THE PERSONAL HISTORY OF DAVID COPPERFIELD | Official Trailer | Searchlight Pictures
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 08. 2024
- THE PERSONAL HISTORY OF DAVID COPPERFIELD re-imagines Charles Dickens’ classic ode to grit and perseverance through the comedic lens of its award-winning filmmakers- giving the Dickensian tale new life for a cosmopolitan age with a diverse ensemble cast of stage and screen actors from across the world. Emmy® winners and Oscar® nominees Armando Iannucci (IN THE LOOP, THE DEATH OF STALIN, HBO’S Veep) and Simon Blackwell (IN THE LOOP, HBO’S Succession) lend their wry, yet heart-filled storytelling style to revisiting Dickens’ iconic hero on his quirky journey from impoverished orphan to burgeoning writer in Victorian England.
#ThePersonalHistoryofDavidCopperfield
#CopperfieldFilm
#SearchlightPictures
Connect with Searchlight Pictures Online:
Visit the Searchlight Pictures WEBSITE: www.searchligh...
Like Searchlight Pictures on FACEBOOK: / searchlightpics
Follow Searchlight Pictures on TWITTER: / searchlightpics
THE PERSONAL HISTORY OF DAVID COPPERFIELD | Official Trailer | Searchlight Pictures
/ foxsearchlight
When ever I hear David Copperfield I think of the magician.
Pop
Is there another one? Lol
I read somewhere that Dev Patel said that was his first reaction, too...haha.
lol
How sad.
I went to see this film in Ireland because it was already out there. It was amazing! Tilda Swinton and Hugh Laurie are divine! So are the costumes,cinematography and screenplay! It should be watched by everyone!
Because it was out... is why you watched it... there in Ireland... Cool story bro!
Actually I live in Ireland
DO YA REALLY ? IM ONLY ASKING ,,,TO BE SURE HAHAHA
This movie was incredible. As delightful, colourful and multi-faceted as the people David Copperfield encountered in his life
it was shit An indian named David Copperfield in the 1800s? It sticks out like a sore thumb diversity is ruining movies
Now this is how you adapt and bring to the screen Dickens, tragicomedy, strangeness, an absurd and intricate plot, colours everywhere ❤️
It's not the book but purely a exercise on hijacking great works of prose for anti white racism. It's ridiculous & not very good. What next get the colouring pencils out & colour-in the great pictures in every Dickens book of the characters for political correctness.
@@seltaeb9691 wow, a lot of words to show how pressed you are
Ok but everyone is sitting on how hot dev patel looks in this??
He looks hot ALL THE TIME.
No he doesn't but he isn't my taste. I don't find Indian men attractive. Good luck with that
@@Tippy2forU Then this comment is not for you, and you know it.
Tiff'sTravels2012 then shut up and leave. I don’t get it 😂 what’s up?
@@Tippy2forU i am American🇱🇷🇱🇷🇮 then you can try me
This actor is everywhere now, well done
A comedy and a fantasy horror trailer starring Dev Patel (an Indian) set in medieval Europe on the same day. Something I'd have never thought of.
The dude's not Indian. He's British. His parents were Indian.
@@anonymousperson7390 well but he is of Indian ethnicity. So it's rare to see that in a period film.
This is Victorian, not Medieval. This is almost 400 years after the end of medieval period.
@@sparker2857, You can expect to see a lot more Colored people in non-Coloured roles in more upcoming films. It's all in the name of Diversity. Patel used to get the role of Indian guys which was right. But nowadays Hollywood doesn't care about history accuracy it just needs to satiate the far left.
Sayan, he’s also in The Green Knight, a fantasy horror film set in a mythical form of the Middle Ages.
Today is the Day of Dev Patel. The Green Knight and now this
The Green Knight looks amazing
Brown washing?
A FANTASTIC contemporary version of this classic Dickens tale. The multi-racial cast is magnificent! Good show!
Pointless. Purely another racial PC exercise. Write your own books rather than mince up great literature for so called multi racial policies. Does Bollywood make any concession for white skin colour. No chance. They'd just laugh at it.
Had no idea the real David Copperfield was of Indian origin. Fascinating.
this movie is so hilarious and well done. baffled as to how it didn't get BAFTA or oscar noms
It was an abomination for an amazing story.
I LOVE how they cast dev Patel as David copperfield. Casting a brown man in the movie and not needing to give an explanation or a silly cliche poor background. I already see people in the comments a bit heated but u thing this is absolutely fantastic and can't wait to see it!
I mean, the movie looks fun take on its own merits. But it is arguably a defacement of the original work and completely revisionist of its historical setting. From an "artistic" standpoint this may be interesting. But personally I find its deviation from the source and setting irksome.
