In my opinion, the early movie versions of the Dickens novels stand out against the countless others. For one thing, they are produced in black and white, and seem to capture more of the authentic angst and fear that existed at that time. Many films today give us a more sanitized version of these works. Don't get me wrong. There have been some nice pieces done, but the bleakness of Victorian England really shows through here. Of course, this is the classic plot, where a man, Darnay, whose life has been upended, tries to go on with life, knowing that the Revolution creates incredible danger to him. We then have Sydney Carton, who has led a life of profligacy and has been weak when push came to shove. He carries a torch for Lucy Manette, but it is unrequited and hopeless. There are greats scenes of the citizenry and the venom (a rightful venom) that they carry in them. The problem with revolution is that the innocent are often punished when they have no skin in the game. This is so, and the mob scenes are stunning, though incredibly frightening. Ultimately, this is about a man who for one powerful moment has the opportunity to turn a worthless life into something meaningful. My hesitation about an afterlife and rewards in heaven aren't those of the man of which I speak. It is interesting to compare the casting of this film with other versions. I think this will stand the test of time. Granted, all Dickens books are filled with subplots and characters not seen here, but that's what movie producers and writers must constantly face.
Review of A Tale of Two Cities
