THE PERSONAL HISTORY OF DAVID COPPERFIELD delivers, but may not live up to my great expectations

The Personal History of David Copperfield has been part of a parade of ‘oh-wow-are-they-making-a-movie-of-that-again?’ literary classic film adaptations to roll through the theaters (or, perhaps, our at-home-theaters) in the last 12 months. Last winter audiences were treated to Greta Gerwig’s highly successful Little Women, and the spring ushered in Autumn de Wilde’s somewhat mixed adaptation of Emma.  Of all of them, my expectations might have been highest for Copperfield, though; combining the razor sharp cynicism of a creator like Armando Iannucci (Veep, In the Loop) with the classic and timeless sensibility of Charles Dickens seemed like an unstoppable combination.

The Personal History of David Copperfield stars Dev Patel as the titular David Copperfield, a young man who grows up to know triumph and tragedy in equal measure after losing both of his parents at a young age. When Copperfield’s abusive father-in-law sends him away to work, he bounces between various families and homes, developing close friendships spanning the vast social and economic classes in England. He lives with a kind conman known as Mr. Micawber (Peter Capaldi) who is constantly evading debt collectors, wealthy aunt Betsey Trotwood (Tilda Swinton) and her friend Mr. Dick (Hugh Laurie), and attends a boarding school before striking out on his own attempt to amass family and fortune. Many of the characters in Copperfield’s orbit make questionable decisions, but the only true villain of his personal story seems to be the devastating power of wealth and class: financial ruin constantly creeps into Copperfield’s life just when he thinks he’s escaped it.

While I enjoyed Copperfield, it wasn’t quite the slam dunk my expectations might have hoped for. It’s a playful adaptation with stylish flourishes and moments of genius that get a bit bogged down in the monumental task of condensing a lot of story and emotional beats into the confines of a short film. If asked to describe the film in only a few adjectives, most of them are style or mood-based: whimsical, quirky, fantastical, etc. Copperfield is a film brimming with color and quirk and character. At times, though, this is a double-edge sword: it can be difficult to gracefully thread the needle on so many character and story beats, to thoroughly explore or deliver the grief and pain or joy of a particular scene, while also enveloping the entire affair in such a signature style and mood. Sometimes, as a result, the emotional beats of particular scene didn’t hit as effectively as I would have liked. It also means Iannucci and screenwriter Simon Blackwell’s (Veep, In the Loop) typically sharp comedic fangs were toned down a bit more than I would have expected.

That said, the film is still well worth a viewing for a few reasons. First – it’s a unique take on Dickens that likely no one has delivered before, challenging the more traditional retellings of the story. Second, style does count, and Copperfield has it in spades – the film is oozing bright colors and beautiful sets, even when portraying the drudgery of a factory or a back alley. Thirdly – the casting is stellar. Patel, Capaldi, Swinton, Laurie, along with Ben Whishaw sporting the worst hair you’ve ever seen, Benedict Wong, Gwendoline Christie, Rosalind Eleazar, and countless others flit in and out of our field of vision for hours, and their combined talent is immeasurable. It’s also nice to see British filmmakers finally addressing the question: “Why are British period dramas so white?” with a rather straightforward answer: They don’t have to be.

Back to Top