There have been so many Great Expectations films, it's hard to keep them straight! The good news is usually big names flock to the adaptations, so it's easy to remember them as the "John Mills one," or in this case, the "Michael York one."In the Michael York version, several other big stars of the 1970s joint together for Charles Dickens's classic novel about striving to become a gentleman: Sarah Miles plays Estella, Margaret Leighton plays Miss Havisham, Joss Ackland plays Joe Gargery, Anthony Quayle plays Jaggers, Robert Morley plays Uncle Pumblechook, and James Mason plays Magwitch. While it's wonderful to see James Mason lend his talents to the heartwrenching role of Magwitch, I always wondered why he wasn't cast as Pip in the "John Mills version". He would have been the right age and had the right talents for the part.This version is very "seventies" in the way it was filmed and edited, but there are some good parts to it. This is the only version I've seen where the character Biddy teaches Pip how to read; it's not necessary, but it is an interesting part of the story. Michael York has the wide-eyed innocence required for Pip, and if you can get past Sarah Miles, you can pretend he has other motivations and root for him. Great Expectations is my mom's favorite book, so she always recruits me to rent every version known to man. Unless this is also your motivation, just check out the cast lists and pick whichever version you think you'll like.

I remember being assigned to read Charles Dickens' novel, "Great Expectations," as an English major in college. I think this movie would have greatly enhanced my understanding of the story. The film has a first rate cast featuring a rising star, Michael York, as the adult Pip. Miss Havisham is played by the late great British actress, Margaret Leighton. Sarah Miles played Estella in this film. I loved Leighton's performance as Miss Havisham, the mysterious woman who lived in a mansion in a small English village with Estella, her adopted daughter. The first rate cast features plenty of great actors and actresses mostly British such as Joss Ackland, James Mason, Anthony Quayle, Heather Sears, Rachel Roberts, and even Tom Owen has a scene in there as taunting adult Pip. The quality is decent and the film was done in Elstree Studios long before East-Enders in Bedfordshire, England.

This made-for-television production obviously doesn't follow the book too closely. The novel brims with sub plots and details of the period. I know this not because I've ever read it but because I once saw it in a library, took the book down, and hefted it in my hands before deciding I wasn't up to tackling it. I was just recovering from a traumatic experience with "War and Peace." But the movie is nothing to be ashamed of. Oh, it's not as taut and dramatic as David Lean's earlier version, which is compact and superb, but it has its virtues.One of them is Sarah Miles -- not so much her performance as the bitchy Estella, but the fact that in her first scenes she passes adequately for a post-pubescent teen ager. This is remarkable because she was a post-pubescent teen ager ten or fifteen years earlier in both "Term of Trial" and "The Servant." She's mean enough, but doesn't quite project the same genuine haughtiness of Jean Simmons in David Lean's film.Michael York is adequate as the blacksmith's apprentice turned snob turned Mensh. The Oxford-educated York seems to handle the accent well. Joss Ackland is a proud, benign presence. He had yet to develop the jowls he displays and wobbles so threateningly in later villainous roles, like the Commisar in "Citizen X." James Mason -- this is quite a cast, isn't it? -- James Mason is the rude and murderous Magwitch and handles the part surprisingly well, given that his criminal persona is usually so suave and ironic. Anthony Quayle, a great Shakespearean, is lawyer Jaggers and Peter Bull appears in a small role. Margaret Leighton is fine as the tragic Miss Havisham.It all ends happily or, at least, justly. In the final scene York manages to convince Miles that she should give up the notion of re-living Miss Havisham's life and marry him instead, and he prints on her soft cheek a lover's kiss.Yet it's all a little depressing. Dickens is almost always a little depressing. What are the themes he deals with so relentlessly, after all? Poverty, wealth, inheritance, greed, pride, social class, power, parentage. No one was more graphic about being poor and to see it in living color on the screen isn't exactly uplifting. Dickens himself was born poor and knows whereof he speaks. During a visit to the United States he had a chat with Edgar Allan Poe. One can only wonder what in God's name they had to talk about.

The story is hardly any close to what the book has. The acting is pretty dull, not interesting at all. Even Pumblechook and Jaggars (who seemed to be put in as a comical figure then a shrewed one) bored me with their performance. The only character that stuck to the book was Miss Havisham. Michael York's performance is not a good one but the way Estella, Biddy and Joe are portrayed is hardly any better. Those three characters are completely against the characters in the book- they are much older then they should be.For those of you who might want to watch this movie instead of the book for a class, don't even bother. The plot is so far off and you miss tons of important events. You're also probably going to have much better time reading the book then watching this movie. The movie is just as tedious and wordy as the book and the plot is way off.