Beanbioca As Good As It Gets

Catangro After playing with our expectations, this turns out to be a very different sort of film.

Bluebell Alcock Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

Juana what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

bowofdeath I don't see the purpose of making this version. Apparently the BBC has more subsidy money that they can think of what to do with it.Frankly, the actor playing Pip is not that great and Estella is downright homely and I can't help but see Hercule Perot. Harry Lloyd wonderful as Herbert Pocket as others have said.Since others have covered many of these shortcomings I shall restrict my further comments to my disappointment in the production design and cinematography.Since the 1946 version won Oscars for Best Cinematography, Black- and-White, and Best Art Direction-Set Decoration, Black-and-White the standard was set. Making the film in color did not alleviate them of a need to meet or exceed that standard. I know, it won Outstanding Art Direction for a Miniseries or a Movie and Best Cinematography or a Miniseries or a Movie. but all I can say is how can that be? Apparently the judges know nothing about Victorian architecture, furniture or decorative arts and thus are unqualified to judge this film. As for the cinematography, they obviously chose to overlook some fairly frequent major flaws.Having been an antiques dealer and having a degree in Architecture and being a filmmaker and cinematographer I was hoping at least the production design and camera-work would be worth the effort. The production design is awful with mismatched furniture and decorative arts throughout, usually in the same room.The overdone areas in a severe state of decay throughout the Haversham mansion was ridiculous. First floor rooms will rarely show signs of decay from a leaking roof in a two story mansion, especially after only a couple decades of neglect. Having the wedding day dining table unchanged makes since but everything else is overkill and unbelievable. The contrast of the dining room with with the rest of the house in previous versions was missed.There was never any sign that any dust was ever disturbed even on the staircase handrails. Absurd. It is set in London and surrounds in the early to mid-1800s. The use of candles everywhere was totally wrong. It is the Victorian gaslight era and just before and candles went out of everyday use long before that due to their high cost. They were handmade, and were replaced by whale oil and then kerosene long before gaslight became available in the early 1800's in London. If you can't get that right you are doomed as lighting is the most noticeable thing in the rooms. They should have limited the use of candles to candelabras on the dining tables at formal dinner affairs, just like today. I hardly saw any furniture that didn't appear to be several decades out of fashion for the period. Not a sign of wealth to have old fashioned used furniture. Reminded me of the set for The Heiress which had a great set except for the furnishings which were also out of date despite belonging to a rich New York surgeon. Few people in London and New York with money at that time did not own out of fashion furniture yet everyone in this film does no matter what their own age. I think the spendthrift Pip would be buying the latest designs to impress Estella and his new friend, not used, out of style furniture.But for the color, the flocked wallpaper in the Haversham mansion was right out of "The Unsinkable Molly Brown", an even worse production design disaster.Some of the weird camera angles and lenses had no purpose and distorted things and people's faces for no apparent reason. Even though much of the cinematography was nice, this so took me out of the scenes that I can't fathom how it was overlooked when awards were given to the DP. I also was annoyed by his sometimes misdirected rack focusing and blown out exposure on Pip's admittedly pancake makeup white face and other faces at times.

ruigrande I don't consider myself as an expert on Charles Dickens' adaptations for the screen, as I recognize it on some other reviewers, but, not knowing other ones, I simply loved this one.In Portugal we were always flooded with Dickens's tales. We practically grew up on them. And this mini-series is a wonderful document for the new generation of youngsters that don't have patience to read. In fact, I believe that this kind of documents may lead them to search for more tales loke this and look at reading books at a different perspective and see the wonders of it. This is a masterpiece. The photography is superb and the actors play wonderfully their parts. Even Estella, but I agree that a bit more charm and beauty would better fit Dickens' idea. I recommend it to everyone.

phd_travel Please don't watch this terribly miscast BBC version of the beloved tale. Just wait for the Ralph Fiennes version coming out soon. Or re watch the John Mills and Jean Simmons version which is near perfect.Lots has been said about Gillian Anderson being too young and pretty to be Ms Havisham but she is actually alright quite ghostly and spooky. The problem is Vanessa Kirby as Estella she is just way too plain - like some ugly step sister of Cinderella. Even Ms Havisham is prettier than Estella!. Terrible miscasting. You could throw a stone and find a prettier English girl on any street in London. Really spoils the series.Douglas Booth is too pretty and polished for Pip instead of being wide eyed and rough around the edges. He doesn't display enough emotion at the right parts. It's like the Beauty and the Beast with Estella the beast! Even the 2 kids as young Pip and Estella aren't cute.There is a lack of romantic sweep and drama in this version. Also there are some crucial things they didn't show eg Pip trying to save Ms Havisham. Watching this version will ruin your image of the story. Just skip it.

KatherineGM Personally, this programme made my Christmas much better. I watched it with my family and it was just the kind of thing that was suitable for everyone. The actors were excellent, Gillian Anderson giving a very creepy yet sympathetic performance of Miss Havisham, and Harry Lloyd was pitched perfectly as the eccentric and loyal Herbert Pocket. Ray Winstone and Shaun Dooley were also heart breaking as the convict Magwitch and Pips kind brother-in-law Joe Gargery. But the person that stood out to me most was Douglas Booth as Pip. I'd only seen him before in Burberry magazines, and he is admittedly gorgeous and I'm now a fan :) but his acting ability far exceeded my expectations,he was very convincing and proved he is more than just a pretty- well, STUNNING face! The one thing that bothered me was Vanessa Kirby as Estella. It wasn't that she was bad, she just wasn't as good as everyone else. She's also supposed to be absolutely beautiful, but next to Douglas Booth she just looked plain and uninteresting, which isn't necessarily her fault. The scenery and setting were great, the young Pip and Estella were magical, and the whole thing was flawless, exceptional. There should have been more episodes because I felt very sad when it finished. Definitely recommended.