Does anyone know if this Masterpiece Theater adaptation is faithful to the novel? Maybe I should ask “how” faithful is it, since it seems like nobody messes with Dickens, except maybe to leave out some minor characters or subplots.
I read a couple of synopses (synopsises?) early on (I had to know what happened) and the sequence of events in them is different from the PBS version.
Also, does anyone else think the actress playing Esther looks like Fiona Shrek in some shots, and that the actor who plays George is hot?
I’d like to say that the casting is perfect, but since I haven’t read the book, maybe that’s presumptuous of me.
I haven’t read any “long” Dickens – just A Christmas Carol and A Tale of Two Cities. Who’s read Bleak House? Would it be a good place to start?
I’ve been watching, and just yesterday I DLed ‘Bleak House’ from Project Gutenberg.
I’m not far enough into the text to say how closely the plot is being followed, but I’ve already hit many, many chunks of dialog that were used (I think) word for word, so probably the televised version is fairly faithful.
They’ve removed a few minor characters (Sir Leicester’s poor cousin, Volumnia, and the family friends that Sgt. George hangs out with, that help him decide about showing the letter to Tulkinghorn initially) and given Tulkinghorn a clerk that didn’t exist in the book, but other than that it’s pretty faithful.
However, some of us over at TWOP are wishing that the actresses playing Lady Dedlock and Esther looked more alike; the whole plot is set in motion by Guppy being reminded of Esther by seeing Lady D’s portrait, and Jo mistakes Esther for her mother when he first meets her. The Rosa and Caddy love subplots have been time-compressed, and Smallwood’s part reduced a bit, but otherwise it’s pretty authentic.
I’m re-reading and am about ten chapters behind where the adaptation is now. The lucky Brits have seen it all already!
You’re re-reading it? There’s encouragement for me.
More Smallweed? “Shake me up!” and then the sound of bones crunching. Ugh. The actor who plays him reminds me of an American actor, but I can’t put a name to the face. Sort of a cross between Gary Busey and Nick Nolte, maybe.
Great! I’ve never gone past the first page or so at TWOP – didn’t know there were discussions of so many shows. I’m reading it now and am puzzled by the Guppy love. I think he’s a smarmy, self-serving little twit. The actor’s doing a great job though.
Haven’t seen the TV show, but my favorite character in the book was the guy who never did anything, but was a “master of deportment”. The highlight of his life was when he graciously doffed his hat as the Prince of Wales rode by. He was the perfect forerunner of the modern corporate “empty suit”.
Well, it’s over, and that’s that. They certainly had a lot of story lines to clear up in just two hours. It went by really fast, and it almost felt rushed.
Can someone explain what the deal was with the little boy Joe and Mr. Skimpole? Skimpole spirited Joe back to London, for money, but why? Who wanted Joe? Wasn’t London full of little boys who could run errands?
I thought the reason that Joe was wanted by Skimpole was that he knew too much. He had seen Lady Dedlock at the grave of her former lover. Skimpole wanted to keep the information about Lady Dedlock, Esther and her father exclusively to himself.
Some very skillful telescoping in this adaptation, I think. For example, I was very impressed by how they tightened whole chapters on Nemo early on, eliminating Dicken’s subtle, and mysterious, characterizations of him and employing just a shot or two of his face and his carriage to convey “honorable,” “decent,” “long-suffering” etc. I think many productions, with less skilled actors and crew, might have belabored that point by lingering much longer on the actor or by having Mr. Krook and Mrs. Whatzis with the parakeets discuss him for a bit.
How was this series broadcast in the US? In the UK the first part lasted an hour, followed by weekly half-hour episodes. This is supposed to follow the way that Dickens published the story as a magazine serial. This enabled Dickens to incorporate “cliff-hangers” and encourage people to buy the next edition of the magazine.
Also weren’t there weeks in the run when they didn’t show an episode? I got messed up, and lost a few episodes, either by their non-consecutive week policy or my own brainpan maladies, I’m not sure which.
Warning! Spoilers!
Mr. Athena and I loved this series, and were sorry to see it go.
That said, I thought the last episode (or at least the final hour of the two-hour final episode) seemed very rushed. We paused it about ten minutes before the end, and I looked at Mr. Athena and said “How in the world are they going to tie up all these loose ends in ten minutes?” I was starting to get worried that it was a 2.5 hour show and we’d only Tivo’d 2 hours of it (sorta like what happens if you Tivo a sports game and it goes over the alloted time.)
But they did clear it all up… ten minutes later Ada was apparantly pregnant and at ease that Rick was dead, John Jarndyce decided that he was, after all, Esther’s father figure, not husband material, and Esther married the good doctor.
Also didn’t like how they tied up Hortense killing Mr. Tulkinghorne. There wasn’t enough finality to it. We kept looking at each other saying “so was she really the one who did it, or is it yet another twist before they find the real killer.”
And same with Lady Dedlock’s death. Just way too fast.
Despite all this, it was a great series, and we’ll probably end up buying the DVD one of these days.
I have to watch this! wasn’t the obscure lawsuit a big part of the story? The lawsuit went on aand on, till both parties were dead, and the estate was exhausted…could such a legal action actually have taken place, in Victorian England?
I think Dickens did base this on an actual court case which went on for generations. In fact I came across a mention of the original case in a book I was reading just the other day. Unfortunately now I cannot find this quote . Google doesn’t help either. perhaps someone else knows.
My Norton Critical Bleak House mentions the Wiliam Jennings case, begun in 1798, still unsettled by the time Dickens began BH in 1852. Also mentioned is the Day case.
