At this point, I am no longer interested in the debate over whether novels such as Great Expectations and Jane Eyre or a play such as Romeo & Juliet should be adapted again and again for the screen. Such adaptations, and the directorial impulse from which they spring forth (to revisit the most iconic characters and moments of Western literature), are just a fact of life. And as a person with both an academic and personal fixation with the literature of Britain, I am always open to fresh visions of the titles in the canon. The latest version of Great Expectations, perhaps the highest profile film or television adaptation of Charles Dickens' best novel since the iconic David Lean film over 60 years ago, is by and large an earnest and faithful rendering. It, of course, condenses the storyline, but it does not, say, transplant it to modern-day America or the near future. No, this is recognizable from the misty and isolated church graveyard where poor orphan Philip, or "Pip," has a fateful encounter with an escaped convict onward. It will not prove revelatory to people acquainted with the novel and/or the Lean film, but it is elevated by its gorgeous costume and production design and also the caliber of the performances. Ralph Fiennes, for instance, is a master of blending ferocity and regality and is therefore a perfect choice to portray the enigmatic Abel Magwitch, a man who enters Pip's life as filthy, violent criminal and then reenters a quietly benevolent patron.

Director Mike Newell, whose credits range from delightful (Enchanted April, Four Weddings and a Funeral) to borderline toxic (the inept adaptation of Love in the Time of Cholera), acquits himself well. Most of the excisions from the novel, including a key antagonistic character who murders Pip's older sister, are justifiable and wise, though his headlong rush to turn the novel into a riveting two-hour mystery and suspense film does grate a tad at certain points in the film, which would be enriched if characters, moments, and places lingered longer on the screen; at times, atmosphere and texture are sacrificed in favor of intensity and plot centric propulsion. I give him enormous credit, however, for conceiving an elegant final scene which blends Dickens' original, more downcast and grounded ending with the revised, borderline euphoric conclusion he later wrote to avoid alienating his vast readership.

B+