Nicholas
Nickleby (2002)
Our rating: 3 out of 5
Rated: TV14
reviewed by Charity Bishop
None
of Charles Dickens' novels are light reading. Most of
them are dark, morbid, and melancholy but have a certain
sardonic sense of humor.
Nicholas Nickleby
is one of the lesser known volumes but also one of my
favorites. I was eager therefore to see the Bravo
adaptation which is supposedly much closer to the book.
Overall I was disappointed. The filmmakers chose to
incorporate lecherous designs and sexual undercurrent
much more than in the later Hollywood adaptation or the
novel. This in itself ruined many aspects of the film.
Much to the misfortune of his family, Mr. Nickleby has
died, leaving his widow and two children Nicholas (James D'Arcy) and
Kate (Sophia Myles) penniless. In hope of gaining financial assistance
from her husband's older brother Ralph, Mrs. Nickleby takes her family
to London. A distinguished old moneylender with a heart of ice, Ralph
(Charles Dance) is displeased at being left to care for his brother's
family. He immediately seeks to employ Nicholas under Mr. Squeers, an
out of town schoolmaster who takes in boarders. Under the impression the
school is perfectly respectable, Nicholas leaves his family for the
northern country. Having been "rid" of his nephew, Ralph next seeks to
employ Kate with a local dressmaker. Being a young woman with virtue and
innocence on her side, she supposes her uncle's intentions are only for
the best and weathers her new employment willingly, shedding many tears
in secret, little knowing the fates which await both herself and her
brother. Nicholas has discovered the "school" is an abominable place
where the boys are starved, mistreated, beaten, and forced to work.
Among the children is an abused young man named Smike
(Lee Ingleby) whom the Squeers kept "out of the goodness of their hearts"
after his benefactor stopped sending payments to keep him enrolled. A sickly
creature with a bad foot, Smike is berated, whipped, cuffed, and shouted at
with little compassion or heed for his weak memory. At first Nicholas turns
a blind eye. But after an accident in which Smike is badly hurt falling down
a flight of stairs, the cripple runs away. The Squeers set out after him in
a violent wrath and Nicholas becomes his savior when he refuses to allow the
schoolmaster to whip him until he bleeds. Taking the boy in hand, Nicholas
flees the school, leaving many foul feelings behind -- and an unconscious
Sqeers. The news travels swiftly to London by the pen of young Fanny
Squeers, who considers herself "rejected in love" by Nicholas and seeks to
ruin him. In the meantime, Kate has become an outcast at the dressmaker's,
for her pretty face has become too popular with the clients.
A misfortune turns her out into the street and Uncle
Ralph has even more sinister plans in store for her. Having read the novel
and seen the Douglas McGrath version by the same name, I was eager to see
how the Bravo adaptation differed. As it turns out, this adaptation is a lot
closer to the book... but also a lot more offensive. I like the other
adaptation better because I felt it improved on the atmosphere and was less
lecherous, but if you want an adaptation almost exactly like the novel, this
is it. The best aspect of this production is how expertly the two stories
are woven together to create a whole. Scenes filter back and forth between
Kate and Nicholas, giving the illusion of things happening to different
people at the same time. The soundtrack is memorable and varies from
lighthearted to darkly sardonic and melancholy. But what really stands out
here is the acting. James D'Arcy in the lead is brilliant; he's exactly as
Dickens wrote his character... empathetic, but also violent-tempered. Sophia
Myles is a lovely Kate, and Charles Dance makes a cold-hearted but almost
forgivable Uncle Ralph. But the real standout here is the almost
unrecognizable Lee Ingleby as Smike. He turns in a beautiful performance;
the audience immediately loves and sympathizes with him. His most touching
and heart-wrenching scenes are attempting to remember his lines for Romeo
& Juliet (with Nicholas patiently teaching him), and looking at Kate
adoringly as he has his miniature painted. Tom Hollander even has a brief
role -- and it's the most likable I've ever seen him.
While overall it's a good period drama, I do have harps
with the casting, as well as some of the changes made to the script.
They severely downplay a key dueling scene, attributing it to a
gentlemen's quarrel rather than a character adamantly standing up for a
family's honor. I disliked this change primarily because it lessened the
sacrifice of the young man involved, who really died in honorable
circumstances and not over his wrath at being called a "coward." Dominic
West makes a good Mulberry Hawke, but he's too young -- the book implies
a good fifteen years older. They also wrote in innuendo and scenes NOT
in the book, like Hawke trying to force himself on Kate and the Squeers
being all over each other. There is some mild language -- mostly
straight out of the novel. Mantalini has the habit of saying "demn"
every other word. There's one noted use of "Oh, my God!" The violence
isn't very severe or difficult to watch; unlike the other adaptation,
Smike is only hit with the rod once before Nicholas intervenes.
Characters are smacked around, thrown to the ground, and
punched in the jaw. An argument between two young gentlemen leaves one with
a broken arm and the other unconscious on the pavement. A man is shot and
killed in a duel (implied, not seen). We see a dead body hanging from the
rafters. The real problem is mild sexual elements. Cleavage becomes
embarrassing in many of the key scenes, particularly when affectionate
husbands like to kiss and caress whatever's visible. Mr. Squeers retrieves
an important document from an old crazy woman by wrestling it out of her
bodice. After humiliating Kate over dinner, Sir Mulberry Hawke follows her
into the billiard room, tries to put his hand down her dress, and finally
forces her onto the pool table. This scene wouldn't have been problematic if
he didn't have his hand up her skirt. Later he catches up with her on the
stairs during a musical performance and forces her to kiss him. In the
meantime, her uncle stands by and makes excuses on why he can't intervene
after having compromised her integrity in the first place.
A sub-plot involves an older man desiring to marry a
young beauty because of her secret fortune. The sight of a
seventy-year-old man lustfully eyeing a girl of eighteen is
disconcerting. None of the sexual elements portrayed on screen were even
alluded to in the novel; I feel they've degraded Dickens and made a
politically correct version rather than an accurate one. The humor is
almost nonexistent, while in the book it was the main hinge for the
storyline. For those of a more courageous nature willing to overlook the
film's flaws, this adaptation has several things the later version
doesn't -- the violent arguments and daily make-up sessions between
Fanny Squeers and her best friend; Ralph's secretary Mr. Noggs cracking
his knuckles when agitated and occasionally plummeting the air in his
wrath for his employer; and the abdication of a will. It's really a pity
filmmakers decided to give Nicholas Nickleby a good dose of
impropriety, because in all other ways this adaptation is memorable.
|