AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

PodBill Just what I expected

GazerRise Fantastic!

Donald Seymour This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Hitchcoc Dickens heroes are always complex characters. They often have flaws and bad judgment that get them into trouble. There are routine forces working against them, be they societal or individually human. David is brought up by a doting mother who is quite weak. When his father dies, his stepfather (Basil Rathbone) has no time for him. He is a burr in his saddle and wants to get rid of him as quickly as possible. He is cast out. As he grows he finds another woman to marry who is not unlike his mother. He makes the acquaintance of a cad who claims to be his friend. Through all this are amazing scenes of the dark English countryside and the oceans with their clashing waves. Like most Dickens books, there are a host of minor characters who inhabit the picaresque novel. Mr. McCawber, Peggoty, Uriah Heep, and on and on. Copperfield's trust in these folks directs his future. Freddie Bartholomew is quite good as the very young David. He was the best of the child actors of his day. W.C. Fields has his best moment on the screen.

cantileb I admit upfront that I am a fan of sentimental, romantic stories and this one tops them all. My opinion must not be too off center though because it was "selected by The New York Times as one of the 1000 greatest movies ever made." I saw it as a young girl and have never wavered in my opinion of it. Granted, Freddie Bartholomew's portrayal is now a bit over-the-top, but I still like it. It helps that the writer, Charles Dickens is also a favorite on my reading list.How could this picture go wrong? George Cukor directed it and David O. Selznick produced. It was up for Best Picture at the Academy Awards although it did not win. And the cast was superb.W.C. Fields was amazingly eclectic and his performance stands the test of time. For me though, Edna May Oliver's portrayal of the endearing, but eccentric Aunt Betsey was the best performance. Basil Rathbone as the abusive, husband/stepfather villain still ignites the wrath of the viewer. Who couldn't love Nurse Peggotty (Jessie Ralph)who loved the child as her own flesh and blood? Lionel Barrymore also has a strong presence. And, even though I wanted to shake her, Maureen O'Sullivan's, Dora, was flawless. Roland Young still gives me the creeps as Uriah Heep. In summary, let your kids see it. They and you will love it.

st-shot Dead for some time, Charles Dickens was easily the hottest writer in Hollywood in 1935 with four major releases of his works. Tale of Two Cities, The Mystery of Edwin Drood, The Old Curiosity Shop and David Copperfield were all released in that year and along with Two Cities Copperfield are the two finest American productions of the famed authors work. Smoothly directed by George Cukor and acted by a cast of rich character actors where even a subdued WC Fields does a commendable job as Micawber.The loving household young David enjoys as a child takes ugly turn when his widowed mother marries the cold and callous Murdstone who brings his equally humorless sister along. Battering and badgering both mother and son matters become unendurable when the mother succumbs and Murdstone and sis hammer David even more. David takes to the road and encounters a variety of challenges eventually making his way to an aunt who had rejected him as a child for not being a girl but embraces him now and is more than well prepared to take on the Murdstones.As David the magnificent child actor Freddie Bartholmew is mature and responsive beyond his years carry the lead throughout. As the aunt Edna Mae Oliver dominates her scenes in the same way she did in Tale of Two Cities, ditto for the villainous styling of Basil Rathbone who matches his callous and venal Evermonde to the equally vile Murdstone. Elizabeth Allan as David's mother is the one glaring misstep in the cast with her mannered fretting stifled and erratic.Cukor for his part moves things along at a breezy enough pace re introducing characters and building on the plot in a seamless relaxed fashion ably working the constraints of the medium to give a lush interpretation of this classic novel.

bandw This movie is entertaining enough for many reasons, but unfortunately I had read the book before seeing the movie and came away feeling that the movie failed to capture the richness of the book. I suppose it is not possible to capture Dickens' masterfully detailed descriptions on screen in a two hour movie. The characters are vividly rendered, although somewhat caricatured. I am tempted to reread the book with the images from the movie in mind.With so much material to cover the story is rushed from scene to scene almost in a sequence of vignettes, often played as if this were a stage play. David goes quickly through the stages of his life. With so many characters, the character development is not deep. For example, Uriah Heep's treachery is not revealed gradually, but erupts in a crucial scene near the end. You have to give Dickens credit for his talent for names (Murdstone, Barkis, Gummidge, Peggotty, Clickett, Micawber, Steerforth, and so on) and the name Uriah Heep is a master stroke to the point where it has entered the language to refer to a person presenting a guise of humility as a cover for devious ambition. And the name lends itself to a wonderful double entendre when Micawber refers to him as "you Heep of infamy."As the young Copperfield I found Freddie Bartholomew to be too much of a child actor rather than a believable character. Some sequences cannot be taken seriously, like David's 72 mile trek to Dover--what was he living on during that arduous journey? The sappy score is a bit off-putting, but maybe can be forgiven for a 1935 movie.Overall the positives outweighed the negatives for me, the main positive being to see so many interesting actors assembled in one cast.