Such a frustrating disappointment

Load of rubbish!!

Good movie, but best of all time? Hardly . . .

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

it is a pure Dickens. the spirit of novel, the details of its universe, the splendid acting - Jamie Bell is the great revelation - are pieces of a lovely sensitive film who can not only seduce but be an admirable discover. because it is a beautiful movie and its beauty is result not only for the inspiration of director and exemplary choice of cast but for the recreation, with care and precision, of a world atmosphere, the powerful images, the great performance, the Dickens spirit, together, makes the entire work more than a common adaptation. work of extraordinary actors, it is a real joy for viewer. and that is important. so, see it !

I have been watching our DVD box set of the 1982 mini-series, "The Life And Adventures of Nicholas Nickleby" again.I had avoided the 2002 version until this evening when it appeared on TV. I think a good job was done in getting this massive production into 2 hours. I pretty much like the cast in the film, but was appalled when I found that Barry Humphries played Mrs. Crummles! What an insult to Lila Kaye, who was the perfect Mrs. C. BTW, I'm also in the process of re-reading my copy of Dickens' book, which also confirms that Ms. Kaye was right for the part. Alan Cumming was as always, delightful & perfect for his role. It was worth the time just to enjoy those eyes & that devilish smile.

How this version could have received a score of 7.2 is almost beyond imagination - except that nowadays the young people have such crap to watch generally that they are perhaps incapable of judging properly! So they vote with their eyes for Charlie Hunnam and are impressed by the list of well-known actors who generally do a good job... and who all should hang their heads in shame for being part of this enterprise. Christopher Plummer is wooden, Jamie Bell is wasted in this as his character is barely developed, Mr Hunnam is woefully miscast as he doesn't have an ounce of credibility in any of his scenes. The only ones who come out of this without damage to their reputations are Tom Courtney, who plays his role believably at least, and the duo of Nathan Lane and Barrie Humphries (basically recreating his Dame Edna Everage personage)... these two succeed where everyone else fails because they are never to be taken seriously anyway, but are simply characters in the theatre of the absurd, and so fit in perfectly with the rest of this terribly terribly feeble attempt at bringing Dickens' characters to life.If you want to watch an excellent version of this story, watch the 2001 film with James D'Arcy in the title role. Everything that is wrong with the 2002 film will become evident in watching this far superior version!

I rented this movie because it receives 7.3 average scores from the votes in IMDb.com However, it was a little disappointing. The film did not capture my interest that much. I think it's because the main character is an all too-good gentleman. The evil is just plain evil. It's like watching an old movie that wants to teach and uplift moral in society. Well, good intention, but a bit preachy and boring. The conversation is too long and some are unnecessary. The story is just nothing but a series of hardship that one has to go through, but somehow Nicholas seems to know it all how to deal with the obstacles in his life. What's fun about that? He already knows that he will win and the story does not make it too difficult for him to win. Actually, in the beginning when he was sent to that horrible school and finally stood up against the evil couple and helped the poor crippled boy, I was shouting in my mind 'Go,Nick,Go! You must do it. Don't let them hurt that poor boy!' That part was very good and very moving. But after that, our Nicholas becomes the know-it-all hero who looks like a knight in shiny armour. He rescues everyone. He is a real gentleman with no flaw. That's really the weakest point of this film. Don't get me wrong. This is not a terrible film or anything. It's well intended and the story is harmless for viewers of all ages. The acting is fine. The cinematography, the lighting, the scenery, are very beautiful. It's just that the story is a bit too dragging and the characters are too flat. That's all. I still want to recommend this as a family movie, the one you can watch with young children and let them see example of true gentleman. It's better than let them watch something full of gun, blood, and swearing.