Josh L ye... im sure hes a great actor but it does irk me that they are brushing over the social standing of minorities in england in the 1840s. Like pretending it never happened. I read an interview with the director and he said “I want this movie to reflect how far Britain has come today”... then just set it in modern time. You want it to reflect today, but it was a novel written 150 years ago. This whole revisionist thing just bugs me.
It is a bit disrespectful; by casting him with no explanation, they are glossing over the racial injustice of this period.
@@nickchavarria8052 Aye. The proper take would be to either address the racism of the day by adapting Copperfield as a POC without ignoring the racial implications of the story's Victorian setting, OR, just set the story in contemporary England. Of course, people love period dramas. And they love fantasy. Unfortunately, history has been sacrificed on the altar of mass market appeal.
Back when I was a kid we would watch things like this all in public it was called a movie theater
Yeah, on your phone, like? Minimum two meters from anyone else, right?
It’s back go see it
Boomer
She straight up kicked that person off that donkey. Anyway, I'm here for Dev Domination coming to your theatres in 2020.
F
That part was so funny! I wasn’t expecting that. I really enjoyed this movie
Is today Dev Patel day? The trailer for this and The Green Knight released today
@Fit Tall Gay Blond Dickens didn't draw the illustrations.
@Fit Tall Gay Blond - And what color is Dorothy's hair in The Wizard of Oz?
no its not.. cause copperfield was white
Would love to see Dev Patel as Queen Elizabeth or King Charles.
Ok I’m Indian and I love the lead actor as he is very talented, but when you sacrifice historical accuracy to create diversity, it sorta ruins the movie.
Historical? It's fiction. There were tens of thousands of Indian people living in Victorian England. David Copperfield totally could've been one.
@@rhov-anion This Movie is based on a Novel by Charles Dickens, and this movie is not faithful to the source material. If the Novel said he was Asian or Black, I would be complaining if they cast a white actor. It's a matter of faithfulness to Source Material.
@@chanakyanaravarjula6237 Wait, so... A book must describe a character as having colored skinned, otherwise it's a White character? That's the very definition of "White Default," and it's a bad habit common in readers.
Prime example: Hermione in "Harry Potter" is never given a skin color. Everyone assumed she'd be White, and folks went berserk when the stage play casted a Black actress. J.K. Rowling herself stepped in and confirmed, she never said Hermione WASN'T a woman of color, and she supported the idea of a Black Hermione.
Now, unless there is a line in "David Copperfield" that described his skin color as peachy, pale, sallow, etc., there is no argument to support that the casting department did anything wrong.
For that matter, when have movies ever been faithful to all the gingers in novels played by blonde actresses, hmm?
@Cardboard Box
Indian: no
Living in the UK: no
Making stuff up: no
@Cardboard Box okay, you're right, I'll stop telling the indigenous people of the UK. So let's see, definitely not the Anglo-Saxons, we can pinpoint when they immigrated to the Isles, definitely not Picts or Frisians or Celtics since we know where they originally came from, not the Britons either as they didn't arrive until the Iron Age. So like... who exactly? The Welsh are at least somewhat genetically linked to the original Stone Age people of the British Isles, so they're probably the closest you're gonna get to "indigenous." Okay, I apologise to the Welsh!
(Wow, a "dumb American" like me who studied History of the British Isles for one semester in university can so easily tear down a right wing racist argument. Sad.)
The British Isles have always been a land of immigrants, wave after wave, Britons mixing in with the Stone Age settlers, Celtics pushing Britons into Wales, Saxons pushing out the Celts, fresh blood from Sweden or France or India moving to England and eventually spreading out across the land, each changing the culture and enriching it.
So what you mean isn't the word "indigenous." It's "White." What you really mean is, "White people were here first, historically White people have always played British characters, and we don't want Brown people to have any representation in even fictional British stories." Just be honest with your words, dude.
FYI, my statistic about 70,000 Indian people living in Victorian England is not wrong, unless the British government was wrong, which it could've been. We all know how White people just love to imagine EVEN MORE brown people live in their country than who actually do. 🙄
Also, your example of Roots is ridiculous, as that's specifically about a unique cultural experience. David Copperfield is not. A better example would've been "Finn in Star Wars could've been played by a White actor," to which I wholeheartedly agree.
