David Copperfield

My first thought was, why another adaptation? The BBC version was pure poetry in motion. Why ruin it's memory with this garbage version? It seems that creativity and research are no longer used in the world of film making. The quest for greed; producers with no experience and/or talent, lend their ugly hand in remake after remake of stories that have been told over and over again. Come on Film World, let's be more original and do what film making is supposed to do: ART and CREATIVITY.

This David Copperfield version was alright

The best version ever is the 1999 BBC version of David Copperfield. All I can say is that the oh so cute, Daniel Radcliffe as David Copperfield is just so adorable.

The only person that bothers me is the older David Copperfield.

Everyone else is perfect especially, Uriah Heep (ooh! very perfect and creepy), Dame Maggie Smith as Aunt Betsy is even better than Sally Fields!

I recommend the BBC version than this version

I wished Hugh Dancy had done the BBC's version of David Copperfield....he is the perfect David

the BBC version is the most faithful to the book however I feel they miscasted older David...Hugh Dancy is perfect

the hallmark David Copperfield is not as faithfull to the book in my opinion...Sally Field as Aunt Besty is not all too great...Dame Maggie Smith was better...if Hugh Dancy had been in the BBC version it would have been perfect

This adaptation of "David Copperfield" did have some strengths, but for the most part was disappointing. Some scenes were good, such as the savage beating Mr. Murdstone gives to young David, cut with scenes of the mature David flinching as he remembers the blows. Uriah Heep was a truly Dickensian villain, slithering and oiling his way into a position of power. But Mr. Micawber was spoiled by the extremely eccentric accent of Michael Richards, and Sally Field was just not English enough for Betsy Trotwood. Her shouts of "DonkEEEES!" sounded like Minny Pearl. A story like this must naturally be abridged for the screen, but that's no excuse for omitting important storylines like the Steerforth/Little Em'ly/Rosa Dartle situation and instead inventing a new one, like Mr. Murdstone as a sort of marital vampire whose destruction is the turning point of David's life. Despite some good performances and scenes, this is not a memorable "David Copperfield".

Having seen other adaptations besides reading the book, I kept watching this travesty in hopes that it would get better, but it didn't. Americans need to keep their accents and not "fake" an English one. Networks need to remember that there is too much competition to become sloppy in adaptations or becoming too creative with the "Classics". This drives away viewers who spend their dollars on advertisers' products and what credibility does it give them for future productions. David Copperfield was totally lost in this production and never grew, never matured. Dora was delicate and somewhat spoiled in past productions, not this simpering, whiny, pathetic creature that you wanted to slap into life. Agnes was a mere shadow of what she has been in the past, just enough backbone to recognize her character. Sally Field was disappointing as she tried to fake an English accent as Aunt Betsey Trotwood. Her past works have shown she is capable of an award winning performance, but not this time. Anthony Andrews' character of the mean stepfather became cartoon-ish as we saw his character reappearing in the story. His part was written as if the screenwriter wanted to give the stepfather his comeuppance. Don't waste the time to even schedule the VCR if you missed it, because there wasn't anything to miss.