User reviews

It is always going to be a challenge to take a classic novel and turn it into be a movie that will satisfy everyone, especially when the story is being changed and adapted to fit a modern setting. If what you want to find from this movie is an exact translation of the book you will be unimpressed.

I personally loved this movie, it is completely stylish thanks to a brilliant soundtrack and the gorgeous leads Ethan Hawke and Gwyneth Paltrow (who is cast perfectly as the beautiful ice queen). They are helped along by a strong supporting cast of Anne Bancroft (wonderfully eccentric as Ms. Nora Dinsmoor), Chris Cooper and Robert DiNero.

The problem, however, is that in trying to fit a story as long and complicated as ‘Great expectations' into a 90 minute movie you loose a lot of the development of the characters necessary to identify and have an emotional reaction to them.

Rather than linger on these issues Alfonso Cuaron concentrated on the visual aspect of the movie and the result is a movie that is great to watch!

Great Expectations is one of the few films that can incorporate stunning visuals, one of the best soundtracks to ever grace a film and simply characters that you truly care about by the end of the film.

It's true that the character development on the character of Finn is a little weak, but the characters of Estella and the over flamboyant and heartbroken Miss Dinnsmore certainly make up for Finn's minor flaws. Personally i found the film very enjoyable and immersive, and the incredibly imaginative cinematography will certainly keep anyone's attention as well.

This film is a stylish and brilliant remake of a classic and could almost be considered timeless compared to other recent attempts at "updating" the classics which fail in comparison(such as the recent failed attempt at romeo and juliet). Great Expectations is certainly worth a rental (or even purchase) for anyone that enjoys simply a good, immersive movie with some absolutely beautiful imagery.

Hollywood and the movie industry have made many bold moves over the past decade in bringing to life old classics. None however have been done more boldly than the remoulding of William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, and Charles Dicken's Great Expectations. Both are daring attempts to rebirth a storyline from the distant past, as a tale told in our modern times. I say attempt because in both cases, as good a job the cast and crew did, there was something lacking in these new renditions. Great Expectations, the movie, lacks many qualities that make the novel a success. It cannot be said to be a total loss, the basic elements are intact, it is only the embellishments Charles Dickens developed in the novel to make the story more realistic that are missing.

One success, I must admit that I observed while watching the film was the rich visual setting. Although not taking presented in the same place, or era Great Expectations, the movie, is a feast for the eyes. It captivates the mind with beautiful shots of the rural Florida coast life, and yet still retains the jumbled, rundown atmosphere that is described of Pip's small birthplace in a small English town. These qualities of squalor are evident in the impoverished coastal fishing village of the movie. The best achievement in cinematography, is the in-depth views of Pardiso Perduto, a sister mansion to the decaying Satis house of the novel. Even the scenes of New York, the city of "expectations" for our youthful protagonist, Finn, has contrasting aspects of rich beauty and unsightly slums that the London of the nineteen century demonstrated. This is the most major achievement for the film; to capture on film a most ingenious modern equivalent of Charles Dicken's astute descriptions.

Unlike some attempts to revamp literary successes the movie at least retains some of the dignity of Dicken's work. The core of his novel is intact within the screenplay. Also many ingenious ideas were used in some plot changes, and cinematography. Overall it is not a bad representation of the novel.

I loved this film, it was simply well made for this modern time. I read the book by Charles Dickens and it is quite different, but very enjoyable.You never know do you? It was a bit confusing, I mean Gwyneth Paltrow's character, I guess you could say she was unique. And I understood Ethan Hawkes character perfectly. Wonderful film, I'd recommend it to anyone.

Good romantic-drama, based on Charles Dickens' classic novel. I haven't read the book, so can't say how faithful this adaptation is (obviously, it has been modernized). The transplanting into the modern day doesn't suffer from the usual stuffiness that such adaptations usually suffer from (eg Baz Luhrman's Romeo & Juliet), and feels like a modern romantic-drama.

Solid direction from Alfonso Cuaron. Pacing is generally good, though there are one or two patches where the movie drifts.

Ethan Hawke and Gwyneth Paltrow are solid, though not spectacular, in the lead roles. Good support from Chris Cooper, Anne Bancroft and Robert De Niro.

