Great Expectations (1998)

Aan Unexpectedly Great Makover of the 1946 Movie

This is a great makeover (not a remake) of the English 1946 black and white film which was much closer to the Dickens original both in time and setting when it begins: South East England just after the end of the Napoleonic Wars and the Thames Estuary where one can discern the floating hulks of pensioned off warships stripped of masts and rigging and turned into holding prisons for felons awaiting transportation to Australia. In this 1998 version the time is the late twentieth century and the setting is the shallow waters of the Gulf of Mexico off the South Western Florida coast, faraway from the more fashionable Florida Gold Coast on the Atlantic Ocean side.

Any filmmaker today who dared to remake the 1946 film would be doomed to failure as it would be a hard, if not impossible act to follow. Having said that the newer film is a gem precisely because the producers did not make that mistake and for a score of other creditable reasons as well, not least the superb cinematography and soundtrack. It is as if a builder were told to reconstruct a beautiful aging mansion but to keep the facade and the basic structure while having complete liberty to do whatever he felt best for the interior. The 1998 film is therefore the modernised version of Great Expectations, probably close to what Dickens would have actually written had he been alive today. The filmmakers have preserved much of the novel's structure and a little of the facade but have gone to incredible lengths to put a new stamp on it, with considerable success.

Let me say that the much esteemed 1946 black and white English movie had its faults. John Mills who played the part of the grown up hero, at 38 was really to old for the part. Also while a 17-year old very lovely Jean Simmons played cruel young Estella to perfection, Valerie Hobson as the older Estella was a terrible miscasting. The 1946 had Alec Guinness in his first actor part in movies (he was merely an extra in a 1934 film) looking much younger than his real age. Unfortunately, the supporting role he played in the 1946 movie has been eliminated from the 1998 version.

For no reason that I can explain the 1998 producers decided to change virtually all the characters names. The hero Pip becomes Finn, the prisoner, formerly Abel Magwitch, is now reduced to Lustig, etc & etc. I would have trashed my DVD if they changed Estella's name, fortunately they had the sense not to do that.

The opening and closing scenes in the new movie are in the Gulf. Finn (Pip) is set upon by Lustig , admirably played by Robert de Nero with his wonderful elastic features who has been hiding beneath the shallow waters off the Gulf coast. As the there are no prison ships floating around one has to imagine how he go there. What immediately follows is pretty well by the book, it would have to be a otherwise it would be another story. Finn dwells in a shack with his elder sister and her ex- fisherman boyfriend Joe (name unchanged). The trawl fishing industry has died and Joe ekes out a living by mowing lawns and other odd jobs. In Dickens Joe is a blacksmith, but an odd job man in the newer movie. Such a fellow in the 1990s would as likely have had a bolt cutter handy as a blacksmith would have a file in the 1820s. Equally useful tools for an escaped prisoner to release himself from iron shackles.

In Dickens the sister is ugly and unpleasant but an honest homemaker, in the new version she is an attractive slut who moonlights as a prostitute. In Dickens she dies , in 1998 she just disappears. In both versions Joe is a simple jolly fellow who likes his young charge.

Finn (Pip) falls n love with super rich young Estella when he is sent to be her playmate in the old dilapidated mansion where Ms Dinsmoor (Miss Havisham) dwells. The original Dickens recluse is more distraught than evil but the 1998 Dinsmoor is aggressively nasty and conniving , a role played well by the late Ann Bancroft. While in the new version one glimpses for a second the remnants of the wedding feat that never happened it does not feature as much nor the darkened dining room as in the earlier version where the rather pathetic woman spurned at the altar still wears her ragged white wedding dress decades after. In contrast Ms Dismoor is quite stylishly clad and her long term plot to induce Finn to fall in love with Estella is more immediately evident.

New York City replaces London as the venue for Finn (Pip) after he meets a lawyer who informs him he has an unknown benefactor who has Great Expectations of him. Everything Finn needs to make his success as an artist in the Big Apple will be provided only the name of his mysterious patron cannot be revealed ( back in the 1830s Pip is making his name as a young law man but we have to have a plausible reason to see Estella in the nude). Of course , while in New York Fin bumps into Estella (as Pip does in London).

The grown up Estella is played exquisitely by the very versatile actress Gwyneth Paltrow, who looks convincingly like a grown up version of the younger girl Finn used to play with. (A truly wonderful shot in the old mansion shows the transformation of the dancing pair from children to young adults in a single twirl). Most filmmakers since the 1980s have felt obliged to have nude scenes and soft porn love making embedded somewhere if there is a romance going on so this version of GE is no exception. All I can say is that the lurid scenes are very tastefully done, it's the most of I've seen of Ms Paltrow in the buff since watching Shakespeare in Love (another 1998 movie). She has a body that men dream about , even if her features are rather plain, but she is certainly more attractive, even when clothed , than Valerie Hobson in the same role back in 1946. I still have not made my mind up about Ethan Hawke as Finn. Is he really that gormless looking-almost to the point of idiocy- or was that just for the part? Nevertheless, he plays the role fairly well. The character is supposed to be a bit naïve, more believable of somebody whose career goal is to paint rather than one who wants to follow law.

