Nord et sud III

I've only just started watching the first episode of book three after going through a marathon of watching two episodes a night of books one and two. Didn't know there was a third until I got the DVD. Have read the book, but it was a while ago.

Inconsistencies avail in this series. Orry Jr. never seems to age. I noticed this at the end of book two. Orry tells George at the hospital he hasn't seen Madeline in two years. We he reunites with her, the baby looks like he's six months if that. He should be almost two years old!! In book three the time line is fuzzy at best. How soon after the war does the setting take place? Orry Jr. is still not that much older, but Gus, Charles' son, is five years old!! He was born after Orry Jr. who looks like he's maybe a year old.

George mentions kids, as in more than one, but no mention made at the end of book two that he has more than one.

Why would Madeline want to build a house in Mont Royal's front yard, when the slave quarters were not destroyed? I thought she was interested in rebuilding Mont Royal, yet she takes the time to build a school for freed slaves. Doesn't she have Justin's house she could sell or live in, or if that was burned down, the property could be sold to help refinance Mont Royal.

If Charles hated the war so much, why wouldn't he stay behind, raise his son, and help rebuild Mont Royal with Madeline.

Why bother replacing Ezra and Simi with Jane and Issac? Why not bring back the two freed slaves that stayed with them to the end of book 2? And the opening scene with the footage of Patrick Swayze making his way across to the front door. That is obviously Mont Royal, because when Madeline is meeting with Ashton at the friend's house in Charleston, from which the double for Patrick exits, the set up and lighting are way different inside.

Though I am a big fan of the first two, I would only recommend watching the third one out of curiosity. It doesn't have nearly the same quality all around. Thank God it was only three episodes instead of six.

After watching the first 2 books, this was a bad one. But book 2 totally strayed from the actual story. If Book 2 would not have strayed so far, this story would have made sense in conjunction with the others. I thought this story was well done. It showed a lot of the problems that existed with the Reconstruction era, and the problems associated with a Democratic president from the south, and the Radical Republicans in power in Congress, who were previously all abolitionists before the war. I do think it was weird for George Hazard and Madeline to marry after the death of their spouses. Also they used a different actor for Charles Main. After seeing the same actor for the 2 previous books, they should have tried to get the original guy back. In the whole trilogy, they also used 3 different women for Isabel Hazard, and also 3 different men for Billy Hazard. That's confusing for those who have seen this whole trilogy over and over.

My first thought watching this is that it was nowhere near as good as books one and two, but it wasn't the worst thing i have watched. The first episode was quite interesting, and the ending to that episode was really good. The only thing i didn't like was that it looked kind of... cheap. I hated the way the scenes were edited, and especially the painting effect used on the opening to each scene, because it was tedious and not so good. Overall though i thought it was okay, and may watch it again in the future. But if you want something exactly like the first 2 books, you might want to steer clear in order to avoid some disappointed, but if u are generally interested, take a look.

Where was cooper Main in the first two parts? Didn't Stanley and Isabel go to jail at the end of part 2? Why are they back as if nothing happened? Did Bent not get blown up in part 2? He looks good for a dead man. This is one of the worst follow-ups in history. Instead of following the concept that the first two mini-series follows, it decides to follow the book by John Jakes. It does do a pretty good job at following the book that it is based on, but unless you have read the books, you would be lost. A note to Hollywood: Do not make a movie that does not follow the book, than decide to make a sequel to it that does. It makes no sense as does this mess of a mini-series.

After Books I & II, what a let-down! First--what's with no Orry in Book III? Hmm. . . too cheap to hire Patrick Swayze? And randomly inventing a brother (Cooper) for Orry that was not in the first 24 hours of the mini-series, but is apparently important enough for the final 6 hours? That's pathetic! Oh, and didn't Elkanah Bent (your favorite villain and mine) did in that huge barn explosion in Book II?

I grew up watching the first two books of "North & South", and I refuse to even recognize this third book as part of the mini-series.