I have never read Dickens' "Great Expectations," but I can tell you that this is one of the best movies I have ever seen. Let me clear something up right away. This is not a b-movie, a cheesy remake, or even a remake. It is my understanding that this movie is loosely based on the Dickens' book, but that it does follow the themes, just not the exact story. This is a great movie, it is a modern classic. The acting is excellent. Ethan Hawk is amazing, he really is a top notch actor. He's not just a young sexy leading man type who gets by on looks and a touch of acting (as I had previously thought since he looks like the typical Matt Dillion or a Lowe type). Gwyneth Paltrow is absolutely stunning and plays her role perfectly. De Niro has a nice, powerful role, and duh, he's awesome in this movie. Anne Bancroft was hauntingly superb in this movie, you'll see what i mean. Hank Azaria and Chris Cooper play great supporting roles. I think this movie was probably Chris Cooper's breakthrough role, and he was great.

The movie was breathtakingly shot. The cinematography was better then even the recent crouching tiger hidden dragon. The movie gives you a feeling of awe and mystery because of it's settings. It's a work of art. The writing...based on a classic Dickens novel..come on it is superb. No cheesy lines; yes there are heartfelt beautiful lines, but none cheesy or over-emotional or over the top dialogue. The writing and actors clicked perfectly. Need I say the story was both interesting and intriguing (based on Dickens' Great Expectations). It may be loosely based or not, but it was GREAT.

The directing pulled everything together and added some nice tricks to make this movie a Modern classic. And the way music was used to intensify this movie and when and where it was used was absolutely brilliant, and i suppose this is the director's job, WELL DONE.

The music was almost as important as the acting in this movie. The musical score for this movie is one of the best I have ever encountered. It makes this movie move you. And just as good are the music (songs) the movie uses, how and when they are used. This is one of the few movies that thrives on sound (music) to help create it's mood, power and emotion and it is done masterfully.

This movie is a masterpiece. Beautiful on the eyes, ears, heart, and mind. I feel sorry for you if you don't ever get to experience this movie, it is a MUST see.

What a novel idea! Set Dickens' classic tale in modern Florida. Pip, now renamed Flynn (Hawke), is a white trash kid being raised by his brother-in-law (Cooper), a professional fisherman. Pip still has all the adventures of his Victorian antecedent; helping the escaped convict (De Niro), eerie visits with the crazy rich woman (Bancroft) and her mysterious niece (Paltrow), the mysterious benefactor, the sudden success.

Somehow it doesn't come together. The acting is weak. Ethan Hawke and Gwyneth Paltrow seem to be sleepwalking. Bancroft and De Niro certainly help, but the real bright spot is Chris Cooper as Hawke's brother-in-law.

The screenplay doesn't help either, it's slow pacing is often just too slow, making a relatively short movie seem quite long.

Not a rip-off by any stretch, and the southwest Florida scenery is excellent. Just don't rent this when you're in the mood for something exciting.

I went into Great Expectations with high hopes. The story has always been one of my favorites and I couldn't wait too see what they had done with it. The film is beautiful. It is very rich in color and scope. The cinematography was outstanding and the direction was solid. The acting was brillant all around. Robert De Niro is in the movie only briefly, but brings respect to a role that could be just a flash in the pan for anyone else. Ethan Hawke and Gwyneth Paltrow are great and Chris Cooper turns in a very subtle but powerful performance as Finn's guardian. The film left me feeling good, what more could you ask for in a movie?

Although Ethan Hawke and Gwyneth Paltrow are as romantic a pair of lovers as you will find on the current cinema scene, Great Expectations is like all Charles Dickens novels, a plea for social justice in the setting of the time and place they were written. Not to say that the works of Dickens can't be updated as Great Expectations is here, but the whole premise of the novel is sacrificed.

A lot of the framework of the original novel is left intact though the location is now Florida in the late 20th Century instead of Victorian England. Young Finn (Pip) finds an escaped convict Robert DeNiro whom he aids at first against his will.

Later on the rich and eccentric Anne Bancroft sends for him as a playmate companion for her niece Estella. After that good things just keep coming his way and Pip develops some Great Expectations about his prospects.

In the novel our protagonist Pip goes into business, but in this case young Finn now grown up Ethan Hawke becomes a painter and he gets a few unseen boosts up the ladder of success. He and Estella now Gwyneth Paltrow can't seem to live with each other or without each other. She goes for and against Hawke on a whim even at one point marrying someone else.

I don't object to the modernization of a classic, it might inspire some to check out the original article and that certainly is a worthy goal. But even in sacrificing Dickens's concern for social justice to make this a romance, the ending is changed. I think Dickens would most object to the ending in this film which most assuredly is not what Dickens wrote. The ending for Hawke and Paltrow could have been kept within the spirit of the original novel.

