Great Expectations

Moviecut—Great Expectations

source: Great Expectations

The guy in front of me in the cinema was the spitting image of the Abel Magwitch on the screen - at least from behind. When you see Finlay Currie's Magwitch, you'll realise this is no joke. He's a gruff and alarming, just as he should be. The opening scenes are great, but the film can't sustain them - unlike Dickens's novel, which is almost unique in the way it awakes our interest in the child and goes on to DEEPEN our interest in the adult. On screen it's often hard to see much in the mature Pip. Still, the mature Pip is far from being a disaster, and Alec Guinness's Herbert gives us a strong vicarious liking for the man (which, again, is as it should be). And yet the story just continues to deteriorate as it approaches its end. David Lean knew that he wouldn't be able to include everything from the book - Orlick, for instance, is nowhere to be seen - but the film has the appearance of filling in detail more and more hastily as it goes along. The amount of narration sharply increases - always a bad sign. The entire character of Bentley Drummle is given to us in voice-over narration, when Pip casually mentions that (a) Estella is engaged to him, and (b) he's not very nice. Since we don't actually SEE how odious he is, we don't have much reason to believe Pip on this point - yet, of course, it is ESSENTIAL that we know not just that Drummle is odious but that we feel the very same desire Pip does to pick him up and throw him in a fireplace (or something of that kind). The Hollywoodish ending is worst of all. I don't know why it's always been fashionable to lament the way Dickens ends the novel. His published ending was at least much better than the one he first wrote out; and every attempt I've seen to fiddle with Dickens's published ending is a flat failure. I won't deny that Lean's film has a certain style. It certainly has potential. The main problem, I think, is the difficulty of turning `Great Expectations' into a good film. He did much better two years later with `Oliver Twist'.

Charles Dickens certainly liked to write his novels from a child's point of view. Oliver Twist, David Copperfield, and Great Expectations all start with the hero/protagonist as a child. Only young Oliver Twist of the three I mentioned ended still a child in the novel's conclusion. In Oliver Twist, young Oliver is reunited with his propertied and somewhat wealthy grandfather looking to rise in station from his humble background. Young Pip, short for Philip Pirrup, is also of humble background in Great Expectations. His parents are killed when he's young, he lives with his sister and her husband who is a blacksmith. During his childhood he befriends a convict on the run. Later on for mysterious reasons to him, he comes under the protection of eccentric old Miss Haversham who wants him as a companion for her adopted child Estella. Later on as an adult, he has a mysterious benefactor who provides him income enough to live as a gentlemen, something he fervently desired all his life. It seems to be a dream come true. But there are still quite a few bumps on Pip's road of life. Charles Dickens despaired of the poverty he saw in early Victorian Great Britain. But he also knew that riches alone did not necessarily guarantee happiness. It didn't for Scrooge, for Ms. Havisham, and certainly not for John Mills as the adult Pip. Nor does it for Valerie Hobson who inherits Ms. Havisham's estate. Mills and Hobson are a perfectly cast pair of leads in this version of Great Expectations. Alec Guinness began a long association with director David Lean as Herbert Pocket, Pip's friend and roommate. Finlay Currie, the craggy Scot's player who usually played kindly old gentlemen, turns out to be kinder indeed than originally presented as convict Abel Magwitch. It's a different kind of part for him. Martita Hunt as Ms. Havisham plays a part all to familiar to me. I had an elderly relative in my family a lot like her, bitter at the world and taking it out on all around her. My favorite in the film though is Francis L. Sullivan. Usually Sullivan's characters are crooked and/or corrupt in most of his films. As attorney Jaggers who seems to have an unseen hand in all the proceedings he actually is working for the ultimate benefit of both of our leads. In Dickens's world, wealth can corrupt as easily as poverty. It's the character inside you that counts and that fact is not better demonstrated than in this adaption of Great Expectations.

