Let's be realistic.

Fantastic!

One of those movie experiences that is so good it makes you realize you've been grading everything else on a curve.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

it is not an easy thing to do Charles Dickens without being tedious, in my opinion. The first few episodes of this are a little bit slow, but once it gets in full swing, it is a great production. The adaptation, the music, the pace, for the most part are excellent. The main exception being Gillian Anderson, who I expected to like, but couldn't. It seems to me that she thinks she is being understated in her stiff, aloof portrayal of lady Dedlock. She succeeds in looking beautiful and being mysterious, but I think it is over-acted. I have never seen someone try so hard to be stoic and restrained, with no appearance of the presence of the emotions that supposedly need to be held back so. It seems to me that stony unsmiling face with a slight pucker of the lips is a default she uses in lieu of any actual acting. I have nothing against her in general, but she has done something similar in both The Fall and x-files, and I think its beginning to be a gimmicky aloofness that doesn't always work. The other characters are superbly cast and well acted.

"Bleak House" (2005), is a miniseries directed by Justin Chadwick (8 episodes) and Susanna White (7 episodes). This movie is a superb adaptation of the book that many believe is Dickens' best novel.The plot follows the fortunes of a young woman, Esther Summerson, after she arrives a a country mansion called Bleak House. Esther, played by Anna Maxwell Martin, has grown up unloved and unwelcome, but she finds a comfortable position as companion to a young woman with more means.Much of the plot hinges on Esther's relationships with those around her. However, an underlying and ongoing theme is a protracted law case--"Jarndyce vs. Jarndyce." The case sucks in--and ultimately destroys--almost all of the potential heirs.Intertwined in the plot is the relationship of Lady Dedlock (Gillian Anderson) to Esther. And, intimately involved in everything is the lawyer Mr. Tulkinghorn, played by Charles Dance.The film succeeds because of the strength of the novel, the strength of the adaptation, the strength of the BBC production values, and the strength of the minor characters.However, what lifts this movie above the basic excellence of other BBC adaptations is the extraordinary acting of Dance and Anderson. You believe that Mr. Tulkinghorn can always achieve what he wants. You believe that he wants power about all else, and you believe that there is no limit to what he'll do to achieve that power.Gillian Anderson was born to play Lady Dedlock. With her slender, erect figure, her incredible blue eyes, and her unremittingly haughty demeanor, she becomes Lady Dedlock. Obviously, Gillian Anderson is an attractive woman. However, this attractiveness reaches new heights when she portrays Lady Honoria Dedlock. Try this experiment: go to Google Image, and click on "Gillian Anderson, X-Files." Then click on "Gillian Anderson, Lady Dedlock." You'll see what I mean.Bleak House is not a happy novel, and the film is not a happy film. The directors make the movie very depressing by showing repeated scenes of the dirt and degradation found in 19th Century London. When the location is one of the country estates, they avoid the pleasure we would get from grass, trees, and flowers. When they switch to the rural scenes, the directors start with a series of jump cuts, accompanied by harsh metallic sounds. They are telling us, "This may be the country, but don't expect a break from the grim story lines."I think this movie would be better seen on the large screen. However, it was made for the small screen, and it certainly worked well enough on DVD. If you love Dickens, this film is a must see. If you don't love Dickens, it's still a must see. Find it and watch it.

I was wary about watching this because I find Dickens so hard to read. I'm still trying to make my way through this book but he is so wordy that it seems to take me forever and I usually end up giving up. Don't worry about any of that with this miniseries, though. It is EXCELLENT. It was long but it held my interest the entire time with suspense, drama, romance, and comedy. There's really something for everyone. The acting was also excellent. My one complaint, though it may just be due to my TV, was that some scenes were shot a bit too dark so it was hard for me to see what was going on.

I've read this novel at least four times, always with rapt enjoyment. I advise viewers of this terrific drama to read the novel, too. You won't be bored. It has a texture and a wealth of character, as well as the great writing of Dickens, that even this fine drama can't match. There are also differences in character. Jarndyce is Jarndyce -- he couldn't be closer to the original. Esther, on the other hand, has lost a layer of hesitation and uncertainty that at least one important critic attributes to her being illegitimate. Esther has been blamed for this, and really bad critics, like the Sitwell character who prefaced the Oxford hardbound edition, dismiss Esther as grossly coy and self-absorbed. I wouldn't change a hair on her head and feel sure Dickens wouldn't either, if he were still with us. At any rate, the wonderful actress playing Esther has removed this seeming coyness from her portrayal, and she comes off as a rather harder character than in the book, though still admirable and lovable. I was surprised to read someone's comment that the actress has a tendency to simper. In my (fallible) view, that illusion of simpering (the product of a sadistically-induced complex) is exactly what the actress has refined OUT of Esther's character. I wouldn't want this drama to be otherwise, but it's not the book, and these differences alone, plus infinitely more detail, will make you love the book.