Phonearl Good start, but then it gets ruined

Hadrina The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

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.

Sarita Rafferty There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

Python Hyena Oliver Twist (2005): Dir: Roman Polanski / Cast: Barney Clark, Ben Kingsley, Jamie Foreman, Harry Eden, Leanne Rowe: Another reworking of the Charles Dickens story about an orphan on the run from neglect and abuse. Twist uses survival instincts to escape from a cruel household yet falls within the realm of child thieves headed by an elderly man bent on using him for the same purpose. When he is housed by upper class gentleman who sees beyond the surface Twist finally discovers what love and acceptance is all about. Directed by Roman Polanski in similar fashion to his earlier film The Pianist, also about someone searching for refuge. Barney Clark brings intelligence and charm to the role of Twist who endures brutal hardship but ultimately learns the value of friendship and trust. Ben Kingsley as the youthful gang leader steals the film in his promise of success and delivery of broken trust. Jamie Foreman steals scenes as the villain Sikes whose acts of cruelty knows no boundaries yet consequence ultimately surface. Harry Eden plays the resourceful Artful Dodger. Leanne Rowe plays a young prostitute named Nancy who is in an abusive relationship. Despite its many translations, Polanski succeeds greatly here. Early century beautifully realized with a world that relates in stunning affect to the opening drawing or painting that opens and closes the film. Score: 10 / 10

Steffi_P Stories, no matter how respected and illustrious, can exist beyond their origins. Charles Dickens's novel of Oliver Twist has been adapted for the screen a number of times, but rather than simply returning time and again to the source novel successive versions have taken cues from each other, gradually refining the tale over the centuries. David Lean's 1948 version invented the idea of Olvier being abducted by Bill Sykes for the rooftop finale (in the novel Oliver is safe and sound by this point). The subsequent Lionel Bart musical copied this ending, effectively making it official. It's a stark example of the power of cinema as a shaper of stories and cultural knowledge. This latest big screen offering takes that trajectory even further with a modern-style, naturalistic take on the Dickens tale.Just as Dickens's books are most often remembered for their vivid characters so do many Dickens adaptations succeed or fail on the strength of their cast. With this version, I'm quite impressed by Barney Clarke in the title role. Clarke is not a stupefyingly good actor, but in him we at last have an Oliver who is not completely meek and frail, and has a believable amount of fight in him. Ben Kingsley's is certainly the best dramatic Fagin ever, and really the only high quality acting job in the movie. But some of the best moments come from the obvious rapport between the supporting players. There are some moments that seem so perfectly to capture something very familiar and immediate yet also appropriately Dickensian, as when Fagin's boys remove Oliver's fine clothes - they sound just like a normal bunch of teenagers, in spite of the archaic language.But many other times, it just doesn't work, and there are some absolutely woeful bits of acting on display. Worst offender here is Jamie Forman as Bill Sykes; a wooden performance of sub-Eastenders calibre. Also, while it's nice to have a Nancy who is less a mother-substitute and more like a big sister, Leanne Rowe is just not that good. And though the realism of the performances can sometimes conjure up something wonderfully natural and fluid, it can just as easily produce the irritating drone of Jeremy Swift's Mr Bumble.It seems that many of the cast members, good or bad, were chosen for their appropriate physical appearance than anything else. This is not surprising, since Polanski his crafted a rich and thriving world for them to inhabit, as if he was creating a photographic illustration more than a movie. Pawel Edelman's cinematography captures the detail and texture of a Gustav Doré print. The setting does not dampen Polanski's trademark visual style, with lots of tight, grim-looking compositions. A neat example is when Oliver is hauled before the workhouse governors, and the handful of seated men are arranged to create a surreal kind of tunnel. The 19th century squalor seems stiflingly close to the viewer.But perhaps the most significant thing about this edition of Dickens's story is its manipulation of the story. Screenwriter Ronald Harwood has excised the subplot of Oliver being related to Mr Brownlow, a daft construction that stretched the bounds of probability and confirmed the class prejudice Dickens held at that time. This adaptation also emphasises Oliver's final confrontation with Fagin, a powerful and moving coda and a very mature thing to include. A lot of other minor diversions have been stripped away to give a very direct and efficient retelling. But this tinkering with the text is also the movie's downfall. In simplifying the story, just a few too many corners have been cut. Key characters like Bill Sykes are introduced without ceremony. There's also not enough time to build up a convincing relationship between Oliver and Brownlow. This version of Oliver Twist may look sumptuous and have many flashes of brilliance, but as a whole it is a rather cold, drab experience.

beresfordjd How disappointed am I!! I like Roman Polanski's work usually-Just loved The Pianist, but this film is so bereft of emotion and atmosphere it could have been made by just about anyone. The costumes and sets are well done but do not look grubby enough for the period and the descriptions that Dickens gives. So many versions have been done so much better-given that Oliver! (the musical) managed to convey the atmosphere I find it hard to understand how Polanski could not manage it. No-one looks right or acts convincingly apart from Ben Kingsley. An actor would have to go a long way to top Robert Newton or Oliver Reed as Bill Sykes and the Bill Sykes in this is not up to it. It seems so true to the book and yet Monks and his motive is not part of it.It is a difficult story to tell with all the richness and characters that Charles Dickens supplies but RP should have tried- much harder.

piedbeauty37 I've seen several versions of this Dickens classic, and this is the best. Dickens first wrote "Oliver Twist" as a serial for the newspaper. That's why there were so many side plots--Oliver's unwed mother, the two cousins in the country, Mr. Bumble and his wife, the lost locket etc.None of the side plots are really necessary to the core of this story, which shows good and evil unvarnished. The boy who played Oliver was simply marvelous. This film had the best Bill Sykes--evil and unredeemable. The squalor in which these people lived is portrayed very well.I totally loved this version.