IMDb-BEWERTUNG
7,9/10
4946
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Füge eine Handlung in deiner Sprache hinzuTales of love across two films highlighting the very different challenges that face the couples, With Michael and Thomas just after WWII, and Adam and Steve in the present day.Tales of love across two films highlighting the very different challenges that face the couples, With Michael and Thomas just after WWII, and Adam and Steve in the present day.Tales of love across two films highlighting the very different challenges that face the couples, With Michael and Thomas just after WWII, and Adam and Steve in the present day.
- Auszeichnungen
- 1 Gewinn & 1 Nominierung insgesamt
Folgen durchsuchen
Empfohlene Bewertungen
I can't remember when a movie has haunted me more than this one, at least since Brokeback Mountain, which has a similar resolution to the first part of this Masterpiece Theater miniseries. I was so sad after seeing Brokeback Mountain that I never wanted to see it again. But something about Man in an Orange Shirt keeps drawing me back again and again. Having the second part to help resolve the hurt and pain is part of it. But it's the first 17 minutes I'll remember most, in which two main characters meet in WWII Italy and, two years later, resume their relationship. The editing, the score, and two very attractive and believable lead actors are perfection. There's also a love letter, key to the plot, that will bring tears to your eyes, it's that beautifully written.
This two-part miniseries leaves many questions, such as what happened in the 60-year interval between episodes. The second part, set in 2017, answers many of them if the viewer watches and listens closely for clues. The two parts are so different, it might seem that there are two different directors. The first one plays out cinematically like a movie from the '40s or '50s, with lush colors, a stirring theme, the thrill of a long-denied romance explosively consummated, and a somewhat melodramatic conclusion that leaves the viewer wanting more. As an intentional contrast, the second part follows present-day stylistic conventions, with quick edits, repeating motifs, more sex scenes, and some dark and intensely personal confrontations. There's an interesting dichotomy raised by pitting these two episodes against each other: How can same-sex relationships survive a world that overwhelmingly condemns them, and what happens organically when the legal condemnation is removed but the prejudice remains?
All of the acting is superb, which is to be expected from the venerable Vanessa Redgrave, but the other lead actors (who don't yet come close in name recognition) are impressive in their very difficult and heartbreaking scenes. At the top of my list is Andrew Jackson-Cohen, who is the definition of leading-man material. I'd seen him in lighthearted or action fare, but this man deserves to be cast in more dramatic roles like this. I can't fathom why he didn't garner a ton of acting awards.
If you can, watch the BBC original. There are many short snippets of dialog and reactions that make the story feel much less rushed and add greater understanding of the characters' motivations.
This two-part miniseries leaves many questions, such as what happened in the 60-year interval between episodes. The second part, set in 2017, answers many of them if the viewer watches and listens closely for clues. The two parts are so different, it might seem that there are two different directors. The first one plays out cinematically like a movie from the '40s or '50s, with lush colors, a stirring theme, the thrill of a long-denied romance explosively consummated, and a somewhat melodramatic conclusion that leaves the viewer wanting more. As an intentional contrast, the second part follows present-day stylistic conventions, with quick edits, repeating motifs, more sex scenes, and some dark and intensely personal confrontations. There's an interesting dichotomy raised by pitting these two episodes against each other: How can same-sex relationships survive a world that overwhelmingly condemns them, and what happens organically when the legal condemnation is removed but the prejudice remains?
All of the acting is superb, which is to be expected from the venerable Vanessa Redgrave, but the other lead actors (who don't yet come close in name recognition) are impressive in their very difficult and heartbreaking scenes. At the top of my list is Andrew Jackson-Cohen, who is the definition of leading-man material. I'd seen him in lighthearted or action fare, but this man deserves to be cast in more dramatic roles like this. I can't fathom why he didn't garner a ton of acting awards.
If you can, watch the BBC original. There are many short snippets of dialog and reactions that make the story feel much less rushed and add greater understanding of the characters' motivations.
The emotions, the love, the fear, the self-hatred, the harsh realities. I really loved it; however it felt incomplete, like we got part 1 and part 3 but they forgot to film part 2. Too many unanswered questions for a drama with this much emotional heft.
