IMDb रेटिंग
5.8/10
1.1 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
षडयंत्रकारी पूर्व प्रेमियों की एक जोड़ी प्रलोभन की शक्ति का उपयोग करके दूसरों का शोषण करने का प्रयास करती है.षडयंत्रकारी पूर्व प्रेमियों की एक जोड़ी प्रलोभन की शक्ति का उपयोग करके दूसरों का शोषण करने का प्रयास करती है.षडयंत्रकारी पूर्व प्रेमियों की एक जोड़ी प्रलोभन की शक्ति का उपयोग करके दूसरों का शोषण करने का प्रयास करती है.
- 1 BAFTA अवार्ड के लिए नामांकित
- 3 कुल नामांकन
एपिसोड ब्राउज़ करें
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
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...
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.
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 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.
I don't agree with the reviews that were discontent over the series departing from the original source material. I do not mind if a film strays from an original story as long as it's well written and directed. Sadly this series not only changed the story but replaced it with something much worse.
The dialogue was dull and boring, the story uninspired and convoluted, and the pace was painfully slow. It's a mystery as to how these shows get green lit. I really like the Starz network's historical dramas but this one was a major disappointment. I suppose the actors did the best they could with terrible dialogue but not even good actors could save this.
The dialogue was dull and boring, the story uninspired and convoluted, and the pace was painfully slow. It's a mystery as to how these shows get green lit. I really like the Starz network's historical dramas but this one was a major disappointment. I suppose the actors did the best they could with terrible dialogue but not even good actors could save this.
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.
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.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाLesley Manville originated the role of Cécile de Volanges in the 1985 Royal Shakespeare Company stage version.
- कनेक्शनVersion of Les liaisons dangereuses (1959)
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How many seasons does Dangerous Liaisons have?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें