IMDb रेटिंग
6.8/10
35 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंAn adaptation of the classic Dickens tale, where an orphan meets a pickpocket on the streets of London. From there, he joins a household of boys who are trained to steal for their master.An adaptation of the classic Dickens tale, where an orphan meets a pickpocket on the streets of London. From there, he joins a household of boys who are trained to steal for their master.An adaptation of the classic Dickens tale, where an orphan meets a pickpocket on the streets of London. From there, he joins a household of boys who are trained to steal for their master.
- पुरस्कार
- 2 जीत और कुल 4 नामांकन
Joe Tremain
- Hungry Boy
- (as Joseph Tremain)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
I was somewhat ambivalent about the thought of one of my favourite directors making a version of the much loved classic tale Oliver Twist. On the one had Roman Polanski crafts wonderful and moving films extremely well so I was intrigued to see how he would weave this one together. From his early 'Knife in the water' through to 'The Pianist' each has his trademark directorial stamp on it whilst still being truly incredible and individual films. On the other hand, the Oliver Twist tale has been screened to death both in two highly regarded films as well as multifarious TV versions over the years. In my opinion David Lean's version is fantastic, Alec Guiness superb as Fagin and the whole film experience has kept me going back from childhood through to adulthood.
So it was with great trepidation that I went to see this spanking brand new version and thankfully I was not disappointed. The character of Fagin, so crucial to the story, is performed with outstanding ability by Ben Kingsley. He really portrays this grotesque but somehow lovable character well from his slight mannerisms and movements to his vocal abilities. Also, finely performed were the parts of the artful dodger (Harry Eden), Mr Brownlowe (Edward Hardwicke) and of course Oliver Twist (Barney Clarke). There was such sadness and despair in his eyes throughout that he really captured the part well. Less convincing was Bill Sykes (Jamie Foreman) who was not right for the part nor performed well enough to stand up against the masterful Oliver Reed in a previous version. Foreman is a regular in gangster type films and for me did not really fit into the cast or film well here.
The recreation of mid 19th century London is done well with Polanski drawing on the visual inspiration of Dore prints of the period for authenticity. The cinematography is as accomplished as always in a Polanski film and the lighting helped to create dramatic moods well.
All in all a very competent and entertaining version with great acting, a fine pace and an outstanding final scene of Fagin finished and soon to face death gripping hold of Oliver tightly. I would highly recommend to adults, children and die hard fans of other versions. All great directors have different visions and Polanski has used his vision and experienced craftmanship in successfully remaking this much loved tale.
So it was with great trepidation that I went to see this spanking brand new version and thankfully I was not disappointed. The character of Fagin, so crucial to the story, is performed with outstanding ability by Ben Kingsley. He really portrays this grotesque but somehow lovable character well from his slight mannerisms and movements to his vocal abilities. Also, finely performed were the parts of the artful dodger (Harry Eden), Mr Brownlowe (Edward Hardwicke) and of course Oliver Twist (Barney Clarke). There was such sadness and despair in his eyes throughout that he really captured the part well. Less convincing was Bill Sykes (Jamie Foreman) who was not right for the part nor performed well enough to stand up against the masterful Oliver Reed in a previous version. Foreman is a regular in gangster type films and for me did not really fit into the cast or film well here.
The recreation of mid 19th century London is done well with Polanski drawing on the visual inspiration of Dore prints of the period for authenticity. The cinematography is as accomplished as always in a Polanski film and the lighting helped to create dramatic moods well.
All in all a very competent and entertaining version with great acting, a fine pace and an outstanding final scene of Fagin finished and soon to face death gripping hold of Oliver tightly. I would highly recommend to adults, children and die hard fans of other versions. All great directors have different visions and Polanski has used his vision and experienced craftmanship in successfully remaking this much loved tale.
Perfect, there is no better way to describe this wonderful production by Roman Polanski. This time honoured story by one of the world's greatest writers has been given excellent treatment by a fantastic director.
First, the acting is quite good, not just as one would expect from Ben Kingsley (who out does himself as the scheming cantankerous Fagin), but from the child actors as well, most notably Barney Clark and Harry Eden (who play Twist and Dodger, respectively). Another notable aspect of the cast is they all speak with a thick 19th century British accent, and yet manage to be perfectly intelligible to the audience.
