Amistades peligrosas

This just seems like the scriptwriter has read the premise of Dangerous Liaisons on the back of the book and created a series based purely from their own ideas of what the novel should be about, the period is the same as the novel and some of the characters are but others have been added for some reason. I also want accuracy for anything set historically and while servants and lower classes may be EM in the 18th century a Chevalier would definitely not be. If you want to watch an adaption of DL then watch the 1988 film. Even the Colin Firth film Valmont is a closer adaption and at least they changed the name so as not to confuse people. Unfortunately modern adaptions of classics are getting so bad they should just use the premise and set them in the modern day as modern writers and producers are unable to take themselves out of today's society. I am dreading the next adaption of a Jane Austen novel.

The only reason to watch this mindless tripe is for Lesley Manville. So disappointing. It pays no respect to the source material, turning a story about rich, bored, wicked people destroying others for sport into romantic fluff. Do yourself a favor - read the book or the play, watch the 1988 film or 1989's Valmont. Even Cruel Intentions is a more worthy update of the story.

It looks beautiful. The costumes are gorgeous, the cinematography is first rate. Too bad it's all wasted on a silly, adolescent screenplay. Call it something else, because this show has nothing to do with Dangerous Liaisons.

Ok a lot people reviewing this obviously didn't bother to read the synopsis or watch the trailer. This is a television show so they are expanding on the novel. The show starts by giving origin stories to Merteuil and Valmont. The direction for their origin stories is kind of weird to me. Merteuil and Valmont being snobbish aristocratics is part of their appeal and says a lot about who they are personally. The show instead tries to give them a Dickensian type of humble beginnings origin. I'm guessing they are trying to make them more relatable but I find it kind of boring. Merteuil and Valmont are rich jerks who look down on people. Aside from that the show obviously is shot well. The female lead is descent. Not sold on the male lead though. The supporting actors are good. I'll keep watching but I'm going to manage my expectations.

There is some excellent casting in this show but unfortunately the lead isn't one of them. Valmont isn't sexy or charming or attractive. He's smarmy and unappealing and not too bright. And he looks like a 16-year-old boy; not someone wealthy Parisian women would want in their beds.

Character development is seriously flawed. Personalities go from angelic to evil to meh back to angelic in the course of one episode. So much flip-flopping.

And why add the murder story line? Completely unnecessary and didn't really develop into anything plot wise. A bug dud. Same w/the kid being alive. Why? It went nowhere.

Six stars b/c I'm still entertained by just about any period piece. Shame on me.

This production is another example of today's media trend of dumbing down great past works of art that appealed to mind, body and heart and instead writing sophomoric scripts full of insultingly expository dialogue, gratuitous sex, and non-existent character development. Oh...and somehow it's ok to anachronistically race flip historical characters, but not gender flip any. Instead, this adaptation reinforces cliche false sex stereotypes about men and women and turns the delightful cat and mouse game of the original tale between a female and her male equal into a cringeworthy catfight between two women spewing the comically insulting female tropes we (unfortunately) see everywhere else these days. Skip it. I had to go back and watch the Glenn Close/John Malkovich (1988) and Annette Bening/Colin Firth (1989) versions just to cleanse my palette. Oh, what Leslie Manville could have done with scripts of that caliber! But...now we'll never know...