Nicholas Nickleby (2002) - Adventure, Drama, Romance

Hohum Score

7

Engaging

A young, compassionate man struggles to save his family and friends from the abusive exploitation of his cold-heartedly grasping uncle.

IMDB: 7.1
Director: Douglas McGrath
Stars: Charlie Hunnam, Jamie Bell
Length: 132 Minutes
PG Rating: PG
Reviews: 13 out of 101 found boring (12.87%)

One-line Reviews (57)

This is what I feel Douglas McGrath has done with Charles Dickens' Nicholas Nickleby, a two hour thought-provoking period film with an all-star ensemble cast of some of Britain and Hollywood's finest thespians and a climactic, unexpected, spiritual ending.

Nicholas finds himself in a world full of colorful characters some of them sinister, some of them sweet, and most of them very exciting.

Love unexpected warms the heart.

The trailer has such a fun tempo - it certainly beckons one to go see it and have an enjoyable time.

It is quite predictable that almost all his difficulties are created by his uncle.

Jamie Bell's performance is drab, drab, drab in comparison.

The conversation is too long and some are unnecessary.

Enjoyable film .

A Dickens adapted period drama with good performances, an engaging story, a bawdy sense of humour and a sprawling production budget.

This is an absolutely well-acted,well-directed and an entertaining adaptation a Dickens serial.

What comes out is something good to look at but tastes bland and horrible.

Stunning photography, outrageous characters and a powerful, emotional story: that's Nicholas Nickleby, the 2002 adaptation from the famous book by Charles Dickens.

Its contented in gently spinning an delightfully entertaining yarn.

Bar Mr Hunnam the acting is excellent and there is some very entertaining dialogue.

I usually agree with critics of overly literal book adaptations on screen--- they can be too fussy, and a bit tedious.

Charlie Hunnam has been accused of blandness as Nicholas: indeed, he is guilty truly only of the crimes of sweetness, goodness, and stunning good looks.

But when realization ineluctably dawns, Plummer's intense acting blasts from the screen figuratively lowering the theater temperature with a gripping chill.

In today's society film makers seem determined to role out films which lack true imagination, and sincerity, films which are easily predictable and I find myself constantly thinking `it's been done.

The screenplay was disorganized and the interactions between characters were either trite or overly dramatic.

This film shows that the search for love is filled with many detours and sometimes love is found in the most unexpected places.

Overall--- this is really a very watchable and entertaining movie.

I compare this quite light Dickens film to the grindingly grim and exciting tension of some notable Dickens' adaptations I've particularly liked - Our Mutual Friend, David Copperfield, Tale of Two Cities,Little Dorritt 2 versions, Bleak House 2 versions.

Adults and children alike will find the characters both entertaining and admirable, and will be able to distinguish the movie's thesis: you reap what you sow.

Though it sounds like it could be frightfully dull, this film is not.

And to reinforce this point, I don't remember a damn thing from that, because it was so boring.

It's a compelling look at the very root of evil and the eventual downfall it brings to a man enslaved by it.

The story taken from the book put together a sentimental and trite plot that would not give a proper idea of Dickens' original story.

Its cast is superb, from the intense protagonist down to bit players and walk-ons.

As to the actual movie per se, it is plodding, patchy, and utterly uninspiring.

I really enjoyed it.

Lovely film, well worth watching .

And yet so much that Dickens tells us is ultimately true, and a healthy corrective to the empty picture a contemporary world-view provides.

He fully intended them to be ponderous, full of life-changing lessons and morals.

Well, good intention, but a bit preachy and boring.

This adaptation of the novel proves to be both original and entertaining.

The story is still engrossing, the characters are still interesting and the pace is fine.

Its a simple and enjoyable cinematic tonic that will soothe your pressure cooked heart and release those pesky bottled blues.

Sentimental and trite .

However, I must say that I was pleasantly surprised with this entertaining enchanting film based on the Dickens novel.

The evil characters are entertaining, and good characters, admirable.

I would highly recommend it to both Dickens enthusiasts and those who simply enjoy morality plays.

I highly recommend it and not only to die hard Dickens fans.

Dickens wrote Nicholas Nickleby for serial publication so its disjointed episodic nature was acceptable.

It's not bad - it's not the RSC production everyone unfairly compares it to, but it's as entertaining as a 2 hour version can be expected to be.

Folks who thought it was too slow are probably attention deficit disorder sufferers, and one must not mock the afflicted, so let's not criticize their intolerance for artsy character and situation development.

Jamie Bell shed all memories of Billy Elliot and deserves citation for his initially cringing performance as a crippled boy trapped in a torture house cum boarding school (don't ask).

Nicholas Nickleby is just as worthwhile and quite entertaining.

His rages seemed completely contrived, his smiles and tender moments were never sincere.

Entertaining and heartwarming.

Christopher Plummer is worth watching as the wicked uncle.

He's hugely enjoyable.

It's enjoyable for all.

Bored the dickens out of me .

In fact, everyone involved in the making of 'Nicholas Nickelby' should take a bow for converting such a fun, entertaining novel into such a fun, entertaining film.

Worth watching!

After the unexpected death of his father,Nicholas watched over his mother and his sister Kate.

This is one of the darkest and most depressing, perverted, bizarre, pointless, meandering, bitter revenge stories ever to emerge as a PG-rated period costume drama.