BBC’S 1999 VERSION OF CHARLES DICKENS’ ‘DAVID COPPERFIELD:” CHILDISHLY CHARMING, DICKENSLY POWERFUL

by Federico M. Bones

This production – is it a film? Is it a series? – had always been waiting there, but I kept putting it off. I’ve never been really drawn to Dickens, since it’s known that his works deal with the awful treatment children received during his time. His depictions being so powerful, I couldn’t bear reading his books. Whenever I started one, it shocked me so strongly I had to put it away after, at most, three chapters. And as I’m a book-first-movie-second advocate, I didn’t want to watch productions of Dickens’ books.

Now, it’s a well-known fact that boring stretches of time procrastinating on one’s computer can have unimaginable outcomes. What happened? After some hours without much to do, the possibility to watch this film came up once more and, without much consideration, and after a ‘why not?’ I clicked a video with the full thing on YouTube.

Little did I imagine how delighted I would be.

I’m afraid I’m prone to liking anything where a bunch of actors from the Harry Potter films appear (as is the case with this: Madame Hooch, Dolores Umbridge, M. McGonagall and a young Harry can be seen in different roles.) But that’s by no means all there is to this marvellous piece.

The actors I’ve just named excel, especially my beloved Maggie in one of her now typical roles: she plays Betsie Trotwood, a boy-reluctant, sarcastic, rich spinster who, at the very beginning, rejects godmothership of her nephew’s baby because of his sex. She’s an outstanding display of talent and, for a woman of 65 as she was back then, incredible agility (running donkeys away from her green and everything.) The baby, called of course David Copperfield, will grow into a boy played by Daniel Radcliffe and later into a man played by Ciarán McMenamin. Zoe Wanamaker is the hero’s unnervingly strict, hateful step-aunt (if that’s a possibility,) while Imelda Staunton will come up well into the film as the emotional wife of an indebted protector who hopes our hero up (lightening the narration at one of its darkest stages.)

But, as I said before, excellent acting is not enough to make a film good. It’s a whole package where a lot of elements are to be considered. But that’s not my point anyway.

One of the main reasons why I liked the film, which is very good, is because it took me back to childhood. The hero’s story itself is the kind that I was read (or read myself) as a child: Oliver Twist, Great Expectations, Tom Sawyer, Huckleberry Finn and so on. I had never come across this one in particular, and experiencing it for the first time was very comforting as a whole.

There are cartoonish characters which are undoubtedly meant for children/pre-teens, like Betsie and Mrs. Micawber for the sparkling, funny side and Mr and Ms Murdstone and Uriah Heep for the darker one.

There are many terrible events in David’s life, and I found myself suffering together with the character and feeling relieved when they came to an end. This had not happened to me for a while, and I’m glad I had my senses and/or feelings shaken.

Then, as if that were not enough, there’s the more mature reading one can’t avoid making. And this reading has to do with what Dickens meant as social criticism: the dreadful conditions which factory workers (especially children) underwent, the horror that schools could be, the hypocrisy and class-oriented bias of different people who David has contact with.

This takes me to another point. The film made me value Dickens as a writer. It made me look at him in a different light: he was not the pessimist I had prejudiced myself against. On the other hand, there is great hope, great expectations for his characters. He shows life as it was then and is now and will always be: a succession of moments – sad moments, happy moments – and not as a 100% bleak or otherwise immaculate period.

In what is said to be his most autobiographical novel, he creates a fantastic gallery of unforgettable characters, none of which will go unnoticed. Some we’ll love, some we’ll hate – but for each and every one we’ll grow feelings.

I’m glad I chose this three-hour version; it’s a jewel I’ll cherish forever. Dickens is the main person to thank, but the BBC too. They have fantastic film-versions of classics, and ‘David Copperfield’ is certainly one. I don’t usually grade the stuff I review, but I will do it for this one: five out of five. Probably it’s a biased grading, but aren’t they supposed to be so?

----------

None of the images posted belongs to me and they were not introduced pursuing any economic or financial interest.