Completed the book today and now I'm on the internet trying to find pieces of character I love
I finished it just now, and am doing the same thing as you are! Haha! I'm so happy David and Agnes ended up together ultimately. ♥
@@judesolis481 same... when david and dora married, i thought it wouldn't happen and since david always referred to her as a sister... but it was a satisfying ending
I have read the David Copperfield novel in my school it's fantastic this excited me so much
may I ask is the novel any good? i'd love to read it if I ever get the chance!
@@stelthyy5018 bro mine was of class VI like it was named as The stories of David Copperfield It was same as this story but thin in size and a quick summary of this and at last It was interesting!!
@@marvelousansh6270 thanks!
@@stelthyy5018 go to your school library & get Dickens book. They aren't wrote for multi culturalism but for conditions the poor & downtrodden working classes. This is just utter tosh a panacea for paddling racial migrants. You won't get Bollywood making films for white audiences.
Dev Patel putting in work! Good to see.
Of course they make him a different race. Let's try a Black Panther reboot with Bradley Cooper or Slumdog Millionaire with Leonardo DiCaprio and see how they like that, if the "Hollywood money people" allow it.
I love Dev Patel. I have enjoyed every movie I have seen him in.
Capaldi seems like he’s just doing Dr. Who but stuck in the turn of the century
Pretty much. It works, though. ;)
lol i was looking for the part when the butler sjust starrs at him mad close
Publishers are delighted - sales of David Copperfield will definitely go up.
Good.
You had me at Peter Capaldi and Hugh Laurie...
Who’s peter Capaldi?
Is this the Bollywood version of David Copperfield?
Yes
No. It’s the Korean version.
Perfectly plausible lead character in 1849, wouldn't you say, chaps?
He will one day play queen Elizabeth and King Charles.
As a latina, a fan of Charles Dickens and someone who writes this is literally taking a shit on history and the setting the author intended. I appreciate the diversity but that's just absurd, why not take the david copperfield story and apply it to a modern setting where what you are trying to do works. An example of that with a Dickens novel is the Great Expectations movie. That's like making white people star as indians in an ancient world setting which historically makes no sense
So David Copperfield was Asian? I don't get it. Will Bollywood reciprocate using young white British actors? Just asking.
dev patel is english
@@shrimpfriedizzy yes but you get my drift
COPPERFIELD 2019 BEST MOVIE SINCE EMILY , FRIEDA , and A PERFECT MIND
I couldn't love this movie more. Surprised to just have discovered it, but happy, happy happy. And the MUSIC! Can't get enough!
I can't wait for that remake of Roots starring Robert Patterson as Kunta Kinte.
1:33 okay that was absolute creativity and cleverness
I see no creativity and cleverness in here
I was just seeing what Prince zuko was up to these days! Looks like a interesting movie.
@Coasting & Toasting! I take it you did not enjoy the movie clip 😂... Well I'm willing to give it a try.
I didn’t realize he was price Zuko!! I’m glad he didn’t give up on acting after that train wreck of a movie 😂
@@annabellenonimous1302 what movie?
Omg it’s that guy from skins! I thought I recognised him
I can’t get over how much I loved this movie.
I am Indian but this diversity part is too much for this movie
One Indian is too much?
I think I’ve already seen this episode of doctor who? In fact I think he was even wearing the same outfit
loool! Well played :)
😂😂😂
I LOVED THIS SO MUCH!
(The movie, not just the trailer)
I was waiting to see magic and illusion for the first 2 minutes before realizing my mistake and misunderstanding.
a bunch of hot people in victorian clothing. count me in!
I'd love to see James Earl Jones as the king David of Israel and Will Smith as Solomon.
I'd love to have see Trump pardon Assange, but hey-ho.
Or Toby Maguire as Tre Stiles in Boyz N the Hood. Robert Patterson as Kunta Kinte in Roots. Or Willie Nelson as Sofia in The COlor Purple.
@@stevemcauliffe1887 IKR.....
@@johnmark6628 I'm still waiting for Christopher Walken to play ghandi.
@@sixhawks That oddly would not be far off. I can totally picture Walken walking around with a shaved head and an orange bed sheet repeating fortune cookie lines to people.
wish real life was as chill and cool as this
I loved the George Cukor original film and didn’t think I’d like this but was hooked in from the start, all brilliant and so bloody funny !
Historically Wrong!
What's next Chinese Abraham Lincoln? Black Elvis Presley? White Chuck Berry?
"Sort your movies out Hollywood!!"
You can only cry about it now because generally people like it.
@@user-zb3ih3vh4n Dullards
@@paulsmithii racist
@@user-zb3ih3vh4n As if You know anything about me.. 😂
@@paulsmithii by seeing your comments any one can tell what's your level of thinking and who you are
Apparently, Oprah Winfrey is being set to play The Queen of England in a new Movie, Denzel Washington will be Prince Phillip, the corgis will be played by cats.
