Radio Times

As a rule, the best reason to watch a BBC Dickens adaptation is to see the pride of British character acting in full sail, and on that front, Little Dorrit has not disappointed.

The script is full of galloping eccentrics; so much so, you start to wonder if writer Andrew Davies misread the brief and took his inspiration from Little Britain. This is good news for some of the cast, as it means they can weigh in with performances so deliciously hammy they might as well be honey roasted, covered in breadcrumbs and served with slices of pineapple.

There's a growling Alun Armstrong, a monocled Robert Hardy, a shrieking Annette Crosbie, a simpering Ruth Jones, a Tom Courtenay bouncing between delusion and tragic arrogance and, of course, a leering, snarling, over-the-top-and-then-some pantomime villain in Andy Serkis as Rigaud.

But my best supporting actor award goes to the restrained Russell Tovey as John Chivery. The episode where he proposed to Amy Dorrit by the riverside, only to be turned down, was heartbreaking. "I set my heart on you," he breathed, barely able to get his words out, a lifetime of disappointment dawning on his face. It was the standout scene of the drama so far. (Doctor Who supremo Russell T Davies tipped Tovey as a possibility to play the next Doctor and you can sort of see why.)

There have been other touching moments. But overall, there's a nagging sense that Andrew Davies may have spread his story a bit too thinly and that two half-hour episodes a week don't work as well as costume drama's traditional berth - an hour on a Sunday night.

What's missing is narrative oomph: the characters drift along but there's no sense of a big, meaty conflict driving them. "I'm all for the heart and b****r the plot details," Davies has written of his approach, and perhaps that's the problem. Mind you, there's a long way to go with the story yet, including a few plot twists with the kind of contemporary resonance drama producers dream of (life and debt Victorian-style may not, it seems, have been that different from our own). So we live in hope.

**

For more on Little Dorrit - including photo galleries and blogs - take a look at our dedicated page.

Little Dorrit was great, wonderful performances from all yhe actors, especiallyTom Courtenay, cant wait for the dvd. Thanks to everyone on the production, I am seething that it won no baftas, Tom Courtenay deserved to win. I loved Bleak House as well. and am longing for the next Dickens novel to be shown. He is my favourite author. I hope it will be Dombey and Son with Tom Courtenay.

I absolutely hated this Little Dorrit from the moment when Ammy's sister told her not to'cramp my style'. That was when I realised Little Dorrit was on a steep learning curve. I was also too distracted by every pie seller and street urchin being a BAFTA winner looking for an Emmy. But Russell Tovey was indeed sublime.

Should have been hour long episodes; MacFadyen too young looking to play Arthur; otherwise, thoroughly excellent!

I've been a fan of Dickens all my life and I'm always eager to see any new adaptation of his work. Characterisation was Dickens's forte and the range of figures that he created serves to illustrate the extent of his imagination. John Mortimer once said that the people he wrote about were often 'one foot above the ground', that is to say Dickens's characters are a curious and memorable mix of realism, eccentricity, humour and exaggeration. He was a story-teller and his purpose was to enteratin his reader. I think the recent BBC adaptation of 'Little Dorrit' fully understood this. The entire cast, production team and Mr Davies are all to be congratulated on an excellent adaptation.

I have also just finished watching the last episode and agree that Russell Tovey was fabulous as John Chivery. My heart felt so much more for the character then it did when I read the book. The way Mr Tovey portrayed the final confrontation with Arthur Clennum was truly heat-wrentching and immediately transported me to the heart-break of my first love. (Albiet, at 17 year old!) My most sincere congrats, though, goes to Eve Myles and her potrayal of Maggie. After 10 seconds of seeing this character on screen did I, and more importantly my 7 year-old avid Dr-Who-fan-son, forget that Miss Myles actually plays the fiesty role of Gwen in Torchwood! This actress has revealed what a wide range of roles she is capable of and I hope to see more of it in the future.

What a superb actor Tovey is. The last episode 'while I was breaking my heart over her....' I'm afraid we were all unashamedly sobbing. I would make him the next doctor. By the way, all this talk of hamming up the acting? Well, Dickens was a sublime writer (not as good as his contemporary Elizabeth Gaskell) and ultimately a popular writer. People do tend to idolise, they do it with Shakespeare, the characters are ripe for wringing every last drop from acting wise!

I love watching however Charles Dickens's books are portrayed because I do not have the time to read them and this is a fast-track way to enjoy them.

Having seen the final "Little Dorrit" episode last night, I can only agree - Russell Tovey was amazing and outstanding as John Chivery. My heart bled for him as he fought with his despair and continuing love for Amy

I have loved every moment of Little Dorrit just as I did Bleak House. Yes, they both pale when compared the novels - how can they not? God bless Andrew davies.

