De Niro's appearance and the performances by Chris Cooper and Anne Bancroft save this film from being a total waste.
I'll admit, it starts out good (really good, in fact), but it ends up just being OK.
Hey there, Johnny Boy, I hope you fry!

I think the David Lean is "better" if you especially wanted a movie that stayed true to the book. I personally didn't care that Cuaron ventured into his own world there, especially when he seemed to know what he was doing (for the most part). When the "simple love story" is crackling with fire and energy (and, of course, visual nuance), I become forgiving of the film's faults.
Clear eyes, full hearts, can't lose.

It's a good movie but not the best adaptation of this particular story. The David Lean version is better. I think the problem with this version, as Ebert pointed out in his otherwise-positive review, is that Cuaron had to work with a script that reduced the novel's merits into a simple love story. And it's still a good movie, but no longer the fascinating coming-of-age story Dickens conceived; as a studio pic, I much prefer what Cuaron did with
A Little Princess
and
Prisoner of Azkaban
.

Hot Dog!!

enlighten me

if you had a functioning brain, it would be obvious
What the $%*& is a Chinese Downhill?!?