The Worst Film Ever

Powerful

Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

Please don't watch this terribly miscast BBC version of the beloved tale. Just wait for the Ralph Fiennes version coming out soon. Or re watch the John Mills and Jean Simmons version which is near perfect.Lots has been said about Gillian Anderson being too young and pretty to be Ms Havisham but she is actually alright quite ghostly and spooky. The problem is Vanessa Kirby as Estella she is just way too plain - like some ugly step sister of Cinderella. Even Ms Havisham is prettier than Estella!. Terrible miscasting. You could throw a stone and find a prettier English girl on any street in London. Really spoils the series.Douglas Booth is too pretty and polished for Pip instead of being wide eyed and rough around the edges. He doesn't display enough emotion at the right parts. It's like the Beauty and the Beast with Estella the beast! Even the 2 kids as young Pip and Estella aren't cute.There is a lack of romantic sweep and drama in this version. Also there are some crucial things they didn't show eg Pip trying to save Ms Havisham. Watching this version will ruin your image of the story. Just skip it.

I cannot get the time back that I wasted watching this horrible piece of garbage, but I hope these actors (particular Gillian Anderson) got paid a lot of money to appear here! Not only did they rush through crucial parts of the story, but by rushing through these parts, they added dialog that didn't exist in the book, and deleted extremely important (and well known) dialog from the film.The rushed nature of the film (considering the fact that these are the same people who took five episodes to complete "Bleak House") is mind boggling! "Great Expectations" is one of the Dickens novels that someone unfamiliar with Dickens might watch in adaptation, and yet "Bleak House...?" The psychological games played between characters is far too sinister for the story. The back-story does have intrigue, but nothing so diabolical as implied... oh, why am I bothering. Don't soil your eyes with it!

I actually just finished the book a month ago so it might have adversely affected my opinion since this adaptation is so very different than the book. Without going into details and risk spoilers, I just have to say the casting is subpar, except for Gillian Anderson as Miss Havisham. The streamlining and changes in plots are questionable, the loss of some characters and changes to their actions and personality render them un-Dickensian. There should be enough time in 3 hours to tell a closer story to the original but the 3 hours felt like 6, I was bored and unmoved. I remember watching Bleak House, also with Gillian Anderson, and couldn't get enough, this one, I couldn't wait for it to end.

I don't want to go into too much detail or else it will be thoroughly spoiled. I anticipated this adaptation for months, being a great Dickens fan, especially after the BBC's magnificent adaptation of Bleak House.Similar problems always arise in these adaptations, both suffered from an absence of some key characters (although the latter had more episodes, and didn't suffer as a result) so here as a result the character development is not as it should have been.I was impressed however by how much of the plot they fit into just 3 episodes over Christmas, and the pace was terrific. There were flaws in the script, where Bleak House took plenty of quotes from the novel, this didn't and therefore doesn't feel as fleshy or ultimately, Dickensian. Why change the best form?I commend the cinematographers. One really felt the setting as it was written. Now onto the major successes and faults; casting.Douglas Booth as the protagonist tried but came off as a bit too wooden. He also looked far too attractive (which of course is not an insult) but it didn't really work.It is nice to see Claire Rushbrook again. Not seen her since Secrets & Lies. She was very convincing as Mrs Joe. Shaun Dooley was excellent as Joe Gargery, as were Harry Lloyd as Herbert Pocket, Jack Roth as Orlick, David Suchet as Jaggers and Ray Winstone definitely brought great life and humanity to the dreaded Magwitch.My hat though must go off to Gillian Anderson, although many have thought her wrong for the part, let me explain why she was so good and right for the role.Although Miss Havisham has been typically played as elderly, and her age is never specified really in the book, she was almost married as a teenager, and the time passing would place her in her forties, to early fifties. This makes Anderson, if anything, TOO YOUNG for the role, and the original "best" Martita Hunt, was only some years older. Of course she has been aged by her style of existence. Anderson did look more worn and ethereal as the series progressed. People also seemed to have a problem with her voice.I see the childish voice as her being trapped in her 18 year old self, which presumably is the age she was jilted, so like the rest of the house, time stopped at that point, which is why she had a similar childish outburst when her relatives visited. I think Anderson's performance therefore is rather genius. One can really feel the angst, anger, regret she feels. I would have preferred a more dramatic apology to Pip in the end, but I suppose it was more subtle. Anderson again impresses in a Dickensian role, showing something completely different to her outstanding portrayal of Lady Dedlock.It is her impressive work which for me gives this a 7 over 6. Oh and the intro sequence was quite beautiful. Slightly disappointing but overall an engaging adaptation, with a brave effort by Anderson which should really be recognised by BAFTA.Dooley, Roth, Winstone and Lloyd should all create some buzz too.