The Man Who Invented Christmas

Seen at the wonderful Star Cinema in Eaglehawk near Bendigo.  This cinema is struggling financially, so we participated in their “bums on seats” campaign, bringing ourselves and a friend.

Bea says: This was a great insight into Dickens, who, I realised I knew very little about despite having studied his works exhaustively in my days as a student of English literature. 

I didn’t know that A Christmas Carol was written in only 6 weeks, under tremendous financial pressure following several flops, and that the concern in all his books about the working conditions of children in the Victorian era stemmed from his own childhood in a boot-blacking factory after his family fell on hard times.  I knew that Christmas trees were something of a transplant from Germany, brought over by Prince Albert, but not that Christmas as we know it today didn’t really exist prior to this era.

A Christmas Carol is rather overdone these days in terms of faithful reproductions of the story; this was a fresh new take as it showed the story developing and growing and Dickens' always wonderful characters coming to be – a small exchange in the film also shows how Dickens apparently got some of his characters’ names.

Above all – and we saw this on the 23^rd December – it was an uplifting reminder to (and no apologies for sounding cliched here) follow one’s own dreams and path, and do good by others where and when you can.  A great message to take into 2018 in these somewhat dark times.

****

Cecil says: Like Bea, I was bowled over as much by the setting as the film itself, with it being so close to Christmas and in an old hall that has been converted into one of those cinemas with only sofas to sit in.

I also hadn’t realised that Dickens went through such a tough patch, but had that almost Mozartian tendency to live above his means, only to turn out another classic and get things back on an even keel – only Dickens, we learnt, didn’t always produce best sellers and he was short of a bob or two while writing a Christmas Carol.

I also enjoyed seeing how he picked up names for characters along the way, though I already knew that from my tour of UK cathedrals, where Portsmouth and Southwark gave him a few good names.

I kind of enjoyed the Thackeray character, who keeps popping up like a bad penny to gloat over Dickens’ failings, having had lots of success himself in America. I can’t help wondering if he was thrown in mainly for an American audience since he is so much more popular and well-known over there. It’d be nice to know what made the film producers bring him in – were there diary entries they sourced from either Thackeray or Dickens himself?

I can’t quite give this film the four stars Bea has, though the occasion overall – close to Christmas and in an independent cinema we hadn’t been to before – is worth four. But for me, it’s

***.5

Great Expectations

Bea says:  Cecil, being a little older than me, sometimes takes me along to the Seniors Screen at our local Odeon, when I have a Monday free.  A bargain at £3, with tea and biscuits thrown in.  Last Monday was Great Expectations.

Now, there has recently been a BBC TV production of Great Expectations, and at times during the first half this felt very similar indeed, although as the plot moved along, different episodes in Pip's life were focussed on, so it was in the end different enough - just.  It did make Cecil and I wonder though - Dickens had a pretty good output, why aren't we seeing any of his other works in film?  Like the Pickwick Papers, or A Tale of Two Cities, perhaps? 

So this is Dickens, so the story speaks for itself, and the larger than life characters jump off the screen.  Helena Bonham-Carter does a standout turn as Miss Haversham - but I have always liked her work and it is great to see her regularly back on the big screen - and Ralph Fiennes was almost unrecognisable as Magwitch.  I am afraid I didn't really rate the younger actors although I guess they have time to develop. 

And the rest - atmospheric locations (Kent in particular - although it seemed to be exactly the same location as the BBC television drama), nice costumes, but too much make up on Estella to be truly authentic and in fact it distracted me from what she was saying.

***

Cecil says: As Bea says, it's difficult when two productions come out so soon after each other based on the same literary work. You're almost forced to compare, and although I liked Fiennes as Magwitch, I actually found Ray Winston scarier and therefore more true to my memories from reading the book.

As to Miss Haversham, I liked both Bonham-Carter and Gillian Anderson, so wouldn't try to compare or put them in a league table of favourites. But isn't it interesting - as Bea suggests - that I actually can't remember who played any of the other characters in either the TV production or the film we just saw.

The film did begin with virtually the same marshy set as the TV version. And there was lots of mud on camera, both in swampy Kent and in downtown Victorian London. They did pretty well, for that sense of just how grimey things were, even for the gentleman around town.

But even if they were trying to highlight the mud, there were a few too many shots taken at ankle level for my liking in this film. And a few too many very dark scenes, though again that is probably an attempt to make it more real for us softies living in the 21st century.

Apart from that, I did enjoy this, as did the rest of the 75-80 seniors who were in the audience: a fantastic turn-out for a Monday morning and maybe a lesson other cinemas should learn in terms of scheduling and pricing.

***