"DAVID COPPERFIELD" (2000) Review
"DAVID COPPERFIELD" (2000) Review
For the past eight to nine months, I have been increasingly obsessed with Charles Dickens . . . namely television and movie adaptations of his novels and stories. Many may not find this odd, but I do, considering my previous disregard of his writing. Yes, I have seen various Dickens adaptations over the years. But for nearly a year, I have viewed many Dickens adaptations with a vengeance, including the 2000 made-for-television adaptation of his 1850 novel, "DAVID COPPERFIELD".
This adaptation of "David Copperfield" was a joint American-Irish production that had two Britons - John Davis and Greg Smith; along with an American named Robert A. Halmi serving as the film's producers. However, the director, Peter Medak, shot the movie in Ireland. Starring Hugh Dancy in the title role, "DAVID COPPERFIELD" told the story of an English author living in Switzerland, as he recounts his life up to that point from his childhood to early adulthood.
While living in Switzerland, David Copperfield has a chance encounter with his stepfather, the brutal Edward Murdstone, who seemed to be courting a wealthy young Englishwoman. David uses this encounter to write his autobiography, beginning with his birth some six months after his father's death. David recalls his widowed mother and the family's kind housekeeper Clara Peggotty raising him in an ideal setting. Following his and Peggotty's visit to the latter's family in Yarmouth, they return to discover Mrs. Copperfield's marriage to the harsh Mr. Murdstone. They also meet the latter's equally loathsome sister, Jane Murdstone. After a physical encounter with Mr. Murdstone, the latter enrolls David into a boarding school under a ruthless headmaster named Mr. Creakle. This decision sets David's journey in motion in which he makes new friends, forms new enemies and finds love as he matures into adulthood.
Dickens had regarded his 1850 novel as one of his favorite, regarding it as a strong similarity to his own life. Knowing a bit about the author's life, I found this assessment of his a bit hard to swallow. Perhaps this was wishful thinking on Dickens' part? Who knows. But I must admit that his story seemed first-class and the beginning of a more mature approach to his writing. This 2000 television movie seemed to reflect both qualities of Dickens' novel. Although I believe "DAVID COPPERFIELD" seems like a very faithful adaptation of the novel, I believe it is not as close to the latter as some might have believed it should.
I had a few issues with the movie. One, I believe it had made the mistake of closely following the 1935 movie adaptation, produced by David O. Selznick. I thought it had merely paid lip service to the story arc involving David's schoolfriend James Steerforth and Emily Peggotty and her family. In fact, most of the story involving this arc happened off-screen, much to my disappointment. Also, screenwriter John Goldsmith had reduced law clerk Uriah Heep's complex embezzlement scheme to a simple one involving stolen diamonds. Perhaps that is why this particular plotline seemed as if it had come out of the blue to simply serve as the character's downfall. In fact, the movie's last twenty-to-thirty minutes seemed very rushed to me. I also had one or two issues regarding the casting, but I will later touch upon it.
Despite my issues with parts of the movie's screenplay, I cannot deny that I had enjoyed "DAVID COPPERFIELD". I realized this is not the first or last adaptation of Dickens' novel, but it proved to be the first adaptation I have viewed. Like I said . . . I enjoyed it. Between Goldsmith's screenplay and Peter Medak's direction, I believe the movie took care to set up David's story as a flashback, using his encounter with his old foe as a means to kick start the narrative. "DAVID COPPERFIELD" proved to be a solid, yet entertaining story about the protagonist's coming-of-age, through his experiences - good, bad and tragic, and the people he met. I honestly thought I would be bored with this movie at least thirty minutes into the story. But I found myself both intrigued and entertained.
Also, it seemed a miracle that the David Copperfield character had not been overshadowed by the more colorful ones that appeared in this story. One has to credit Hugh Darcy for his skillful, yet emotional portrayal of the movie's protagonist. The actor had received a few negative reviews from critics who thought he had given a weak performance. I . . . have no idea on how to respond to that. I was more than satisfied with his performance.
"DAVID COPPERFIELD" also featured some very competent performances from the rest of the cast. Max Dolbey proved to be effective as the young David. Both Anthony Andrews and Eileen Atkins provided plenty of subtle menace as the cruel Murdstone siblings. Both Emily Hamilton and Julie Cox gave charming performances as David's two potential love interests - Agnes Wickfield and Dora Spinlow. Judy Cornwell and Nigel Davenport gave skillful performances as the Copperfields' housekeeper Clara Peggotty and her solid and dependable brother, Dan Peggotty. Dudley Sutton proved to be both charming and eccentric as Aunt Betsy Trotwood's close friend and tenant. The movie also featured solid performances from the likes of Lesley Manville, Oliver Ford Davies, Edward Hardwicke, Freddie Jones and Simon Delaney.
The two Americans in the cast for "DAVID COPPERFIELD" - Sally Field and Michael Richards - had received a good deal of criticism for their performances. Frankly, I can honestly say that such criticism were unwarranted. At least in my eyes. Granted, it seemed odd hearing that comical voice emitting from Field's mouth, when she first appeared as Aunt Betsey Trotwood. But in the end, I rather enjoyed her performance. I also enjoyed Michael Richards' performance as the genial, yet unreliable law clerk Wilkins Micawber. But I must admit there were a few times when the actor had allowed his Cosmo Kramer character from the television series, "SEINFELD" creep into his performance every now and then. Paul Bettany made a first-rate James Steerforth. It seemed a pity that the movie had given him very little screen time. I also feel the same about Sarah Farooqui and Anna Maguire, who had portrayed both the adult and young Emily Piggotty. We finally come to Frank McCusker's performance as the villain in the story's second half - Uriah Heep. I thought McCusker gave a skillful portrayal of the character. But at the same time, I found his performance rather exaggerated at times . . . bordering on cartoonish.
"DAVID COPPERFIELD" featured some lovely cinematography, thanks to Elemér Ragályi's colorful photography of the Irish locations. Michael Pickwoad's photography and Josie MacAvin's set decorations did a great job in re-creating early Victorian Britain. And I must admit that I really enjoyed Joan Bergin's costume designs. Most of the narrative for "DAVID COPPERFIELD" is supposed to be set in the 1840s, but the images below seemed to hint at a late 1850s or early 1860s setting for this particular film:
Overall, "DAVID COPPERFIELD" proved to be an entertaining adaptation of Charles Dickens' 1850 novel. Granted, I had some issues with the movie's decision to push most of the James Steerforth and Emily Peggotty arc off-screen and the simplification of Uriah Heep's scheme. Otherwise, I really enjoyed the movie, thanks to Peter Medak's direction, John Goldsmith's screenplay and a very skillful cast led by Hugh Dancy in the title role.