De grandes espérances

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.

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.

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.

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.