Perfectly summarized this historically incorrect tripe. Next Abraham Lincoln, Julius Caesar and Snow White will be black too.
@@HBosman But you can bet not a single black historical person will be played by a white actor.
The agenda pushing, woke whining, Anti white, hypocritical, fact dodging muppets WON'T LIKE THAT.
They will be first in the cancelation queue, having their little meltdowns over white supremacy, while at the same time purchasing their tickets for Whoopi Goldberg playing Lady Diana in her latest movie (Diana the African years).
The idiotic brain-deads they are.
@@halloweenville1 It's mainly because the entertainment industry is in the majority hands of ultra-libtards who wants to rewrite history just because they don't like real history. They stick their heads in the sand like ostriches and force their agendas upon the general public through social engineering, using entertainment and media as a tool for their agendas.
Isn’t this guy the guy who played zuko in the last airbender live action
That movie never happened.
DairangerSentai7 ah yes forgive me
Can you just release this digitally please because this movie rules and more people need to see it
I am all for more interracial casting for contemporary movies, but this just seems strange and is not era appropriate. The world wasn't always a multicultural/multinational place, it is just not always wrong depicting things how they were or how they were imagined to be.
Maybe we can use our imaginations to envisage a society where all races were considered equal?
@@wonderwoman5528 Of course we can, but it really doesn't feel right in this movie at least for me.
Guys, go and watch this movie! It was one of the best film I've seen lately. Just lovely
I have read the book, loved it. Is this film true to the original spirit of the Dickens novel?
I've just watched this film and I think it's absolutely wonderful. Well done to the people who made it! Thanks!
David Was still à child when his mother died in the book, but here he is gentleman🤔
I have to see this movie! Dev Patel and Peter Capaldi look wonderful.
The doctor and house in the same movie? I need to watch this.
Can’t wait tell they put an Indian as black panther!
They would never risk angering Black folk. They do it to White people because there are so many bootlicking self loathers out there. Just look at all these posts already praising this insult of a classic.
Spot's open now lmao
Not soon enough! Feels like forever before it'll be in the U.S. I love so much of this cast and REALLY love Armondo Iannuci. Can't wait.
I love Dev Patel's work, especially in I Lost My Body, Slumdog Millionaire and Hotel Mumbai.
Lion as well.
@@mark1h2023 Life of Pi? That was Suraj Sharma who played Pi PATEL. Lol. And of course, Lion was his best so far.
@@fdl238 Sorry, I misremembered, I meant Slumdog Millionaire
A lovely film for all the family. Dev was the best man for the job
thought this was gonna be about the magician smh
Nah, the Charles Dickens novel is better.
Though it would be quite awesome to see a movie that has a magician in the 1800s.
Wow. Just wow.
SymphonyBrahms apparently they didn’t teach you how to take a joke
They turned a white guy into an Indian dude . TADA!
I dont know much about David Copperfield, but I'm only watching cause I like Dev Patel as an actor
It's a great novel, highly recommended! Good read during quarantine.
I saw the movie today, and it's great.
For a bollywood movie this looks fantastic, where is all the dancing ?
Why is David Copperfield being represented by an indian actor? Like, don't misunderstand me, it doesn't bother me at all, but it has nothing to do with the novel, where he was British. With all the good british actors over there why would you choose a foreinger?
Dev patel is English, he's just of Indian ancestry
@Kermit TheFrog English is a nationality not an ethnic group
@Kermit TheFrog OK fair, but it's also a nationality.
@@letsgetfluffy3138 Do you think a white guy born in India would ever get to play the lead in their movies?
@@hijack69 No I do not think that, unless there was some certain reason tying into the story
Can't wait to see Taylor Swift star in an adaptation of a classic Indian tale
Matt Damon was in a film version of Mahabharata like 20 years ago.
@@brianlynch996 And how did that work out?
Big ol' flop, which is irrelevant to whether or not it was made.
@@brianlynch996 It's reception is relevent.
How so? Valli was acting like such a thing wouldn't happen. But it did. It doesn't matter that it turned out poorly. That said, the whole analogy is irrelevant in this case, as this is an English actor in an English movie based on an English story, which makes for an odd comparison to an American singer in an adaptation (country not specified) of an Indian story.
Love this cast! It’s like watching a Dickens play on West End! Charles would be proud.
It seems that this film takes a interesting turn of Dickens’ classic.
more like ridiculous turn
agreed
Coming soon Queen Latifa in Wuthering Heights and Jackie Chan as Macbeth
Honestly I loved it.
