REVIEW

TV Review: Bleak House Part I

Written by Lyz Baranowski
Published January 23, 2006

Bleak House is said to be Dickens' greatest work and by "is said," I mean a bunch of guys at Harvard made a list and made it number one. So, because I do what the white guys tell me to, I read it.

Now let me tell you a little something about Dickens and me. We don't usually get along. I love his characters and his stories but they are so lost in his ponderous shenanigans that I tend to throw the book across the room several times before finishing it and Bleak House is the most ponderous of them all. But if you can wade through the page long descriptions of a fireplace then you will find a breathtaking array of characters, a true Dickensian treasure. But like running a marathon, it's only useful for bragging rights and professional athletes and it is the one book I would recommend "training" for.

Therefore, I have always been of the opinion that Dickens books translate to film more so than most Victorian writers and Bleak House is no exception. This is not because I'm lazy, or a child of the TV generation, who wants nothing more than to kick back and be entertained but rather because the process of translating Dickens to film is like refining a diamond. You take off the ugly rock of paid-by-the-word ruminations and what emerges is a beautiful gem. Though the movie jumps from character to character with reckless abandon, each is played so memorably that you never forget a face. And each face is so emotionally charged that the complexity of the book is spelled out through the innocently determined face of Charley Neckett to the pathetic obsession of Mr. Guppy. Even Mademoiselle Hortense is instantly revealed by the look of parched desperation she gives to the mirror reflection of her mistress, Lady Deadlock. I read a criticism that the actors played their parts too intensely. Yet, I would argue that anything less would render the movie prey to the book's worst of follies, boredom.

The show is riveting, which is amazing considering that the show's writers tackled this project with the intention of cutting out as little as possible. "What I wanted to do is get down and dirty with it, make it as real as possible," Justin Chadwick, the director, told The New York Times. And real is exactly what the show becomes. Music and cinematography give Bleak House a modern edge and a contemporary snap, without sacrificing the essential Victorian. Chadwick and the show's writer, Andrew Davies, also imbue the show with something else often lacking from modern television and cinema, that all characters are created equal. Some of Dicken's most memorable and accessible character's are not the protagonists, who are often tediously moral (I'm looking at you, Pip!), rather they are the smaller characters who pop in and out of the story such as Nancy and Fagin in Oliver Twist. Davies and Chadwick hold true to this Dickensonian democracy and it breathes life and complexity into a fascinating book

Though the book is a Gordian knot, the television show is completely accessible and enjoyable. I'm completely willing to give up Family Guy for the next two months of Sundays, and I'm one book snob who loves her Family Guy.

Bleak House airs Sunday nights at 8 p.m. central on PBS.

Keep reading for information and comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own!
TV Review: Bleak House Part I
Published: January 23, 2006
Type: Review
Section: Video
Filed Under: Books: Literature and Fiction, Video: Drama, Video: Television
Writer: Lyz Baranowski
Lyz Baranowski's BC Writer page
Lyz Baranowski's personal site
Spread the Word
Like this article?
Email this
Submit to del.icio.us Save to del.icio.us
RSS Feeds
All RSS Feeds (240+)
Comments on this article
BC articles by Lyz Baranowski
Books: Literature and Fiction
Video: Drama
Video: Television
All Video Articles
All Review articles
All BC articles
All BC Comments

Comments

#1 — January 23, 2006 @ 13:02PM — Bill Wallo [URL]

I enjoyed the show. Didn't care for some of the trick cinematography that seemed more at home in a sci fi flick than a Victorian period piece, but overall I thought they did very well.

#2 — January 23, 2006 @ 15:40PM — Rodney Welch [URL]

I get the feeling from your comments that this adaptation is mostly geared toward Dickens-haters. Have at it.

#3 — January 23, 2006 @ 15:59PM — Lyz

I think the Dicken's lovers will like it too because it has EVERYTHING in it and doesn't veer from the book. Plus, it aired first last year in England and it was the Princess Di of tv shows. And can you be English and hate Dickens? Doesn't that violate a law? It would be like being American and hating Thoreau, which I am and I do, so probably not a good example, eh?

#4 — February 27, 2006 @ 07:01AM — barb

Who plays Lady Deadlock in Bleak House? Is it Scully from the Xfiles???

#5 — February 27, 2006 @ 07:20AM — Lyz

Yes it is! Lady Deadlock is played by Gillian Anderson. Isn't she awesome?

#6 — February 27, 2006 @ 09:50AM — Barb

YES she truly is!! So TOTALLY different than anything I'd ever seen her do. Lovely actress.
I just read her bio on another site and she was apparently raised in England, returning to the US when she was 9 or so..but had to overcome the accent. I'm amazed when actor can do this!!

#7 — February 27, 2006 @ 11:58AM — Nancy

I've always enjoyed Dickens, but I was a strange child, anyway. His books have to be read with an understanding that he was writing for a slower, more leisurely time, when people had longer attention spans than they do now, and were considerably more literate - in the literal sense of that word.

No doubt, his character development still can beat just about any other 'modern' writer. So can the mood he creates. Is there anything creepier than the fog that crawls through London & blankets the Courts, or subliminally nastier than the rag-&-bone shop & its vile owner? The only problem I ever had with his writing was his tendency to depend on dei ex machinae in his plots, but again, I read from the vantage point of 160+ years later, when such machinations were not quite so worn & tired by subsequent overuse & overexposure as they are now. Even so, he still turns out a rippin' good tale, and translates well into modern media. I'm sorry I missed it; I hope it will be available on DVD in the near future.

Just out of curiousity, who played the character of Jo the sweeper?

#8 — August 28, 2006 @ 09:21AM — Chris

I have watched this series with much awe
especially with regards to the acting and the realistic Victorian period settings along with fantastic Dicken's Storyline ,though the quick cutting from one storyline to the next has kept the story line flowing ,I was very dismayed that
the Final programme was too rushed ,with the important final Concluding scenes of the cherished storyline jumping too rapidly between scenes with little time to reflect after following the Storyline and Characters for
so long,I was very disapointed ,that the pace was
not slowed down for the final climax of the Story

Want comments emailed to you? No spam, promise! Address:

Add your comment, speak your mind

(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/42649)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.





Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!

Fresh
Articles
Fresh
Comments