Talk:Rebecca (1940 film)

Cornwall Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cornwall, an attempt to improve and expand Wikipedia coverage of Cornwall and all things Cornish. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project member page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.CornwallWikipedia:WikiProject CornwallTemplate:WikiProject CornwallCornwall-related articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

See drop-down box for suggested article edit guidelines:

Be bold - if you know something about Cornwall then put it in! We value your contributions and don't be afraid if your spelling isn't great as there are plenty of spelling and grammar experts on clean-up duty!
Articles on settlements in Cornwall should be written using the standard set of headings approved by the UK geography WikiProject's guideline How to write about settlements.
At WikiProject Cornwall we subscribe to the policies laid down by Wikipedia - particularly civility and consensus building. We are aware that the wording on Cornish entries can sometimes be a contentious topic, especially those concerning geography. You don't have to agree with everything but there is no excuse for rudeness and these things are best solved through consensus building and compromise. For more information see WP:CornwallGuideline.
These pages are not platforms for political discussion. Issues relating to Cornish politics should be restricted to those pages that directly deal with these issues (such as Constitutional status of Cornwall, Cornish nationalism, etc) and should not overflow into other articles.
Most of all have fun editing - that's the reason we all do this, right?!

Film: British / American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the British cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Library of Congress Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Library of Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Library of Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Library of CongressWikipedia:WikiProject Library of CongressTemplate:WikiProject Library of CongressLibrary of Congress articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Romance High‑importance

	Literature portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Romance, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional romance in literature and romantic fiction writers. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.RomanceWikipedia:WikiProject RomanceTemplate:WikiProject Romanceromance articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Cinema Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Film portal This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force (assessed as Top-importance).

Was Rebecca murdered after all?

I would like to point out that the movie still allows the possibibility that Maxim murdered Rebecca but lied about it. All that was changed from the novel was Maxim's STORY of what happened; we never see the actual death. Hitchcock may have outsmarted the censors after all, showing Maxim getting away with murder. CharlesTheBold —Preceding unsigned comment added by CharlesTheBold (talk • contribs) 03:18, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

WP:OR Gwen Gale 06:53, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not original research, the criterion web page linked to in the article covers that possibility but discards it: or we hypothesize that Maxim is lying (for which the film supplies no support).--134.130.4.46 01:52, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have just watched the movie once again (is one of my favourites) and I keep thinking that Max killed her. In fact, I think she was actually pregnant and that the reason the doctor says she had cancer is because the one with cancer was Mrs Danvers. As I see it, Mrs Danvers would go to London wearing Mrs de Winter's clothes to see the doctor. She was ill, and that's why she actually kills herself with the fire. The only thing is that how she managed to survive that long. I would like to read the book because, surely, there are many things that I am missing.--Nauki (talk) 23:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just watched the film yesterday, and I find the above possibilities interesting. Personally, I believed Rebecca's death to be an accident. While I won't say that, upon hearing the suggestion, foul play is not implied in context, I don't believe it to be the case. Just my impression. I did find Maxim's account of that day to be somewhat odd; the "accident" seemed oddly coincidental. Given the subversive nature of the story, I wouldn't be surprised if confirmation did appear on the subject. However, without any citation, I don't believe that concept merits mentioning in this article. On the Danvers matter, I don't think it was in any way implied that Mrs. Danvers killed herself. She is seen trying to escape from the fire, and then the ceiling caves in on her. She may have very well impersonated Rebecca as stated, however. That would certainly fit within the described parameters of the character.Kp.murphy (talk) 14:28, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw the movie last night. The doctor describes Mrs. Danvers (his patient) as beautiful. I highly doubt anyone would describe the real Mrs. Danvers as beautiful. Alphabet55 (talk) 18:04, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, Nauki's interpretation is strained. What crossed my mind was that Maxim could have got to the Doctor before they arrived, but there is nothing to imply that he and the doctor were not complete strangers.

Yes, the doctor does describe his patient as a very beautiful woman. Not exactly Mrs Danvers as she appears in the film. I'm not sure about the novel. I love the film. I wanted to read the novel, but I couldn't get into it. Maybe I'd been having too much Chandler and Hammett. But I found GWTW compulsive reading. O Murr (talk) 07:48, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bibliography of materials to use

Rebecca at UC Berkeley Libraries. —Erik (talk • contrib) 00:41, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Danvers' death in film

Par on Adaptation notes that there is ONE major plot change in the film's adaption of the book, and that is that Max does not murder Rebecca in the film, but instead she falls during their quarrel and dies from a head injury. This was so to be in keeping with the Hollywood Production Code's insistence that if Max murders his wife, the film must show he is duly punished for it. There is a SECOND major plot change though, and it too may be linked with concerns with the Code; in the film, Danvers dies in the fire she has created at Manderlay, but in the novel she escapes with no comeuppance. This detail is surely worth including in the "Adaptation" section.

