YouHeart I gave it a 7.5 out of 10

Livestonth I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Arianna Moses Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

Hayleigh Joseph This is ultimately a movie about the very bad things that can happen when we don't address our unease, when we just try to brush it off, whether that's to fit in or to preserve our self-image.

bettycjung 3/2/18. There are at least 8 renditions of "Wuthering Heights" on film, including one that is coming out this year. The National Film Registry picked this one for its archives. Can't say that this was the best rendition (as I have not seen all the others), but it's the oldest and probably the original one with which all others have been compared to. And, if the history of cinematic remakes is any indication of the lack of improvement over time, then this your best bet for enjoying this classic on film. You really get the chance to see Olivier at his most handsome as the tormented Heathcliff who is madly in love with the fickle Cathy who cannot bring herself to truly love Healthcliff because of his lowly station in life. If done right, tragic love on film will stay with you for a long time.

cmattheiss-56431 When I watched this film there was something very unrealistic about the love story. After reading about the life of Emily Bronte who wrote it, then it all starting making sense- how could a slightly under 30 year old woman during the 1800s, who was probably a virgin, know the reality or obstacles of love... she couldn't and wouldn't. Also how could she permit a male character to be so abusive and mean to many around him as Emily most likely had this experience of men during her own upbringing, so she must have felt a soft place for these types of personalities no matter how abusive they might have been (the main male character in Jane Eyre is also somewhat abusive but softens as the story moves forward). Anything sensible about love in this story would have probably been influenced or transferred by Charlotte her elder sister, who did a lot of the editing for the book to be published and then re-published. Charlotte did not marry until much later in life but perhaps had more experiences with other's issues of love to be a bit more practical in her view than her sister Emily. People who find this story terrific would have to be somewhat emotionally immature or fantasy-like in their ideals of love. This is a melodrama and one far from being factual... When Heathcliff marries another woman and treats her like basically dirt, people seem to only admire his character for being this way because his heart bleeds for Cathy, therefore he is forgiven... Heathcliff's character is a sadistic narcissists. And in the end when Cathy is sick on her deathbed because she chose a life of riches and comforts with a man she did not love or wouldn't due to her lingering inextinguishable passion for Heathcliff, people feel sorry for her as well and forgive her for her shortcomings... Cathy is another narcissistic personality (histrionic) who was basically out for her own advancement and threw out her love for Heathcliff because of it to be able to use another man (not much different than prostitution really). Its a wonder why such a novel would be so popular among the mainstream as most people worship narcissistic personalities and give little regard or empathy to the the other characters who were treated poorly or hurt such as Cathy's husband or Heathcliff's wife because they are viewed as less important. I found the story too fantasy-like, not developed in its definition of 'true love' and the main characters too self-absorbed or selfish to really be liked. I was disappointed with this story and felt it was dark and a love story far from being applicable to real life. I found Jane Erye a much better film with a more realistic approach to romance and love, so I thoroughly enjoyed it. The only really positive thing I can say about this film is that the actors are good and the scenery is nice which captures a bit of old England, and the costumes well represent the time period. However, i would not base any ideas about real love coming from this story as it is just too make belief. All the Bronte sisters who wrote lived for years in a fictional world of their own and I would say this story is an example of that fictional world, so I hope people leave it as fiction.

Coventry I have a couple of confessions to make for starters, actually. The first confession is that I have never read the Emily Brontë novel and the second that this is also only just the very first film adaptation of the legendary story that I watched. Since there isn't a point in reading a book after having seen the film, and since I'm pretty convinced that none of the other hundred or so film versions can surpass this fantastic 1939 version, it will probably remain and one and only acquaintance with "Wuthering Heights". How to describe the events taking place in this immortal story? Well, I believe Charles Bukowski described it best with the title of his own work "Love is a dog from hell"… It's a love story, but an utmost depressing and melancholic one, with loathsome characters as well as gloomy decors and mournful dialogs all around, but simultaneously all this is also exactly why it's MY type of love story! Just like in that other cinematic milestone from the same wondrous year 1939, "Gone with the Wind", this is more tragedy than romance and you certainly don't have to expect an overload of mellifluous situations or a happy-happy-joy-joy denouement. Perfectionist director William Wyler was the ideal man to turn the legendary novel into a milestone motion picture, because even though the British roots are missing and there isn't much attention given to the role of the rural setting, he does provide the film with a strong atmosphere of morbidity. Allegedly the production process of "Wuthering Heights" wasn't a very pleasant time for everyone involved, neither. The cast and crew quickly got fed up with the endless number of takes that the perfectionist director demanded, the director wasn't enthusiast to work for a producer – Samuel Goldwyn – that usually only makes bland movies and, most of all, the star actor Laurence Olivier and star actress Merle Oberon couldn't stand each other. I'm convinced, however, that all these tensions contributed to the fact that "Wuthering Heights" became such a flawless and influential classic. Oberon depicts a despicable character, as Cathy is a selfish and capricious shrew, but she does it wonderfully. And even though Laurence Olivier's Heathcliff is fundamentally a creepy and disturbing psychopath, he's still one of the most desirably male characters in the history of cinema. Just ask Kate Bush

jjnxn-1 Dark, beautiful version of Emily Bronte's master work. Unquestionably Merle Oberon's selfish, conflicted Cathy is her best work and she's matched every step of the way by Olivier, perhaps at the peak of his attractiveness, who also gives one of his best performances as the tormented Heathcliff. All the actors acquit themselves with distinction but what makes this stand out is both the assured touch of Wyler and the stellar photography which is so effective it almost becomes a character in the piece. A story of doomed love and revenge it can hardly be described a happy film but it is an emotionally involving one. Every few years there is a new version trying to improve on this, they can't. Catch it if you can.