Robert DeNiro has now put his own interpretation on three classic movie portrayals of the past, Robert Mitchum in Cape Fear, Richard Widmark in Night And The City, and now Finlay Currie as the escaped convict Magwitch. His part is completely updated to 20th Century America and still it's in the spirit of what Dickens wrote for Magwitch.

This version of Great Expectations is a nice romantic film, but it's not in any way what Charles Dickens was writing about.

For beginning, Alfonso Cuarón is one of my favourite directors; and this work of him puts together a great cast of actors: Gwyneth Paltrow, Ethan Hawke, Robert De Niro, Chris Cooper and Anne Bancroft. British novelist Charles Dickens's novel "Great Expectations" is the resource for this successful adaptation. I have read the novel, and it's an autobiographical drama and humour. I also saw the 1946 silver-screen adaptation, which was boring and indifferent than this novel; and I think it was indifferent on its own, as well. On the other hand, Alfonso Cuarón's Great Expectations is a transformation of a drama/comedy work of art into a romance. Besides, Alfonso Cuarón used his materials perfectly through matching the relations of these materials between each other:

1- Ms.Dinsmoor and her oath of revenge against mankind, that composes feminism 2- Estella and her enchanting beauty, falling the trap of pride 3- Finn and his pure emotions, falling the trap of loving an insensitive beauty 4- The mysterious benefactor of Finn who bears compunction of his past actions in his life and thus is laying down all of his possessions to Finn, whom he knows as a good-hearted little kid

The screenplay is so powerful that solidifies the plot with new original features including surrealist drawings of Finn, that turns the movie a real work of art. Estella is the inspiration of Finn, of his love, of his work, of his success, of his life, ultimately of himself; that he finds and pursues the love of his life all the time. In addition, he stays loyal to Estella. There is the one great qualification of this movie that, lovers always stay loyal to each other.

Although Estella has dated with rich businessmen and even married with them, she have always known that Finn was there waiting for her with complete determination and faith. They soon to come together to live happily ever after, like all the wholeheartedly love endings or non-endings. Read my synopsis for this movie, if you haven't got any chance yet to see it.

I did not have any expectations before I saw this film, no pun intended, I had not read the book but am a fan of Hawke and Paltrow, and De Niro.

I enjoyed this movie, it had a style that I found compelling and Paltrow was simply dripping with sensuality. Paltrow and Hawke both shined in this evocative film and Bancroft and De Niro's parts were both well acted. 2 scenes stick in my head from the film, the scene of Finn and Estella at Finn's house and of them under the bridge.

This is not a Meg Ryan love story, this is a story of a girl raised by a tormented Aunt and a young man who thinks he has nothing to offer.

7 out of 10.

Thanks in part to this "bomb," it took me awhile to get around to looking at the good film presentation of this famous Charles Dickens story, the one directed by David Lean in the late 194-0s, the one that is actually on the book and not some blasphemous "modernization."

Regardless, the 1946 film was good movie-making; this is crap. That's putting it nicely.

Just listen to the profanity in the first 15 minutes of this movie and tell me you feel like your into a Dickens novel. Come on! I guess that's part of the "modernization" of the his literary classic. The only profanity allowed should be critics discussing this sorry mess. Dickens getting a gratuitous screen credit as an author must have had him rolling over in his grave.

The adventure of the original story is basically in this translation, which is mainly a love story. Since the female interest of "Pip" is not someone to admire or root for, it was better to have her as a minor character as in the '46 film, instead a major one here.

Also, this rich-is-evil story that Hollywood loves is so hypocritical it's laughable. Most of the people who make these films are filthy rich and squander a lot of their money....but preach nonetheless. And....there is not enough difference these days between "old" money and "new" money to base a story around that theme.

The only reason I didn't give this the minimum one star was the beautiful cinematography. That's what kept me going watching the movie. It's beautifully shot and I can only wish the story was half as good as the visuals.

Too many times we fall into the trap of comparing a movie with the book. Every director and every writer has a vision and we must judge that vision through their respective mediums. This film brings an unconventional theme to a society fascinated by what they cannot have. This film symbolizes just that. Standing on its own, this film was magnificent in its visual images and music and very many other areas. Do not be caught in that trap of comparing this film to the book. Dickens should never be compared to any screenwriter in the first place.

