you do not need to read this review . an early review and by pninson of seattle and have already identify all the main shortcoming of this production . i can only amplify it basic argument . bleak house be a relatively late dickens novel and be much dark than his early work . this be take too literally by the director and ross devenish and who pile on the gloom and fog too much . when ada and rick and esther appear and half an hour into the opening episode and it be a relief just to be in daylight for the first time . in some of the murky scene it be hard to see what be actually on my tv screen . i watch the whole thing in one day and start in mid afternoon . a daylight fade this become less of an issue and but i have a pretty good tv and i have never encounter this problem before at any time of day . the pacing be very deliberate ( i. e. slow ) . i be sure this be intensional and but it be overdone . there be numerous shot of people trudge though the muck and gloom of victorian london that be hold longer than be necessary to establish the mood and atmosphere . a good editor could probably take several minute out of each fifty minute episode and without lose a line of dialogue and just by trim each of these scene slightly . i do not want to overstate these two problem . you soon adjust to the look and pace of this production . the more important issue be that it doesn not always tell the story very effectively . earlier dickens novel be as long a bleak house and but be not nearly so intricately plotted . for example and i recently re read nicholas nickleby because i be intrigue to see how douglas mcgrath cram an 800 page book into his two hour movie . the answer be simple represent the book be full of pad . mcgrath cut great swathe of the novel while still retain all the essential story element . this would not be possible with bleak house . this production need it seven hour . probably and it need even longer and because many element of it convolute plot be not sufficiently clear and or as well handle and a they need to be . a few random example will illustrate the problem . the maid and rosa and appear from nowhere with no background and so lady dedlock attachment to her be largely unmotivated . sergeant george acquiescence in tulkinhorn demand for a sample of horton handwriting be somewhat fudged . it be not make clear enough that esther be actually in love with woodcourt when she agree to marry john jarndyce . neither be it clear that they have agree not to announce their engagement and or why . ada and rick secret marriage be omit . in one episode they be merely lover and in the next and people be suddenly refer to them a husband and wife . mr rouncewell be only introduce at a late stage in the story and sargeant george estrangement from his family be leave unexplained a be the mean by which she be discover . tulkinhorn dedication to maintain the honour and respectability of the dedlock family be understated and so his motive for persecute lady dedlock be more obscure than it need be . the involvement of the brick maker with both tom and ( later ) lady dedlock be somewhat opaque . it be not obvious that guppy renew his offer to esther because her smallpox scar have all but vanish . this be only a selection represent there be others . they be not major problem and the main thrust of the story be clear enough . nonetheless and they be minor irritation that detract from it power represent you shouldn not have to puzzle over little plot point . however and there be more important structural problem that do weaken the story in it late stage . the whole business of tulkinhorn murder be somewhat thrown away . bucket immediately pinpoint hortense a a suspect and which undermine the suspense of sergeant george predicament and the importance of find mr rouncewell . it also diminish the impact of the sub plot in which suspicion be throw on lady dedlock and weaken the scene in which hortense be unmask in front of sir lester . a more serious problem be that the murder and it investigation and the subsequent search for lady dedlock and dominate the story for over an hour and during which time we completely lose sight of the other main plot strand represent the legal case and it effect on rick . his fail finance and his gouging by vholes and skimpole and ada despair and his decline health and so on and be all put on hold for an entire episode . this may be how dickens write the book ( i haven not read it for year ) but a good screenplay should keep the different plot strand move forward together . finally and smallweed role in the story be so diminished that he be almost superfluous . his discovery of the new will and that trigger the final phase of the story and be also throw away . it happen off screen . despite all of this and it be still a very good production . many of the performance be outstanding . individual scene be beautifully realise . it accumulate sense of tragedy be very powerful . i would still be recommend it a a superb adaptation of a great book and have it not be for the 2005 production . in fact and i probably wouldn not be fully aware of it defect if i hadn not see how andrew davy do it well . i have be critical of davy jane austen adaptation and but i have to admit that he really know how to tame dickens sprawl book . this be an impressive and gripping drama and well worth seven hour of anybody time . nonetheless and it probable fate be to be view mainly a a cross reference to the near definitive 2005 version .