As for the story, well, what can I say, it's Dickens! Some characters are of course cut from the book, and some plot points and elements are missing, but that is to be expected when a book is translated into a film. Despite the cuts, the movie is very faithful to the book, and one could hardly ask for a better translation of written medium to the visual.
Despite wonderful acting and excellent story, my favourite part of this movie is definitely the visuals. The set and costume crew has done an amazing job of recreating the London in which Oliver lived. Every nuance of London, from the slums to the well to do areas has been very faithfully realized on screen. The squalor of the back alleys is almost palpable as the characters trod through the mud, and one is almost tempted to doff their hat when the scenery moves to the middle class homes.
Overall, I can find very little to not praise about this movie, the only thing I can find some flaw with is the soundtrack, as it seems a bit sparse in some areas, and perhaps a bit too repetitive. I would definitely recommend this movie to anyone who is a fan of any genre.
First, the acting is quite good, not just as one would expect from Ben Kingsley (who out does himself as the scheming cantankerous Fagin), but from the child actors as well, most notably Barney Clark and Harry Eden (who play Twist and Dodger, respectively). Another notable aspect of the cast is they all speak with a thick 19th century British accent, and yet manage to be perfectly intelligible to the audience.
As for the story, well, what can I say, it's Dickens! Some characters are of course cut from the book, and some plot points and elements are missing, but that is to be expected when a book is translated into a film. Despite the cuts, the movie is very faithful to the book, and one could hardly ask for a better translation of written medium to the visual.
Despite wonderful acting and excellent story, my favourite part of this movie is definitely the visuals. The set and costume crew has done an amazing job of recreating the London in which Oliver lived. Every nuance of London, from the slums to the well to do areas has been very faithfully realized on screen. The squalor of the back alleys is almost palpable as the characters trod through the mud, and one is almost tempted to doff their hat when the scenery moves to the middle class homes.
Overall, I can find very little to not praise about this movie, the only thing I can find some flaw with is the soundtrack, as it seems a bit sparse in some areas, and perhaps a bit too repetitive. I would definitely recommend this movie to anyone who is a fan of any genre.
I completely disagree with the comment I just read. I thought Roman Polanski did great respects to the story and to Dickens. I thought all of the performances were well done and Ben Kingsley was just amazing. I have been in the production of Oliver! the musical three times and have read the book about a million times. It is one of my all time favorite stories and plays and I have been disappointed with the past Oliver Twist films. I remember a few years ago I saw a very poorly done Oliver Twist with Elijah Wood as the Artful Dodger. This one did not disappoint me as a huge fan in the least. I feel Roman Polanski really understood what Dickens was trying to express in his books. And by the way, the character Oliver is supposed to faint, it is a sign of his weakness. I know I am repeating myself but I really did love the performances. The Artful Dodger was great and Mr.Salsbury was done so justly. Even the smallest characters were performed amazingly. I think the only way someone would foolishly call this off as a poorly written, poorly acted, or poorly done film was if they were blind and deaf! No offense to anyone who is of course, but I was very taken aback, as I said, by the comment I just read about this film. The only thing it has against it is that it's a bit long. I knew where the story was going at every moment but for someone just being introduced to Oliver Twist, it might seem to go on for a while. But if you look back at the history of movies, many of the best films are long. If you are a fan of Charles Dickens, please see this film - you will love it. If you are a fan of Roman Polanski it is one of his best! If you wish to be entertained in a very classic and non-offensive way, please see this film. I just loved it and could go on and on. This is a story and film for all ages!
Polanski is the kid of guy who likes to dance on the edge. A mixture of clown, genius and artist who has suffered personal tragedy and humiliation but one who keeps cranking amazing films. This Oliver Twist is no exception. Polanski has reworked the story and taken out the 19th century coincidences, e.g., the highly improbable fact that Oliver is Brownlow's grandson and the business with the portrait of Oliver's mother, given the old tale a fresh coat of paint with new amazing character actors such as Leanne Rowe, a young and thoroughly charming Nancy, Henry Eden, a scamp of a Dodger, Jamie Forman, a repulsive Bill Sykes with no redeeming features whatsoever and the veteran Edward Hardwicke as Brownlow. But, it's young Barney Clark who steals the show. In past versions, Oliver is merely a device upon which the other array of characters are hung. We'll all remember Sir Alec Guinness, Richard Dreyfus and Ron Moody's Fagin, Oliver Reed and Robert Newton's Bill Syke, Elijah Wood, Anthony Newley and Jack Wild's Dodger but who were the Olivers? We will remember young Master Barney Clark in this marvelous, intriguing and eye-pleasing Oliver.