For the sake of my mom, I'll be kind in my review of the modern remake of Great Expectations. I watched it when I was far too young and wasn't able to appreciate much of it. When you look at it from a literary point of view (instead of a nine-year-old's) it's a very clever adaptation of the Charles Dickens classic to a modern American setting.

Pip (Finn in this version) is played by Ethan Hawke, a perfect choice, since he'd recently starred in Snow Falling on Cedars and Hamlet. He lives with his sister and her boyfriend Joe (modernized from husband), and instead of going "on the rampage" she upsets the homelife by being promiscuous. Robert De Niro plays Magwitch (Lustig in this version), an escaped convict who encounters the young boy. Anne Bancroft is Miss Havisham (Dinsmoor in this version), an eccentric, wealthy woman who trains her niece (not her ward) to protect her heart at the expense of others. Instead of hiring Pip as a playmate, which wouldn't make sense in a modern setting, Joe is hired for gardening (he's not a blacksmith in this version) and by chance Pip meets Estella. As the aspiration of "becoming a gentleman" doesn't apply to modern American thinking, Pip's ambition is to be a painter. I don't know how English audiences feel about this adaptation, but it's a valiant effort to connect with Americans.

Both Magwitch and Miss Havisham are highly sought after parts, and while in this version, Magwitch is still given a lot to do, Anne Bancroft's role is unfortunately censored. The one portion of the story that just can't translate to a modern setting no matter how much the screenwriter tries is the reason behind Miss Havisham's solitude. No one would consider herself a ruined woman and lose her mind because she was left at the altar. Today's attitudes towards relationships, marriage, and sex are completely different, so instead of the true character of Miss Havisham, she has to just be portrayed as an eccentric old lady.

If you love Great Expectations, you'll probably like this version, since it's obviously thoughtful and pays great attention to detail. The acting is great, so even if you don't like the changes, you'll still be entertained. Seeing Chris Cooper hurt just makes you want to cry, doesn't it?

I've not read the novel by Charles Dickens, and didn't know anything about the film's plot. Maybe the book is better, but I loved this movie. Almost two hours that looked like 30 minutes to me. Great characters and a great direction. Not to forget Robert De Niro role as the escaped prisoner. Adapting a novel to nowadays is always a dangerous work, you can loose some important parts in the process. Reading some other comments, I think Alfonso Cuaron did a good job, like placing Finn birth's place in a humble fishing village in the florida gulf. Gwyneth Paltrow and Anne Bancroft did a great playing, Ethan Hawke not too bad. Ah! And the children Finn/Estella did also a good work. A movie is worth to see. Don't miss it.

I saw this movie when it came out in 1998 and thought at the time, "this is the best movie I've ever seen" and that has not changed 20 years later. I love the cinematography, the colors, the music, the actors - it's all amazingly perfect!

I was not expecting a completely faithful adaptation of Dickens' book, it was made clear that this was a loose adaptation and I was expecting that. On its own terms, it is definitely worth the viewing, but I was a little underwhelmed considering the talent involved.

Great Expectations(1998) is certainly not a bad movie. It looks amazing, with gorgeous scenery and some of the best cinematography I've seen recently. The music is haunting and sweeping, complimenting the film wonderfully. The script has its frothy moments, but also moments of tension and wit. The supporting cast really help to carry the film, especially Anne Bancroft's haunting, deranged Mrs Dinsmoor and Robert DeNiro's caring criminal-type character in the name of Lustig.

However, I wasn't as convinced by the leads. Ethan Hawke and Gwyneth Paltrow look handsome certainly and their chemistry is okay, but overall I did find Hawke too sensitive and Paltrow too shallow. The story is loose as anticipated but also a rather clichéd poor-to-rich sort of story with some elements of draggy pacing and preachy tone. Alfonso Cuaron's direction was stylish certainly but forgets to give the film much substance and if anybody is looking for any of the basic underlying themes of the book you won't find much here sadly.

All in all, stunning and stylish visually with a great score and supporting cast but the direction I had mixed feelings about, the story is rather clichéd and doesn't have enough substance to make me forgive that and the two leads are unconvincing, in my opinion. 6/10 Bethany Cox

What makes a person love another? Can love be "created" or destroyed at will? Is it possible to manipulate someone's emotions? People change? These are some of the questions that Great Expectations asks us. And the interesting thing is that it doesn't bother to give us all the answers. Based on the book of the same name by Charles Dickens and tells the story of Finn (Ethan Hawke), a boy who grows up in the company of Estella (Gwyneth Paltrow), a rich girl who lives with her crazy aunt (Anne Bancroft). Over the years, Finn falls head over heels in love with Estella, even receiving "warnings" (actually, a statement) from the girl's aunt, that she will break his heart. Of course, a woman can make such a prediction: after all, she was abandoned by her fiance at the altar 30 years ago and dedicates her life to "training" Estella so that she will dominate and hurt all the men she has a relationship with. There is also a "subplot" involving the escape of a prison murderer (Robert De Niro) and his encounter with Finn.

