The Life and Adventures of Nicholas Nickleby (play) reception was enthusiastic, critical reception was mixed. Frank Rich in "New York Times" reported dull passages piling up as "dead weight", while John Simon in the "New York Magazine" felt that the work was a "middlebrow enterprise" doing "scant justice" to the novel. In contrast Mel Gussow, again in "The New York Times", noted that ""Nicholas Nickleby" remains true to Dickens – many of the lines are taken directly from the novel, dialogue as well as narration – and to first principles of theater" when describing the RSC's recast production in 1986. Playwright and reviewer Thomas Hischak, writing in retrospect
The Life and Adventures of Nicholas Nickleby (1947 film) more exciting as to plot and a good bit more satisfying in the nature and performance of its characters. There are just no two ways about it; the story of "Nicholas Nickleby" — at least, in screen translation — is a good whole cut below that of "Great Expectations" and its tension is nowhere near as well sustained . . . No doubt, the compression of details and incidents compelled by John Dighton's script put Director Cavalcanti on a somewhat unenviable spot, which is evidenced by his failure to get real pace or tension in the film's last half. And