The Larkins

I don't really understand the motivation behind this (extremely loose) adaptation of HE Bates' novels.

A lot of reviewers have commented on the anachronistic racial diversity. It is anachronistic but that doesn't particularly bother me, the problem is more that the script sounds "written by white people" and is very heavy-handed with how it manages that aspect.

What does bother me is jamming 2020s morals and mores into a 1950s setting. The original series and books are very much laid back, laissez-faire, rural romping and hedonism. Amoral, perhaps.

This new series is full of contemporary angst and grating moralising. Ma sounding like a modern-day parenting manual. Lectures on classism. Mariette endlessly wanting to widen her horizons, which cheapens the whole "rural idyll" that the Larkins' village represents.

Then weird plot changes. Why is Oscar no longer their baby? The Larkin children getting it into their heads that Pa is committing adultery. The silly Charley/Tom rivalry.

It's not unenjoyable, but a lot of it just feels pointless, and it lacks the innocent pleasure of the books and the earlier series.

I would urge anyone watching this to give the earlier series a go if you haven't seen it, as well as read the books. There's so much more to love there.

I noted that a certain TV station were running 'The Darling Buds of May' concurrently with 'The Larkins' and I was excited to see a remake. However, the acting is certainly very wooden and the timeline is inaccurate in keeping with the basic facts of H. E Bates' written works. Although good to see a multi-cultural cast, I am not sure if this truly reflective of 1950's Kent. Another distasteful addition is the use of modern slang so I don't know what the writers were hoping to achieve but it. Somewhat tarnishes the innocence and floaty feeling in the aforementioned TV series. The only character that resembles Pam Ferris is the new Ma Larkin (given that Pam Ferris was very well chosen going by the books), but all other characters are really quite forgettable. A big disappointment.

I know it seems racist to say this and I don't want to be that way but as others have said this would not have been a multi-cultural society at that time. For some of us and what we know about the Darling buds of May etc adding characters of non-Caucasian ethnicity is just more tokenism and sometimes we could live without it. Not that it doesn't have its place it's just lets make it appropriate. Anything else is patronising.

Well I've watched parts of two episodes of this awful remark of the Darling Buds of May and I hope no more episodes are planned. The actors are ill-suited to the characters and the series lacks all the charm and atmosphere of the books and the original. The Christmas episode was embarrassing - so clearly shot on what looked like the hottest day of the year with trees in full leaf and the sun high in the sky. Standing in the shade doesn't make it look like winter you know!! I gather certain characters were changed in order to be inclusive and politically correct. Why?? Why not be true to the book and the times as represented by the author? A poor show all round IMO.

I so wanted to enjoy it as I am a big fan of Bradley Walsh but no effort was made to freshen the storyline or even the plot. The script was weak and acting felt like they were going through the motions. The mains leads were look-a-likes and didn't need to be. There is a difference between paying homage and being mimics. It had a Disney family movie feel about it. Will trying again next week to see if it grows on me but I am sceptical.