User Reviews

It is hard to compare this version or any other version of Great Epacation because of the numerous ones made ,and the fact that they were all made in different time periods. The main idea though is to get the point of the novel across. This version does this in a very timely manner as well as appealing. While it may not be a blockbuster it is a fair interpretation of the movie. It should not be taken lightly. It is in fact a great movie for the use in teaching of the book. Were is in the place I view this fine production. Even though it is not the best I want to reinforce again it should not be forgotten ,and should be remembered as a classic.

GREAT EXPECTATIONS (Universal, 1934), directed by Stuart Walker, became the studio's contribution to the current trend of classic literature captured on film. With Louisa May Allcott's LITTLE WOMEN (RKO, 1933) and Charles Dickens' oft-told tale of OLIVER TWIST (Monogram, 1933) having reached the screen, it would be a matter of time before other literary works would be retold in celluloid, particularly those by Dickens. Universal other contribution, THE MYSTERY OF EDWIN DROOD (1935) would soon join MGM's masterful adaptations with both 1935 releases of David COPPERFIELD and A TALE OF TWO CITIES, each outdoing all previous attempts on Dickens thus far, even to a point of earning Academy Award nominations as Best Picture, while the Universal carnations are literally well made, though not accurately retold from the book, they're close to being virtually forgotten.

As with David COPPERFIELD, GREAT EXPECTATIONS is told in two parts, first with its central character as a boy before moving forward to the same character as a man. Set in England during the 19th Century, the story opens in a gloomy churchyard cemetery where the sad-faced Pip (Georgie Breakston) visits the graves of his dearly departed parents and siblings. He is soon confronted by an escaped convict later revealed as Abel Magwich (Henry Hull) who, after learning his sister's husband, Joe (Alan Hale), is a blacksmith, asks him to meet him the following morning with food, drink and a file to break his chains. At home, Pip is mistreated by his older but stern sister (Rafaela Ottiano), upon being forced to drink the dreaded tar water, but is well liked by his good-matured brother-in-law, Joe. Sneaking out of the house to keep his promise to the convict with his sister's pork-pie, brandy and file, Pip, in turn, no longer fears the convict, but pities him. After his capture and arrest, and before being sent back to prison, Magwich, to assure Pip won't be punished for doing a good deed, tells Joe that it was he who stole his food and file. Pip then cries as he watches Magwich being shipped back to prison. Later on, hoping to acquire extra money, Mrs. Joe and Pip's uncle, Pumblechook (Forrester Harvey), arrange for Pip to become a part-time companion to the ward of the richest woman in the county, Jane Havisham's (Florence Reed). Aside from seeing the neglected mansion full of frightful surroundings, with a reception room and wedding cake covered by cobwebs, Miss Havisham, dressed in wedding gown, introduces the boy to Estella (Anne Howard). Estella, taught to dislike and mistrust all males, verbally abuses Pip to a point of tears, but after winning a fight with the neighboring Herbert (Jackie Searle), Estella, who still finds Pip to be common, allows him to kiss her. Years later, the adult Pip (Phillips Holmes), has grown to love with the sophisticated Estella (Jane Wyatt), regardless of her continued verbal put-downs. Through a lawyer named Jaggers (Francis L. Sullivan), Pip finds that an unknown benefactor has arranged for him to rise from hard-working blacksmith to sophisticated gentleman of great expectations. A series of unforeseen circumstances based on "chance acquaintances" would soon take effect on his life.