@@korblif Jackie chan as macbeth sounds like an amazing potential satire. or the worst thing you'll ever see. either way i want it
So when is Hugh Jackman playing Gandhi?
@Christian Taylor You're making an assumption that Charles Dickens specifically said David Copperfield was White.
Lol
...gandhi is played by a white guy ben kingsley....of course he is indian descent...but he totally looks white...bloody racists.....and what about complete whitewash of ancient one character from doctor strange.....this charectr was nepali man in comics
How many asians have been played by white actors?!
Racist spotted.
Fun fact: Ben Kingsley played Gandhi 40 years ago.
If you’re not aware of who Ben Kingsley is, Google him.
Would it be too presumptuous to hope tomorrow we get 3 Dev Patel trailers?
*GO WOKE, GO BROKE*
It's not WHAT you're doing. It's WHY you're doing it...
@Fried Vegetables Lol! I *hate* that for em'! 😂
@Fried Vegetables Agreed-- lol! They *think* we need them, when it's actually the other way round... And I take great pleasure in that. 😎
this was a great book, idr much of the writing style now though, idr if it was this comedic, but i loved the novel when i read it, and i also cried at some points, it was a masterpiece
I see the name of the guy who made In the Loop and Veep. I know it will be a great movie.
Don’t forget that he made The Death of Stalin and The Thick Of It too!
armando nation !
Saw recently the one w/ Daniel Redcliffe, read the book- this couldn't have come at a better time for me!😄
This already has a 92% rating in Rotten Tomatoes
It's from Fox Searchlight Pictures in the United States and Lionsgate in the United Kingdom.
@killingangels “Why brown people in movie. Brown people scary :(“
MasterCombine no. It’s why brown people in a movie about a place that had very few to no brown people playing a part that was not brown. But if we see a white character in a brown movie where there’s no white people then it’s RACIST!!!!! Waaaaah😭😭😭😭😭😭
As it should.
@Odins Spear LMAO NO IT WAS NOT
Another Dev Patel trailer? Why, thank you so much.
Watching this trailer i was thinking is David Copperfield a time traveler now? I mean he is not that old
Feb 13th is National Cheddar Cheese and Dev Patel day.
Okay, I kind of love this as an actual idea and may have already added it to my calendar for next year :D Cheese board and a Dev Patel movie next year it is!
This is literally the most underrated movie in the entire world.
Will watch for dev Patel..such a good actor+sooooo good looking😍
First Green Knight trailer drops and now this?
Double Dev Patel feature!
Daniel Kaluuya will head the cast in the upcoming remake of Oliver Twist. Idris Elba's playing Bill Sykes and Stormzy is playing the Artful Dodger.
Directed by Ishmael Goldensburgstein.
don't see a problem
@@shrimpfriedizzy I don't suppose you do.
LOL...I thought of the magician David Copperfield before clicking the thumbnail
This looks really good.
The actors were amazing :0
More like David Cornershop.
A very good British-Indian band! I recommend.
I thought this was going to be one of those trashy 'activism' remakes. But Patel absolutely nails this role.
The humor made me accept this movie separate from the actual storyline. Also I loved the cast. Otherwise I would have hated it.
It was used to be Fox Searchlight Pictures.
Before Fox got swallowed up by Buy 'n Large.
I am totally for more inclusion in box office productions but that has limits. This is a period piece that doesn't reflect the realities of its period.
For example, Indians were colonial subjects, not citizens. By virtue of their skin color and their legal status, they wouldn't be seen mingling as equals with white English men. Especially not in high society or amongst the gentry. People of Chinese ancestry, if they ended up in Britain at all, certainly wouldn't be hob knobbing in high society dressed in fancy western clothing. Black women definitely would not be seen strutting around in fine dresses and getting out of lavish carriages. Moreover, David Copperfield was white and widely considered to be the literary stand in for Dickens, who was most certainly white. By our standards the Victorian era was racist af, Anglo-centric and white supremacist. So, the multiculture ensemble here is way off the mark. I mean, LOL. Seriously?
They're revising the literary and historical fact to suit modern social sensibilities. Which on a certain level could be deemed good. But on another level is just silly. Such anachronisms make it hard to appreciate the production because you know for fact that's not how things were in that day and it is also unfaithful to the original work.
That makes the whole thing corny and off-putting. It's just cheap pandering to modern sensibilities rather than remaining true to the source.
If they wanted to create a Victorian multicultural fantasy completely unhinged from the historical reality, they could have done an original story and that would have been fine, albeit silly. Instead they ripped off a literary classic in order to bank on its instant recognition and fame. Personally, I find that to be irksome.
