I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

There's a more than satisfactory amount of boom-boom in the movie's trim running time.

Martin Chuzzlewit is perhaps not Dickens at his best but it has the ingredients that make him such a great author in the first place and it deserves to be better known. This 1994 adaptation is fabulous in all areas, one of the best Dickens adaptations of the past 25 years. The production values are splendidly evocative, not too bleak or too squeaky clean, and the adaptation is shot with natural skill. The dialogue is very Dickenesian, with its fair share of funny and affecting parts, while the story while leaving some things out is compelling and faithful in spirit and style to Dickens, respecting his work rather than disregarding it. The pace is just right, the drama is given time to breathe but there's no signs of tedium, while as to hope from a Dickens adaptation the characterisations are rich. Of the fine performances, Tom Wilkinson dominates, a brilliant performance and he hits the arrogant and hypocritical sides of Pecksniff spot on. Phillip Franks is incredibly moving as Tom Pinch. Paul Scofield's titular character is played with splendid dottiness and the much missed Pete Postlethwaite is superb, and we also have an unforgettably hilarious Elizabeth Spriggs and Keith Allen who has never been better. All in all, an underrated book given classic treatment. 10/10 Bethany Cox

It takes Dickens to invent and explore such a sordid family history and story. For Dickens the world is cut into three types of people.First the rich who are supposed to make money by all means, and of course first of all speculation. Madoff certified and a long time before that particular character appeared in finance. Dickens explores the greed of these people but also in some the sound sense of business and fairness, and yet always distorted by selfishness, since selfishness seems to be the main characteristic of man.Second those who exploit the rich and they are of different types. The beggars or immoral servants, those who drink too much and reside in the petty crime of overbilling their services and taking advantage of an open door. These are luckily counterbalanced by those who are faithful, honest, hard working and ready to help those who deserve that help. Some are easily taken in and exploited again by some social climbing individuals.Third the social climbers who consider all means are permitted to climb any step, or should I say rung, on the social ladder. They exploit the young, they steal their work and use it under their own names, they flatter the rich when they feel these are weak and gullible.The best side of Dickens is that everyone will get the payment their deserve. The social climbers will be ruined by their own greed and the bigger greed of some other predators, when it is not plainly killed by one of their victims. The greedy rich will be the prey of all types of predators and those unworthy to be rich because totally overcome by their greed and unable to repent or simply be humble about it will die in the hands of worse characters of lower extract, including their own children. The faithful servants will be rewarded and happy in their hearts. The profiteering servants will be gently discarded.Two themes are addressed besides these. The position of women in Victorian society. They are pure victims if they do not keep some distance and independence, the victims of men who take wives only to make a profit or to be presentable in society. But at the same time some can get free and keep free as soon as they are of age, provided they want to sever some ties that may hamper them or to refuse some attachments that may prove unwise. Strangely enough in this totally inhumane society women are a ray of sunshine when they believe in love and fight for it.The second is America. Dickens had a special feud with the USA about his works being pillaged and looted by the American press without paying the royalties his copyright should have produced. Here again the American caper of Martin Chuzzlewit is a visit to a hellish and totally negative hallucination.But if we look at the weddings in this story we find that ambiguous vision of Dickens: One marriage is a total failure, that of Mercy with Jonas Chuzzlewit; two will be happy, the marriage of Mary with Martin Chuzzlewit and the marriage of Martin's self appointed servant with the housekeeper of the wicked profiteer Mr. Pecksniff. Two will never be fulfilled, that of Tom Pinch who was in love with Mary who chose Martin, and that of Charity whose paramour is taken away to Tasmania. Tom Pinch's sister will probably marry happily with Tom's friend. We are far from the four weddings of the Midsummer Night Dream by Shakespeare. Dickens' world sounds more like a Janus-like picture of a dream that covers up a nightmare.This particular production by the BBC captures the slow and delicate rhythm of the original with quite a lot of details and side situations that give some depth to the main line of the story. This production also seems to emphasize the depiction of the monstrous and bleakest characters and even Old Martin Chuzzlewit, Martin's own grandfather, is not shown most of the time, and even at the end as a very palatable person. A beautiful piece of 19th century literature that will inspire some of the political minds of that century and the next. When you see such deep social rot the idea of a revolution becomes acceptable or even worth being desired.Dr Jacques COULARDEAU

