Dodger (2022– ) User Reviews

It is what it is....

[colinkhenry · 6/10 · 27 March 2022]

It's a childrens programme, made for CBBC. It is being aired on BBC1 for family viewing. It's over acted as most childrens drama is, to make it more enjoyable for children. Just as pantomimes are. So the harsh comments on here are not justifiable. You can't compare it to Oliver or any other Dickens stories/drama's. It is loosely based upon the Artful Dodger. Nothing more, nothing less. With regards to the 'diversity' comments - does it really matter? It's a story. Do people think only 'white' people existed in London in the 1830's? It's a childrens drama. Diversity should not matter in the slightest. After all, children do not know any different.

The set and costumes are excellent.

Yes the acting is OTT. But you do have to remember it's a Childrens programme. For the age of 6 upwards. If it was acted as per any normal Dickens type drama children would lose interest as it would be too serious for them.

Victorian London had thousands of black residents

[Meroitic · 7/10 · 14 February 2022]

First let me say it's a good show. My kid loves it and it's interesting enough from an adult perspective that my wife and I can both watch it as well. It's well acted with reasonable amounts of humour and drama side by side.

One thing I found very interesting was that just like real life Victorian London this show had a number of black and brown people in it. This wouldn't be remarkable but for the people who seem enraged by the inclusion of nonwhite actors in the cast because their inclusion constitutes "wokeism". Period pieces are never really realistic because if they were no one would watch them. Our mores are too different and the disease, filth, cruelty, and degradation they took for granted would be unbearably repulsive for us. The shows are aimed at showing a relatable view of the past rather than showing the past as it actually was. So it seems very strange for anyone to ignore the genuinely unrealistic aspects of this and every show set in the Victorian era to fixate on the fact that London was accurately portrayed as having ethnic minority residents.

No show is perfect of course and I found that some of the plots demanded that minor characters display a level of stupidity that was truly astounding. Overall though I'd say it was entertaining and definitely worth giving a chance.

Good fun, easy to watch with the kids.

[phoenixdrumcommunity · 7/10 · 27 February 2022]

Well produced, written and acted show. The characters are rounded and likeable. London is well realised and the score deserves a special mention for being based around exceptionally funky percussion.

Charles Dickens inspired, it's not.

[jasondutton · 4/10 · 16 March 2022]

If you are over the age of 10 this is probably not for you.

As you'd expect, the costumes and sets a really good, however, the script and a large proportion of the acting is terrible.

A great show aimed at children and families

[darrelltill · 8/10 · 22 March 2022]

Ignore the bad reviews on here. This show was created for CBBC and it's great to see a proper production and cast for a children's show. Perhaps it's because they've repeated it on BBC1 in the Sunday afternoon family slot, or because it's on iPlayer, but many seem to be confused about the target audience and are judging it by adult television standards.

Likeable characters

[annebouscal · 7/10 · 21 February 2022]

I'm baffled by the negative commentary and low ratings. It's definitely something a family could watch together.

I've watched two episodes (just getting set for the third) and am happily enjoying it. It was a long time ago that I read Oliver Twist so I'm in no position to comment about how faithful this series is to that portion of the novel. However, I am enjoying seeing the story through childrens eyes, particularly The Dodger, aka Jack Dawkins.

I only wish my adult grandchildren were much younger so we could watch it together and use this program to launch a conversation about what the world was truly like for children in Dickens' era.

Very poor.

[ajhmacleod · 3/10 · 13 March 2022]

The concept is good, but the execution is typically poor from the BBC. Some of the acting is good namely Dodger and Fagin, but the rest are very amateurish like a parody of a village play. Obviously we understand this is a work of fiction but no attempt has been made to actually get things right. In the mid 19th century, the average wage of a market worker was less than a shilling per day, yet the workers seem to be willing to gamble 2 shillings on a card trick. The production is also overshadowed by the BBC diversity rules, this leads to a view of victorian England having a 50% ethnic minority population. Worst of all the production suggests that the mill owner would be black.

It's not a documentary, people!

[mariacalonico · 10/10 · 25 March 2022]

It's fun, it's silly, if you are able to 'suspend your disbelief', it's highly enjoyable. I find that most of the bad reviews here were written by the anti-woke. The main actor who plays Dodger is brilliant! He cracks me up :). And C. Eccleston is great as Fagin.

Great for kids

[bravo1331 · 7/10 · 28 July 2022]

I will keep it short as there is so much hate here.

Just like the 2001 Australian iteration (Escape of the Artful Dodger), this is aimed at kids, so the acting and comedy style is designed to target that audience.

If you can accept it for what it is, then it is enjoyable. Not everything needs to be serious and on point aimed at adults.

Dodge This

[decmurphy-51273 · 20 February 2022]

The Awful Dodger. If the elites at the BBC are wondering why so many people are cancelling their TV licence, it's because of rubbish like this. The world of Charles Dickens as imagined by some woke millennials who've never been outside London. Avoid.

Woke up people!! 🙄

[burganth · 1/10 · 5 April 2022]

Absolute bilge. Is this what we have to suffer? Classic stories ripped up to appeal to the 'new age viewer?' Please stop rewriting history to appease them.

Breath of fresh air

[jaynew-33940 · 8/10 · 19 March 2022]

I think people are far too critical these days of programmes when did just watching a bit of tv become a place to give very unfair comments? I Absolutely loved this I do hope they have a series 2.

CBBC

[Steveoptic · 6/10 · 25 December 2022]

It's funny how many negative reviews appear for a Childrens tv show by adults, complaining about ethnicity, plot, acting and even make up of the child actors. There are many children who happily watch all manner of shows that do not stand up to a critical review.

If the kids like a harmless show - let them watch it.

