Great Expectations

This is perhaps the worst film version of a Dickens novel ever made by a major studio. All of the dramatic power of the story is drowned in syrupy music and mostly mediocre to awful acting. Phillips Holmes is terrible as the adult Pip. Holmes, never a good actor, is alternately stiff and hammy.

Henry Hull, usually quite enjoyable when hammy, and actually quite good normally, is unsatisfying compared to Finlay Currie as Magwitch (Currie appeared in the classic 1946 David Lean film). Jane Wyatt conveys nothing of the icy-yet sympathetic haughtiness of Estella. Florence Reed is just fair as Miss Havisham, especially when compared with Martita Hunt's absolutely unforgettable 1947 performance, and Francis L.Sullivan showed much more enthusiasm playing Jaggers in the 1946 film.

The 1934 version of Great Expectations is generally overlooked and dismissed by connoisseurs of the classic story. If it were remastered and put into the Criterion Collection, like the 1946 version, I think it would hold its own.

The start of the 1934 and 1946 versions are nearly identical. Young Georgie Breakston meets the frightening convict Henry Hull in the graveyard while visiting his dead family. He gets Henry the requested "vittles" and cries as he sees him dragged away by the police. Joe Gargery, played by Alan Hale, makes faces at the boy to cheer him up when Mrs. Joe, Rafaela Ottiano, goes "on the rampage". The movies only diverge when Pip meets Miss Havisham, but all in all, they're still very similar. The same actor, Francis Sullivan, even plays Jaggers in both versions!

You're going to have to accept the fact that this version hasn't been remastered. The picture is a bit fuzzy, and the dialogue is even fuzzier. If you can get past that, you'll be in a much better position to appreciate it. Georgie Breakman and Phillips Holmes perfectly represent the younger and older versions of each other; I haven't been able to make up my mind which one was trying to imitate the other! Jane Wyatt is stunningly beautiful as the adult Estella, and as she proves she could have easily handled Dora in the following year's David Copperfield.

Florence Reed has a different interpretation of Miss Havisham, but I really liked it-especially when compared to other ladies who made absolute fools of themselves. Henry Hull (in the only movie I've ever seen him to get first billing!) shines as Magwitch. He's unrecognizable and puts on a thick Cockney accent, and his thin frame and desperate movements make him naturally believable as the convict. You'll be hard-pressed to find a Henry Hull movie where he's the lead, so rent this one to see him in full force.

DLM Warning: If you suffer from vertigo or dizzy spells, like my mom does, this movie might not be your friend. When Henry Hull comes to the apartment and flaps him arms from the cold, the camera tilts for a few seconds, and it will make you sick. In other words, "Don't Look, Mom!"

About two years ago I had written a review of this fine film and wanted to add a footnote. It seems easier to begin again with a few pertinent comments, so I wanted to mention that this is my favorite version of the film. Although I like the David Lean version from '46, this is the one I prefer. I love the lovely casting of the characters, the beautiful sets and charming music depicting new events in the life of the orphan boy, Pip.

About 30 years ago my husband and I enjoyed this film from a Family Festival, like it mentions here. It was on one weekend and was shown in its entirety. Shortly afterwards, I needed a blank tape at a moment's notice, and taped over it. A real mistake, because all subsequent screenings have cut out Valerie Hobson's part entirely as Biddy, governess to Pip. She was also the nurse to Mrs. Jo, Pip's sister.

Also missing is a scene of the vengeful man who worked in the forge for Pip's brother-in-law. In this scene we learn that he had struck Pip's sister with a block of iron, and this is why they needed a nurse for Mrs Jo and a governess to Pip. Enter Biddy, who performed both functions ably.

Although the film still works without those scenes, the more cohesive pattern is of course with them. They are essentially key to the story, like vital links in a chain.

I am a collector of period pieces and try to understand why they would cut a film which was depicted so well. A real mystery to me is that they would do this fifty years after the fact! My husband and I think there were 2 films sent to the movie studio that day, and the one we saw was complete. Upon subsequent screenings, I taped the movie 2 or 3 more times to no avail. In future it was impossible to obtain the film complete.

