Moonfleet

My family sat down to watch this two-parter quite excited. The advertisements had looked good, the title was interesting and it was a Christmas special. But by the end of the first hour-long episode (including advert breaks) we were very much hoping there were at least two more episodes to come. At the end of the second episode, we sat back and looked at each other disappointedly with one thought: this is what happens when you try and cram a story into two blocks of 45 minutes.

I have not read the novel this is based on, and am rather tempted to do so now in the hope that the story will redeem itself. The problem was not with the story, you see. Enough happened to make you believe the book to be quite thrilling. But too much happened too quickly and with too little explanation. The actors were good, but the characters were underdeveloped. The love story was there, but barely so. Why would finding this treasure change everything? What was this curse? Why were the Mahoons so evil? Why was there a contraband ring? The questions continue...

If you want a synopsis of the story of Moonfleet before you read it, this is perfect. But that is all this is - the skeleton of a story. I may be wrong, and maybe the book is no better, but from what I can tell, an extra two hours would have made a world of difference in taking this from substandard, to brilliant British television.

This recent version reunites Ray Winstone and Phil Daniels who carved out their early careers together in gritty British reality films Scum and Quadraphenia J. Meade Falkner's novel, on which this outing is based, was once a perennial favourite along among such classic family adventures as Treasure Island and Robinson Crusoe. The 1956 movie deviated a long way from the original storyline and it took until 1984 for the three hour TV miniseries to do it any justice on screen. This included filming at the genuine castle at Carisbrooke featured in the book.

This latest version has less time to fill out detail, but has no than many feature films have managed to portray novels of similar length. The result is, however, a journey that moves though each part of the plot like a box ticking exercise to moved all too (implausibly) fast. The character development was shallow and, alongside the mediocre performances, left me with no feeling of empathy. Not all of me puts the blame on the acting though. The role taken on by Winstone is easily suited to his type cast manner and Aneurin Barnard is believable. I think the real problem for me was in the screenplay itself and the inane dialogue made available to the players. An underwhelming, but honest, four out of ten for me

While I realise that there has to be a bit of a 'poetic' licence to squeeze 19 chapters into an hour and a half, I was disappointed to find that no one from the team could have read the book, as this is as close to J M Falkner's Moonfleet as X-men is to X-factor! I thought Ray would be an excellent choice to play Elziver Block but Elziver was not a womaniser! Shame on you Ray, we're about the same age; you should have read this in school. I honestly thought that the 1955 version couldn't be beaten (where they kill the hero in the first few minutes) but much to my surprise the team that made this drivel gets the all-time booby!

I think I wrote a review once on this film on the Amazon Lovefilm site, now defunct. This just didn't "do it" for me. The setting and costumes are good and atmospheric for this classic story but the treatment falls stunningly flat. Winstone stumbles through this, mumbling his lines (so I couldn't make out half the dialogue) and looking like he wished he wasn't there. The Dorset accents are laughable. I fast forwarded through it to say I'd "seen" it, and sent it back. Oh dear. A mess. Might be OK for the kiddies.

If by watching this movie, you feel you know the story, you don't. Read the book! This adaptation strays from the novel in many places and re-orchestrates relationships and situations to suit itself. It's disappointing.