Dev Patel's David Copperfield is yet another example of colourblind casting that has the purists grumbling. But 'historical accuracy' comes in many forms, writes Robbie Collin

A couple of years ago, when it was announced that Dev Patel would be playing the title role in a new adaptation of David Copperfield, I remember wondering what the sly, postmodern rationale behind that choice might be. After seeing the film, I realised it was this: he’d be really good at it.

Patel is a wildly charming screen presence, with a fumbly, self-effacing quality that appealingly undercuts his matinee-idol looks. Yet the 29-year-old British actor is usually cast in roles that trade explicitly on his Indian heritage: Slumdog Millionaire; the two Best Exotic Marigold Hotels; Lion; The Man Who Knew Infinity; Hotel Mumbai.

Regardless of how many croaks of ‘woke’ have come out of the undergrowth in the last week or so from people who’d argue the contrary, the truth is this: race counts for a lot in the film business, and British Asian actors are only rarely cast in roles they needn't have played. When work began on The Personal History of David Copperfield, director Armando Iannucci and his regular casting director Sarah Crowe clearly thought to themselves: let’s be the exception.

Doing so was to their credit. More importantly, it was to their film’s benefit, because Patel is a tremendous fit for the part. Moreover, absolutely nothing is made of David’s race: the other characters don’t remark on it, just as they don’t seem to notice the various familial mismatches the colourblind casting strategy creates. (Mr Wickfield, played by Benedict Wong, is Asian; his daughter Agnes, played by Rosalind Eleazar, is black.)