Davcid Copperfield

Saw it last evening and loved it. I think Dickens would have approved. Loved the casting and the gentle comedy and the fact they still managed to include the dire circumstances of many people then. Felt sorry for poor Dora.

My only gripe is that Yarmouth’s wonderful golden sands and dunes had been transformed into a steep pebble beach under a cliff. Apparently Weybourne along the coast. So many wonderful beaches in Norfolk and they pick the stone one.

Well I am a purist and I loved it. Mind you, I never did like Dickens.

Now the new 'Emma'. I have seen the trailer and will not be going.

Finally went to see it this afternoon with an open mind and looking forward to it . Unfortunately I missed most of the funny comments as I couldn't hear them. It was as loud as the cinema usually is and I don't normally have a problem so can't explain it. I loved the casting and found the presentation interesting but the cruel/sad bits upset and angered me as much as they did in the book, the factory, the stepfather, David's mum's death for example. I especially loved Hugh Laurie and Peter Capaldi but something about the whole did not quite work for me. Worth watching though!

OH and I went to see David Copperfield, I loved it but OH didn't. However, I do wish that someone would use some of Dickens's lesser known books rather than the same ones all the time.

Looking forward to seeing it soon. I can imagine Nicholas Lyndhurst being an excellently 'umble' Uriah Heep Parsley3

I saw this film yesterday and loved it. If you are going, don’t expect a retelling of the familiar story as it isn’t. It is an original take on Dickens’s life and work. The casting is excellent. However, my best ever Uriah Heep has to be Nicholas Lyndhurst. He made my flesh creep with his
’ umbleness’

I saw the film this afternoon as part of two couples. The other 3 people enjoyed it but it didn't work for me. No problems with casting or acting but I didn't get engaged with the re-working of a familiar story and characters. I heard an occasional chuckle but there was less humour than I had expected. It is after all a Dickensian story with plenty of hardship, even if we know it will have a happy ending.

I feel there is little point in rehashing a classic with different actors so this is probably why I enjoyed the film so much. You have to let go of your preconceptions of the story and just sit back and enjoy it, yes it does come across as a farce but that was fine for me. I agree if you are a purist you probably won’t enjoy it. Hugh Laurie and Ben Whishaw were the stand out performances for me.

The trailers for Emma make the film look very entertaining. I tried to re-read it recently because I loved it in my teens. I found it far too dense and wordy - I think I've become lazy about reading page turners. Modern novels tend to have quicker plots I think.

Just think ! remake of Jane Austen's Emma is out at the end of this month in the UK !

Could not agree with you more. well said.

True. I often find myself disappointed with films that aren't quite what I expect them to be. I think I'll enjoy it far more when I rewatch it on dvd without being critical.

I think you have to look at the title as this is the story of David Copperfield seen through his own eyes as a budding writer and not a direct retelling of the book.. it is really a light-hearted bio of Charles Dickens. Quirky and amusing and well acted too!

One of my favourite books. I am going this week to see it. I am no film critic and something has to be really terrible for me to complain. It sounds good !

I love watching remakes, good or bad. It makes me rethink my own views and see a different side to characters and stories. I don't mind a little poetic license or story tweaking either. I have been known to go back and read the original to find points of view and details that escaped me before. Mind you, reading books (and watching films) at different ages does tend to give you a whole new perspective,

Just home from seeing it - loved it. A fabulous film, excellent cast, Hugh Laurie wonderful, Dev Patel ditto and Tilda as Betsy Trotter a joy. Ben Wishart. Oh yes and Mr MacAwber and family. In fact, there wasn't a weak link in the casting. I'm another who enjoyed the colour blind casting.
Glorious film of a wonderful story that can continue to be told many more times I'm sure.
Dickens - genius.

It was OK. Hugh Laurie was easily the stand out performance.
The multicultural casting was heavy handed I thought and seemed a bit artificial and a bit smug frankly. Sort of 'Ooh look how politically correct we are!'
Dev Patel is lovely. I've always liked him but he's not a 19th century middle class English boy.

DH loved it I was not so sure as they deviated from the book quite a bit. I also felt that to get the laughs they made bits farsical . Well acted though and good to see the fact they actors were not picked for their colour.

That's interesting helennonotion!

Some of the filming was done in our old town. (Hull) It was fascinating to see how they transformed the streets. I will definitely be going to the cinema , I'm looking forward to seeing how our local area looks on the big screen!

I saw it yesterday and liked it a lot! It was surprising, witty, the sets were brilliant and Laurie as Mr Dick. Say no more, Perfection,

I loved that the casting was colourblind too.
Much better than the Death of Stalin which was Ianucci's last movie and I did not enjoy very much.

Saw it. Loved it!

Obviously not a rule as such Chestnut - but directors will interpret a story in many different ways. So what if there’s been a fairly recent, popular version? Different interpretations bring different things to the table for different audiences and that’s a good thing imo.

Brilliant! Such an interesting way to tell the story. I do not want to spoil it for anyone so I will just say, very clever indeed!

SirChenjin: I don’t think there should be a rule that says something can only be remade if the previous one is dated
I don't think there is such a rule! Although remakes are not always necessary or desirable if there is a fairly recent version which ticks all the boxes and appeals to modern audiences. To be honest, I'm not a big fan of today's movie-making. They often seem to be made in the same style with over-use of dark filters and CGI.