The Buccaneers

I'm a huge Regency romance fan and was intrigued by this show. Yet I've found myself rolling my eyes more and more as each episode passes. The character's personalities and are inconsistent and the direction makes the show remain shallow as it grasps at depth. The rah-rah sisterhood theme of the show is quickly bowled over for flashy and increasingly annoying drama. I think this show had potential to be an alternative to Bridgerton but the sets and costumes do the heavy lifting to make the show feel 1800s. I never thought I would come across the manic dream girl in a period drama but alas here we are... men falling over one character because she just happens to not want to swim in a corset or takes her shoes off. I love the sets and costumes are good but not memorable but the show makes me annoyed as a regency romance lover.

I oddly enjoy it. Despite the over the top, American loudness of our main character group. Because it does seem very American. Everything about the show screams it.

Does it seem a rip off of Bridgerton, yes.

I cringe when the group of girls scream like they're on spring break. When they go swimming in their underclothes with batchelors.

I'm only 3 episodes in but their behaviours, their vocabulary, their style of dress are very inconsistent with what would have been the norm.

Instead it seems like a group of Valley cheerleaders have been transplanted into mid 1800s England.

I guess it's made made to appeal to a TikTok generation's imagining of what that time would be like.

Despite the faults of the show and my inward cringing of just how...American...it is, I kind of enjoy it. Most of the cast are capable actors.

If you don't mind glossing over historical accuracy and enjoy a bit of vapidness, you probably wouldn't mind spending a few hours watching this.

... one critic's comments... "The Buccaneers, a refreshing take on the period drama genre, exploring the clash of cultures and the pursuit of love and ambition with a modern sensibility, all within the enchanting setting of 1870s London. Its bold and unapologetic approach might not be everyone's cup of tea, but it undeniably adds a unique flavor to the genre."

... an ok show, well done for the most part... you'll know within the first episode if you're going to be sticking with it week to week... it's entertaining to a 6 of 10, really not much more... acting like it's trying to be, yet Bridgerton it's not

... 12.14.23 - quite the S1 ending ... night b4 wedding, hubby-to-be out on some balcony drinking, while fiance's 'bedroom-entertaining'.. and that's only one of the pairings... S2 coming ... (and actually early-episodes new-Bridgerton's-boring)

No wonder there's so much disdain and lack of appreciation for how people lived in the past. Stop making films about old world history as though it's today's teenagers playing dress-up. Use of current music distracts from immersing oneself in the time period.

The 1995 miniseries with Carla Gugino, Mira Sorvino, Greg Wise, Michael Kitchen and Cheri Lunghi is so much better than this drivel. Carla is wonderfully cast as is James Frain.

Learned recently that this story is loosely based on Winston Churchill's mother.

The original version is 6 episodes long and enthralling from beginning to end.

Not great at first, definitely trying hard to be Bridgerton, but still entertaining. The worst decision the creators of the show did was cast Alisha Boe, I'm sorry but she brings down the quality of the show making it feel very "High School" and she plays almost the exact same character as she does on 13 Reasons why. I feel the show would have been much better without her. Other than that, the rest of the casting is great. I love all the characters and the actors do a great job bringing their characters to life. It's very unrealistic but so is any show of that theme. The storylines are good and catchy. The costumers are ehh. Nan, Guy, Theo, and Lizzie are all easy to love and get into.