I should at first make it clear that I missed the opening, so didn't hear Oliver ask for more, but began watching it I presume not long after that.
1. Schizophrenic soundtrack
I agree entirely. Self-consciously modern music was adopted to rebel against what was seen as the stuffy cliche of period orchestral music and to make Dickens (or Jane Austen or whomsover) "feel modern". But this has been done very often now, and frankly has iself become a cliche. And a far worse one, as the first experiment proved beyond doubt that it doesn't work. It's just silly, distracting and disorientating. The job of a decent production is to make the period itself feel contemporary, without distorting the sense of time and place by overlaying it with jarringly anachronistic music. it's really an admission of defeat.
I love Gregor Fisher, but here his accent was all over the place.
Well I maybe don't quite love him, but I agree about his accent. Far far more ghastly, however, was Michelle Gomez, playing Mrs Sowerberry, who any sensible or sentient director should have reprimanded, restrained or sacked for such a ghastly display of accent-churning and mannered over-acting. Why people of a thespian persuasion start grimacing and gurning the second they put on a top hat or crinoline is beyond me. Perhaps Christmas pantos are to blame. Be that as it may, decent directors need to slap actors once in a while, not indulge them. (Apologies for that to my actor friends.)
Not only are these untrue to the book, they smack of a very modern familiarity
We part company here. Unnecessary, maybe; a bit "Eastenders", perhaps. But I found the banter tolerable enough for dramatic reasons - to release the tension, if nothing else - and so unexceptionable.
The Dodger - no spark at all, I'm afraid, the dialogue almost auto-cued in its delivery.
I didn't mind him at all. That non-stop cheeky-chappy banter routine struck me as Dodger's assumed style. All a bit forced, the way cheeky-chappy banter can be, but intentionally so. He's not the best Dodger by any means, I agree, but tolerable enough, in a low-key televeision way. That's again a directorial or casting problem: Dodger gives a more low-key "TV" performance, and others give hugely mannered theatrical ones. They don't sit well together.
On the plus side, Timothy Spall's Fagin is intriguing - I'd expect nothing less from this fine actor, although an "avaricious old skeleton" he ain't! I look forward to seeing how this character develops.
I remain undecided but less optimistic. I've never quite seen the appeal of Mr Spall. I somehow always see the actor behind the gestures, and never more so than here, where he seems doubly self-conscious and theatrical in his delivery. While the conception of the role
is interestingly new (perhaps a touch of Mickawber has snuck in), the accent is still old-style Alec Guiness, if a little more blurred.
William Miller gives a decent enough performance in the title role - at last we have a non-weepy Oliver with a non-posh accent, which is how it should be. [...] he plays the part well, and full credit for that
I'm less sure about him. But I've been spoilt. Having just watched
Cranford, and seen Alex Etel give an extraordinarily moving performance in the final episode, young Mr Miller struck me as, by comparison, rather inert. When he arrives in London, sits by the wall and cries, it all feels terribly mechanical and I remained utterly unmoved by his plight. But then, the director may need to shoulder some of the blame for this as well.
Tom Hardy (playing Bill Sykes) is an impressive and promising actor - one of the best of his generation - and I found him pretty acceptable here, but a little muted. Perhaps he is trying hard
not to overact, but somehow I think he is capable of generating much more electricity and a sense of danger. Perhaps he's saving himself for later. But there's really no spark at all between him and Nancy and, given that both he and Sophie Okonedo are appealing enough performers, I can't help but think that the director is at fault, yet again.
Call me Ishmael...
reply
share
alfa-16
16 years ago
Having just watched Cranford,
Bit of a problem that, isn't it? Starting this 48 hours after the BBC have raised their own bar to a new height where I think it will stay for bit.
My problem is that Oliver Twist has become like Christmas Carol or even Aladdin (to pick up your panto thread). Familiar ground, lots of memorable and unmemorable versions of every big scene. I like Hardy as Sykes. But is he as good as Oliver Reed? I like Sophie as Nancy but will she surpass Kay Walsh, or even Emily Woof? Folk memory even contains a musical soundtrack with hideously persistent tunes and lyrics.
If you can't have novelty, you have to rely on skill and craftsmanship and there simply isn't enough go round in this. This team would have done much better doing The Old Curiosity Shop (we'll get to see how ITV pull that one off soon) or The Pickwick Papers (Spall might make a decent Pickwick) or any Dickens that isn't tackled every other year.
God knows there's enough out there.
reply
share
apostasia
16 years ago
Thoroughly enjoyed it. Shame the rest are only 30 minutes' long. I agree with some of the points raised above - particularly about the anachronisms both in the soundtrack and the familiar nicknames - but hey, compared to yet another programme of Celebrity Pointless Reality Toss clogging up the schedules, this stuff is priceless.
Thought Tom Hardy was wonderful - it was a menacingly restrained performance, quite convincingly and casually suggesting the violence he's capable of precisely through the downplaying of it. Quite chilling. Timothy Spall's fey Fagin was more ambivalent - an interesting approach, not sure I'm entirely sold on it, though.
It's not perfect, but it's highly enjoyable and I'm certainly not going to complain about Cranford, Oliver Twist and The Old Curiosity Shop being shown so close together. Christmas is at least good for that.
Just a painted face on a trip down suicide row
reply
share
toxina90
16 years ago
I'm disappointed other didn't enjoy it - at first the music was the same for me - but I grew to enjoy it a bit more - I love the hints of flamenco guitar I'm sure I heard.
Shame it isn't that loyal to the book then.
"When I light a candle at midnight I say to the darkness I beg to differ"-Sr. Helen Prejean
reply
share
apostasia
16 years ago
I love the hints of flamenco guitar I'm sure I heard.
I certainly didn't expect to hear one in
Oliver Twist!
Just a painted face on a trip down suicide row
reply
share
Laurynmari
16 years ago
This is good but not the best Oliver Twist I've saw. The ITV adaptation is miles better and the way this is structed, it resembles a rushed rip off of it. It's a good, promising cast although I'm not sure about the Oliver yet and was disappointed with Timothy Spall's Fagin. He's a terrific actor yet I don't belive in his performance. And the stupid accent is a bizarre input. Also as a previous poster said, the soundtrack is just wrong.
Mr Bumble, Mr Brownlow, Mrs Sowerberry are very realistic but for me so far, Tom Hardy's Bill Sikes is amazing. He's only spoke a few lines but his presence is really felt. I think it should improve significantly!
"My father made him an offer he couldn't refuse"- Michael Corleone
reply
share