Plot: After a young estate owner in 19th century England initially plans to kill her cousin believing that she murdered his guardian, his feelings for her complicate matters.

Films about Daphne Du Maurier novels have had a pretty solid history. But it has been a while since we have a major release for one. The last time was probably 1973's 'Don't Look Now'.

A couple of major successes involved the late great Alfred Hitchcock. He won Best Picture for 1940's 'Rebecca'. Also, there was 1963's 'The Birds' which certainly changed the way I looked at birds.
Other notable releases are Jamaica Inn, The Years Between, Hungry Hill.

With 'My Cousin Rachel', it was a solid piece of period drama. The first act took a while for me to piece everything and understand why certain characters were doing certain things. Once that was sorted, it was evolving into something you would expect with every Du Maurier screenplay. Than sadly, the final act never gave us a big pay-off. I know Du Maurer's ending usually leaves it open for discussion. But the execution of it in this one, did not give me that punch of satisfaction.

The performances were a strong positive aspect. Sam Claflin is becoming quite an impressive young actor. His mix of success in top franchises and British period pieces as well as Me Before You has now made him quite a hot property. What's even better, is that he continues to deliver a very engaging performance every time. His development kept me interested and his chemistry was spot on.
Rachel Weisz was very good as the title character. She keeps that air of mystery that you expect from a Du Maurier novel throughout. You are never sure what her true personality is, and it keeps you guessing far beyond the credits. It is easy to forget how great of an actor she is.
There some surprisingly memorable scene-stealing moments from the supporting cast which was great to see. Most notably from Tim Barlow, Holliday Grainger and Iain Glen.

What a period drama always seems to do well, is the settings. The locations were gorgeous to look at and the sweeping camera shots really a terrific backdrop to have. Also, the costume designs looked great and the actors made them look ever better.
The score by Rael Jones fitted the story well. It hinted at any possible sinister characters, but never gave anything away.

Seeing this reminded how good Du Maurier books are at transcending into film. That mystery tone to them, and the ending that always make you question the decisions are main characters make in the end.
Sadly, I think the performances and the execution of the story did not seem to mix enough to make it a highly memorable experience. Nothing had me totally gripped. It just went at a pretty pedestrian pace with a few potential moments of tension that never had a finished product.

Everything is there. The performances are great, the setting and costume designs looked on point and the score is solid.
What was missing for me, was the emotional impact. I think in the right hands this would have been as good as it should have been. I wish someone like the late Alfred Hitchcock could have got their hands on this.

It is still worth watching, especially for Rachel Weisz. But by the end of it, I was thinking more about what it could have been rather than what it was. I can see a lot of people thinking the same thing as well.

Rating: 7/10