Avis des utilisateurs

It got worse and worse. It started out ok. There were a few instances of context that are not in Dickens, references to opium and the slave trade, and there was some clunky dialogue where women explained they were not ok with second class citizenship. That was ok. I felt it was unnecessary personally but I can see the temptation to make obvious to a modern audience what is implied or inferred.

By episode three it went off into scenes that are not in the book in any way and dialogue that has nothing to do with the novel. It is also slow paced. So much plodding music and a brooding boy. Makes you wonder why it was made.

I have to be honest, I groaned when I heard that this was being remade, with the array of possibilities, this seemed like a very uninspired choice.

I am curious as to some of the one and ten star ratings, neither made any sense to me at all, I simply don't see how it can evoke such strong feelings either way.

The word that came to my mind, was predictable, from the casting, to the visuals, right down to the presence of Olivia Colman, it's almost as if The BBC has tried to go right back to basics, but they've just missed the mark.

As you'd expect from The BBC it's very well made, it's also very well acted, no issue with either quality, but it just lacked something, I can't say I feel enthralled by further episodes. It's guilty of being dull.

It feels so unnecessary , and it is by far the weakest made for television adaptation to date, I grew up as a kid with the terrific adaptation starring Anthony Hopkins and Jean Simmons, it never left me, I find it hard to picture this leaving such a mark on anyone.

It looks great, some of the language used feels out of place, but it lacks any real sparkle.

5/10.

Despite the casting I think you could produce this story with donkeys if it was told and presented well. I'not one to say what dicken's intended or meant but I've been watching this story since I was a kid and so far I don't see any of that in this series. Great cast. How can you say anything bad about oliva colman. It's not her fault they made her look like a fool. She doesn't look like a woman jilted and aged unwell hanging on to the past. She looks more like the female ghost of xmas but made up for holloween. As I recall the story was mostly about envy, especially the envy for something out of your reach which ultimately creates the drama which makes the story timeless. Most of us can identify but it's rarely in productions these days because so much of the culture is narcissistic. So far I'm not getting any of that but a bunch of characters riffing on each other with their own silly purpose. I can't give the film a 0 because there's so much professional effort they got right but they forgot to tell a story, or whatever they're selling, not interested.

I was anticipating this show with great expectations. I circled the day on my calendar. I was looking forward to the deep, colorful characters and masterful story telling and beauty of Charles Dickens. Instead, I found the outline of Dickens' story clothed in a gaudy and perverse costume. I was shocked by the steep incline into evil and darkness. I suggest that rather than having your soul assaulted, tuck a copy of the book Great Expectations under your arm and head for a quiet place to read. Even better, find a friend to go with you and take turns reading out loud. Enjoy the gift of Charles Dickens in all its glory.

Several of my favorite actors are in this adaptation, and I really wanted to love it. With every episode, I hated this version more and more. The entire thing strayed so far from the book and other adaptations. I get the creative license and interpreting it in a unique way, but my great expectations for this adaptation did not come to fruition. I think my disappointment was in the Pip storyline most of all. There were a few things I did like about this interpretation but it was from other characters mostly. I know Great Expectations is generally depressing, but this version was so extremely depressing and full of heartache and negative scenes (even gross scenes), that it really turned me off. I will not be watching this version again (I have previous versions on DVD).

I would hate anyone who hasn't read the story to watch this and think that this is what Dickens wrote. Charles Dickens would not recognise this dark relentless chunk of misery as his warm, witty and engaging coming-of-age story Great Expectations. The only redeeming feature is the acting of Olivia Colman, superb as always, although why make her such a nasty opium addict? The script bears hardly any reference to the book, and the language used is disgraceful. Where are the many light hearted moments, the amusing conversations, the wry observations? I have endured three episodes and have no engagement or sympathy with any of the characters. I do not intend to subject myself to any more of this dross.

So it seems that many are hindered by the excellent adaptations in the past being their "expectation". Y s they were great and yes this one did stray from the genius that is Dickens more than I'd like. However, the book is much darker than any adaptation, including this one and I query how many have actually read it. I was lucky enough that my first experience with the story was the book and no adaptation has come even close to it. This.one does not differ there but it was dark, subversive and had the unusual element of keeping me guessing. The cast were very good although I didnt find Estella cold enough or Pip snobby enough, the filming excellent and the pace spot on . Did I like the ending? Not as much as I hoped but like I say nothing has or will come.close to the cold raining November night in the late eighties when I turned to the last page and that is not the fault of any adaptation. That would be because Dickens and his incredible story telling.