Thank you for that long-winded and boring rant. I have good news and bad news. Fortunately for you there are already countless all-white adaptations of pretty much any Dickens work you could ever want to see. Watch one of those. Clearly this one is not for folks who are irked by seeing non-white actors playing parts in movies. Unfortunately for you, the racially preoccupied seem to be a dying breed. The very simple fact that studios are increasingly willing to bankroll inclusion despite you folks going into utter meltdown on every comment section of every movie in which there are a few non-white actors-- always spewing the same old tired BS about why this or that character shouldn't be anything other than a white man-- attests to this. If it annoys you, don't go see it. Simple as that. Obviously nobody cares about you lot and your superficial hang-ups anymore, at least not those making awesome looking movies like this one.
@@jonathanneal6611 I'm not offended by diversity and inclusion in film. I'm just bothered by a period drama that inaccurately depicts history and is unfaithful to its source.
It's a two edged sword because I was also critical of Dunkirk for excluding the instrumental rear guard role of non-white British soldiers in the conflict.
In general, it's a peeve of mine when any serious cinematic work radically distorts, omits, truncates, over simplifies or entirely fabricates the facts. So, the film looks fun and interesting and may even be worth watching when it hits Netflix, but because it flies in the face of plausibility, I can't take it seriously.
I'm sure there are a lot of people that hate to see brown and female leads in film. I'm not one of them by any stretch. However, that's not what bothers me about this adaptation.
I understand why you would assume that about me but you clearly weren't listening to what I was saying. I'm making a film criticism. It's devoid of bigotry. But rather than merely engage with the film criticism, you had to go and make it personal in the most condescending way you could.
For your information, that kind of makes you an ass.
@@joshl6275 whether or not you think I'm an ass, I think my words still stand. Although as you said, the novel is semi-autobiographical, the author himself called it a " weaving of truth and invention". The characters are fictional.
You talk about the work being brought to screen 'as the author intended' but I think that's a silly notion. We've seen it brought to screen in all white productions before; how this would make a work of fiction more historically accurate is beyond me. And having read the work upon which this movie is based, I don't remember the author explicitly stating that every character was white (although he did admittedly describe features that most would assume to be caucasian in some). And ultimately, after so many existing versions, what would be the point of doing the movie again *unless* it was a novel interpretation or re-imagining?
And what would you say of all the other artistic liberties that are commonly taken in adapting written works to screen? Should every movie be filmed exactly as it was written in the novel and be entirely bound by the conventions of the time period in which it was originally conceived, all other artistic considerations be damned? That sounds like a pretty boring world to me.
I wonder if you are this much a stickler for costume, skipped chapters, the deletion or addition of characters, inappropriate colloquialisms, wrong location, the fact that establishments that should have been there aren't, incorrect street names, dirt roads where there should've been cobbled streets and vice versa, people playing characters of different nationalities, wrong accents/intonation and all the other little departures that are commonly made in movies from the specific point in history and geographic location in which the source materials were originally written to take place?
If you are then I wonder how you manage to enjoy anything. If on the other hand none of these things bother you, but the skin color of the actors is enough to take you completely out of the suspension of disbelief then, as reasonable as you otherwise sound, you may want to look into implicit bias, a problem we ALL suffer from to varying degrees.
What I do take from your more recent comment is that you don't seem to have any malicious intent in saying the things you do and that you otherwise sound like a pretty thoughtful person. I also very much appreciated you breaking your reply up into paragraphs. It communicates your ability to make coherent arguments as well as consideration for your interlocutor.
I'd ultimately end by suggesting that you simply give the movie a chance as a work of art. Nobody with any sense will be walking into the theater thinking 'Hey, Victorian England looks like it was a great place for black and brown people!!' I mean yeah, bud, we get it, we weren't welcome there,-- like we're not welcome any-fuckin-where-- but sometimes, as an 'other', one longs for a revisionist approach to time periods. Reality blows, that's why we go to the cinema. It's not always to speak to the way the world is or was-- there are plenty of movies that do that-- but perhaps sometimes to the way it *should* be or *should* have been. If you can't revel in the awesomeness of that because you're a stickler for the cruel bigotry of humanity then what can I say, really?
@@jonathanneal6611 As I said, taken on its own merits the film looks interesting and it would probably be fun to watch. But the way it totally disregards racial realities of the Victorian era is still a bit jarring to me.
I have no problem with fantasy genre proper. But if a fantasy purports to be historical drama without acknowledging to the audience in some fashion that it is merely a fantasy, that's when I get peeved.
