The book by Daphne Du Maurier is amazing and a favourite, a masterpiece of suspenseful atmosphere and psychological depth. There are three versions of 'Rebecca' prior to this latest one from 2020, the best known one justifiably being the Alfred Hitchcock directed film. While the 70s adaptation with Jeremy Brett is the best version as an adaptation, Hitchcock's is my personal favourite. Even with inevitable changes to suit the code, it is superbly made, acted (Judith Anderson is unforgettable) and directed, true in spirit to the book's atmosphere.

Unfortunately, this version is inferior in nearly all those aspects. It does have its good things, but of all the four versions of 'Rebecca' it is easily the worst for me. Being the only one to not work, the other three are excellent and more. Visually and stylistically, this 'Rebecca' is mostly very successful. When it comes to the substance however, this film adaptation and standalone wise is a failure. Actually don't think one needs to have seen any of the previous versions or read the book to see how badly flawed the film is, a friend of mine also saw it with no prior knowledge of the source material or previous adaptations and disliked it too, highlighting the lack of atmosphere, shallow characterisation, erratic pacing, messy final act and Armie Hammer as particular flaws.

'Rebecca' (2020) has good things. It does look gorgeous, though in my mind the film would have benefitted from a darker look either in a Gothic or noir-ish sense. The film is exquisitely photographed and the settings have beauty and vivid atmosphere, especially in Monte Carlo. Apart from the yellow suit, the costumes are nice and Manderlay is a beautiful and atmospheric house if not quite the character of its own kind that the previous three adaptations achieved. Clint Mansell's score has parts where it is ominous and stirs the emotions.

Didn't care for the performances on the whole, but Kristin Scott Thomas is very good indeed as Mrs Danvers and there is a formidable quality that makes her very memorable. Sam Reilly's Favell is deceptively friendly but suitably manipulative, though could have afforded to have been more caddish.

However, Lily James and Hammer didn't do it for me in their roles. Actually like James as an actress, ever since her charming 'Cinderella', but she lacks the plain mousiness that is needed for the 2nd Mrs De Winter and comes over as too neurotic in her more haunted moments. Hammer is also too young (especially considering that there is meant to be a big age difference, without it the story dynamic doesn't work) and too handsome, personality wise he is like a bland uncharismatic cipher as well as jerk-ish even when Maxim's character writing darkens. The lack of chemistry between the two really hurts the film and too lukewarm romantic comedy-like instead of the conflicted one it ought to be. The characters are stripped of their complexity and become one-dimensional, the most interesting is Mrs Danvers easily but that is down to Thomas mainly.

Furthermore, the script could have flowed more and is too mundane with no spark. Some of it was awkward too. The direction is too constrained and tends to be pedestrian in the first half and then out of control and too reliant on a horror vibe in the second. The story is completely lacking in suspense and the omnipresent spookiness just isn't there, with the psychology of the characters being too muted. Likewise with the more mysterious elements in the story. The pacing is a mess too, it takes too long to get going and is too deliberate in the first half and then the final act especially becomes very rushed and jumpy. This part of the film is also far too melodramatic, the tone shift is not just completely uneasy and jarring but the second half feels like a different film altogether and in a schlocky horror way, not in a suspensefully psychological way. The ending is very tacked on and did reek of studio interference or of the writers not being sure how to end the film.

In summary, liked the style but the substance underwhelms. Very disappointing. 4/10.

It beats me why directors and studios keep insisting on remaking, reimagining and reworking the old classics that don't need touching in the first place. REBECCA (2020) is a case in point: Hitchcock already did the definitive version of the Daphne du Maurier story back in 1940 despite changing the book slightly, and this new Netflix adaptation doesn't even come close. It's REBECCA for the DOWNTON ABBEY crowd, and lead actress Lily James - a DOWNTOWN alumnus herself - puts in a woefully bland turn as the lead, a far cry from Joan Fontaine's performance finesse in the Hitchcock film.

Directorial duties are handed to British director Ben Wheatley, still generating a lot of goodwill a decade after KILL LIST; personally I find him hugely overrated, but I know he has a lot of fans. At its heart, the novel is a rich gothic mystery and a unique spin on the ghost or haunted house genre; more psychological and realistic than supernatural, but just as affecting. Here, there's little mystery and no atmosphere at all; you don't feel a thing. The sets and costumes look good, as they always do in modern historicals, but the writing is uneven at best. The only thing that made an impression on me was Armie Hammer's lead and that was for all the wrong reasons; check this guy's Twitter account if you want to find out more about him, but let's just say he's hardly a romantic hero.

The protagonist (Lily James) is a companion-assistant to rich abusive Mrs. Van Hopper (Ann Dowd) traveling in Monte Carlo. They encounter wealthy man-about-town Maxim de Winter (Armie Hammer). He falls for the poor orphan young girl and they get married. He is still haunted by his first wife Rebecca who died in a boating accident. They return to his large estate Manderley with a vast cast of servants led by the harsh Mrs. Danvers (Kristin Scott Thomas).

It's interesting that the lead character remains nameless. I've never read the Daphne du Maurier novel. I always assumed that her novels are pulpy romances. It probably meant that the book was written in a first person point of view putting the reading in the young assistant's shoes. It's a great way to get the female readers to embody the protagonist and walk her journey. I wonder if the movie should try doing something as experimental as strictly using the first person point of view. It does need something. As it stands, it's a rather old style melodramatic narrative. There are some attempt at gothic horror. The film looks beautiful. The actors are fine. In the end, nothing is superior or new or punch you in the face. It's fine.