The 1948 David Lean film is a classic, that is well worth watching for the outstanding performance of Alec Guiness. This adaptation was very good indeed, but I do think it is inferior to the 1948 film.
The film does look splendid, with fine period detail, and the cinematography is gorgeous. I also thought the score by Rachel Portman was beautiful, and very fitting. Roman Polanski's direction is excellent, and although it is a long time since I read the book, it is fairly true to the source material. Barney Clark gives a charming and vulnerable performance in the title role, and the Artful Dodger and the other boys are well done. Nancy was well portrayed and her character's death was very disturbing, I have to admit. The end scenes were very well staged and perfectly captured on camera.
However, the film does have some less impressive bits. I will confess I was disappointed in Ben Kingsley as Fagin, he wasn't terrible, he just wasn't quite my idea of Fagin. Fagin is supposed to be oily and manipulative, and while Kingsley occasionally had these in his performance, compared to the outstanding performance given by Guiness, it was somewhat anaemic. Jamie Foreman looks the part of Sikes, and evidently has the acting ability, however I felt that something was holding him back, as if he was reluctant to be violent. The dog wasn't quite as convincing as the dog in the 1948 film, in the case of the 1948 film, if there was such thing as an Oscar for animals the dog should've got it. I did like the fact that the film tried to be faithful to the spirit of the book, but it felt a little bloated at times.
Don't get me wrong, it is not a terrible movie, it's just that I preferred the David Lean film, but I did like this film a lot. 7/10 Bethany Cox
The film does look splendid, with fine period detail, and the cinematography is gorgeous. I also thought the score by Rachel Portman was beautiful, and very fitting. Roman Polanski's direction is excellent, and although it is a long time since I read the book, it is fairly true to the source material. Barney Clark gives a charming and vulnerable performance in the title role, and the Artful Dodger and the other boys are well done. Nancy was well portrayed and her character's death was very disturbing, I have to admit. The end scenes were very well staged and perfectly captured on camera.
However, the film does have some less impressive bits. I will confess I was disappointed in Ben Kingsley as Fagin, he wasn't terrible, he just wasn't quite my idea of Fagin. Fagin is supposed to be oily and manipulative, and while Kingsley occasionally had these in his performance, compared to the outstanding performance given by Guiness, it was somewhat anaemic. Jamie Foreman looks the part of Sikes, and evidently has the acting ability, however I felt that something was holding him back, as if he was reluctant to be violent. The dog wasn't quite as convincing as the dog in the 1948 film, in the case of the 1948 film, if there was such thing as an Oscar for animals the dog should've got it. I did like the fact that the film tried to be faithful to the spirit of the book, but it felt a little bloated at times.
Don't get me wrong, it is not a terrible movie, it's just that I preferred the David Lean film, but I did like this film a lot. 7/10 Bethany Cox
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाThe set was so huge that director Roman Polanski rode around it on a motorized scooter.
- गूफ़Flipped shot: At 46:55, after Oliver is punched in the face while running from the crowd, the lettering on a hand held sign ('ELECTION') is backwards.
- भाव
Oliver Twist: Please, sir, I want some more.
- इसके अलावा अन्य वर्जनSPOILER: Footage of the beating of Nancy from Bill was cut in the UK to obtain a "PG" rating.
- कनेक्शनFeatured in Troldspejlet: एपिसोड #35.9 (2006)
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is Oliver Twist?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइट
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Oliver Twist: Cậu Bé Mồ Côi
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- प्राग, चेक गणराज्य(only studio)
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $6,00,00,000(अनुमानित)
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $20,80,321
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $68,447
- 25 सित॰ 2005
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $4,25,80,321
- चलने की अवधि2 घंटे 10 मिनट
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.35 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें