Must See Movie...

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Richard Burton and Olivia de Havilland scheme, doubt, and swoon in this Gothic thriller based on a Daphne du Maurier novel. It's a handsome looking production and adequately captures its 19th century setting. But despite the good actors, the whole thing never works up much steam, and what should be a juicy costume drama in the same vein as "The Little Foxes" instead remains fairly tepid.I think the problem is with the casting. Olivia de Havilland is a wonderful actress, but she doesn't have the kind of sex appeal that would make a horny twenty-something go bonkers over her. Without that, Burton's obsession with her doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Burton is good, and if his performance is a bit intensely one note, I attribute that more to the character than any flaw in his performance. He was absurdly nominated for a Best Supporting Actor Oscar for this film, one of the most flagrant examples of category fraud in Oscar history. He is literally in nearly every scene."My Cousin Rachel"s attention to period production values paid off, as it was also nominated in the black and white categories for Art Direction, Cinematography, and Costume Design, though it went home empty handed.Grade: B

Richard Burton plays Phillip Ashley, an orphan in 19th century Cornwall who grows up in the care of his wealthy cousin Ambrose who is part a father and part an older brother to him. As Phillip grows to manhood, Ambrose says he must go abroad for his health's sake, and although Phillip asks to go with him, Ambrose asks him to stay in Cornwall and take care of the estate.While abroad, Ambrose marries somebody named Rachel. Shortly thereafter, in Florence, he takes ill and writes letters saying that he believes Rachel is trying to kill him and asks for help. His last letter is practically incoherent. Phillip sails for Florence, but it is too late. Ambrose has died and the widow has moved out the day before Phillip's arrival.Phillip goes home with hatred in his heart for the person he presumes killed his beloved cousin who has been so good to him. But he doesn't have to worry about finding Rachel to accuse her, because she shows up at the estate in Cornwall, almost unannounced. She immediately goes about charming Phillip by being quite different from what he imagined. She seems genuinely mournful over Ambrose and completely alright with the fact that the entire estate went to Phillip rather than to her, the widow. She does not intend to challenge the will, which in those times she easily could have done. This completely disarms the loyal yet naïve Phillip.What is so great about this is that even though this is Burton's film, De Havilland's Rachel steals the show just from the Hitchcockian mystery with which she fills the part. You spend your entire time wondering what is going on with this woman. I felt that despite the warmth blended with disciplined composure she seems to radiate that there was something evil and calculating just under the surface, but I just can't tell you why.Then there are all of the facts that blur matters more. Ambrose's father died of a brain tumor. The way Ambrose was behaving at the end seemed to indicate the same thing, although in the 19th century there would be no way to know for sure except maybe an autopsy. If Rachel just wanted the estate, why didn't she make sure Ambrose wrote a new will with her inheriting BEFORE she started poisoning him, IF she was poisoning him in the first place? There are other pieces of "evidence" that seem to indicate Rachel has a homicidal streak and a greedy streak as well, but I'll let you watch and find out.There are plenty of touches with noirish connections, like voice-over narration and moody black and white cinematography. I'd give this an eight if it just didn't seem like, that for all that is great about it, there is just "a certain something" missing. I can't tell you what that is, but on Turner Classic Movies the other night, when they screened this, it was said during the introduction to the film by the host that George Cukor was originally set to direct, but then Henry Koster ended up getting the job. Koster was a more than adequate director over at Fox, but just did not have the same level of craft of Cukor.One rather minor detail that I found fascinating is how Rachel seems to go in and out of mourning at her convenience. When she first appears in Cornwall she is always wearing black, but as time passes and she gets chummy with Phillip the mourning clothes go away. When Phillip tries to press her for a marriage she says she never wanted and he feels led on, the mourning clothes come back out, as if to emphasize the impropriety of the relationship that she is at least saying she feels. I don't know if it was a mistake or a nice touch, but either way, I liked it.

Richard Burton is simply outstanding in his role as Phillip. I am also impressed with how well Nicholas served as his godfather. Rachel is so well mannered and polished it made it difficult to read her true intentions. I loved John Sutton in his very brief role as Ambrose. The director and musical score was well done. Elizabeth was a true and dear friend to the end. Youth is not the best quality in making sound emotional decisions. Phillip is such a strong character. Rachel is quite his match when it comes to getting what she really wanted. The ending leaves one to question everyones true motives regarding money and love.

It isn't surprising that this movie plays like Rebecca Lite since both were based on novels by Daphne Du Maurier, and both are about a spouse with mysterious intents who may or may not be a murderer. The comparison is unfortunate since not only is Rebecca the better story, Alfred Hitchcock was also a more brilliant director than Henry Koster, even if the latter had the aid of Joseph LaShelle, the cinematographer who did amazing work with shading in Laura. LaShelle does good work here too, though it's not as indelible as with Laura.It is amusing to compare Olivia de Havilland here with the lead actress of Rebecca, Joan Fontaine, since both are sisters who had a very public rivalry going. Fontaine's definitely better, but only because, again, Rebecca is the better movie. I thought de Havilland out-acted any performance of her sister's with The Heiress. Similarly, Richard Burton here pales in comparison to Laurence Olivier in Rebecca, though it is still interesting to watch Burton in this, his breakout role, and see how his strong personality was already evident even then.