Nicholas Nickleby (2002)

Good

This movie does some things well. The mean schoolmaster and his meaner wife are well-played. Their conniving daughter is funny in a couple of scenes. The deceiving uncle who seeks to take advantage of Nicholas's sister is quite believable. Nicholas is likeable, as are his new friends of the acting troupe. The later employers of Nicholas, identical-twins, pot-bellied, jovial and good are perfectly portrayed. Some funny lines. From the novel by Charles Dickens, writer of the great classics "Oliver Twist", "A Christmas Carol", and "David Copperfield". This is the best version.

See how this movie can be re-made even better under the "comment" button below. September 8, 2008

A must see film

This particular film adaptation of Nicholas Nickleby is first rate. The cast and sets are superb, and the film is true to the story, which isn't always the case with the classics. It's a must see, and it may just make a Charles Dickens fan out of you! July 25, 2008

Wonderful adaptation of a sweet novel.

Everything about this is top notch, particularly the cast.

Charlie Hunnam is absolutely angelic as Nicholas. (Keeping in mind angels can be both comforting and fierce, as needed.) He gives a beautiful, vulnerable performance, and it's hard to drag your eyes away from him whenever he's on screen - even when he's opposite Jamie Bell or Christopher Plummer. He's just fascinating to watch, and I'm sure we'll be seeing a lot more of him in years to come. Indeed, we would have already if he weren't so choosy about his roles.

Also, I'd like to point out, he is British not American as some reviewers here have claimed. He is from Newcastle, in England.

Romola Garai is sweetly dignified as Kate and, to her credit, a bit easier to engage with than Kate is in the book. Jamie Bell is heartbreakingly authentic as Smike, as is Christopher Plummer - albeit in a very different way - as Uncle Ralph. Bell's physical transformation is moving in itself.

Alan Cumming is a delight as always, and Timothy Spall radiates goodness and happiness as Mr. Cheeryble, which is a nice change of pace from his usual roles. Heather Goldenhersh (Lina in TV's "The Class") is a wonderful, funny surprise as Fanny Squeers, and Kevin McKidd's John Browdie is hilarious. The fantastic David Bradley (lately Filch in the Harry Potter films) has a small role as Mr. Bray, too, which delighted me no end.

Amazingly, the movie does not suffer much from being under two hours long. As a fan of the book though, as well as most of the people in the cast, I wished it could have been longer. I just didn't want it to end so soon. Only the special features seemed lacking. The director's commentary was surprisingly boring. I'd have liked to see more of the cast in the cast segment and heard full-length commentary from some of them as well - particularly Hunnam, Bell or Plummer.

The sets and costumes are first rate as is the writing. I particularly enjoyed Nicholas and Madeline's scene towards the end. (Trying not to spoil it for anyone by being too specific.) Dickens leaves their conversation to the imagination, but McGrath fills it in surprisingly well. It's believable (and refreshingly open and honest) of the characters in a private moment and completely relatable for a modern audience. It's also utterly, sweetly endearing due to the performances of Charlie Hunnam and Anne Hathaway. Just a beautiful scene all around.

Lastly, and unexpectedly, this film features one of the best on screen kisses of all time. Perfect, timeless, and truly romantic. April 15, 2008

Almost perfect Nicholas Nickleby

This came as a bit of a surprise, suffice it to say, due to the photo used on the cover. I expected less but was so pleasantly surprised!

I read Nicholas Nickleby years ago and have no plans to read it in the near future. That said, I had forgotten much of the story. It is obvious, though, that even without remembering much of the book nor the story, there is much that has been left out of the movie. No matter. What is left here is perfect. Although we may never know why Ralph Nickleby lost his ten thousand pounds just by watching the film, we understand that there must have been some behind-the-scenes scheming going on and that's perfectly fine.

Although definitely a drama, the comedic elements work so well here to lighten the desperate dark Dickensian times.

The film is perfectly cast. Charlie Hunnam as Nicholas is delightful-- moral, upright, brave. Christopher Plummer was unbelievable. Although he's not seen too much of late, it's great to see him in such a plumb role here. He's marvelous-- nasty and cruel with a small amount of humanity left in him (very small and easy to dismiss) to make him extremely complex rather than a caricature. Nathan Lane was a scene stealer and added a large dose of much needed relief from the darkness. And Jim Broadbent and Juliet Stevenson were incredible-- Juliet Stevenson especially. She delivered each of her lines with perfection. At one point, her husband, the evil Mr. Squeers, tells her that she alone could take away any man's pride more quickly than anyone else in England. Recognizing the statement for the compliment it was meant to be, she responds adoringly.

I cannot recommend this highly enough. Highly watchable! And, for younger viewers (not too young, maybe 10 and up), this is a great intro to Dickens, too.


March 12, 2008

1993 vs 2002 vs 1977 vs 1947

The 1993 version of Nicholas Nickleby should not be considered. It is not merely the snake-faced appearance of the actor who plays the lead, nor the fact that he speaks as though he has a bad cold with a stuffed-up nose. But he is also a contemporary character, not a nineteenth-century character. And that's just for starters.

The 2002 version is not bad. With widescreen and surround sound and good photography, this is a good production for what appears to be a limited budget. Problems begin with the casting. The American actor who plays the lead speaks in a carefully articulated generic English accent, but that won't do, nor the fact that his manner and mannerisms are those of a contemporary rather than a period character. Christopher Plummer is an accomplished actor, but his effort here seems half-hearted, as though he didn't think much of this production. The actor who plays Smike mumbles his lines as though he is bucking for the role of Hamlet. The story is powerful enough that this movie is not a washout, but none of it is particularly well done.

What the above versions lack is comedy. Dickens was fond of mixing hilarious comedy with the most heart-rending drama, and Nicholas Nickleby is no exception. The above versions are merely drama. But the biggest crime is in the character of Mrs. Nickleby. Mrs. Nickleby is one of the great comic characters of world literature. Unfortunately, she is also politically incorrect. The above versions simply throw out her character and replace it with a blah nonentity.

The 1977 version. At over 5 hours, this version brings in more of the minor characters of this long story and treats the story according to the book. As often with the BBC, there is lavish attention to sets and their accuracy and little attention to anything else. The music is nonexistent. The photography is not bad indoors but the few outdoor scenes are overexposed. And the acting is marginal at best. Nigel Havers is much too old for the role of Nicholas but does an adequate job. The ending is satisfying. All in all, well worth seeing, especially for readers of the book. The emphasis is on drama. There is humor in the character of Mrs. Nickleby and an attempt at humor in a couple of the minor characters.

The 1947 version was made before the Dhimmist ideology came to dominate movie-making, and here we find Mrs. Nickleby in all her mind-boggling glory. In fact, all of the characters in this movie have that Dickensian edge that makes them larger, or at least more effective, than life. Good scripting and good direction make for a hard-hitting, heart-touching and occasionally side-splitting experience. The actors and actresses don't TRY to speak in an upper-middle-class British accent; they simply speak and behave as they normally would and it is true to the period. The pace is fast, and the script had to streamline some of the events, but all of the major events are here and are effectively presented. The ending is far more dramatic than in the other versions.
January 16, 2008

More reviews at Amazon.com ...