"BLEAK HOUSE" (1985) Review

 

"BLEAK HOUSE" (1985) Review

In less than I year, I have developed this fascination with the works of Charles Dickens. How did this come about? I do not know. I have seen previous Dickens movie and television adaptations in the past. But ever since last year, I have been viewing these adaptations with a vengeance. And one of them turned out to be "BLEAK HOUSE", the 1985 adaptation of Dickens' 1852-53 novel.

Adapted by Arthur Hopcraft, this eight-episode miniseries conveyed the affects of Jarndyce v Jardyce, a long-running legal probate case involving the existence of more than one will. The heirs and their descendants have been waiting decades for the court to determine the legal will, for the sake of a large inheritance. Among those affected by the Jarndyce v Jardyce case are:

*John Jarndyce - a wealthy English landowner, who happens to be the proprietor of the estate, Bleak House. Jarndyce had inherited it from his uncle Tom Jarndyce, who had went mad waiting for a verdict on the case before committing suicide.

*Richard Carstones - Tom Jarndyce's grandson and John Jarndyce's cousin, who also became one of the latter's legal wards, and a potential beneficiary of the Jarndyce v Jardyce case.

*Ada Clare - Tom Jarndyce's granddaughter and Mr. Jarndyce's cousin, who also became one of his legal wards, and a potential beneficiary of the Jarndyce v Jardyce case. She and Richard, also cousins, became romantically involved.

*Esther Summerson - one of the novel's main characters and orphan, who became Mr. Jarndyce's ward following the death of her previous guardian, Miss Barbury, who had also been her biological aunt. She joined the Bleak House household as Ada's companion and Mr. Jarndyce's housekeeper after he became the guardian of Richard and Ada.

*Honoria, Lady Dedlock - the wife of baronet Sir Leicester Dedlock and a beneficiary of the Jarndyce v Jardyce case. She is also the younger sister of Miss Barbury and Esther's illegitimate mother.

*Captain John Hawdon aka Nemo - a former British Army officer, who became an impoverished law writer and drug addict. He is also Lady Dedlock's former lover and Esther's illegitimate father. His penmanship on one of the Jarndyce v Jardyce affidavit attracts Lady Dedlock's attention.

*Mr. Bill Tulkinghorn - Sir Leicester's ruthless lawyer, who noticed Lady Dedlock's reaction to the affidavit. This leads him to investigate her past and possible connection to Hawdon aka "Nemo".

*Miss Flite - An elderly woman living in London, whose family had been destroyed by a long-running Chancery case similar to Jarndyce v Jarndyce. This has led her to develop an obsessive fascination with Chancery cases, especially the main one featured in this story. She quickly befriended Esther, Richard, Ada and Mr. Jarndyce.

As one can see, these characters represented plot arcs that connect to the Jarndyce v Jarndyce case. As one of the beneficiaries of the Jarndyce case, Richard becomes obsessed with the verdict. He seemed more interested in depending upon the Jarndyce verdict to provide him with an income rather than pursue a profession. This obsession eventually led to a clash between and Mr. Jarndyce, who has tried to warn him not to get involved with the case. Another clash formed between Lady Dedlock and Mr. Tulkinghorn, due to his determination to find proof of her past with Nemo and the conception of their child. A clash that proved to create even more damaging for a good number of people, than the one between Mr. Jarndyce and Richard. In the midst of all this stood Esther, who served as an emotional blanket for several characters - especially the inhabitants at Bleak House, a potential romantic figure for three men (ironic for a woman who was not supposed to be a great beauty), and the center of the Lady Dedlock-Nemo scandal.

For years, 1985's "BLEAK HOUSE" had been viewed as the superior of two adaptations of Dickens' novel. The first adaptation had aired back in 1959. But a third television adaptation from 2005 had managed to overshadow this second adaptation's reputation. But this is not about comparing the three adaptations. I am focusing only the 1985 miniseries. If I might be blunt, I believe screenwriter Arthur Hopcraft and director Ross Devenish created one of the better Charles Dickens I have personally seen. Granted, one might use the source material - the 1952-53 novel - as the reason behind the miniseries' top quality. But I have seen my share of poor adaptations of excellent source material . . . and excellent adaptations of poor or mediocre novels and plays. And I would find this excuse too simply to swallow. Hopcraft and Devenish could have easily created a poor or mediocre adaptation of the novel. Fortunately, I believe they had managed to avoid the latter.

