Devotee of the books appalled


Well, I was wondering what someone would think who had never read the books and I am surprised that apparently many think it quite good. I thought it was awful, though some of the cast were good. I could write a book myself on everything that was wrong with it. The Jenkins character was badly cast for a start; the guy looks like a tuxedo model. The way scenes were buggered about with, and characters twisted out of shape...they would have needed twice the time to do justice to the novels of course. I'm so glad I got it free from interlibrary loan, and didnt spend good money on it.!

reply

The guy playing Jenkins is no tuxedo model--he's James Purefoy. You might check out his IMDb listing. His beautiful performance is the only reason to watch this miniseries.

reply

Well, maybe he is good in other roles, but in this one he is about as subtle as a window mannequin. The character in the main is an onlooker or witness, but Purefoy plays him like a inhibited soap opera performer.

reply

Well, I was wondering what someone would think who had never read the books and I am surprised that apparently many think it quite good. I thought it was awful, though some of the cast were good. I could write a book myself on everything that was wrong with it. The Jenkins character was badly cast for a start; the guy looks like a tuxedo model. The way scenes were buggered about with, and characters twisted out of shape...they would have needed twice the time to do justice to the novels of course. I'm so glad I got it free from interlibrary loan, and didnt spend good money on it.!

****************************************


I believe several writers were approached to render this into a television series and they all abandoned the task as impossible. Compressing a series of novels into one homogeneous whole must be a daunting task. But they achieved a result and got the job done. However, you don't like it. Did you have sore eyes after reading all those hundreds-of-thousands of words? Alas, few of us have the stamina! Now, back to the library with you - and don't try our patience again,,,,,,,,,

(silly boy)

reply

Yeah, they "got the job done," and got paid, like a road crew laying asphalt all bumpy and tilted. And made a piece of crap out of a literacy masterpiece.

It's true, I would rather re-read any good book than watch a mediocre TV show or movie. But that's just me. Still, there are many great movies and TV shows that I love. So p--s off. (And I'm not a boy.)

reply

[deleted]

I, too, thought they did a commendable job, considering that characters, events and subplots had to be jettisoned. I enjoyed the performances very much, and thought the overall production looked quite good.

I don't know anyone who's read the entire cycle of novels - I myself read the first novel but lost interest a few pages into the second - this was some two or three years back, I suppose, maybe more, and I remembered nothing of it when I watched the series this week. But I had no trouble enjoying the series, though it was difficult to feel any real involvement or emotional connection to any of it (except for the scene with Ted Jeavons after the house was bombed - Michael Wilson was superb).

It's THE LORD OF THE RINGS that I can't imagine anyone who hasn't read the book enjoying - count me in on that one!

"In my case, self-absorption is completely justified."

reply

I've read all twelve books, four times. I think the TV version is a creditable effort, but I have always regarded the books as unfilmable and that opinion has not changed. If I had been at Channel 4 I wouldn't have commissioned it.

No man will marry a bilakoro

reply