london777 This version keeps a lot more of the novel than most, but most of this material lacking in other versions covers the Maylie sub-plot, which is mawkish and conventional Victoriana.Many reviewers have commented that the series does not stint on the squalor of Hanoverian London (the action takes place in pre-Victorian times). I actually disagree and feel that it sanitizes things. Reviewers write of the "cramped" rooms when I thought they were were more spacious than many a million pound flat in today's London.The direction, camera-work and score were plodding TV quality only, and the actors in some parts unsubtle. Bill Sykes looked the part, and for once you could see why Nancy might have been attracted to him, but his acting skills were one-dimensional. I liked Eric Porter's Fagin. It was based on the Guinness version, but without the anti-semitic element which is embarrassing in the earlier movie.Too many of the children's roles suggested middle-class kids from drama school.I give the makers credit for faithfulness and not attempting smart-ass interpolations or anachronistic social comment, and maybe enjoyment would be enhanced by watching in the original 12 half-hour episodes, but viewing it purely as a "movie" it is fairly dull, especially compared to David Lean's masterpiece. Sharper editing would help to speed things along.

maksquibs OLIVER TWIST films live or die by their Olivers and this ultra-faithful six-hour British mini, dies with two inadequate Olivers. Not that the rest of the cast does much better. No one seems able to sustain the heightened characterizations Dickens needs, giving us a sort of loud, generic hamminess that quickly wears out its welcome. Even so, it's a treat to (just once) get all the story (the Artful Dodger has some surprising character turns), and it's certainly preferable to a recent mini-series which added a 'clarifying' preface. Memorable versions by Frank Lloyd, David Lean & Carol Reed each lose almost half of the story; for the better say I. With early Dickens, small sins of omission do wonders for story construction, especially in keeping Oliver in personal danger for the climax.

metalligirl666 Oliver Twist is one of my favourite Dickens's stories, and this production is the best I've ever seen. The director has somehow managed to restore the dark and Gothic mood of the 19th century London. The cast is brilliant as well. Especially the villains, with Eric Porter as Fagin, and David Garlick as Artful Dodger. Michael Attwell as Bill Sikes also performs a superb acting, I've never seen any other actors who played Bill Sikes doing it so brilliantly. He manages to picture the real Bill Sikes with all the evil characteristics, beside his weak points like any other human beings, especially in the scene after killing Nancy. For those who like the story, I strongly recommend to watch this production. I think it is the most loyal production to the actual text.

scottfunnell I thought that this was an exceptional production, particularly because it starred a young Scott Funnell. At such a young age, his performance was nothing less than remarkable, evoking emotions on a primeval level. I cannot speak more highly of this young superstar, except to say that he has a bright future ahead, matched only by his aspirations and delusions of grandeur. The supporting cast put in an admirable performance too, despite the show stopping form displayed by the Funnell. It was something i wish i did in my youth. Watch this because you will soon find that nothing can match it for sheer pluck and tenacity.