Once Lean’s title has been shown the camera shot shows a close up on an open book that in fact Dickens novel. This really confirms that Lean is simply trying to make a book-to- film conversion and does not really add that much of his own directive genius to the production. During the time at which the book is shown we hear the narration of a now, older Pip, who is the main character of the novel. The script is simply taken from the dialogue of the text, which again shows us that this is only a conversion and nothing more. The first views we see in Lean’s version are exactly what is described in the book down to the last detail; “…dark flat wilderness beyond the churchyard, intersected with dykes and mounds and gates, with scattered cattle feeding on it, was the marshes; and that the low leaden line beyond, was the river; and that the distant savage lair from which the wind was rushing was the sea.”
Jarrold however, uses his own ideas and makes the opening more intriguing and exciting. His first shot is of young Pip in a cornfield running, but from whom, we do not yet know. This provides the audience with an immediate incentive to continue watching (I say this because it was intended for a two-part television showing and would have to be exciting and intriguing for people to continue watching and to watch both parts). We then follow the dramatic chase that Jarrold has constructed through a cornfield and the graveyard. Jarrold’s use of Point of View shots give the audience a chance to feel more involved in the film and to help them to feel the confusion of the chase. The cornfield field itself is Jarrold’s own notion and is not mentioned anywhere in the written novel. However, I feel that this really helps to show Pip trying to hide but that he cannot escape.
Lean does however; use some effective techniques to show the characters. He shows the vast landscape with tall-silhouetted Gibbets to indicate just how small and vulnerable Pip is running across the marshland. These uses of lights and darks are very apparent when me meet the convict, Magwitch. Pip remains in the light but the convict’s face is shrouded from with darkness to convince the audience he is an evil character. Pip’s lightened appearance shows his innocence and makes the audience wonder why such a nice boy is in such a dark and gloomy place. After the confrontation, Pip is seen scrabbling home across the marshes as quickly as possible, using the same eerie landscape.
The choice of the characters that were cast must have been considered for some time but were chosen differently in the two films. Both directors chose a similar Magwitch whose scary and gruff appearance is used to scare both Pip and too the audience. Lean has chosen a small, clean, young, blonde boy as Pip, as he will be considered more innocent and vulnerable to the audience. Jarrold however uses a Pip who is again a young boy but this time is dirty and has dark hair. Although this wouldn’t have made the audience of Lean’s film feel compassionate towards Pip, Jarrold’s more modern audience would understand that he is probably lower class and possibly mistreated at home, just from his appearance.
Jarrold uses a technique, which I feel is highly effective. After the chase and after Pip has been caught, the camera cuts to a flock of geese flying overhead. This works because it is somewhat confusing and leaves what happens to Pip to our imagination. It also makes many questions arise as to why the geese are there, but this is good because now the audience is on the edge of their seats rather than changing the channel.
A lot of what happens in the opening of Jarrold’s version is confusing and little information is given about the characters at this stage. We find out who these people are later in the first few chapters.
Both Jarrold and Lean try to make their openings full of suspense and intrigue. Lean uses the dialogue in his opening to inform the viewer and as such his is more revealing of the characters, but it is not necessarily better. In contrast, Jarrold uses his lack of information to make it more surprising when we actually hear the facts later on.
To analyse these films fully we must look at when they were made, and for whom they were intended. David Lean made his version for cinema in 1946 and as such was catering for a very different audience to the 1999 television version by Julian Jarrold.
Jarrold would have been competing with all the other channels and would have to attract viewers who had not read the novel, whereas Lean’s audience would most likely have been familiar with Dickens “Great Expectations.”
Jarrold did have several advantages over Lean in that the popularity of filmmaking has encouraged technological advances in this field. He was able to use mobile cameras and lighting techniques, and most of his sound is synthesised or computer generated.
Personally, I prefer Jarrold’s version, but then again, I should do. All of his techniques are aimed at today’s audience, which includes me. As such I feel it is somewhat unfair for me to make a definitive judgement on Lean’s work as it was made some 40 years before I was even born. If however I asked someone in their 70s or 80s to judge Lean’s version they would without a doubt prefer it to Jarrold’s version. From this and the information I included earlier I can safely say that both these adaptations provide an entertaining and anticipation-filled experience for their intended audiences.
