Great Expectations

This is perhaps the worst film version of a Dickens novel ever made by a major studio. All of the dramatic power of the story is drowned in syrupy music and mostly mediocre to awful acting. Phillips Holmes is terrible as the adult Pip. Holmes, never a good actor, is alternately stiff and hammy.

Henry Hull, usually quite enjoyable when hammy, and actually quite good normally, is unsatisfying compared to Finlay Currie as Magwitch (Currie appeared in the classic 1946 David Lean film). Jane Wyatt conveys nothing of the icy-yet sympathetic haughtiness of Estella. Florence Reed is just fair as Miss Havisham, especially when compared with Martita Hunt's absolutely unforgettable 1947 performance, and Francis L.Sullivan showed much more enthusiasm playing Jaggers in the 1946 film.

It is hard to compare this version or any other version of Great Epacation because of the numerous ones made ,and the fact that they were all made in different time periods. The main idea though is to get the point of the novel across. This version does this in a very timely manner as well as appealing. While it may not be a blockbuster it is a fair interpretation of the movie. It should not be taken lightly. It is in fact a great movie for the use in teaching of the book. Were is in the place I view this fine production. Even though it is not the best I want to reinforce again it should not be forgotten ,and should be remembered as a classic.

This 1934 version of "Great Expectations", directed by Stuart Walker, has been largely ignored because it pales in comparison with the masterpiece that David Lean made from the same story in the 40's. By comparison, this earlier version is plain and undistinguished, but it is not a bad film in its own right. It is a faithful rendering of the Dickens novel, which is a fascinating story that in itself makes any reasonable movie version worth watching.

The main thing that limits the effectiveness of this version is that most of the acting is so routine. Dickens' characters are always very distinctive (if not peculiar), and to be most effective in a movie they must be slightly exaggerated. Characters like Pip, Magwitch, Miss Havisham, and Estella all have quirks and/or inner conflicts that are very important in making the story work. That is what made David Lean's two adaptations of Dickens stories such brilliant films - he was able to get his actors to portray the characters in exactly the way Dickens created them. But here, only Henry Hull as Magwitch fully realizes the potential of his character.

Still, the story itself is told well enough. The novel was one of Dickens' best, a brilliant study of the main characters: Pip, whose entire life depends on a stroke of good fortune that he misunderstands; Miss Havisham, who spends her whole life reliving one awful experience from her youth; Estella, torn between Pip's warm innocence and Miss Havisham's cold psychological cruelty; Magwitch, desperately trying to leave behind something positive after a sordid, dishonorable life. Although this film version does not realize the full potential of all of these characters, it does at least make sure that we can see who they are, and can ponder the possibilities for ourselves.

The great Lean version of "Great Expectations" is now very hard to find, and for those who like Dickens' stories, this version, while by no means a worthy replacement, is at least a watchable substitute.

There have been too many adaptations of Great Expectations and other Dickens classics that have failed to miss the fact that the eminent Victorian author's novels were not intended as sentimental, romantic fairytales but as scathing criticisms of the less-than-progressive aspects of life in 19th century Britain,namely the exploitation of the impoverished masses by the hypocritical idle rich. This 1934 travesty is about as accurate a realization of Dickens' original vision as Free Willy is a realization of Melville's vision for Moby-Dick. The scenes involving young Pip are played out like an Our Gang comedy complete with cloying music and the rest of it is filled with wooden acting,overly high key lighting, and an abundance of peculiarly well-fed poor people- this last aspect a phenomenon that plagued other mis-begotten Dickens farces of the '30s such as Monogram's Oliver Twist and the MGM A Christmas Carol. Every time this shows up on cable(a rarity at least in Madison,thank God) or is borrowed from a library,Dickens must do a backflip in his grave. All said, if you want to see DICKENS' Great Expectations stick with the Lean version or the respectable 1989 Disney version.Leave this one to rot in Miss Havisham's wedding cake.

About two years ago I had written a review of this fine film and wanted to add a footnote. It seems easier to begin again with a few pertinent comments, so I wanted to mention that this is my favorite version of the film. Although I like the David Lean version from '46, this is the one I prefer. I love the lovely casting of the characters, the beautiful sets and charming music depicting new events in the life of the orphan boy, Pip.

About 30 years ago my husband and I enjoyed this film from a Family Festival, like it mentions here. It was on one weekend and was shown in its entirety. Shortly afterwards, I needed a blank tape at a moment's notice, and taped over it. A real mistake, because all subsequent screenings have cut out Valerie Hobson's part entirely as Biddy, governess to Pip. She was also the nurse to Mrs. Jo, Pip's sister.

Also missing is a scene of the vengeful man who worked in the forge for Pip's brother-in-law. In this scene we learn that he had struck Pip's sister with a block of iron, and this is why they needed a nurse for Mrs Jo and a governess to Pip. Enter Biddy, who performed both functions ably.

Although the film still works without those scenes, the more cohesive pattern is of course with them. They are essentially key to the story, like vital links in a chain.

I am a collector of period pieces and try to understand why they would cut a film which was depicted so well. A real mystery to me is that they would do this fifty years after the fact! My husband and I think there were 2 films sent to the movie studio that day, and the one we saw was complete. Upon subsequent screenings, I taped the movie 2 or 3 more times to no avail. In future it was impossible to obtain the film complete.

The American Film Institute book states that Valerie Hobson's part was deleted from the scenes in Great Expectations, 1934, This is incomprehensible to me. We have all heard of movies being cut before screening, but this film was clearly shown with the scenes up at least until somewhere in the 1980's. This was not to make way for commercials, as the eventual commercial release on Video, and later DVD, etc. is the 1 hour and 43 minutes (which lacks the scenes).

Although Valerie Hobson was fairly new to the movie world, she would shortly co-star in The Werewolf of London and The Mystery of Edwin Drood. Her fine screen presence and sincere acting enhanced many a 1930s film.

Thank you all for reading this. I have been on the trail for about 30 years now, searching for the complete film. If anyone knows where I can find it, please e-mail me (Janet) at MCannady1@Verizon.net. In retrospect, I should have called the TV station the next day to see if I could obtain the complete VHS, but never thought of doing so.

This said, I hope to find someone who knows where I can get a copy of the film on DVD or VHS. I just picked up a clue when Roy Leonard's name was mentioned as host of the TV Station. I had read this in a general description of the film, along with the comment about it being shown incomplete most of the time.