I mean, for one thing, revising history in this way will give historically illiterate individuals the impression that this is how things really were. Over time this kind of thing will create a false collective memory. By colorizing contemporary narratives set in historically racist eras without any acknowledgment to that reality you ironically white wash the sins of the past from our collective memory.
I think it would make more sense if, in addition to making Copperfield Indian, they also worked that into his character and acknowledged in some way the racial realities you would expect him to encounter.
I have no problem with adaptations and novel reimagining of a work. I also am fine with fiction taking liberties with fact for the sake of narrative expedience. But within reasonable boundaries. If you are a period drama, you should at least try to make some attempt at giving a nod to the reality you're riffing off of.
In general I'm willing to suspend my disbelief for just about any fictional work so long as it remains internally consistent.
For instance, if a work is a complete work of fantasy genre but still supposes this world's laws of physics, I'm fine suspending my disbelief regarding fantasy elements such as vampires and werewolves but I also expect otherwise mortal characters to be bound by the limitations of normal human physiology. That would be internally consistent.
Of course, point here being: because of modern sensibilities, in such works you will find depictions where, say, a 90lb, 5'2", Vampire hunting woman is seen being able to toss monsters twice her size around like rag dolls. Because girl power? That just strains credibility. But if you show her being able to square off against supernatural beasts on her own terms because she's clever or well equipped rather than because somehow she has brawn that men twice her size wouldn't have, then I'm willing to go along with it as a viewer.
So, at the end of the day, all fiction is fantasy but I have a hard time getting on board with a story that refuses to follow the rules implied by its own premise.
That said, far be it from me to tell people what they should watch or how they should make their movies. I'm just throwing my two cents in the pot and registering my annoyance at how vapid and poorly thought out most media is.
@@joshl6275 Rapid fire, I love it. I'm going to summarize your arguments and you correct me if I've misunderstood anything:
1. The film disregards racial realities and you personally find that jarring.
OK. I can accept that you are well aware of the racial realities of Victorian England and they are an important enough aspect of that time period that you can't enjoy anything that doesn't pay deference to them.
2. Fantasy must at some point explicitly state itself to be fantasy.
I think this is an arbitrary supposition. Fantasy need not be explicitly labelled as such. We can know it by the degree to which it deviates from the world we live in.
I think we both understand the reality of racial relations in Victorian England and the degree to which this depiction deviates from that. In that deviation I see obvious and deliberate artistic liberty taken. It doesn't bother me because I know the facts. I don't need to see them represented or have them acknowledged in every piece of media/art I experience.
I've seen, as I'm sure have you, visual art that makes no sense, I've listened to-- and enjoyed-- literal noise. That being the case, the simple fact that the movie doesn't acknowledge a racial reality of which anyone I'd ever respect enough to talk to is already be aware doesn't concern me. In this same deviation, you somehow see some kind of personal or historical affront. I can't help but wonder why.
3. Without an explicit statement like 'this is not how things actually were' historically illiterate people might believe that black and brown people were really a part of the upper echelons of Victorian society.
We can't not make art or bar the imagining of alternative histories on account of the fact that stupid or ignorant people might not understand it. Imagine if we conducted anything else this way.
4. If they wanted an Indian Copperfield, they should have changed the character and the story to make that more true to the realities of Victorian England.
For you the reality of race as it was perceived in Victorian England precedes the actual story written by the author. I can tell that you're not much of a theater nerd. In theater so called 'racial, gender, age, sexuality, and body type' realities are bent and twisted all the time in re-imagining some work. And as a person who's seen the story itself brought to stage in countless ways, these different filters always manage to bring out something new. Not for you though, I guess? It's white Copperfield or nothing? How unfortunate.
5. A period drama should necessarily make an attempt to be historically accurate.
This is an arbitrary rule. I respect that it's necessary for your enjoyment, but as I stated before, a work of fiction is not historically accurate and the degree to which you try to make it so is merely going to be based on your arbitrary notions of what constitutes historical authenticity. For you, it appears to be race. For others it's costume. And still others linguistic considerations.
None of it matters though if you're able to produce someone that resonates with people.
6. If we suppose folks to be human beings, they should be bound by the laws of normal human physiology. Only this would be logically consistent with the premise.
You suppose Victorian "racial" hang-ups to be as binding and unchanging as physical laws?
I guess I'm (at least) lucky that didn't turn out to be the case.
Does the premise of being set in the past presuppose the "law" of white superiority as an operating paradigm? You seem to think it does. I just don't.
"I'm just throwing my two cents in the pot and registering my annoyance at how vapid and poorly thought out most media is."
You state this as if it's a foregone conclusion as opposed to a point of contention.