Of the numerous screen adaptations of GREAT EXPECTATIONS, none come any better than David Lean's 1946 British-made production starring John Mills. While the 1934 version has never achieved the sort of lasting impression had it been produced by MGM rather than Universal, it's attempt, though well-conceived, has become the most overlooked and ignored of its screen adaptations. Henry Hull, who heads the cast, is generally a supporting role, the one whose character is unseen for a 40 minute stretch before reappearing again. His performance as the convict is excellent throughout. No problem there. Georgie Breakston does splendidly as young Pip, though, for playing a British lad makes no attempt of speaking with British accent. He briefly spoils it when using the American slang term of "ain't." Phillips Holmes role might have been better served had it been played by either a Douglas Fairbanks Jr. or Frank Lawton ("David Cooperfield"). Regardless, the resemblance between Breakston and Holmes are close enough to be physically the same character from boy to man. The same can be said of Anne Howard and Jane Wyatt. While Wyatt is acceptable as Estella, Anne Howard's poor acting and obnoxious overtones weakens the story. Valerie Hobson, credited last in the opening and closing credits as Biddy, is a character talked about but never seen mainly because Biddy was edited from the final print. Hobson not only appeared opposite Henry Hull in the now horror classic, WEREWOLF OF London (1935), but enacted the role of Estella in the 1946 remake. Francis L. Sullivan would also appear in the Lean production, reprising his original role of Jaggers. Other members of the cast include George Barrard (Compeyson); Eily Malyon (Sarah Pocket), and Philip Dakin (Bently Drummle). Try to locate the uncredited Walter Brennan appearing briefly as one of the convicts in the boat.

Seldom revived since the 1980s when presented on public television or on Chicago-based WGN-TV's Sunday afternoon presentation of "Family Classics" (Thanksgiving weekend 1988) hosted by Roy Leonard. Regardless of its 1998 distribution to home video, the 1934 version of GREAT EXPECTATIONS may not be great nor faithful adaptation to the Dickens book, but manages in getting by with whatever expectations it has during its 102 minutes. (***)

This may be one of the weaker versions of the Dickens classic but by all means not the worst, that's the 1974 version which felt like a musical- oddly enough that version was intended to be that- but without the songs. It is a good looking film, though the opening graveyard scene was too studio-bound for personal tastes, there is at least a sense of time and place convincingly and handsomely rendered and the photography and lighting are good(the one exception is the hideously garish make-up for Florence Reed). Admittedly the music is on the syrupy side, but in a beautifully lush way rather than an overly treacly one. The adaptation at least tries to respect the book, with the literate way the script is written and with the faithful structure, and it gets the point of the book out well enough.

It's not devoid of decent performances too, the cast is an uneven one but not without bright spots. Coming off best is Henry Hull as Magwitch(for me the second most interesting character of the book after Miss Havisham), who plays with real gusto and menace without being too hammy or sinister, though you do feel for him by the end as well. Francis L. Sullivan is firm and occasionally jovial as Jaggers should be, though he is more memorable in the definitive David Lean film. Florence Reed is a haunting Miss Havisham, though much more could have been done with Miss Havisham's cruelty towards Pip(which is more a writing problem than with Reed).

Phillip Holmes however is very stiff as Pip and Jane Wyatt while with an alluring appearance is rather plain and too sympathetic as Estella, with next to none of the icy haughtiness coming out. But the biggest problem with the film is that, while not exactly dull(the pacing is reasonably good actually) unlike the 1974 film, atmospherically it is somewhat bland. There could have been more suspense, more drollness and more mystery, and there is a sense that the film didn't know what to do with some of the characters. Magwitch is fine and the only main character that is somewhat completely unscathed, but with the retrospective and more remorseful approach that the book had not so apparent in this adaptation I didn't find myself quite identifying with Pip in the same way. And Miss Havisham is written nowhere near as eccentric or cruel enough, disappointing seeing as it is those that makes the character so memorable, though Reed still brings those qualities across. The graveyard scene is a disappointment, there is too much of a studio-bound quality, atmospherically and visually, and there is no real intensity or atmosphere, something that was done to unsurpassed effect in Lean's film. The ending is also bungled, few of the adaptations of Great Expectations have had convincing endings but the ending here felt far too sentimentalised. Overall, not so great and one of the weaker adaptations of a classic but difficult book but it is at least watchable. 5/10 Bethany Cox

This 1934 version of "Great Expectations", directed by Stuart Walker, has been largely ignored because it pales in comparison with the masterpiece that David Lean made from the same story in the 40's. By comparison, this earlier version is plain and undistinguished, but it is not a bad film in its own right. It is a faithful rendering of the Dickens novel, which is a fascinating story that in itself makes any reasonable movie version worth watching.