With eight episodes, Hopcraft and Devenish did an excellent job in conveying Dickens' exploration into the chaos of the legal landscape in 19th century Britain, especially cases involving the Chancery courts. One might consider the longevity of Jarndyce v Jarndyce rather exaggerated. However, I speak from personal experience that an extended length of time in such a case is more than possible. But what I thought the effect of Jarndyce v Jarndyce and similar cases in Dickens' story seemed very interesting. In Richard Carstone's case, I suspect his own hubris and upbringing had allowed the case to have such a toxic effect upon him. He had been raised as a gentleman. Which meant he was not expected to work for a living. But since he did not possess a fortune or an estate - like Mr. Jarndyce - Richard never lost hope that the court would rule the Jarndyce v Jarndyce case in his favor, allowing him to inherit a great deal of money. Although it took another case to send Miss Flyte mentally around the bend, I found it interesting that her obsession with Chancery cases led her to attach her interest to the Jarndyce case beneficiaries.

The Jarndyce case also produce a group of leeches in the forms of attorneys like Mr. Tulkinghorn and his obsession with assuming control over the Dedlocks and Mr. Vholes, who had sucked a great deal of money from Richard in exchange for his legal services. The series also featured the vicious moneylender Mr. Smallweed, who helped Mr. Tulkinghorn in the latter's campaign against Lady Dedlock; and Mr. Jarndyce's "friend", Harold Skimpole, who had not only encouraged Richard to pursue a greater interest in the Jarndyce case, but also had accepted a "commission" from Vholes to recruit the young man as a client. Would I regard William Guppy as a leech? Sometimes. I had noticed that one particular story arc was missing - namely the story arc regarding the philanthropist Mrs. Jellyby, her daughter and Esther's friend, Caddy and the Turveydrop family. This did not bother me, for I have never been a fan of that particular arc.

However, I also noticed that "BLEAK HOUSE" featured a few moments in which important plot points had been revealed through dialogue or shown after the fact. Audiences never saw Skimpole convince Richard to hire Mr. Vholes. Instead, Mr. Jarndyce had revealed this incident after it happened. The whole scenario regarding Dr. Allan Woodcock being a survivor of a shipwreck was handled as a past event revealed by the good doctor himself. Hopcraft's script never stretched it out in the same manner as Dickens' novel or the 2005 miniseries. Audiences never saw George Rouncewell's release from jail, for which he had been incarcerated for murder. Instead, Episode Seven began with George in jail and later, near the end, found him serving as Sir Leicester's valet without any information on how that came about.

"BLEAK HOUSE" featured a few other writing and direction decisions by Hopcraft and Devenish that I found . . . well, questionable. Why did the pair solely focused on Lady Dedlock in the series' penultimate episode and Richard and the Jarndyce v Jarndyce case in the final one? Would it have been so difficult for them to switch back and forth between the two arcs in those final episodes? I found Inspector Bucket's resolution to the story's murder mystery rather rushed. I would have liked to see Bucket eliminate suspects before solving the case. In Bucket's final scene with the killer, Hopcraft left out that moment from the novel when the latter had the last scathing word on British society, leaving the police detective speechless. This erasure dimmed the impact of Dickens' message and made the killer even more of a caricature. I had some issues with how Devenish directed certain performances. How can I put this? I found them a bit theatrical.

I have one last issue - namely Kenneth MacMillan's cinematography. I realize that in "BLEAK HOUSE", fog represented institutional oppression and human confusion and misery in society. Unfortunately, I feel that MacMillan may have been heavy-handed in utilizing this symbol in the series. It is bad enough that photography featured a fuzzy element that seemed popular in many period productions in the 1970s. But thanks to MacMillan's use of fog in the story, there were many moment in which I could barely see a damn thing. And I found that irritating.