Martin Chuzzlewit as written by Charles Dickens becomes another of his young men who rise to success stories with a combination of their own perseverance and an unseen hand of fate which seems to be in control of destiny. Others like this are the more well known David Copperfield and Pip from Great Expectations.There are two Martin Chuzzlewits, the first is the young Dickensian hero who is played by Ben Walden and there is grandfather Martin Chuzzlewit who is Paul Scofield who also plays his own brother Anthony Chuzzlewit. The old Martin is one rich dude who is a doddering and miserly sort of man worried as to who might deserve the riches he's accumulated in life. Scofield has a flock of relatives who are hanging on every word and every breath hoping to find favor with the old guy. For strangely enough he's cut off young Walden and now the rest of them just think his fortune is up for grabs with his dying breath.The worst of the Chuzzlewit relatives is a cousin named Seth Pecksniff who is an ostentatiously pious and inwardly scheming individual. He worms his way into Scofield's confidence and tries to undermine everyone else so that he and his daughters may profit. He's not above using his daughters for that end either though the daughters played by Julia Sawalha and Emma Chambers. Pecksniff is one of Dickens's most enduring if villainous characters and here he's played with full unctuousness going on all cylinders by Tom Wilkinson.One of the daughters in fact at Wilkinson's urging marries an equally villainous cousin Jonas Chuzzlewit played by Keith Allen to further the Pecksniff fortunes. He also takes in 'students' to 'learn' architecture and he's got a lovely racket there in passing off promising student's drawings as his own work and living off the money they pay him to allegedly learn. He deals young Walden dirty that way, but most catch on to him including Walden with exception of good hearted Tom Pinch played by Philip Allen. Even he gets wise at one point.Martin Chuzzlewit was written after Dickens had returned from an American tour and part of the novel has young Martin and a friend going to America to seek a fortune of his own. Dickens was not happy with what he saw in America and the Americans you see here are a merciless bunch of greedy film flam businessmen. That part of the novel got a short shrift in this production.Considering how Dickens portrayed some of his own countrymen I can't really fault him for writing what he saw in the USA of the 1840s. Just the Chuzzlewit family or most of them are enough to make you gag.This is a fine BBC productions impeccably cast and giving us a good picture of the United Kingdom of the early Victorian years. Best in the cast is Tom Wilkinson as Pecksniff. The word itself became a noun in the English language for hypocrite just mccarthyism became a synonym for slanderous accusation without proof.When one of your characters becomes a noun, that's the greatest success you can have.

I have not read the novel, "Martin Chuzzlewitz", but a made-for-t.v. movie, or big screen movie, should stand on its own. So, I comment on the movie alone, though in context of a Dickens adaption, of course, as is credited.This written, I've seen far better screen adapt ions of a Dickens novel. This was turgid in many respects, regards the writing. The writer must have kept close to Dickens, because it has all his excesses (imo), e.g. the too kind character, the too sinister evil-doer, and of course a gross assault upon coincidence. With Dickens you have to suspend a lot of disbelief, with this movie, somewhat less though. And you have the fairy-tale ending, which I shall leave as a fairy tale ending, undescribed herein. The only reason to watch this, is the powerful production design and acting, which is a major "only"! The various British period/costume productions have the touch, and that really includes "Martin Chuzzlewitz". It is a joy to watch. But, the acting. All the people in this production were outstanding; if one stood out, it was Tom Wilkinson as the arch-buffoon/no-goodnik. Though everyone was excellent.This was certainly worth the view.