My own experience is that I saw the film years ago and have never read the book, and I suppose that very few men would read it today. Back then, I thought that it was an obvious contrivance that Rebecca dies accidentally. I felt that there was a much more psychologically confronting drama behind the “official” narrative, and that was that Max had been deeply and obsessively in love with this femme fatale, and had murdered her through uncontrolled jealousy. I felt that if it had been plotted in this way, the movie would still have been a melodrama, but a less tinny one. It was only today that I discovered that in fact I had second-guessed du Maurier’s version and instinctively faulted Hitchcock’s in this respect. Myles325a (talk) 05:51, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

B&w or color?

Is the film in black and white or in color?Kdammers (talk) 10:40, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Black and white. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 09:14, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Conflicting sources on editing "in camera"

This criterion essay says Hitchcock shot 250 000 feet of film, which was then edited by Selznick to favour medium and long shots. On the wiki article it says it was edited in camera - presumably the source for this is the book in the third reference.

You are quite right to flag this, thank you. What an important (and wonderful) film and what a poorly sourced bit of writing. I'll have a go at trying to straighten it out, using actual references. Testbed (talk) 11:07, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Length of plot summary

I cut the plot summary down from 844 words to 666 words. Plot summaries on Wikipedia are supposed to be concise, between 400 and 700 words. Invertzoo (talk) 18:25, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Danvers in book and film

As is already mentioned on this talk page in a note from 2010, in our article about the novel Rebecca, it says that another change between the book and the film is that in the film Danvers perishes in the fire, whereas in the book she escapes. Can someone who has access to the book please check this and include it here if this is correct? Thanks, Invertzoo (talk) 12:55, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good sources

Here are additional sources for the article:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/starsandstories/6346991/Alfred-Hitchcocks-Rebecca-rows-rivalries-and-a-movie-classic.html

https://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2012/aug/07/my-favourite-alfred-hitchcock-rebecca

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/movies/alfred-hitchcock-rebecca-masterpiece-article-1.2089299

-- John Broughton (♫♫) 03:33, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Credits

We know that the film was based on Daphne Du Maurier's novel, which she had already adapted into a stage play. The scriptwriters for the film were Robert E. Sherwood and Joan Harrison. Then we have Adaptation: Philip MacDonald, Michael Hogan. What does this mean? Valetude (talk) 04:54, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article WGA screenwriting credit system might be helpful here. Basically, the union has a lot of really complicated rules about who gets credited and how. According to Hitchcock & Selznick... by Leonard Leff, which has considerable detail on the development and production of Rebecca, there were at least seven writers who worked on the script for this movie (including Hitchcock himself), though they didn't all get on-screen credits for their work. Colin M (talk) 19:22, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

horror?

Random musings by IP unrelated to improving the article.

I have seen the picture and later the DVD and I still am wondering Mister Alfred Hitchcock's business.

The title is Rebeca, the woman I most respected in the old testament. But he makes a horror of that woman by picturing a "creature" shaped by Daphne du Maurier. Well it be so, but wasn't for him not better to do something else??? 145.129.136.48 (talk) 15:55, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Collapsed per WP:TPO and WP:NOTFORUM; see your Talk page. Mathglot (talk) 11:36, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Warning in Plot summary

It's Mrs. Van Hopper that warns her paid companion about de Winter, not her Mother. She has no mother. -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 07:34, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why no one talk about the lesbian part of Miss Danvers to Rebecca?

Did nobody see it?

And not forget that the book maker, Daphne du Maurier, have orientietions like this. 81.20.127.64 (talk) 00:22, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article says: "The Breen Office, Hollywood's censorship board, specifically prohibited any outright hint of a lesbian infatuation or relationship between Mrs. Danvers and Rebecca, though the film clearly does dwell on Danvers' obsessive memories of her late mistress." - I just watched the film and thought it was quite clear when Mrs. Danvers salaciously demonstrated Rebecca's completely see-through black negligee to the second Mrs. de Winter, pulled from a case she had embroidered lavishly. 79.203.75.126 (talk) 03:56, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]