This was one of the key movies that helped establish David Lean's reputation as a director. It has been delighting audiences for over 65 years so its merits are too obvious to need repeating here. Nonetheless, I don't rate it as highly as most people. My doubts mostly concern the casting. There are truly memorable performances from Martita Hunt, Finlay Currie, Bernard Miles and Francis L Sullivan but, like many people, I have always had a problem with the relative ages of the lead actors. The young Pip was played by 14-year-old Tony Wager. He is fine, but is having to play opposite 17 year-old Jean Simmons. This age discrepancy is all too noticeable. Why cast a teenager opposite an adolescent? This curious decision would have made sense if the intention had been for Jean Simmons to play the adult Estella as well (with make-up and lighting this would have been perfectly feasible). However, the 20 year-old Estella is actually played by 29 year-old Valerie Hobson. There is worse to come. When the story jumps forward 6 years, 20 year-old Pip is now played by a 38 year-old John Mills. Similarly, Pip's contemporary, Herbert Pocket, is played by 32 year-old Alec Guinness. It might be possible for men in middle-age to get way with playing callow youths on stage, but not on film. Mills and Guinness have to use all their technique as actors to consciously play young, but the effort always shows and the movie camera is merciless in probing the deception. Meanwhile, Joe Gargery is still being played by 39 year-old Bernard Miles. There is now only a one year age difference between stepfather and stepson. These age problems often turn up in Dickens, because several of his novels have childhood prologues and the main action can cover many years. The most intractable of his books is probably Dombey and Son, where the main phase of the story takes Florence Dombey from 12 to 17. This is a near impossible age range for any actress to span. However, I suspect the problems with this film were nothing to do with the story. They were probably due to the disruptive effect of the War, which cut off the supply of new young actors for five years. In 1946, most of the actors with the fame and the experience to carry a movie like Great Expectations had already established themselves way back in the Thirties. Movie buffs, and many ordinary movie-fans, will of course be scornful that I let this question of age bother me. But it does bother me. Great Expectations may show David Lean at the height of his powers as a director, but it takes more than a great director to make a great movie. You have to get the screenplay and the casting right as well. For me, one out of two was not quite good enough. Oliver Twist was David Lean's great Dickens film. PS: In the Railway Children, 19 year-old Sally Thomsett played a girl of about 12 or 13, so she might have been able to play Florence Dombey. Her problem may have been that she would have been more convincing as the adolescent Florence than as the young woman at the end of the book - despite her true age.

I am a bit surprised that GREAT EXPECTATIONS is in the top 250 on IMDb. While it's a very well-crafted film from start to finish, it's also a story that is a bit old fashioned. Now I am about to say something radical, so hold on tight. When I was forced to read this story in 8th grade, I thoroughly hated it. While the film did change my views a bit, I still am not a huge fan of the story. Sorry, but our teacher managed to strip all the fun out of the tale. In general, I liked the film though purists might hate that so much of the story has been changed. I didn't mind this too much, with things like Mrs. Havisham catching fire and Pip putting her out being added--but they definitely were not in the original. One change I really didn't like, though, was the ending. Why give the film a "happy ending" where Pip and Estella supposedly marry and live happily ever after?! This is especially dumb because there is no way that the chronically screwed up Estella COULD have a happy marriage--Ms. Havisham simply worked too hard screwing her up to have her suddenly become normal! That was the point of the original story! Overall, excellent acting, very exciting cinematography and a complete disregard to reverently following the rather dull source material make this a very good film--but that ending?! Uggh.

As a fan of many so-called classic films, I am nonetheless aware that there is some validity to the criticism that early movies (say, anything before Brando in Streetcar) as a rule have less vitality than their modern counterparts, are formulaic to a fault, and strain the limits of modern attention spans more than can be fully blamed on the viewer. Great Expectations treads miles clear of any of these criticisms, and so I recommend it in particular to anyone who has a general disdain for films that a) were released in the first half of the 20th century and/or b) were shot in black and white. Here is one that can change your mind. Naturally, given the talents of the author, the plot itself leaves little to be desired. Further, David Lean, his cast, and his crew, have done a splendid job translating Dickens to the screen. This is indeed, as the Criterion Collection folks have classified it, one of the "Great Adaptations." I doubt that there is a better cinematic adaptation of any Dickens novel and am almost certain there is none in which the Dickensian English dialogue flows more pleasantly and naturally. The actors herein deliver Dickens as Olivier himself delivered Shakespeare. Nor is this an unimportant accomplishment; having to spend a couple of hours listening to actors who sound more like they are delivering a series of quotes (though admittedly they are) than that they are actually conversing can be positively unbearable. Indeed I think that's the main thing that people are hitting upon when, with broad brush-strokes, they paint older films as tedious. Great Expectations is the antidote to just this attitude. If you are a lover of classic films, you have likely already seen this one or will do so regardless of my review, but if, on the other hand, you entertain the possibility of watching Great Expectations with a deep-seated skepticism I implore you to give it a chance. I have every confidence you'll be pleasantly surprised and find yourself drawn into what is, after all, a fascinating story.

