Post by sgev1977 on Mar 27, 2023 1:34:22 GMT
This is actually kinda OT, I remembered that Lucy Forbes was attached to direct the new Great Expectations adaptation with Olivia Colman playing Miss Havisham and I read somewhere that it was aired yesterday so I searched for reviews and they are awful! The good news is that Forbes actually didn’t directed it so she still has a great run with critics! (Again she was just nominated to the BAFTA). The first review I read strongly criticized the director without mentioning their names so I still thought it was her! Although it said the worst was the writing.
Apparently the new version has a lot of sex and violence! Lol I still don’t trust the ridiculous The Guardian asking for no more Charles Dickens adaptations! Classics are frequently adapted because they are classics and it’s important that new generations discovered them. If Alfonso Cuarón could do a great modern version in the 1990s, 120 years after Dickens death, I’m sure there is another great original adaptation in the future!
Also it was written by Steven Knight who once was considered a great scriptwriter but now has a few missteps. It seems his very promoted Dickens adaptations aren’t working. I didn’t knew that they already aired a “darker” A Christmas Carol one and it was also panned. As the Roger Ebert site critic says, Dickens was already pretty good writing dark stories, they don’t needed to exaggerate things trying to make him “edgier”. You just have to respect the soul of the old story.
EDITED Maybe this isn’t the place for this post but I don’t think we will talk too much about this adaptation. Not after reading those reviews! But I’m sure we will have more and more interesting posts about Forbes in the future.
EDITED 2, OK another comment, according to the NYT one of the “edgy” elements of the adaptation is that it recognized the by then illicit slavery at the time but, I wonder, how it reconciles that with the fact that it has a color blind cast. Or they lost time from the main classic plot explaining why the “posh” girl Estella and the lawyer of the mysterious rich benefactor are black when there still were illegal black slaves in the UK or they just ignored that most slaves there at the time were black (which it’s pretty offensive). Don’t get me wrong, I am very pro color blind casting and Dickens is perfect for it but if you would talk about important historical events like slavery, you have to be realistic and not going there. At least, you do a huge explanation about easy social mobility in the 19th century UK! I mean like it wasn’t the country most obsessed with their own class system in the world!
Apparently the new version has a lot of sex and violence! Lol I still don’t trust the ridiculous The Guardian asking for no more Charles Dickens adaptations! Classics are frequently adapted because they are classics and it’s important that new generations discovered them. If Alfonso Cuarón could do a great modern version in the 1990s, 120 years after Dickens death, I’m sure there is another great original adaptation in the future!
Also it was written by Steven Knight who once was considered a great scriptwriter but now has a few missteps. It seems his very promoted Dickens adaptations aren’t working. I didn’t knew that they already aired a “darker” A Christmas Carol one and it was also panned. As the Roger Ebert site critic says, Dickens was already pretty good writing dark stories, they don’t needed to exaggerate things trying to make him “edgier”. You just have to respect the soul of the old story.
EDITED Maybe this isn’t the place for this post but I don’t think we will talk too much about this adaptation. Not after reading those reviews! But I’m sure we will have more and more interesting posts about Forbes in the future.
EDITED 2, OK another comment, according to the NYT one of the “edgy” elements of the adaptation is that it recognized the by then illicit slavery at the time but, I wonder, how it reconciles that with the fact that it has a color blind cast. Or they lost time from the main classic plot explaining why the “posh” girl Estella and the lawyer of the mysterious rich benefactor are black when there still were illegal black slaves in the UK or they just ignored that most slaves there at the time were black (which it’s pretty offensive). Don’t get me wrong, I am very pro color blind casting and Dickens is perfect for it but if you would talk about important historical events like slavery, you have to be realistic and not going there. At least, you do a huge explanation about easy social mobility in the 19th century UK! I mean like it wasn’t the country most obsessed with their own class system in the world!