It is far to be perfect. and that does to critic it very easy. but it gives the right story, using the right actors. and that saves a lot it. because it is a film about secrets, love and relationship. at first sigh, two films. different. with a common point. in fact, it is a film about family. from different perspectives. with wise manner to explore sensitivities, decisions, solitudes. sure, a BBC film is , always, decent to remarkable. but, in this case, the manner to define the honesty, the link between men from same family, in different periods, defining their "sin" in different ways, is more than admirable. and the end, the end has the status of changement about many things from the film. not as revelation. but as the detail giving precise form to sihouettes. so, I admitt : I love it !.
After I had seen the 1st part about the heartbreaking love story of the two lovers Oliver Jackson-Cohen as Michael Berryman and James McArdie as Thomas March, I was looking forward to see how their love story would be going on. Unfortunately it has actually stopped at the end of episode 1. Episode 2 is actually another gay love story about the grandson of Michael. You can say it is a drama crossing generations.
That is exactly the problem, two hours for two love stories is simply too short to achieve a better outcome. Especially the love story between Michael Berryman and Thomas March is simply too short and that I guess and believe most of the viewers would like to watch a longer story for that part. The casting of the two actors Oliver Jackson-Cohen and James McArdie for the two roles are really perfect. They have the chemistry as that pretty pair. Their acting is perfect, watching them in this film just feel like that they are a pair of real lovers.
On a contrary the casting of the love couple of episode 2 (Julian Morris and David Gyasi) is not good. They are good actors but there is no chemistry between the two at all. If one has seen the chemistry which Oliver Jackson-Cohen and James McArdie have delivered in episode 1, one will feel the difference like fruit juice and plain water.
Also the story plot of episode 2 is also weaker too. It does not bring out much passion and spirits. However with crossing generations story lines and add with warm family love and tie between grandma and grand son, it is in a way still a nice episode to watch. The grandma's acting is nice too.
In my opinion, if the complete series is in three hours or at least two and a half hour long (like most 80's mini-series) with a longer well crafted story for the first part and eventually also for the second part, plus a better match casting for the leading roles of the second part, it will surely be much better. I therefore give it 7 stars only.
That is exactly the problem, two hours for two love stories is simply too short to achieve a better outcome. Especially the love story between Michael Berryman and Thomas March is simply too short and that I guess and believe most of the viewers would like to watch a longer story for that part. The casting of the two actors Oliver Jackson-Cohen and James McArdie for the two roles are really perfect. They have the chemistry as that pretty pair. Their acting is perfect, watching them in this film just feel like that they are a pair of real lovers.
On a contrary the casting of the love couple of episode 2 (Julian Morris and David Gyasi) is not good. They are good actors but there is no chemistry between the two at all. If one has seen the chemistry which Oliver Jackson-Cohen and James McArdie have delivered in episode 1, one will feel the difference like fruit juice and plain water.
Also the story plot of episode 2 is also weaker too. It does not bring out much passion and spirits. However with crossing generations story lines and add with warm family love and tie between grandma and grand son, it is in a way still a nice episode to watch. The grandma's acting is nice too.
In my opinion, if the complete series is in three hours or at least two and a half hour long (like most 80's mini-series) with a longer well crafted story for the first part and eventually also for the second part, plus a better match casting for the leading roles of the second part, it will surely be much better. I therefore give it 7 stars only.
All together they are very beautiful stories. Unfortunately they are placed into two 1 hour parts. They needed about double the time to marinate in more storytelling. Each of the individual relationships were so complex I was left wanting to see them develop more gradually. Despite this, the excellent cast (and the director) do all that they can to avoid it all coming off clumsily. There is a lot of beauty on the screen, especially with part 1 of the two.
They were able to make me care about the characters and the parallels between the two accounts, but I think it could have been much richer by delving deeper into each of their stories.
They were able to make me care about the characters and the parallels between the two accounts, but I think it could have been much richer by delving deeper into each of their stories.
WUSSTEST DU SCHON:
- WissenswertesA lot of this is autobiographical for writer Patrick Gale. Like one of the characters in the film, his own mother did discover a pile of love letters in her husband's desk that were written to him by a male friend. She destroyed them, partly out of fear that the discovery of them would incriminate him in the eyes of the law and also out of disgust and ignorance, equating homosexuality with pedophilia.
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
Details
- Laufzeit1 Stunde
- Farbe
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen
Oberste Lücke
By what name was Man in an Orange Shirt (2017) officially released in India in English?
Antwort