Before he became famous for Directing epics (The Bridge On The River Kwai, Lawrence OF Arabia etc.) David Lean directed a number of British literature classics. While I have never seen a movie that has eclipsed It's literary source, This is by far the best adaptation you are likely to see. To adapt one of the most famous novels by one of the most loved novelist's of all time is an almost impossible task. To end up with a result like this is a combination of many superb collaborations. From Lean's Crisp and tight direction to Guy Green's stunning Oscar Winning Black and White photography. The casting of each part was superbly cast from a fine stock of British actors. Led by John Mills as the central Character Pip he was backed up by a magnificent set of actors. Alec Guinness (in his first major role) played Herbert Pocket, Martita Hunt was unforgettable as Miss Havisham, That fine Scottish actor Finlay Currie played the convict Magwitch. Francis L. Sullivan Played the lawyer Jaggers just as he did in a 1934 Hollywood version. The ever reliable Bernard Miles played Pip's shy brother in law, the blacksmith Joe Gargery. The Heroine and the object of Pip's affections Estella was played by two of British cinemas most beautiful exports. A very young Jean Simmons played the young Estella and Valerie Hobson( who 15 years earlier played opposite Boris Karloff, as the bride to be Elsa in the horror classic Frankenstein) was the older Estella. Almost 60 years old there has been many versions of Great Expectations made since this masterpiece. The only question is why when it is obvious this version will never be surpassed as the definitive version.

I was very disappointed in this film. I read great reviews beforehand, ("one of the greatest films ever made" and "possibly the best Dickens on film") and expected a magnificent adaptation. I was sorely disappointed. I mean, part of what I love about Dickens is his humor. One of the few attempts at bringing some of the humor from the book into the movie is when Joe visits Pip in London and can't find a place to put his hat. In the book, this is to show how uncomfortable Joe is outside of the forge, but the humor is compassionate and it is always clear that Joe has a certain dignity that money and fine clothes could never buy. In the film, the hat incident is just used to turn Joe into a buffoon and get a laugh at his expense, nothing more. I don't know how people can say that this movie is faithful to the original. Sure, it is pretty faithful to the story line, even including verbatim excerpts of some of the dialogue, and it was beautifully shot and all, but to say that it is a great rendition of Dickens? Dickens is funny and compassionate and his stories make me think about the human heart and the human motives. This film taught me nothing. If you pare away from the novel all the heart and humor and humanity and everything that makes the characters likable and understandable, leaving only the bare story line, well, then this might be called a great rendition.

This adaptation of Charles Dickens's classic novel, directed by David Lean from a script he co-adapted, and photographed by Guy Green, is a miracle of invention, economy and detail. Every piece on every set; every line of dialogue; every gesture and line reading of every actor; every black-and-white frame of this beautiful film seems perfect. Dickens's characters, situations and themes are all vividly dramatized. Pip, Pocket, Joe, Mr. Jaggers, Magwitch and—unforgettably—Miss Havisham, are all here and all ready to move, amuse, frighten and entertain anyone willing to spend time with them. I haven't read the book since I was thirteen. I vividly remember Miss Havisham, but I don't remember noting the contrast between her and Magwitch, the ex-convict. She becomes bitter and vengeful after a great heartbreak; he becomes great of heart through one small act of kindness. That's what made the movie for me this time; but clearly there's richness to spare for future viewings. There is so much here not only for Dickens fans, but for anyone who loves movies. I especially liked that shot from Pip's point of view as he becomes sick. It's the kind of crazy effect beloved of filmmakers, too; but I love it not so much for itself, but for being the right shot at the right moment. Some directors hide, others show off, but directors like David Lean know how to do both and know when to do which.