good. We are all struggling with good and evil. Rinaldi was NOT her lover, and he told her she was not trustable in the letter........at the ending. cheers...........
Thank you for sharing.
First I didn't know what this movie was going to be about, never have seen the movie before. It came to me later that Cousin Rachel was a drug dealer. Think about it. She had a special garden built on the estate of Philip with various plants she obviously new of their nature. Some of the plants could have been made into poison. Hence the reason she had a relationship of a mysterious sort with the man from France? The day before Phillip spied on them coming out of an inn, Phillip had seen an envelope in Rachel's desk containing plant particles, same ones he remembered were on the patio at Ambrose estate. Then when he spied Rachel and the mysterious fellow exiting an inn we see she hands him an envelope. It is no secret that for centuries poison was used to murder your enemies, for personal gain, etc. Also of course, there was no blood testing to see just what poor Ambrose died from. The excuse was that he had a brain tumor. But, the symptoms that were experienced by both Ambrose and Philip included hallucinations. A common side effect of drugs that are addictive and sold illegally. Another clue was the letter found from Ambrose stating he accused his wife of poisoning him. Something to think about?
lord Peter whimsey
Drugs were legal at least until 1916 in the UK and much later in Italy so there wasn't much point in being a drug dealer.
Thank you for explaining 😊
It seems the ghost of the uncle punished Rachel for poisoning him.
interesting thought!
Amazing❤❤❤💯
I never new until I watched this that laburnum are poisonous.quite scary really
Oh,Phillip. All I wanted to do was to slap you .
A man becomes a man only after an experience like this...unfortunately!
Great and creepy
HAUNTING THE DEAD CAN INFLUENCE THE LIVING SHE GOT WHAT SHE DESERVED 🖤🖤🖤🖤🖤🕷🕸
so demented!
Thanks I really loved it
My Cousin Rachel 1952
My Cousin Rachel 1983
My Cousin Rachel 2017
Which version had the best performance?
Joseph Hernandez haven't seen the other too. But think Olivia and Richard are of the Golden era and probably are the best. But I enjoyed this one too.
This was well done with excellent acting - however, i didnt really understand it. She was poisoning him? Protecting him ? (saving the jewels until he inherited), In the end he found no evidence of her treachery (letters). Rinaldi was …..who? What? A lot of loose ends that I didnt understand - who was the money being sent to? and why? Confusing. But enjoyed it nonetheless. 😂
I saw another film with my mum called Rachel and she went over the cliff on her.horse must be a new film I liked the plot
So many views and only some hundred likes... And on top of that, there are those who always feel the urge to click the dislike button.
People are spoiled, ill-mannered, and ungrateful.
This is so true, and you can see it all over RUclips!
I agree!
Does anyone believe Rachel poisoned Ambrose and that she was going after the estate?
Love it
In the end the wicked murderer deceitful woman died and the stupid boy still decieve. I'm glad I skip to last chapter.
@callasite55
Thank you very much for sharing :)
Kathleen this reminds me of you and Harold
Laura
She has a skull face
I think even the 1952 movie did not do the book justice. But what I thought the whole time watching Miss Geraldine Chaplian was how unattractive this women is . Her acting was horrible, I wish they had picked somebody else for the role , for Goodness sakes she was suppose to be pretty . On the whole I liked the old movie much better, but had the picked another Rachael things would have been different .
Agree, Rachael was ugly, a skeleton face, hard face
Setareh Parvin But she Charlie's little girl lol
Hmm, I think the character was very alluring. Some people didn't think she was beautiful, more feminine though. I can see what you're saying though about the actress.
I do agree with you: Geraldine Chaplin is *not* attractive at all. How old was she?
In "Dr.Shivago" Julie Christie was much prettier than Geraldine.
Please excuse my English: I am a Swiss lady and I cant't express myself properly.
🥴
And it's "Ms."
Now she killing him
well you reap what you sow and she sure could fool anyone with her lies and self absorbed self.
How sickening, I do believe these movie producers have no regard for animals!!!! Every damn time one appears in some wretched film, they are killed off, Iam sick of it!!!!!!!!
I agree. Many writers use animals in this way all the time. It's horrible. It's gotten to the point when I read a book or see a video, that I hope there are no animals in it. Humans are a destructive species.
WHAT THE HELL
Foolish. . Which man would give all he has to a woman and ask her to marry him..
steve rogers vs clark kent for universe champion wwe monday raw 2021 commin sonne
Phillip is soooo annoying
So does he get his $$$$ back????
averngers vs justice legue
Well... Maybe I didn't understood all the facts because english is not my motherlanguage, but I am not conviced that she was guilty. I do suppose she was neither guilty or innocent : she was a human been, unstable and tormented like everyone. That remembers me the title of an Agatha Chistie's novel : "Je ne suis pas coupable", in French. It means that your intentions and thougts are never perfectly clear, in bad or in good.
well, come on, most of the time decent women don’t have several husbands die in suspicious circumstances, they don’t carry around poison, they don’t play around with young men’s feelings, they don’t stick around named young men (heirs) waiting for financial gain, they don’t go to bed with other than their husbands, they don’t keep dubious relationships with other men like Rainaldi, and the list goes on. I haven’t even seen grief from her apart from fake tears in the hope of influencing Phillip.
@@findelka1810 I think that one of reasons she looks guilty from the beginning is she's modern and independant, at a time when people, especially, women, always worried about gossips and seemliness. :)
And I think there is now way to be sure she's playing with Philip. She loose her baby, her husband, and then she meets his cousin who has quite the same appareance... there are good reasons to be disturbed...
A believable story. Who truly knows what lays behind anyone's appearance or words? I've come to dislike fairytale endings. They are too tidy and cheerful. Not lifelike. They do not compel any further thought. They are for the lazy mind; always looking for the easy conclusions.
En español
Thanking with sex...?... Nasty nasty
Beware the woman in black. LOL. !
emma waston vs margot robbie samara weving and emma makey are lesbian blonde in uk and austrilaia
rita ora dua lipa ava max bebe rexha era istrefi eliza dushke dhe nena teresa
yo
Go check that apartment, good h3o 👊, cash money 🤑 💵 stepmother cousins??
Yes fast forward … he’s not good and she is not right !
Typical gaslighting. Yikes!
Long drawn out bore! This is the worst adaptation of this great piece of literature. The two main actors lack suitability to play the lead characters. Both are misplaced and stilted and weak with ‘no’ strength to fulfil what the two parts require, Their performances are FLAT lacking the fire and bounce needed and what the writer intended. AMATEUR acting but both actors we know are generally good at their jobs, but not in this performance.
Karma is a bitch
ha ha hi hi
Pretty boring. Like some other people said she is not near pretty enough for this role.
Fcc
i just regret my precious time I wasted watching dis fake movie,its complicated nd was acted worsly
Sandra Muduwa
You must not like any BBC production, poor soul.
Grueling.
word war 3 is coming 2021 2045 27 years in word hail gods of war
In the credit how did Tody play himself? 32:37 its not a real story.
Toby was the dog, wasn't it?