Great Expectations

My main criticism of this is it is not Dicken's, it is not an adaptation it is not a reworking it just has no connection to the novel so needs a different title. Great works of art exist as the artist intended it is not for anyone to effect great change over the words, the plot or the characters, even if Dicken's novel is the source material.

It is difficult to now address this series as Dickens in any way, the dialogue was reworked losing the beautiful words, we had expletives that grated, the plot was rearranged for no apparent purpose, the casting was bizarre and the idea that these changes made this great work accessible is absurd. Dickens novel is so totally accessible in the first place.

Lastly the idea that this introduced Dicken's to a new generation of viewers is laughable, they are not watching this they are glued to Netflix, the BBC just keep insulting their core audience.

I forced myself to watch this, to give it justice and hated it with a vengeance. Who was this made for, who watched it, all counts no one!

1 outta 10, this was rubbish avoid it.

First reaction. Oh dear god.....Steve knight wrote the screenplay of our most quintessential wordsmith using the 'F' word !! And I so wanted to hate it. But then I started to analyse what was going on. Dickens is most recognised for his amazing characters so how do you get a modern audience to understand the nuances of why they were as they were. We are meant to loathe Pips sister sara but simple meaness would have done it for a Victorian reader but not now. So knight depicts her as a sleazy dominatrix. Well NOW I hate her. Jaggers has been shown as a pure evil Machiavellian. His arrogance and strutting gait is a perfection of acting (Bravo Mr. Ashley Thomas) The modern audience can revel in the mental illness of Olivia Colemans Miss Haversham as Knight explains her prison of the mind created by the use and misuse of a Victorian woman as chattel. Financially buoyed on a background of slave ownership. Tom sweets expressions of fright, fear, apprehension and dread are so much more entertaining than the simplistic terror of other performances.

The cinematography is delicious, the acting is stunning and the new layers in between the plot and characters are a joy to watch. Ok Mr. Knight ........you are forgiven.

Well that's the first episode and it was rather better than I'd been led to expect.

As something of an expert on the novel (I studied it for four long years at school and can still recite most of it from memory) I actually don't mind a bit of licence being taken. I might've preferred the retention of somewhat more of Dickens' marvellous and often highly comic dialogue but, in general, so far I find the production quite respectful of, and in keeping with, the original.

My main beef is simply, why? We already have so many screen adaptations of Great Expectations and there are plenty of other classic novels deserving of attention.

I do feel that anyone giving a one-star review should declare whether they have actually read the novel or whether, instead, they are basing their ire on some idealised notion of the tale from some previous screen adaptation.

Perhaps they could also let us know whether they were also furious about black elves in Amazon's Rings of Power.

This story was loosely based on the Dickens novel which I always loved. I enjoyed seeing the characters come to life in a different rendition of a familiar tale. I thought the casting was good, the acting was good, and I like the diversity of the cast. My only con is it got to the ending a little to fast. Would have liked a little more development in the end concerning Pip's decision and how it ultimately affected Estella. I though the actor playing Mr. Jaggers did very well and Ms. Havisham was also very good. Both Magwich and Compeyson were convincing as well.

Overall, I enjoyed and looked forward to each episode. I always like seeing renditions of good books. I didn't mind that this one took a lot of liberties.

Be warned this is a woke version of the classic Dickens novel and surprisingly not in a bad way. As my second favorite Dickens work after A Christmas Carol and one that I have read multiple times you might expect me to take issue with the many updates and embellishments in this production.

But that is not at all the case. The addition of frank and open discussion of Britains role in the 19th century slavery and opium trades in the context of Pips character development as he comes of age only improves and enhances the original work.

I am shocked at the negative rankings and reviews. Maybe these reviewers don't have the same deep knowledge and appreciation of this novel and its historical context as I do. In any case I highly recommend this mini series.

I knew this was going to be a crass modern pandering to a public sector committee adaptation.

It is poor and to be honest it's the way British drama has been for the past 20 years. They just haven't got any originality or thought in how they will achieve a good drama.

This new, sigh, reworking has all the hallmarks of la-dee-da acting and production. Nothing works. The backstory of the each character is pitiful.

Nothing works like the original. We don't want 2023 values thrust upon an adaptation that's set in the early 19th century. Lord of the rings, or power rings or whatever it's called did the same and it ended up as a pile of rot.

Avoid this drama.

This production is much better than many of the reviews posted here, and is of a high quality I think a lot of reviewers ignored to complain about what they think they should have seen.

I took from this production a way of showing the Dickens story in a way that showcases many modern film techniques, which is refreshing. The director and team stayed consistent with their tone and approach, holding a dim and moody tone very well.

Worth mentioning is the near flawless filming, audio lighting and sets. This show looks incredible start to finish.

