About Lucky Jim I could say, after watching the movie, that the book is much better than it's adaption to the cinema.
In the book Jim is much better described, we can clearly see that in the movie that does not happen.
In my opinion, Ian Carmichael never fully interprets the role of Jim Dixon and therefore, he never manages to portray the proper Dixon. I didn't like the way some situations was changed, in order to make it funnier like the procession scene, or even the fighting scene. About the dog, it's presence was funny, but not absolutely necessary. They could have made the film funnier without resorting to the dog.
In the book Jim is much better described, we can clearly see that in the movie that does not happen.
In my opinion, Ian Carmichael never fully interprets the role of Jim Dixon and therefore, he never manages to portray the proper Dixon. I didn't like the way some situations was changed, in order to make it funnier like the procession scene, or even the fighting scene. About the dog, it's presence was funny, but not absolutely necessary. They could have made the film funnier without resorting to the dog.