The Mystery of Charles Dickens (2000 TV Movie) User Reviews

An Excellent and Fascinating Play

[eelcats1286 · 9/10 · 29 September 2005]

In a tour de force performance, Simon Callow miraculously brings to life one of the most famous men of all time. . . Charles Dickens.

The Mystery of Charles Dickens is a one man play that chronicles the life and times of Charles Dickens. Now some of you might think "Oh great! A play about Charles Dickens. It's bound to be long, boring, and awful." WRONG!!!! The Mystery of Charles Dickens is a fascinating blend of mystery, charm, biography, fact and fiction. From the opening of the curtain, I found myself transfixed as I watched a tale of life, energy, misery and happiness, fame and passion unfold before me.

The play tells the story of Dickens' life. As the story goes along, Callow inserts quotations from Dickens' books into his narrative adding to the image created of this fascinating man. It's amazing to see how much of himself Dickens' put into his writing. It was apparent to me just how much when one time Callow began a quotation from one of Dickens' novels and I couldn't even tell. I thought it was just from a personal writing of Dickens' not from one of his fictional works. Truly a wonderfully written play.

As to Simon Callow's performance, it is in one word, superb. Like Dickens himself, Callow finds a different voice for each of the characters. Whether it is Mr Micawber, Wackford Squeers, or Little Nell these characters come brilliantly to life as do all of the characters. With a wonderful voice, rich, warm and endearing, and facial expressions that let you see into his soul, Simon Callow is the best and only choice to bring this play to life.

I truly cannot praise this performance enough. I never thought I would be interested in the life of Charles Dickens' but he was truly an amazing character as well as being a very real human being. I'll stop talking now. If there's any way possible, see this DVD!!!

The Plot Dickens

[tedg · 13 February 2007]

Its a novel idea at least: have an actor play a writer, the characters that writer writes and a narrator whose job is to tie the two together by commenting on biographical details.

And he is a good actor in the sense that he knows how to inhabit a stage, how to energetically anticipate a phrase, how to pause.

It is interesting at the beginning, especially when we recall the fourth stance we have from this man, an introduction from him as an actor.

I found myself engaged, but much of the reason was the machinery in my own head. I'm interested in how narrative is assembled; what the creative process is in the artist and whether that applies to how the thing is conveyed to us. Dickens is interesting in how he works. He just creates characters and then lets them bump up against each other. Characters first, story second, world third, fate finally. The way the world actually works emerges from the foibles of the characters. Seeing this recognized and elaborated is something of a joy.

But the real value of this is how the transitions are managed. Its just one man on a stage with mundane video cameras simply capturing. So the actual of how he shifts is amplified in comparison, a sort of conservation of attention. The writing is designed in such a way that most transitions are unexpected when the occur. We are jarred as he shifts among narrator, writer and character. Its a hard shift.

But shortly after, there are sufficient cues to make the shift seem logical and smooth after all. Its sort of a retrospective knitting together.

Interesting.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.