Of course, Lustig (Abel Magwitch) shows up in towards the end, as in the book, but in entirely different circumstances. In the book and the 1946 movie his final scene is in a prison hospital after a futile attempt to escape the police. In 1998 it's in a subway car after trying to flee with Finn from some mobsters who are after his blood. In both case the dying prisoner reveals that he is Finn's (Pip's) benefactor as a reward for the only kindness that was ever shown him back in the Gulf (Thames Estuary).

In both movies the final reconciliation between the hero and Estella occurs when they meet by chance back in the grounds of the old mansion which is about to be torn down. Unlike in the 1946 movie and the novel the vengeful recluse is reported to have died and does not suffer the dramatic and grisly end shown in the earlier movies.

Let it be. Either the original version or the reconstructed one make a great story whatever one's expectations. The professional film critics canned the 1998 version for no valid reason. The usual banal credo that any movie produced in the 1930s or early 1940s no matter how hammy the acting, is a classic and must merit four stars and any attempt to make or make over such movies in the 1990s merits only two stars at best (excrementas bovinorum!).

Even if the 1998 version was a flop, and to my mind it was an amazing work, it would have been redeemed at least partly by the superb cinematography. The 1946 film did a great job with black and white film which used to be the normal standard for dramatic movies with Technicolor more often chosen for comedies, westerns or musicals. The 1998 film makers have done wonder with their box of colours and sound tracks. The opening scenes and credits instil the very essence of salty tidewater with the lettering waving around as ifin motion the ripples on the surface of the sea.

Joe's homestead shack is set in a decadent Western Florida jungle, all shabby but picturesque poverty with lush sub-tropical vegetation, the call of birds and the endless monotonous clicking of cicadas. With Spanish moss dripping from tree boughs. Al this is very evocative , one can sense the inherent dampness, the heat and humidity seeping in and almost smell the pungency old wood, rotting fish and the tangy salty smell of sea marshes and tidewaters. I have seldom seen a movie that can convey so much sensuality purely by sound and vision.




June 18, 2008

Pretty but dull

I remember enjoying this film as a teenager, before I had read the book. I found Miss Havisham glamorous and eerie and Estella and Pip's watery kiss's enticing. Now that I have not only read the book, but teach it at GCSE I decided to re watch it. I'm afraid I have to agree with some of the comments here - the film completely failed to engage my emotions. There was none of Dickens's characterisation and humour, which was why the romance was no more real than a kiss in a glitzy music video. I admit the film was visually stunning, but the script was really quite uninspiring and the characters flat and one dimensional. I know it was supposed to be modern, but sometimes people do say clever / funny things even in this day and age - I think Miss Havisham's comment about her cat eating other cats was about sum total of witty dialogue! Joe's forced 'carefree' laughter and Bently Drummel's total failure as a villain were also particularly trying! One the upside I imagine kids could write pages of criticism on this for media coursework so its not all bad! June 17, 2008

Sensual but confusing.

Great Expectations starring Ethan Hawke and Gwyneth Paltrow is a sexy film but the fault doesn't lie with the actors but rather with story. The two stars have never been better, their chemistry is intoxicating and that scene at the drinking fountain, can you say hot, hot, hot! Some of the dialogue seems forced and the direction is somewhat awkward. Robert De Niro and Anne Bancroft have the strangest roles in this film and don't expect an exact interpretation of the Charles Dicken's classic. The ending is what saves the film, give this movie a viewing. April 21, 2008

A work of art

What a great adaptation of the brilliant Dickens novel. Alfonso Cuaron has directed a gorgeous and utterly romantic movie. There's beauty and poetry in every shot, and the scene where Finn declares his love to Estella under the rain is more moving than anything I've seen in movies in a long time. The score is simply ravishing and the paintings by Francesco Clemente are amazing.

Anne Bancroft, Chris Cooper, Robert DeNiro make a fantastic supporting cast, and Ethan Hawke is moving and utterly believable as Finn. I'm not a fan of Gwyneth Paltrow, but I have to admit she makes a pretty great Estella.
February 8, 2008

Has its moments

Every time I think of this movie, for some reason, the beautiful score comes to mind. I can't get it out of my head, it really is addictive. As for the movie, it is certainly watchable, but lacking. The performances are all good but it felt off at times. I have never read the book, but I was told its not really anything like it. However, as a movie, its pretty decent, even good at times. I think its a tad too long though, and it seemed dragging at times. I didn't really feel anything emotionally for any of the characters, and I think that is what bothers me every time I watch this. February 4, 2008

More reviews at Amazon.com ...