Given the above, in Great Expectations, it is possible to see that three possible themes are present: the first, wealth and the desire for social ascension. The second, an epic journey in search of the love of a practically unattainable woman. The third, a denunciation of corruption and misrepresented values of high society, transferred from the Victorian era to 1998, the countdown time for the turn of the millennium. Some of these values were echoed in Tony Burrough's production design, coordinated around several expressive shades of green, in John Kasarda's art direction, in Judianna Makovsky's costumes and in Susan Bode's scenography.

The film begins with credits illustrated by several paintings in varied green tones. Later on, we will learn that the illustrations are the same ones made by Finn in his notebook and drawings. Later, a fade-in followed by a long shot defines the beginning of the story. We are introduced to little Finn, aged seven, on one of the family's boats, painting in his sketchbook. His shirt is green, in a light shade, as are the pencils he uses to color the drawings he makes. It is interesting to observe later that the green tones of Finn's clothes, as an adult, darken, in a game of changing tones as the character matures and transforms his personality.

After this brief preamble, Finn notices a figure immersed in the water, wearing a uniform of intense color that he had not yet identified. Soon, the mysterious figure gets up, grabs the boy and makes some requests, including tools and something to eat. Later, we will know that it is a fugitive from the police, Arthur Lustig (Robert De Niro). The sound of seagulls and Patrick Doyle's minimalist score is interrupted by a sudden drum roll, in a search for representation of the threatening presence of the escaped prisoner. When the night arrives, and a timid storm appears in the sky, Finn carries the items requested by the man and heads to the agreed place.

He delivers the tools and food. Satisfied the hunger of the fugitive who had not eaten well for some time. Finn fulfills his initial mission. The story now takes a different course: the first meeting between the boy and the girl who will become the woman of his life, Estella, played in adult life by Gwyneth Paltrow. In the transition between the acts, Steve Weisberg's edition stitches the narrative together with a variety of green threads, derived from the images captured by Emmanuel Lubezki's director of photography. That's when Finn meets Mrs. Dinsmoor (Anne Bancroft), owner of the "Paradiso Perduto" mansion. It is the setting where he will be little Estella's playmate throughout a memorable part of her childhood.

Mrs. Dinsmoor is an enigmatic being. So much hatred, anger and desire for revenge needs a starting point, a motivation, as we will know a little later, when Finn discovers that that bitter woman had been abandoned at the altar by her husband, doomed to perish inside the mansion, alone and frivolous. From there, she had already started to plant seeds that refer to the desire for social ascension, inducing Finn to think about painting for the rich, having their freedom, things that the limited life of Finn's family would not allow. The following scenes advance to the adult phase of the characters. Finn and Estella's first meeting in New York will repeat a poetic scene at a water fountain in childhood.

Mrs. Dinsmoor is an enigmatic being. So much hatred, anger and desire for revenge needs a starting point, a motivation, as we will know a little later, when Finn discovers that that bitter woman had been abandoned at the altar by her husband, doomed to perish inside the mansion, alone and frivolous. From there, she had already started to plant seeds that refer to the desire for social ascension, inducing Finn to think about painting for the rich, having their freedom, things that the limited life of Finn's family would not allow. The following scenes advance to the adult phase of the characters. Finn and Estella's first meeting in New York will repeat a poetic scene at a water fountain in childhood.

Finn is undoubtedly a puppet in the two women's game. All of his decisions come as reactions to the actions of Estella and her aunt. If he decides to "close" or "open up" to someone, if he tries to be cynical, if he wants to be alone or not, in short: his attitudes are motivated by an external element and not an internal one. It is precisely his passivity that makes him an active part of that "game" commanded by women. Now, without a doubt, the most curious and interesting element of the film is the insistence with which we listen to the song Besame Mucho. Pay attention to the lyrics: "Kiss me, kiss me a lot, like it was tonight, the last time". Because this is the gravitational center of the film: the ephemerality of love. No relationship, however solid it may seem, is stable in "Great Expectations". And I don't just mean Finn and Estella, or Ms. Dinsmoor and the fiancé who dumped her, but virtually every single relationship in the story: Finn's sister dumps her husband Joe early in the film; Finn abandons his roots to become a man "worthy" of Estella; Estella abandons her aunt; Finn abandons Joe; and so on. Nothing is safe here. Everything can change.

