A Tale of Two Cities

1958
7.1| 1h55m| en| More Info
Released: 04 August 1958 Released
Producted By: The Rank Organisation
Country:
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

British barrister Sydney Carton lives an insubstantial and unhappy life. He falls under the spell of Lucie Manette, but Lucie marries Charles Darnay. When Darnay goes to Paris to rescue an imprisoned family retainer, he becomes entangled in the snares of the brutal French Revolution and is himself jailed and condemned to the guillotine. But Sydney Carton, in love with a woman he cannot have, comes up with a daring plan to save her husband.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

The Rank Organisation

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Cathardincu Surprisingly incoherent and boring
ReaderKenka Let's be realistic.
ChanFamous I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.
Micah Lloyd Excellent characters with emotional depth. My wife, daughter and granddaughter all enjoyed it...and me, too! Very good movie! You won't be disappointed.
Prismark10 This is a straightforward version shot in black and white with some location shooting at Loire Valley in France. Pinewood Studios is used effectively enough, it is uniformly well acted and Bogarde gives an effective enough performance as the lead and a young Christopher Lee is a hiss-able French Aristocrat.The story deals with the strands of the two most notable characters in the novel by Charles Dickens. Charles Darnay and Sydney Carton. Darnay is a French aristocrat who turns his back to the life of wealth and privilege but falls victim to the indiscriminate wrath of the revolution when the reign of terror begins.Carton is an English barrister with a taste for drink who attempts to redeem his misspent life out of his unrequited love for Darnay's wife.There is not much humour in the film because of the subject matter but the pared down story does do the film justice.
Kim Harris Why is it that reviewers insist on complaining that a film is less worthy because it does not exactly stick to the book upon which it is based? There are differences between this film and Dickens's novel and other film adaptations. That does not matter. A film is a film and a book is a book and they are different works of art. What matters is whether the film as a work of art, or entertainment, or narrative, works in its own right and on its own merits. I would contend that this film certainly succeeds on that basis. The narrative is coherent and convincing, despite the unlikely premise of the ending of the story - and you can blame that on Dickens. The film is beautifully shot in black and white just at the time when most features were being filmed in colour and, in my view, this adds to the film. The script is well written, the actors well cast and the performances are convincing. Another reviewer has complained that Darnay and Carton were not played by the same actor. That would be a serious mistake, just as to have Viola and Sebastian played by the same actor in Shakespeare's 'Twelfth Night' is a mistake. Much of the dramatic tension comes from having just enough similarity but not too much. In this way, the different characters of the protagonists are emphasised. Bogarde puts in his customary well-balanced performance and the sympathy between him and Lucie Manette is clear to see without being overplayed. The excellent Dorothy Tutin puts in a convincing performance as the beautiful Lucie and the supporting cast is generally very good. The slight exceptions would probably be M. and Mdme Defarge who are not entirely convincing. He is too weak and she is too histrionic.
Rozinda This is my favourite Dickens book and my favourite Dickens dramatisation. I remember reading that there had been some doubts originally whether Dirk Bogarde matinée idol could manage this part. Instead it was presumably his first chance to show the inimitable quality of his acting. He is perfect in this part and I cannot imagine anyone else ever doing it better although I'd guess Ronald Coleman could equal it. I've seen one other, more recent version and although Carton's actor had a good go at it, it totally lacked the amazing charisma Bogarde provided for what is one of Dickens' most poignant characters - flawed, fascinating, cynical, damaged but wonderful.It's a crying shame this wasn't filmed in colour since the producers did consider doing so and then didn't. But the production and acting are so excellent that you soon don't notice it isn't colour as you become completely immersed in the movie. I suppose it's always possible the lack of colour actually enhances the drama, and for me this story is the most dramatic and poignant of all Dickens - a work of pure genius.
noelcox This is a classic film version of one of Dickin's classic novels. Arguably his best novel (though the critics tend to dismiss it - it has a straightforward plot and structure), it translates into an exceptional film. For those who don't know the story, it concerns the fortunes of the Manette and St Evremonde families at the time of the French revolution. In a Romeo and Juliet type situation, Charles Darnay (alias St Evremonde) loves Lucie Manette, whose father Darnay's uncle had wronged. Now living in London, neither can escape the terrible events in Paris, and they are drawn to a climatic conclusion as the guillotine falls on aristocrat and commoner alike.The real hero of both novel and film is Sydney Carton (Dirk Bogarde), an English lawyer who initially defends Charles Darnay against a charge of treason, and later comes to love Lucie, now married to Darnay. The conclusion of the story, for Sydney Carton at least, is both tragic and inspiring, and Mr Bogarde certainly does justice to the role.