For this year’s edition of the Broadway Bound Blogathon, I wanted to write about a Hallmark film based on a pre-existing Broadway play. My original plan was to read a play and then watch its adaptation, creating an editorial on how these works are similar or different. But, to my surprise, the films I wanted to talk about were based on plays that premiered off-Broadway. During my search for another option, I learned the Charles Dickens story, A Tale of Two Cities, was adapted into a Broadway musical in 2008. For this review, I’ve decided to write about the 1980 Hallmark Hall of Fame version of the aforementioned story. Though I haven’t read A Tale of Two Cities, I have enjoyed seeing the adaptations of Charles Dickens’ literary work. In fact, I liked 1968’s Oliver! so much, I ended up reading Oliver Twist after seeing the movie! So, where does this Hallmark Hall of Fame production stand among other stories by Charles Dickens? Turn the page on this review to find out!

Things I liked about the film:

The acting: One of the strongest scenes in A Tale of Two Cities is when Lucie (portrayed by Alice Krige) reunites with her father, Dr. Alexander Manette (portrayed by Peter Cushing), for the first time in over ten years. After mistaking Lucie as the jailer’s daughter, Alexander goes to his bed, in an attempt to avoid Lucie. As Lucie slowly approaches her father, Alexander’s voice is shaky and he is flinching, unsure of what to make of this visitor. But as soon as he discovers Lucie’s hair matches a lock of hair he kept for many years, Alexander realizes Lucie is, indeed, his daughter. Alexander’s expression changes from fear to shock, as he is in awe about seeing Lucie again. He even gives his daughter a hug. Meanwhile, Lucie is overcome with emotion, tears falling down her face and her voice quivering. Both Alice and Peter were able to effectively sell this on-screen relationship as believable and genuine. The emotions expressed felt realistic as well, which allowed this scene to be so strong!

In A Tale of Two Cities, Chris Sarandon portrays both Sydney Carton and Charles Darnay. Out of these two characters, my favorite was Sydney Carton! Throughout the story, Sydney carried himself with a laid-back confidence that made his personality appealing. Yet, more often than not, he displayed a sad look on his face. Even his eyes looked sad, giving the audience an idea of what he wasn’t saying. This made Sydney brooding and mysterious, making me want to know more about him and curious to see where his story would go. The likability of Sydney Carton can be attributed to Chris’ strong acting talents!

Attention to detail: What can make or break a historical drama is a creative team’s attention to detail. This element in the film-making process can make that story’s world feel immersive, transporting the audience to a specific period in time. The Hallmark Hall of Fame adaptation of A Tale of Two Cities takes place in the late 1700s. Jarvis Lorry’s office provides a great example of this film’s attention to detail when it comes to historical accuracy. On a nearby table, there is a large book, boasting a weathered brown cover. Rolled up paper documents and more brown covered books are scattered in the office’s foreground. In the background, Jarvis can be seen working at a desk similar to that of Ebenezer Scrooge. Though the room invites natural light through a dome shaped window, a small candle chandelier and a multi-candle candle stick provide the office with additional light.

The pacing: The Hallmark Hall of Fame adaptation of A Tale of Two Cities is two hours and thirty-six minutes. This is longer than a typical Hallmark production, which is about an hour and thirty to forty minutes. But A Tale of Two Cities never felt like a long movie to me. That’s because I was so invested in what the characters were doing, as well as the story itself. Though this is a character driven film, there was a satisfying amount of suspense, intrigue, even action. Where these elements were placed in the story made the movie feel evenly paced. The way scenes were filmed, written, and edited also contributed to the overall pace, never making parts of the story feel drawn out or wrapped up too quickly. I was so engaged watching A Tale of Two Cities, the run-time was the last thing on my mind!

What I didn’t like about the film:

Inconsistent inclusion of the French Revolution: An overarching conflict in A Tale of Two Cities is the rise of the French Revolution. In the first half of the movie, this conflict seemed like an afterthought, as the primary focus was placed on events happening in England, such as Charles’ court hearing. When a certain situation causes Charles to return to France, the French Revolution played a larger role in the film’s second half. The movie’s creative team built up to the event itself, visually presenting the harsh reality of the French public versus the upper-crust of French society. However, I wish this conflict had a more consistent presence within the story.

Lack of French accents: Because the French Revolution plays a role in A Tale of Two Cities, some of the story’s key characters are French. But the 1980 Hallmark Hall of Fame presentation is one of those films where every character speaks in a British accent, despite the cultural differences. After a while, I became used to the similarity in accents. I don’t blame the actors, as all I can expect from any actor or actress is for them to try their best with the material given. In my opinion, though, I fault the movie’s casting director for not encouraging the use of French accents.

Unexplained parts of the story: On a few occasions, there were parts of A Tale of Two Cities that confused me, due to their lack of explanations. One perfect example involves Monsieur Ernest Defarge’s wife, Therese. While a man is being guillotined, Therese tells her friend she has recorded the Evrémonde family in her stitching. After this scene takes place, Therese’s statement is never clarified. In fact, that particular stitching isn’t brought up again. Parts of the story like this one should have included explanations within the dialogue.

My overall impression:

Most of Charles Dickens’ adaptations I’ve reviewed on 18 Cinema Lane have garnered favorable results. Both Oliver! and Nicholas Nickelby left such a good impression on me, they respectively found a place in my year-end best movies lists! Now that I have seen A Tale of Two Cities, I can honestly say that tradition will continue! The 1980 Hallmark Hall of Fame production tells an immersive story, taking the audience on a journey through time. What also adds to the experience is the strength of the characters, as the acting and the screenwriting worked well together. From the featured props to the costume design, the creative team’s attention to detail was on full display in this film, showing the care and effort that went into this project. Looking back on A Tale of Two Cities, I can see how the story could be adapted into a Broadway musical. As a matter of fact, I think a musical movie adaptation of A Tale of Two Cities would be very interesting to watch!

Overall score: 8.9 out of 10

Have you seen any adaptations of A Tale of Two Cities? Which story Charles Dickens’ is your favorite? Let me know in the comment section below!

Have fun on Broadway!

Sally Silverscreen