1:00
Daisy May Cooper who plays Kerry in This Country! Before fame. Nice.
I'm braving the theatre next week to see this.
It’s Dev Patel Day, I guess!
thought this was about the magician lol
I've been bamboozled 😂
Charles Dickens is rolling in his grave.
Just now I am holding the Great book! I read this book soooo many times! This book is amazing! I am here for movie!!
The movie & the book are chalk & cheese. Copperfield was white, this film is ridiculous. Let's remake Zulu with the tribesman white. That's fair surely.
another woke film
Oh wow I'd love this
If you're a true lover of Dickens like I am, then give this a BIG miss. This movie is so PC and historically INCORRECT, it is cringeworthy. You'll constantly find yourself thinking how Dickens must be turning in his grave seeing the rape of one of the best classics ever written. If you believe Abe Lincoln, Julius Caesar and Snow White should be black, then this one is for you. It is that Absurd.
I love this!!! I care about theatrical indie movies from 20th Century Fox Searchlight and the following year the time the indie movies to be broadcast on FX, FXX, and FXM.
#FXHasTheMovies
Like The Shape of Water (2017) from Fox Searchlight Pictures.
It is just Searchlight now, Disney dropped the Fox, just like it is back to 20th Century Studios again.
Finally putting melanin as the main character. Very happy to see this representation.
It's sad how many people don't realize there were a lot of Indians in Victorian England, and how many think this is the magician, haha!
Oh I absolutely LOVE Dev Patel!!!!
60% of comments: racists.
30% of comments: confusing the Charles Dickens novel with the American magician.
10% of remaining comments: Dr. Who references.
@Mourning Star Did Charles Dickens specifically say David Copperfield was White, or did you simply assume that all British people in the 1800s were White, and he couldn't have possibly been one of the 70,000 British citizens of Indian heritage living in London at the time?
I mean, I don't blame you if you did assume that. "White Default" is very common amongst readers of all races, I'm totally guilty of it too, so it's not exactly racist to make the assumption that, because the character's skin color was never described, they are most likely White. Novelists are just as guilty as readers in that matter, and bad writers go out of their way to remind readers "hey look, I included a Black woman, I'm so damn woke, I'm gonna tell you about her ebony skin every other paragraph."
However, it is racist to INSIST on your assumption being portrayed in all media and insist that any alternatives (such as a British actor with non-White skin color whose ancestors hail from a former part of the British Empire) are all "cultural appropriation."
India became part of Britain's "culture" whether either side wanted it or not. Londoners have been eating curry and drinking spiced chai since the 1700s, which is a lot longer than some of the traditions modern Brits assume are "cultural." Blame our ancestors for expanding the empire.
@Mourning Star Quote a single sentence from the book that makes it clear he is white. (Hint: there aren't any, it's merely an assumption by readers.)
Granted, Charles Dickens was a raging racist, even for the time period (seriously, the man DESPISED the tens of thousands of non-white people living in London) so I doubt he would consciously make a person of color as a protagonist. I mean, it's not like "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" where editors forced Roald Dahl to rewrite Charlie so he wasn't Black. Still, if you have a problem with a literary character who lacks physical description being played by an actor who is non-white... well, that's your own PERSONAL problem. You'd get along great with Charles Dickens, I'm sure.
@Mourning Star All I'm saying is throwing a tantrum "wah wah actor not white I feel oppressed" is dumb, because the book never says what David Copperfield looks like. Even if he was described, how often are actors chosen PURELY to match physical descriptions? Color blind casting simply removes prejudice. I mean, most right-wing Christians I know proudly tout "I don't see color" and promptly lose their minds as soon as they SEE SOMEONE OF COLOR.
Actually, I don't agree with the far-left stance of cultural appropriation. I get their point, but unless it is done with malicious intent, I don't see a problem with white people, or people of ANY color, using and appreciating the culture of another group of people, because I believe we were created as one Human Race, and cultures are all to be respected and shared. You assume way too much. I don't even consider myself to be a liberal. I'm more into Eisenhower-style progressive conservatism. We used to be called "Blue Dog Democrat."
What was with the casting in this movie? Why was a Chinese drunk the dad to a black girl? Why was a fairly dark black woman mother to a very white young man? Why was a character meant to be a reflection of Charles Dickens himself of Indian heritage and acting as the son to a white family? This was just plain bizarre to watch and highly distracting. I generally like classic novel adaptations but this came off as very distracting in the course of the movie. Was it meant to be political or something?
This film doesn't deserve a name "David Copperfield"
i loved this book as a kid but what is this movie...?
An adaptation of the book.