Heavens above, Dickens wrote hammy characters, scads and legions of them that stay in the memory and provide even the slightly literate with wonderful quotations and sayings. The episodic production is great, just as Dickens published his books, keeping his readers hanging on in great anticipation for the next instalment. The acting is wonderful, hams and all. The only real fault lies in the repeated anachronisms in the script. I'd have liked it better if the dialogue had followed more closely Dickens' own use of language, which could scarcely be bettered. Dickens is wonderful, presenting the reader with a richness of image, language and character that can never be equalled by even well-produced, pacey modern series like Spooks.

I love Dickens, so I was a bit disappointed when the minor characters weren't photographed & listed with the rest of them on www.radiotimes.com/little-dorrit. I consider this important since it's a 7 week long show with about 60 characters, making it difficult to follow. Still trying to figure out who Mrs F's Aunt is (Radio Times cast listing).

I reread the book recently and became convinced that it is perhaps Dickens' greatest work. Andrew Davies has spoiled it terribly. The short episode is followed by a spoiler of what is to come, and preceded by the inevitable 'story so far' idiot's guide. Clennam is too young, Fanny is incongruous (as stated above), but I think Tom Courtenay has captured Edward Dorrit to a tee.

Of course there is hammy acting, Dickens himself would have approved of it, I think. His public readings were probably something of the same ilk. The style of writing, episodic and presaging the soap operas of today, was exciting to audiences, and Davies has marvelously failed to capture it! Perhaps he is becoming a little blase after earlier successes.

At least the production design is good!

I hope when the BBC finally decide to put the whole thing onto dvd, they edit it to get rid of the short episode format.

David Butcher says he is relishing the ham of Andrew Davies Little Dorrit. My family and I disagree - it is the over the top ham acting that completely ruins an otherwise excellent production though an hour would be preferably to 30 minute episodes. We are all great Dickens fans and believe that many of Dickens characters such as Mr Pancks played by Eddie Marsan are supposed to be "larger than life" and that actors mentioned by David Butcher such as Alun Armstrong, Robert Hardy, Annette Crosbie, Ruth Jones and Tom Courtenay are such characters and far from being hammy portray them very well indeed. We also agree that Russell Tovey and Claire Foy are top draw and like all outstanding actors they just become their characters without having to make any effort. Matthew MacFayden is also excellent as Arthur Clennam. He has been criticised in the media as being "wooden" but we think this criticism is completely unfair and untrue. What spoils the production for us is the silly hammy over-acting straight out of pantomime theatre by characters such as the villain Rigaud who is like a demented Captain Hook in a 3rd rate pantomime production, the childlike Maggie who overacts her simpleness so much that her character becomes ridiculous - if she toned her performance down a bit it would be much more realistic, Fanny Dorrit who is made up like a grotesque puppet both on and off the stage and speaks in a shrill harsh voice straight out of East Enders - strange when her father, uncle and younger sister Amy speak in quiet refined tones. Pet Meagles who has an infuriating and irritating manner of smirking and constantly chewing her bottom lip, her husband Henry Gowan who has a tediously boring monotonous voice and Tattycoram who tries so hard to act her part and in doing so fails miserably by over-acting which makes her characcter so unconvincing.

Dickens villains were meant to be sinister and menacing like Mr Tulkinghorn in Bleak House who was so brilliantly portrayed by Charles Dance, Mr Murdstone in David Copperfield - a spine chilling performance from Trevor Eve and who could ever forget Oliver Reed as Bill Sikes in Oliver Twist! Little Dorrit is full of wonderful actors and actresses, Judy Parfitt, Bill Patterson, Amanda Redman,Sue Johnston and Maxine Peak to name but a few. It seems a pity to us that hammy acting has to be included in this otherwise first rate TV production.

I loved "Bleak House" - the casting was faultless - but, although many aspects of "Little Dorrit" are excellent, some things don't quite ring true. Matthew MacFadyen is very good but too young. Arthur is supposed to be 40; he doesn't propose to Pet, but tries to convince himself that he isn't in love with her as he thinks he'd too old for her. Tattycoram wasn't "adopted" as we understand the term today; she was taken into the household to be a maid for Pet, which was an acceptable thing to do at the time.

I don't think you can blame Andrew Davies for the thinness or otherwise of the story. Dickens must take some responsibility, after all he wrote it. The point of presenting the book in this way is, I understand, to replicate the way it was first presented in serial form in a magazine. There is a lot of pleasure in watching the layers of the plot build up and in anticipating its resolution. I'm in no rush!