The American Film Institute book states that Valerie Hobson's part was deleted from the scenes in Great Expectations, 1934, This is incomprehensible to me. We have all heard of movies being cut before screening, but this film was clearly shown with the scenes up at least until somewhere in the 1980's. This was not to make way for commercials, as the eventual commercial release on Video, and later DVD, etc. is the 1 hour and 43 minutes (which lacks the scenes).

Although Valerie Hobson was fairly new to the movie world, she would shortly co-star in The Werewolf of London and The Mystery of Edwin Drood. Her fine screen presence and sincere acting enhanced many a 1930s film.

Thank you all for reading this. I have been on the trail for about 30 years now, searching for the complete film. If anyone knows where I can find it, please e-mail me (Janet) at MCannady1@Verizon.net. In retrospect, I should have called the TV station the next day to see if I could obtain the complete VHS, but never thought of doing so.

This said, I hope to find someone who knows where I can get a copy of the film on DVD or VHS. I just picked up a clue when Roy Leonard's name was mentioned as host of the TV Station. I had read this in a general description of the film, along with the comment about it being shown incomplete most of the time.

This first sound adaptation of Dickens' 'Great Expectations' is sorely lacking anything connected with Charles Dickens. Phillips Holmes is a fine actor and he puts all that he can into the hackneyed script. Miss Havisham is played in a sentimental manner and she actually shows kindness. Jane Wyatt is also sympathetic! Her coldness, which she talks about with Miss Havisham, is lacking in action. This would all be fine if it were an original story but it is purportedly 'Great Expectations'! Stick with David Lean's far superior film and the BBC mini-series actually made in Britain. It is no wonder that Phillips Holmes left to make most of his final films in the UK after being disgusted with this film.

This may be one of the weaker versions of the Dickens classic but by all means not the worst, that's the 1974 version which felt like a musical- oddly enough that version was intended to be that- but without the songs. It is a good looking film, though the opening graveyard scene was too studio-bound for personal tastes, there is at least a sense of time and place convincingly and handsomely rendered and the photography and lighting are good(the one exception is the hideously garish make-up for Florence Reed). Admittedly the music is on the syrupy side, but in a beautifully lush way rather than an overly treacly one. The adaptation at least tries to respect the book, with the literate way the script is written and with the faithful structure, and it gets the point of the book out well enough.

It's not devoid of decent performances too, the cast is an uneven one but not without bright spots. Coming off best is Henry Hull as Magwitch(for me the second most interesting character of the book after Miss Havisham), who plays with real gusto and menace without being too hammy or sinister, though you do feel for him by the end as well. Francis L. Sullivan is firm and occasionally jovial as Jaggers should be, though he is more memorable in the definitive David Lean film. Florence Reed is a haunting Miss Havisham, though much more could have been done with Miss Havisham's cruelty towards Pip(which is more a writing problem than with Reed).

Phillip Holmes however is very stiff as Pip and Jane Wyatt while with an alluring appearance is rather plain and too sympathetic as Estella, with next to none of the icy haughtiness coming out. But the biggest problem with the film is that, while not exactly dull(the pacing is reasonably good actually) unlike the 1974 film, atmospherically it is somewhat bland. There could have been more suspense, more drollness and more mystery, and there is a sense that the film didn't know what to do with some of the characters. Magwitch is fine and the only main character that is somewhat completely unscathed, but with the retrospective and more remorseful approach that the book had not so apparent in this adaptation I didn't find myself quite identifying with Pip in the same way. And Miss Havisham is written nowhere near as eccentric or cruel enough, disappointing seeing as it is those that makes the character so memorable, though Reed still brings those qualities across. The graveyard scene is a disappointment, there is too much of a studio-bound quality, atmospherically and visually, and there is no real intensity or atmosphere, something that was done to unsurpassed effect in Lean's film. The ending is also bungled, few of the adaptations of Great Expectations have had convincing endings but the ending here felt far too sentimentalised. Overall, not so great and one of the weaker adaptations of a classic but difficult book but it is at least watchable. 5/10 Bethany Cox