Aside from a few quibbles, I had no real issues with the performances featured in "BLEAK HOUSE". One of those quibbles proved to be the performances for some of the secondary cast members. How can I say this? The exaggerated and wooden performances for some of the cast members brought back memories of some of the minor actors' bad performances in 1982 miniseries, "THE BLUE AND THE GRAY". I must admit that I did not care for Pamela Merrick's portrayal of Lady Dedlock's French maid, Madame Hortense. Her performance bordered and then surpassed the lines of caricature - as some British actors/actresses tend to do. Charlie Drake's portrayal of the moneylender Smallweed tend to waver between a pretty solid performance and pure caricature. Although there were moments when I found her portrayal of the eccentric Miss Flyte a bit hammy, I must admit that Sylvia Coleridge gave a well-done performance. Chris Pitt's performance as Jo, the crossing sweeper boy struck me as very poignant. Yet, at the same time, he seemed so passive that at times, I found it difficult to believe he had survived on the streets on his own, for so long. Jonathan Moore, whom I had remembered from the 1988 television movie, "JACK THE RIPPER"; did an excellent job of conveying the ambitious and self-interested nature of law clerk William Guppy. However, his portrayal of Guppy seemed to lack the character's comedic nature. Denholm Elliot gave a very interesting performance as Esther, Richard and Ada's guardian, John Jarndyce. On one level, I found his portrayal of the kind-hearted Mr. Jarndyce as first-rate. Excellent. But there were moments, including the character's famous quote following Jo's death, when Elliott's Mr. Jarndyce seemed to resemble one of those "angry young men" characters from a John Osbourne play. I found those moments very odd.

However, there were performances that did not leave me scratching my head. Colin Jeavons and Anne Reid gave very competent performances as the grasping solicitor Mr. Vholes and George Rouncewell's close friend Mrs. Bagnet, respectively. Ironically, Jeavons had portrayed Richard Carstone in the 1959 adaptation of "Bleak House" and Reid had portrayed Mrs. Rouncewell in the 2005 television adaptation. Both Suzanne Burden and Lucy Hornak gave solid performances as Esther Summerson and Ada Clare. And yet, both actresses managed to rise to the occasion with some brilliant moments. Burden's moment came, following Esther's realization that she had survived the smallpox. As for Hornak, she gave an excellent performance during Ada's soliloquy about her love's growing obsession with the Jarndyce case. Brian Deacon gave a passionate performance as Dr. Allan Woodcourt, the penniless doctor in love with Esther. Ian Hogg gave a very solid, yet commanding performance as Inspector Bucket. I really enjoyed Sam Kelly's warm portrayal of the law-stationer, Mr. Snagsby. Bernard Hepton gave one of the most colorful performances of his career as the alcoholic rag and bone shopkeeper, Krook. Dave King gave a very solid performance as the loyal, yet intimidating and conservative former Army sergeant George Rouncewell. I found George Sewell's performance as Sergeant Rouncewell's older brother, the wealthy Mr. Rouncewell not only entertaining, but very memorable. I thought Robin Bailey did an excellent job portrayed the haughty and proud Sir Leicester Dedlock.

But there were four performances that really impressed me. One came from Philip Franks, who did an excellent job of conveying Richard Carstone's emotional journey from John Jarndyce's warm and friendly young man, to the more embittered one, obsessed with the Jarndyce case. T.P. McKenna gave a delicious performance as Mr. Jarndyce's self-involved friend, Harold Skimpole, who proved to be quite the emotional (and financial) vampire. I thought Peter Vaughn was superb as the Dedlocks' sinister lawyer, Mr. Tulkinghorn. I was amazed by how Vaughn managed to combine the character's dedication to protecting his client Sir Leicester and his penchant for assuming control over others. If I had voted for the best performance featured in "BLEAK HOUSE", I would choose Diana Rigg's portrayal of the tragic Honoria, Lady Dedlock. I believe the actress gave a brilliant performance as the mysterious, yet complicated baronet's wife, whose cool demeanor hid a great deal of emotions and a personal secret. I am shocked and amazed that neither she, Vaughn, McKenna or Franks had ever received any accolades for their performances.

In fact, I am surprised that "BLEAK HOUSE" had only received BAFTA nominations (and won three) . . . and they were in the technical/arts category, aside for the Best Drama Series/Serial. No Primetime Emmy nominations, whatsoever. Was this eight-part miniseries the best adaptation of Charles Dickens' 1852-53 novel? I cannot answer that question. Granted, it had its flaws. But what television or movie production did not? But I cannot deny that "BLEAK HOUSE" was a first-rate miniseries that deserved more accolades than it had received, thanks to Arthur Hopcraft's screenplay, Ross Devenish's direction and an excellent cast led by Suzanne Burden, Denholm Elliott and Diana Rigg.

