White Teeth

I found this comment on PBS.org and I agree with it... "While the series was great, and the acting wonderful, I would have enjoyed it more had the author bothered to get even the smallest detail about Jehovah's Witnesses correct. There were so many inaccuracies, that I doubt she did any research.

First of all, a Jehovah's Witness would never have a cross in the home. Crosses are pagan relics that have no place in a witnesses' worship. Second, witnesses do not believe in burning hell, nor do they believe in everyone going to heaven. The belief is that while 144,000 will go to heaven, others will live forever on Earth. Third, even in 1974, when some witnesses did believe the end was near, they did not believe they would be taken up to heaven in rapture.

Verna Leep Thoreau, NM" The show is laughable in its portrayal of Jehovah's Witnesses as a stereotype of religious fanaticism. At the same time, it is so inaccurate in its portrayal, I think the average Jehovah's Witness would be vastly amused rather than offended.

I found the four-part adoption of Zadie Smith's novel White Teeth fantastic. I thought the first two parts were more serious then the last two but the plot was more obscure. I thought Christopher Simpson was brilliant as Millat and Magid. I have never seen him before in anything else but his acting was great as he really made his unrealistic characters believable and unforgettable. He had an amazing talent of making the audience believe in these two totally different people.

After watching each part, I found my self-counting the days till the next instalment. I got really involved in the narrative but all the way through the series I felt as if I were watching a story meant for a book because of the extreme situations and characters. The plot was unbelievable at times but that did not spoil it at all but on the contrary made it more entertaining and exhilarating. I thought that having Archi Panjabi play Samad's wife Alasana played by Om Puri, was a bit outrageous and ridiculous because she played his daughter in East Is East. The third part had more of an impact on me and brought me back wanting more. The last part was more humorous than anything, I did begin to think that the plot was going to get really serious but it didn't. I loved the unpredictability of it. It was fantastical. A must see.*_*

After some real stinkers, I wasn't expecting much. Pleasantly surprised. didn't read the book- many think the series is better. and don't read the book (unusual)

some of the turn around E#3 and E#4 a bit muddled.

But one of the better mini-series. about people, relationships, and life choices, and destinies. without murder or serial killers.

Notably, Iria, gets ignored and put down as a woman.

2002, this material is not dated. I enjoyed it. and good solid acting.

I found the first couple of episodes quite engaging. Plenty of fun being poked in all directions: religion, culture, politics and above all the frailty of human nature.

But after the first two, it all began to wear thin. By the final part I just wanted it to be finished.

I think my 5 is rather generous, but it was ok-ish.

Not a fan of the book, as I had been taken in by the hype only to find it more the result of the publisher's effort to earn back the huge investment they'd made in the property than actual merit. That said, it addresses so many cultures and has so many stories, it's perfect for a TV series. And I have to admit, the series is quite interesting. Not the dialogue mind you, which is painfully plebian, but the visuals and wonderful acting. Now I wish I hadn't read the book, because I'm sure I'd find it much more enthralling, not knowing what is going to happen. Whatever the inaccuracies people are pointing out I also found in the book but that doesn't detract from the very interesting portrayal of these characters by a wonderfully cast ensemble in this very unique characterization of London as compared to most other films made about that period.