Now I recognize this is a dry show (which again, likely the director's vision) and its pacing is slow. It's better watched as a moody film student might rather than someone looking for a good time.

Try to watch this with an artistic eye, without comparing it to previous Great Expectations productions.

It's okay for a movie or show to depart from the book it's based on, but if it does then don't we want it to at least do something interesting with the differences? If this series chooses to show Pip as a moody romantic teenager rather than as a child, then couldn't he at least be given some personality? The screenwriters do keep some bits of Dickens' writing -- which stand out from the rest of the wooden dialog -- but otherwise there's no individuality in the characters: they all speak more or less the same way, even those (such as Joe and Pumblechook) from completely different backgrounds. The show is all atmosphere and scenery at the expense of acting and story.

Not your grandmother's Great Expectations. Certainly not Dickens' Great Expectations. The "F" bombs alone set it apart. Far far apart. Other reviewers mention the lack of Dickens' use of language. Ain't that the truth!!

I thought there were only 3 episodes so decided to watch it all. It certainly has excellent costumes and sets. Miss Haversham's bedroom alone is worth it. My question is: How on earth can anyone dust it all?

Once Jagger appeared, it took a turn for the better. He is so brilliantly evil!! The first shot of him is beautiful - enjoy it! It only gets better, as does he.

In fact, he's the only reason I'll watch this non-Dickens Great Expectations. That and to get another glimpse of Miss H's bedroom.

If you want to watch a true masterpiece - watch the 1942 movie, "Great Expectations". THAT's Dickens and cinema's best.

I hear many reviewers shout "This is NOT Dickens", my advice; get over it!

I am dumbfounded by it's low rating. I have read all of Dickens original stories and while I agree that this adaptation is only very loosely based on the original story-line, I find totally irrelevant, for me it stands alone, I believe Dickens would have loved it...

Ashley Thomas is the darkest and dare I say the best Jaggers I've even seen, I rub my hands together in every scene, awaiting yet another dastardly deed; with Olivia Colman's performance as a very creepy Miss Havisham and a fine supporting cast, what more can you ask for? My only reservation is Fionn Whitehead, his portrayal is fine, he just seems a little old to play he main character Pip.

This movie has no fear as it rushes headlong into the subjects we turn away from, dealing with crime, drugs, prostitution and slavery, things that were present in the time of Dickens but he was unable to write about.

My advice would be not to listen to all the 'puritans'; watch it yourselves, it's a gem!

The important word here is adaptation or re-telling. As many reviewers have pointed out, this is not Dickens, or maybe Dickens in a parallel universe. I have read the book, and it is a wonderful and very funny story. This version is not that, nor does it take away anything from the book; it is seen through a different lens, warped, yes unpredictable, yes the same landscape twisted; as I said, I loved the book, and I have enjoyed this. I did not watch this with any expectation, only the knowledge that it was a drama (I found the book to be a comic drama). The casting is a little woke, but this is the BBC, and it is to be expected. Go into this with no great expectations, and you may find, as I did, an unusual tale oddly interpreted.

This is the third adaptation I have watched, I haven't read the book so I won't get my knickers in a twist as to it's faithfulness, though having said that I wouldn't do that anyway because I treat films inspired by books on there own merit as it's foolish to do otherwise. Just as I would a remake of a film that's not Inspired by a book, each one is it's own work in its own right. I thought it was wonderful and certainly the best adaptation I have seen. The acting was fantastic, each character was as stand out as the next. The storyline was inspiring, tense and heartwarming.

So I'm glad I didn't go off the reviews or i could of missed out on this wonderful series.

Dickens was a wonderfully descriptive writer- but there's no richness of story in the first episode.

It is like watching a plodding unimaginative story recounted in a flat voice by someone who can't be bothered.

It isn't the cast's fault- indeed the casting is probably the best part of this version.

I found the relationship between Pip and Joe curiously cold.

I simply found I couldn't care about what happened next.

Perhaps some previous versions have just been too good.

My all time favourite was years ago-with a wonderful Stratford Johns playing Magwitch. I was hoping for something like that this time.

I don't think I'll watch the rest.

It has made me want to re-read the book again.

I won't spoil it, but the series is captivating and thought-provoking. I'm curious, if they had altered the names of all the characters and the title, would viewers simply recognize it as being partly inspired by "Great Expectations"?

Despite its departure from the source material, I enjoyed the show for its era, acting, and intrigue. However, its stark divergence was bound to provoke some displeasure.

Nevertheless, one can still appreciate the original book or David Lean's film without feeling that this adaptation gives away too much or anything, really. So, approach this series as if it weren't titled "Great Expeditions."