Among the coincidences in the script, some of which come from the Charles Dickens novel, there is Finn's reunion with none other than Arthur Lustig, a man who marked his childhood. To make himself recognized, the former fugitive, now elderly, uses the same phrases as the first meeting. Without making use of a direct flashback, the production refers us only to the sound of seagulls and green birds from an apartment furniture that appear next to Finn. Still in this dialogue, Arthur Lustig confesses to having been Finn's benefactor and responsible for everything uplifting that happened in the boy's life, claiming that he did this because the boy was the only person who did something good for him in his youth. Other events lead the characters to a happy ending, something very similar to the inspiring literary work. It is important to note that John Kasarda's art direction thought in detail about the use of the color green, in an attempt to reinforce the verbs that guide this audiovisual sentence: hope, freedom and maturity.

Hawke and Paltrow's performances are understated, which is convenient for the film. Anne Bancroft, on the other hand, draws attention for her far-fetched and, at times, exaggerated interpretation. If "Great Expectations" were not a fable - which I have no doubt it is - Bancroft would be out of place, which it is not: it fits the "spirit" of the film. By the way, director Cuarón sets a certain standard here. After all, how to avoid the comparison between Ms. Dinsmoor from this film and (another spinster) Miss Minchin from his last film, "The Little Princess"?. With a beautiful photograph (the "Paradiso Perduto" is magnificent) and a correct direction, the film still has an interesting soundtrack, which varies from melodious and subtle chords to strong and sensual beats. However, the narrative encounters a major problem in the fact that it has to cover several years of the characters' lives, getting a little "rushed" at times, without dwelling a little more deeply on important points in the story. Thus, we, the spectators, are lost, as we cannot more coherently follow the changes the protagonists go through over time.

The screenplay, adapted by Mitch Glazer, manages to capture the essence of the original work, maintaining the narrative structure and central themes. It addresses social and psychological issues, exploring ambition, the search for identity, unrequited love and the consequences of personal choices. The film delves into the emotional layers of the characters, presenting their motivations and inner conflicts in an engaging way. Patrick Doyle's score is another highlight of the film, with moving compositions that complement the scenes and elevate viewers' emotions. Music is used with subtlety and precision, accentuating moments of tension, romance and reflection.

However, despite these minor caveats, "Great Expectations" is a remarkable film adaptation that masterfully captures the essence of Charles Dickens's novel. Alfonso Cuarón's direction, along with the cast's engaging performances and stunning cinematography, create a visually rich and emotionally deep experience. The film manages to explore timeless themes such as love, ambition and redemption. The film managed to capture exactly the feeling brought by the book: the messages, the sensations and even the frustrations. And the eternal doubt: after all, did Estella ever feel something for the passionate Finn?

The visuals in the movie are quite stunning, this is a movie to be savored, let it carry you away on a journey. It's fantasy, yet so real. Who wouldn't want to live this motto? Let desire be your destiny. Who hasn't had their heart broken yet found it impossible to ever really stop loving their object of desire? Who hasn't felt such an intense and overwhelming need for someone only to be cast aside by them. And then you see them again, and you would do anything for just one moment with them.

This is a story of desire, love, envy, and pain. A story of searching for what one desperately needs and as soon as it comes within reach not knowing how to accept it, pushing it away. The great expectations we all have for ourselves, our future and for some reason deny ourselves ever actually receiving the rewards.

There are lessons to be learned here.

The two lead actors are wrong for this...so were behind the 8 ball before we pick up the cue. Ethan Hawke does not have the screen presence for this, and he is exposed badly. The Estelle character needed to be sexy and beautiful....Gwyneth Paltrow is neither. Hank Azaria is the only actor here who gives a good performance. The script is painfully predictable, and quite simply the idea of making this Charles Dickens Classic in modern day America ..does not work on any level. When Hawke is frantically painting Paltrow (with absurd pop music playing) it becomes so bad.....its funny. There are no memorable moments in this, and when De Niro turns up near the end, farce is in the air. A movie to avoid....if you can.