The main thing that limits the effectiveness of this version is that most of the acting is so routine. Dickens' characters are always very distinctive (if not peculiar), and to be most effective in a movie they must be slightly exaggerated. Characters like Pip, Magwitch, Miss Havisham, and Estella all have quirks and/or inner conflicts that are very important in making the story work. That is what made David Lean's two adaptations of Dickens stories such brilliant films - he was able to get his actors to portray the characters in exactly the way Dickens created them. But here, only Henry Hull as Magwitch fully realizes the potential of his character.

Still, the story itself is told well enough. The novel was one of Dickens' best, a brilliant study of the main characters: Pip, whose entire life depends on a stroke of good fortune that he misunderstands; Miss Havisham, who spends her whole life reliving one awful experience from her youth; Estella, torn between Pip's warm innocence and Miss Havisham's cold psychological cruelty; Magwitch, desperately trying to leave behind something positive after a sordid, dishonorable life. Although this film version does not realize the full potential of all of these characters, it does at least make sure that we can see who they are, and can ponder the possibilities for ourselves.

The great Lean version of "Great Expectations" is now very hard to find, and for those who like Dickens' stories, this version, while by no means a worthy replacement, is at least a watchable substitute.

The 1934 version of Great Expectations is generally overlooked and dismissed by connoisseurs of the classic story. If it were remastered and put into the Criterion Collection, like the 1946 version, I think it would hold its own.

The start of the 1934 and 1946 versions are nearly identical. Young Georgie Breakston meets the frightening convict Henry Hull in the graveyard while visiting his dead family. He gets Henry the requested "vittles" and cries as he sees him dragged away by the police. Joe Gargery, played by Alan Hale, makes faces at the boy to cheer him up when Mrs. Joe, Rafaela Ottiano, goes "on the rampage". The movies only diverge when Pip meets Miss Havisham, but all in all, they're still very similar. The same actor, Francis Sullivan, even plays Jaggers in both versions!

You're going to have to accept the fact that this version hasn't been remastered. The picture is a bit fuzzy, and the dialogue is even fuzzier. If you can get past that, you'll be in a much better position to appreciate it. Georgie Breakman and Phillips Holmes perfectly represent the younger and older versions of each other; I haven't been able to make up my mind which one was trying to imitate the other! Jane Wyatt is stunningly beautiful as the adult Estella, and as she proves she could have easily handled Dora in the following year's David Copperfield.

Florence Reed has a different interpretation of Miss Havisham, but I really liked it-especially when compared to other ladies who made absolute fools of themselves. Henry Hull (in the only movie I've ever seen him to get first billing!) shines as Magwitch. He's unrecognizable and puts on a thick Cockney accent, and his thin frame and desperate movements make him naturally believable as the convict. You'll be hard-pressed to find a Henry Hull movie where he's the lead, so rent this one to see him in full force.

DLM Warning: If you suffer from vertigo or dizzy spells, like my mom does, this movie might not be your friend. When Henry Hull comes to the apartment and flaps him arms from the cold, the camera tilts for a few seconds, and it will make you sick. In other words, "Don't Look, Mom!"

This is perhaps the worst film version of a Dickens novel ever made by a major studio. All of the dramatic power of the story is drowned in syrupy music and mostly mediocre to awful acting. Phillips Holmes is terrible as the adult Pip. Holmes, never a good actor, is alternately stiff and hammy.

Henry Hull, usually quite enjoyable when hammy, and actually quite good normally, is unsatisfying compared to Finlay Currie as Magwitch (Currie appeared in the classic 1946 David Lean film). Jane Wyatt conveys nothing of the icy-yet sympathetic haughtiness of Estella. Florence Reed is just fair as Miss Havisham, especially when compared with Martita Hunt's absolutely unforgettable 1947 performance, and Francis L.Sullivan showed much more enthusiasm playing Jaggers in the 1946 film.

