Reviews

And oh my God, it is awful. I will admit right now I am not enchanted with making the old new again...why can't it just be mostly old? Period drama is meant to show what life looked like in a specific period. I hate hate hate when new music is added to eras hundreds of years ago. I hate when the hairstyles on the females show long flowing locks that would never have been seen loose like that ever, and only even down on girls under 11 or so...and even then neatly braided etc...why do producers think modern people can't look at people from other times in history as they were? Sure, diversity is one thing but please dress the actors according to the era and have them say things those people would have said. I used to watch BBC period drama to learn about costumes and customs of a particular period. Now the fad is to plop modern actors into fancy prom dresses and let them rock out while showing how independent and feisty they are. That's fine for Mean Girls or Clue remakes but Edith Wharton wrote classic serious novels that showed how constrained women were by the societies they lived in. Sometimes they broke out but they always paid a price. I know this show was not targeted to me, that much is clear, but I made the mistake of hoping it would be done like the 1995 version which was excellent and still shows the personalities of the young women without turning them into manic pixies on acid. Now I just hope Hollywood leaves these old stories alone, I can always watch the better versions thank heavens.

Not based on any book or movie. I only watched this due to my obsession with costume drama and 18th century in particular. But there is a reason I prefer to rewatch BBC series from the seventies to most of the newer films and series claiming to be "period drama". Those at least followed the basic mores and customs of the time portrayed for the most part and worked hard to get the shapes of costumes and hair accurate. Now in these newer ones you see long flying curls on grown women (which you would not see even on little girls in most eras) modern eye makeup and "shrugs" to act as Spencer jackets etc...to name just a few. I love period drama and history and am sure that most people can manage to watch and enjoy these shows showing how people looked, acted and dressed during the time that they lived...but producers seem to think a modern audience can't handle that, that we must have modern dialogue that clangs on the ear like a metal trash bin lid, pop music and beachy waves, in order to engage. It would be nice if some of these series were made for adults who go into it wanting to see how life was lived "back then" and not some young producer's idea of what would be cool and watchable. I know I am in an age bracket (old) that it not catered to in any way, shape or form ...okay I get it. But most teens are not looking for period drama anyway unless it has time travel, dinosaurs or vampires so they are not the audience for these period dramas anyway. I just watched "Mr Malcolm's List" which is a perfectly enjoyable, benign romance/comedy but the idea of Mr. Malcolm taking a young lady to the opera on a "date" early on made me laugh out loud and kind of ruined it for me. There is no way in hell any young woman was going on a date with a man or that he would even ask. Unmarried young women often could not even be alone in a room with a brother or cousin, so strict was the division of sexes, without a chaperone. That may be a small point but it tilts the whole of the era being shown. Why bother make it "period" at all if you intend to modernize it beyond all recognition? Just make a romantic comedy or drama and be done with it. So many disappointments recently. But this show, and also the latest "Persusian" have to be clunkers for sure.

Be a little uncomfortable. For years, Dickens' literary reputation protected him from much scrutiny about his personal life. He fathered ten children with his wife Catherine but as his ego and fame grew, his interest in his wife diminished. Meeting a teenage actress named Ellen Terrnan only served to expedite his eagerness to rid himself of his wife. Even while embroiled in an affair with the lady lady, he took the time to write letters to the press in defense of himself and denying any improper behavior on his part. How the public viewed him was his ruling passion...and he was determined to be thought of an upright, moral man of genius. Meanwhile he banished his wife from his presence, set his young lady up in a house and carried on with his speaking tours, his books and the management of his reputation.

Dickens comes across as a sort of predator, a manipulator and a gas-lighter. He must have been well into his forties while romancing a 19-year old who hero-worshipped him. Today, in the wake of "Me Too", he would have been exposed and possibly "cancelled" although his fame would probably have protected him.

The acting in the movie is well done across the board. I watched it more for my love of British period drama than a love for Charles Dickens. I enjoy some of the miniseries based on his novels but he writes in a highly sentimental style that does not quite do it for me. A lot of his characters are stereotypes, women in particular. That trait is common to many Victorian make writers and makes you wonder why so many seemed to have issues with women. The angel/devil syndrome was strong as far as defining women of the era. A good woman was a wife and mother above all. If a widow, she never remarried, instead holding her dead spouse up as a saint a la Queen Victoria. If a woman or girl "went bad" I.e became pregnant while unmarried, only two choices were possible in Victorian fiction; she repeated and entered a convent t or she died. Dickens seems to embrace these so-called values whole heartedly whole busy with his own adulterous affair. In some ways he becomes more interesting for having such "flaws" but the hypocrisy is sickening at the same time.

Enjoy the movie!

Both of the leads, Nicola Paget and Stuart Wilson, are nearly perfect in their roles. Wilson especially is a fully developed character and one a woman might fling away her life for. Nicola Paget is beautiful, high strung, and portrays Anna as a woman on the edge...more or less forced into an early marriage with a stuffy, pompous and very dull statesman. Only the love for her young son prevents her from divorcing at any cost. Meanwhile the love of her life Vronsky suffers for her as she drives herself to distraction. Wilson is really excellent as Vronsky and I also loved him as Fernando Lopez in The Pallisers. He is an underrated dramatic actor. The supporting characters are mostly well-cast and well-acted. I have watched many versions of this story and this version ranks at the top for me.

Not especially suspenseful and poorly written. Unrealistic as far as the sister trailing the homicide detective loke she was part of the team. She was annoying as hell and I was wishing thay whatever happened to her brother would turn out to be her fault. The acting is mediocore and no one is rising above it. Many of the limes are given as though reading off cards. I kept it n, as I was reading and it was okay as background noise as it is not exactly a show requiring all of your senses.

But it tries to be too many things...the number of storylines are way too many. The bad cop, the mom who makes her child sick on purpose, the drugs and poor llama, the woman digging up all the secrets in town, faked pregnancies, bodies buried in walls, chases on foot through town, WTF

The kitchen sink of mini-series

Sort of sorry to see Richard Armitage in these shows...he belongs firmly in the 19th century in my mind...not these cheesy over the top dramas...