I Luminari - Il destino nelle stelle

Those of us with NZTV "On Demand" have been able to binge The Luminaries.

Yes, I have read the book. When I have read the original work, I believe in taking care not to be overly critical of film, or in this case, mini-series, adaptions, as that is a difficult process. That said, I found this adaption simply awful even in that forgiving context.

The best aspect of the novel, is a technical one: a somewhat fresh structure within the otherwise standard and well trod genre of romance novel, or combined romance+crime-drama novel. Ingenious? No. Fresh? Yes. Specifically the central 12 astrological symbol based men whose aspects are the core part of the story telling mechanism of the novel.

Sadly the mini-series adaption keeps the overly worn romance/crime drama tropes, and there are just an endless stream of them, and completely glosses over the clever technical aspects of the original work. In the end what we have is a standard soap opera. It is profoundly dumbed down to the point of being an insult to the audience; who the makers and adapters must think are generally idiots. It is not as if some of the complexity, nuance, are gone -- they all are gone.

The acting, cinematography and certainly the art direction, are above average. But the narrative structure is for the simple minded, with all the inventiveness it seems carefully removed. The dialogue is has had every element of irony, subtlety removed. The most interesting book characters are turned into shallow two dimensional cut-outs. One character, who in the novel is a essentially a catalyzing impetus, bizarrely becomes the lead character in the adaption,. Yet she is given no compelling, or interesting story. Also the novel refreshingly did not moralize in a heavy handed way. The bigotry for example are presented matter of fact, which is effective. Yet the adaption is patently moralizing, and hamfisted at it as well. It is just a cheap shot to be saying -- "look at this! 1860's era New Zealand setters had bigoted views!" Really? Who on the globe did not at that time."

In the end this is a hollow and superficial viewing experience. We are not in the 1970s or 1980's television era, but in the golden age of series and limited series work. The age of Fargo, True Detective, Chernobyl, Rome, Boardwalk Empire, House of Cards, and a litany of smart and very well written work.

Sadly, "The Luminaries" mini-series adaption, specifically the plot and screen writing, takes us back to the junk age of television.

I have just finished watching the entire 6 part series. Yes the plot in the way it is presented is complex. We are presented with events and then history leading up to that event, more events and the histories leading up to those events, and so on. This makes for a complexity that requires some attention, although many hints are always on screen to tell us where in time each scene is located, past, recent past, and present. The complexity is a positive, but a casual viewer with the show on in the background with sparse attention paid to it will find it hard to follow the twists - you need to actually watch it.

It took me until the 3rd episode (first two with mild attention wandering) before I became absorbed, will probably watch again in a couple of weeks with fresh eyes.

Clever, a slow burn, this show is a bit of a gem. I would summarise it thus: Gold, greed, gowns (will make sense when watched), love, murder, mystery, mystique and revenge. A healthy dose of good viewing. I was sorry but also sated when it ended.

The novel on which this series is based is sophisticated and the plot is complex. It is original and mature writing (it won the prestigious Man Booker Prize) but it's definitely not easy reading. Given this, it's asking too much to expect mere entertainment from a TV adaptation. The story is too complex to be reduced to the level of simplicity that many people want and expect. The novel demands active involvement for it to be rewarding; the TV version likewise. It's near-impossible to reduce a nearly 1,000 page novel to six hours of television. If this sounds like justification for the TV version's complexity, that's exactly what I'm trying to do. It's certainly isn't easy going, but it is rewarding if you're prepared to provide input yourself - just like the novel.

Well worth your time. Align your expectations with what I think the makers were trying to achieve though. This is a bit of a slow burn for me, with viewers circling the end of story rather than approaching the end from a linear past to present to end. It requires patience, and attention to what is going on, with various signals (e.g. dress colour pink, blue, black) indicating which stage of past, recent past and present you are in. The unusual aspect is this for me: the series is short, pace is not fast, but requires a reasonable intensity of the viewer to catch details. There is a disjunct between the pace of the series, and the effort sometimes required on the part of the viewer. I enjoyed this about the series though, rather than everything explained for the viewer so you can half-watch, switch brain off and still know what is going on.

Having said that, whoever wrote the advertising-lines on IMDB is quite a way off the mark (in my opinion). The text attempts to sell the series as some sort of fast-paced murder mystery from the USA for example "Adventure mystery set in the midst of New Zealand's 1860's gold rush period it has all the stuff that makes a good drama murder, love and revenge as men and women travel the world making their fortunes." Pushed my expectations into a different vein as to what I might see. Once I realised what this is - a character-driven story (very low on adventure) that unfolds in intentionally cryptic ways to reveal a complexity of plot, and most importantly, an understanding of different stages of character made more stark (obvious) by moving the viewer through (for example) past, recent past, and present, then past, recent past, present etc. We get to see the contrasts as character contrasts rather than linear development. The signals for "where in time" are all there to help the viewer, but you have to pay attention, and it will pay off. It took me to episode three to "get" it and fall in love with it. The viewer is circling the end of story, not just approaching it from past through to present through to end.

On the not so positive side, Eva Green just plays the typical Eva Green role, bring nothing new to the role than what we have seen from her before. Unfortunately for me, feeling typecast and therefore a little trite.

Eve Hewson is interesting to watch, her mannerisms and charm feeling a little restricted though. Unsure whether that is her scope, or the direction given to her. She does break out sometimes, however the feeling of slow burn is only enhanced by long periods with a limited range of expressions and emotional variance.

Solid work. Save it for a time when you can give it your attention.

I was excited to watch this but after the second episode, found it hard to follow, the timeline was jumping all over the place, it would have been helpful to put dates on the scenes. I also found it a bit far fetched.The acting was very good though, as were the costumes and setting, so still worth watching.