About two years ago I had written a review of this fine film and wanted to add a footnote. It seems easier to begin again with a few pertinent comments, so I wanted to mention that this is my favorite version of the film. Although I like the David Lean version from '46, this is the one I prefer. I love the lovely casting of the characters, the beautiful sets and charming music depicting new events in the life of the orphan boy, Pip.

About 30 years ago my husband and I enjoyed this film from a Family Festival, like it mentions here. It was on one weekend and was shown in its entirety. Shortly afterwards, I needed a blank tape at a moment's notice, and taped over it. A real mistake, because all subsequent screenings have cut out Valerie Hobson's part entirely as Biddy, governess to Pip. She was also the nurse to Mrs. Jo, Pip's sister.

Also missing is a scene of the vengeful man who worked in the forge for Pip's brother-in-law. In this scene we learn that he had struck Pip's sister with a block of iron, and this is why they needed a nurse for Mrs Jo and a governess to Pip. Enter Biddy, who performed both functions ably.

Although the film still works without those scenes, the more cohesive pattern is of course with them. They are essentially key to the story, like vital links in a chain.

I am a collector of period pieces and try to understand why they would cut a film which was depicted so well. A real mystery to me is that they would do this fifty years after the fact! My husband and I think there were 2 films sent to the movie studio that day, and the one we saw was complete. Upon subsequent screenings, I taped the movie 2 or 3 more times to no avail. In future it was impossible to obtain the film complete.

The American Film Institute book states that Valerie Hobson's part was deleted from the scenes in Great Expectations, 1934, This is incomprehensible to me. We have all heard of movies being cut before screening, but this film was clearly shown with the scenes up at least until somewhere in the 1980's. This was not to make way for commercials, as the eventual commercial release on Video, and later DVD, etc. is the 1 hour and 43 minutes (which lacks the scenes).

Although Valerie Hobson was fairly new to the movie world, she would shortly co-star in The Werewolf of London and The Mystery of Edwin Drood. Her fine screen presence and sincere acting enhanced many a 1930s film.

Thank you all for reading this. I have been on the trail for about 30 years now, searching for the complete film. If anyone knows where I can find it, please e-mail me (Janet) at MCannady1@Verizon.net. In retrospect, I should have called the TV station the next day to see if I could obtain the complete VHS, but never thought of doing so.

This said, I hope to find someone who knows where I can get a copy of the film on DVD or VHS. I just picked up a clue when Roy Leonard's name was mentioned as host of the TV Station. I had read this in a general description of the film, along with the comment about it being shown incomplete most of the time.

This first sound adaptation of Dickens' 'Great Expectations' is sorely lacking anything connected with Charles Dickens. Phillips Holmes is a fine actor and he puts all that he can into the hackneyed script. Miss Havisham is played in a sentimental manner and she actually shows kindness. Jane Wyatt is also sympathetic! Her coldness, which she talks about with Miss Havisham, is lacking in action. This would all be fine if it were an original story but it is purportedly 'Great Expectations'! Stick with David Lean's far superior film and the BBC mini-series actually made in Britain. It is no wonder that Phillips Holmes left to make most of his final films in the UK after being disgusted with this film.

There have been too many adaptations of Great Expectations and other Dickens classics that have failed to miss the fact that the eminent Victorian author's novels were not intended as sentimental, romantic fairytales but as scathing criticisms of the less-than-progressive aspects of life in 19th century Britain,namely the exploitation of the impoverished masses by the hypocritical idle rich. This 1934 travesty is about as accurate a realization of Dickens' original vision as Free Willy is a realization of Melville's vision for Moby-Dick. The scenes involving young Pip are played out like an Our Gang comedy complete with cloying music and the rest of it is filled with wooden acting,overly high key lighting, and an abundance of peculiarly well-fed poor people- this last aspect a phenomenon that plagued other mis-begotten Dickens farces of the '30s such as Monogram's Oliver Twist and the MGM A Christmas Carol. Every time this shows up on cable(a rarity at least in Madison,thank God) or is borrowed from a library,Dickens must do a backflip in his grave. All said, if you want to see DICKENS' Great Expectations stick with the Lean version or the respectable 1989 Disney version.Leave this one to rot in Miss Havisham's wedding cake.