Thackeray prefaced his book with a short piece apparently explaining that the characters were just "puppets" who lived, ate and made love in a (fictional?) world that was neither moral nor immoral. Some have taken this at face value. However the book is generally seen as a savage satire and even today the appearance of Knight of the Realm, Sir Pitt Crawley, is rather shocking in that the reader just as much as the characters in the book, mistake him for a footman or even watchman such are his appearance and manners - breaking a convention that other Victorian writers such as Dickens and Trollope strictly observed. In the opening chapter the exceedingly disrespectful young Becky Sharp is again a character set against the Victorian archetype. Neither virtuous nor fallen woman (generally the literary alternatives at the time), Becky Sharp fights her way through life using her sharpness of perception and her bodily attractions - sometimes winning, sometimes losing badly.Thackeray portrays a world where people can and do behave badly and act grossly. They are though not puppets - satire is not the portrayal of puppets, rather a clear-sighted, uncharitable and somewhat exaggerated version of reality. Thackeray is writing without rosy spectacles. The virtuous do not necessarily live happily ever after and the bad go unpunished. The weak, it seems, go to the wall. His preface then should be seen as a disingenuous disclaimer to quiet and fob off those who took exception to the sourness of his portrayal of humanity. But the book stands on its own two feet. The real Becky Sharp, on the make and none too scrupulous, existed then, she exists today, as do all the other characters but it requires the removal of the rose-tinted spectacles to see them - and perhaps some courage to write about them too.This production plays the story entirely straight - an excellent cast portraying their characters realistically and without exaggeration, living according to their respective values and the hand Life deals them. It is left to the titles - the visuals and the music - to sound a ripe raspberry at their antics - and to remind us that this is not a puppet show but a sharp satire on how some people lived in England 200 years ago.A pretty fine cast, not all though got an opportunity to shine, but memorable were Jeremy Swift as a perspiring great dumpling Jos Sedley; an unsmiling, uncharming and unsightly Lord Steyne, removing the noble from the nobility; Philip Glennister as the ever reliable Dobbin; Nathaniel Parker as the dashing officer/adventurer snared by adventuress, Becky Sharp. The problem however I had with Natasha Little was that she was no seductress, there was no sweetness (however false) that surely would have been an essential weapon in her fight to get what she wanted? Perhaps the book does not make clear the nature of her appeal to men, only her will, her lack of scruples and the mixed success she had. Was she too sharp to successfully mask it with sweetness? Was her practical, cool matter-of-factness attractive? Perhaps for all his sharp observation, Thackeray did not have intimate knowledge of such aggressively ambitious women? Nobody mentions adapter Andrew Davies? Probably because he has done his job so well that nobody notices. I rather doubt there will be a better version.

As the name suggests Vanity fair is about pretensions and showing off vanity. The backdrop is London and the age is early 19th century. William Makepeace Thackray has written an unbelievable piece of literature and this film does justice to the great story of human imperfections. Story in my opinion is a complete opposite of 'Dr Jekyl and Mr Hyde'. Dr Jekyl and Mr Hyde suggests that there is no pure good but there is pure evil while this story says that there is no pure good or pure evil. Whatever the truth is the film brings out the flavor of the time and intention of the film clearly on screen. I watched all six episodes of 50 minutes each in a single day. I was really mesmerized by the story and the direction. Actors are very good, characterization is very deep and every episode has a surprise element to it. Story doesn't finish until the last scene is over. I think it is just right neither overdone nor underplayed. There are certain flaws like actors don't age even after 10-12 years but the story is so good that you see them as grown up men and women psychologically. I think all the actors were fine. Story was really supported by very good actors. Natasha Little was a delight to watch as a lady with grey shades. I haven't read the novel or knew anything about it. I had to chose between Mira Nair's 'Vanity Fair' and this one. It was easy I have left Mira Nair's 3 films in the middle including 'Kama Sutra'. Imagine how boring things can get. The film is really good but novel has to be a masterpiece.

I haven't seen the new version (it's not out in the theaters yet here), but the fuss led me to re-watch the DVD of the mini-series. I agree with the comments that this is not the top-of-the-drawer BBC miniseries, although there are some very dramatic scenes, particularly as the venue of the film shifts to Brussels in the lead-up to Waterloo. Natasha Little is indeed bewitching as Becky Sharp, a slippery character if ever there was one, and it will be interesting to see how Reese Witherspoon will cope with this role. Perhaps since Ms. Little is much less well-known than Ms. Witherspoon, she has more scope for creating a unique image of the ambitious Becky Sharp. I look forward to the comparison.

I enjoyed Vanity Fair. However, it probably won't be on my top ten list of mini-series to watch. I love Andrew Davies work, but the character of Becky Sharp was dialogued rather sparsely. How many times can Ms. Sharp "look sultry and seductive" instead of speaking? The stand-outs in the cast are the man who played William Dobbins (Phillip Glenister) and Joss Sedley (Jeremy Swift).