"BLEAK HOUSE" (1985) Photo Gallery

 

Below are images from "BLEAK HOUSE", 1985 adaptation of Charles Dickens' 1852-53 novel. Adapted by Arthur Hopcraft, the miniseries starred Diana Rigg, Denholm Elliott, Suzanne Burden and Peter Vaughn:

"BLEAK HOUSE" (1985) Photo Gallery

"NORTH AND SOUTH" (1975) Review

 

"NORTH AND SOUTH" (1975) Review

I had been a fan of Elizabeth Gaskell's 1855 novel, ever since I first saw the 2004 television adaptation a few years ago. Mind you, I had never read the novel. And I still have yet to read it. Despite this, I became a fan of the story. And when I learned that the BBC planned to release an older adaptation of Gaskell's novel, which first aired in 1975, I looked forward to seeing it.

As one would assume from reading this review, I eventually purchased a copy of the 1975 adaptation on DVD. And if I must be honest, I do not regret it. "NORTH AND SOUTH" proved to be a pretty damn good adaptation. Like the 2004 version, it consisted of four (4) fifty-minute episodes. Gaskell's novel told the story of one Margret Hale, who returns home after ten years to her cleric father's rector in Helstone, after attending the wedding of her cousin, Edith Shaw. Margaret's homecoming is short-lived when she and her mother learn that her father Richard Hale has left the Church of England as a matter of conscience, after he has become a dissenter. His old Oxford friend, Mr. Bell, suggests that the Hales move to the industrial town of Milton, in Northern England; where the latter was born and own property.

Not long after the Hales' arrival in Milton, both Margaret and mother Maria Hale find Milton harsh and strange. Due to financial circumstances, Mr. Hale works as a tutor. One of his more enthusiastic students turn out to be a wealthy cotton manufacturer named John Thornton, master of Marlborough Mills. Appalled by the conditions of the poverty-stricken mill workers, Margaret befriends the family of one Nicholas Higgins, a union representative. She also develops a dislike of Thornton, finding him gauche and seemingly unconcerned about his workers' condition. Unbeknownst to Margaret, Thornton has grown attracted to her. The volatile relationship between Margaret and Thornton eventually plays out amidst the growing conflict between mill owners and angry workers.

As I had stated earlier, "NORTH AND SOUTH" proved to be a pretty good adaptation. I have a tendency to regard BBC miniseries produced in the 1970s with a jaundice eye, considering their tendency end up as televised stage plays. Thanks to the conflicts, social commentaries and romance featured in "NORTH AND SOUTH", the miniseries was never boring. Many viewers who have seen this version of Gaskell's novel claim that it was a more faithful adaptation than the 2004 miniseries. I cannot agree or disagree, considering that I have yet to read the novel. But I have never been too concern with the faithfulness of any movie or television adaptation, as long as the screenwriter(s) manage to come up with decent script that adheres to the main narrative of the literary source. Fortunately, David Turner did just that. His screenplay, along with Rodney Bennett's direction, explored all of the aspects of Gaskell's 1855 novel - the reason behind the Hales' move to the North, the labor conflicts between the workers and the mill owners, Margaret Hale's conflict/romance with John Thornton, the latter's relationship with his mother, Nicholas Higgins' conflict with fellow mill worker Boucher, and the fragmentation of the Hale family. Also, Bennett directed the entire miniseries with a steady pace that kept me alert.

It is a good thing that Bennett's pacing kept me alert . . . most of the time. Like many BBC productions in the 1970s, "NORTH AND SOUTH" did come off as a filmed play in many scenes. Aside from Margaret's arrival in Helstone in Episode One, the labor violence that erupts within the grounds of Marlborough Mills in Episode Two and the delivery of Boucher's body in his neighborhood; just about every other scene was probably shot inside a sound stage. And looked it. This even includes the Milton train station where Margaret says good-bye to her fugitive brother, Frederick. Now many would state that this has been the case for nearly all BBC miniseries productions from that era. Yet, I can recall a handful of productions from the same decade - 1971's "PERSUASION", 1972's "EMMA" and even "JENNIE, LADY RANDOLPH CHURCHILL" from 1974 - featured a good deal of exterior shots. And there were moments when some scenes continued longer than necessary, especially in Episode One. Margaret's conversation with her cousin Edith and Mr. Hale's announcement of his separation from the Church of England seemed to take forever. And due to this problem, there were moments went the miniseries threatened to bog down.