If you like it as well - great, (But if you can't say nuthin' nice - don't say nuthin') Steve And I love Pratchett.

By coincidence, my favourite book is Dodger and I only wish there had been time to possibly start a series in the style of the Tiffany Aching series... (Though if they were produced by CBBC it would host a vast number of negative reviews!)

Awful

[debbieobrien · 1/10 · 19 February 2022]

The whole thing was dreadful and cringworthy, not worth watching, I gave it 1 star because I had to give it something to be able to leave a review, not worth even a look.

Beyond cheesy

[kdycer · 3/10 · 10 April 2022]

Oh dear. Who is this aimed at? Kids? Young adults? I doubt it would appeal to any of them. It's just pretty bad, cliched sets, awful wigs, the obligatory dirt smudged unconvincingly on faces. The acting is poor and storylines non existent. It's like a parody of period dramas. Dickens must be turning in his grave.

Family Viewing

[simon-692 · 8/10 · 14 March 2022]

Some commenters on here seemed to have missed the fact that this is Children's TV, and for that it is entertainment, nothing more. Yes, there is a bit of forced ethnicity which is unrealistic, but at least children (and indeed the disabled) see themselves represented. If you think that's a bad thing then you have swallowed the Anti-BBC newspaper's spin. Think about why Sky-owning Murdoch wants the BBC shut down eh?

It's amusing and good family viewing. You kids will love it.

Jammy...

[owen-watts · 7/10 · 15 August 2022]

Rhys and Montgomery's cultishly strange mockumentaries are always fun, so I was deeply excited to see this Dickens prequel come to life. It doesn't disappoint, with a sharp young ensemble cast, anchored by the brilliance of Eccleston and Threlfall as well as the occasional comedy legend cameo. There's a lot of broad children's TV foolishness here (and even after the much more consistent special episodes I'm still not certain each episode needs to be so long) but Dodger also has a surprising amount of dark twists, Dickensian empathy and a healthy disrespect for any and all authority figures. I genuinely was really taken with it. I hope we get even more however illogical that is to Oliver Twist but even if we don't I'm certain its contemporary kid audience will remember it fondly for a long time to come and that is a very pleasant thought.

Woke-tastic

[eliasashmole · 1/10 · 14 March 2022]

Laughable, and not in an intended comedy way. Truly a woke-fest from start to finish. More license fee money wasted by the BBC on another experimental series. I wouldn't mind, but it's my and our money being wasted on this by the BBC. However, to be fair, this series is a shoo-in for the BAFTA ceremony in the 'Most Woke Drama series' award.

Great family viewing

[adight-50880 · 8/10 · 8 February 2022]

This is the show that Netflix's Irregulars could've been if pitched to CBBC. It's fun, family centred entertainment, using characters familiar to all. This is the kind of TV the BBC has done so well for years. I'm surprised it's only on CBBCand not getting an early Sunday evening slot on BBC One, where shows like this used to live.

Reviewers complaining it's "woke" or "historically inaccurate" because of a colour blind cast (don't let them near The Great or Bridgerton!) are missing the point, it's not supposed to be, and I'm surprised they haven't complained that Christopher Eccleston isn't Jewish. I can agree that there wouldn't be a black mill owner in early Victorian Lancashire, but if they don't believe that there were black, Asian and mixed race people in Britain at that time, especially in the East End of London, I'm not sure what history they're referring to.

Absolutely abysmal, one star is too much

[dianajoannakhan · 1/10 · 15 February 2022]

Why take a great Terry Pratchett book and then remove all semblance of plot and character development? All comedy surgically removed, plot mangled beyond recognition, characters arcs in shambles. This is the same type of disaster as The Watch. BBC should never ever put their grubby little hands on Pratchett book adaptations. If they called this tv show 'Jacks' Adventures' I wouldn't even have guessed that it's based on a book by my favourite author. Shame on the people who were involved in butchering the script. Christopher Eccleston did his best as Fagin. Madame Tussauds should be deeply offended by episode 2. Honestly, by a quick Google search you could have found an artist who would hove done some decent silicone sculptures for you. I wish I could submit it with a zero stars, one is too much.

Excellent family drama

[katie-63059 · 10/10 · 7 February 2022]

Artfully directed and charismatically delivered by the actors (some being only children), this is a brilliant family adaptation of a classic. Bravo to all cast & crew.

What the...

[lynne611 · 1/10 · 20 March 2022]

God almighty. Says it all. Sincere apologies to Charles Dickens and everybody over five years of age. If this is what they waste the licence fee on, bring back Muffin the Mule.

Absolute Mince.

[bwmcg · 2/10 · 24 February 2022]

There are some big names in this miniseries but for the life of me, I can't understand why.

I know you get paid for acting but do you get paid extra for overacting?

This may be ok for children's tv (at a stretch) but as a serious piece of drama? Never.

We love it

[paullouise-92583 · 9/10 · 25 February 2022]

Ok it might be a bit lightweight. But I watch this with my 10 year old. I love Dickens and he loves this. So we both enjoy it. I watch so much family film trash that counts as family viewing. Thank you BBC.

it's ok for kids...

[vixescape · 3/10 · 15 December 2023]

I have always loved Chris Eccelston, so seeing this was a must for me, but apart from the leads the acting was really not top notch, with mumbled lines & make up props like wigs that looked rather silly. This really is not for me (The series Artful Dodger is better for production values) but I can see how this would appeal to children & young adults alike, who may enjoy it. Some of the story lines did not make much sense & character development was lacking in many areas when a story like this needs good strong characters to make it believable. For me Dodger was hollow & not really attention grabbing, leaving me to think this has all been done before. & YES! Of course it has! The story has been televised & made into films for many years & a lot of those previous attempts are much more engaging than Dodger is, but children will like it.