But as much as I liked Turner's adaptation of the novel, it seemed far from perfect. One aspect of the script that really irritated me was that Turner had a habit of telling the audiences what happened, instead of showing what happened. In Episode One, following their arrival in Milton, Margaret tells her parents that she met the Higgins family. The miniseries never revealed how she met Nicholas or Betsy Higgins in the first place. The series never revealed the details behind Boucher's death in Episode Four. Instead, a neighbor told Margaret, before his body appeared on the screen. We never see any scenes of Fanny Thornton's wedding to mill owner Mr. Slickson. Instead, John tells Mr. Bell about the wedding in a quick scene between the two men on a train. Also, I found Margaret's initial hostility toward John rather weak. A conversation between the two about the mill workers took part after audiences met the Higgins family. It is easy to see that John's arrogant assumption regarding his control of his workers might seemed a bit off putting to Margaret. But it just did not seem enough for her hostility to last so long. And while the script probably followed Gaskell's novel and allowed John's regard for Margaret to be apparent before the end of Episode One, I never felt any growing attraction that Margaret may have felt toward John. Not even through most of Episode Four. In fact, Margaret's open declaration of her love for John in the episode's last few minutes seemed sudden . . . as if it came out of the blue.

The above mentioned problem may have been one reason why I found Margaret and John's romance unconvincing. Another problem was that I found the on-screen chemistry between the two leads, Rosalie Shanks and Patrick Stewart, rather flat. In short, they did not seemed to have any real chemistry. The two leads gave first-rate, if somewhat flawed performances in their roles. Aside from a few moments in which I found Shanks' Margaret Hale a bit too passive, I thought she gave an excellent, yet intelligent performance. Stewart seemed as energetic as ever, even if there were moments when his John Thornton seemed to change moods faster than lightning. But they did not click as an on-screen couple. Also, Turner's screenplay failed to convey any signs of Margaret's growing attraction toward John. It simply appeared out of the blue, during the series' last few minutes.

I certainly had no problems with the other performances in the miniseries, save for a few performances. Robin Bailey did an excellent job in portraying Margaret's well-meaning, yet mild-mannered father, Richard Hale. Bailey seemed to make it obvious that Mr. Hale was a man out of his depth and time. Kathleen Byron perfectly conveyed both the delicate sensibility and strong will of Margaret's mother, Maria Hale. I was very impressed by Rosalie Crutchley's portrayal of the tough, passionate and very complex Mrs. Hannah Thornton. I could also say the same about Norman Jones, who gave a very fine performance as union representative Nicolas Higgins . . . even if there were times when I could barely understand him. Christopher Burgess' portrayal of Boucher struck me as very strong . . . perhaps a little on the aggressive side. And Pamela Moiseiwitsch gave a very funny portrayal of John's younger sister, Fanny; even if her performance came off as a bit too broad at times. It was a blast to see Tim Pigott-Smith in the role of Margaret's fugitive brother, Frederick Hale. I say it was a blast, due to the fact that Pigott-Smith portrayed Richard Hale in the 2004 miniseries, 19 years later. As much as I enjoyed seeing him, there were times when his performance came off as a bit hammy.

Overall, "NORTH AND SOUTH" is a pretty solid adaptation of Elizabeth Gaskell's novel. Aside from a few changes, it more or less adhered to the original narrative, thanks to David Turner's screenplay and Rodney Bennett's direction. And although it featured some fine performances, the miniseries did suffer from some narrative flaws and a lack of chemistry between the two leads - Rosalie Shanks and Patrick Stewart. However, "NORTH AND SOUTH" still managed to rise above its flaws . . . in the end.

"NORTH AND SOUTH" (1975) Photo Gallery

 

Below are images from "NORTH AND SOUTH", the 1975 BBC adaptation of Elizabeth Gaskell's 1855 novel. Directed by Rodney Bennett, the four-part miniseries starred Rosalie Shanks and Patrick Stewart:




"NORTH AND SOUTH" (1975) Photo Gallery