The Dovekeepers - Il volo della colomba

I read the book and loved it, I was hopeful for this adaptation to live up to the book... But no such luck. They left out one of the major characters entirely, one who actually narrates a 1/4 of the book, as well as many other important characters and events from the book. They didn't do justice to any of the characters' back-stories, leaving the viewers without any real understanding of the characters and their motivations. The book was a beautiful piece of historical fiction that told the story of strong, devout Jewish women and the things they did to survive the times and the conditions and the Roman siege. This miniseries was just a historically inaccurate soap opera.

The book the Dovekeepers was interesting with much information about history. The movie is only sex and left all the information out. Also, the movie is very disjointed. I recommended this movie to friends and was embarrassed. What a total disappointment. Where were the scenes of of the destruction of the Temple, the hazards of traveling across the desert, that the person they were talking to was Josephus the great Historian, that Masada was built by Herod, the importance of the dovekeeping and sending of messages, who were the Essenes,where were the fields and what did they grow, what was the Mikveh, the explanations of the rituals done by Shira and her methods of holistic healing, etc. Where was all the information that was given in the book. We know about sex and lust but not about the history that was provided in the book. This movie removed the essence of the book leaving nothing of interest.

I never read the book so I don't know what the intention or full story was. (This version seems to exclude a lot). And I can forgive the lack to authenticity. (Blue eyed, flame haired Judean 2000 years ago? Yeah, right.) It's fictionalized history.

What's unforgivable is the the lack of likeable characters (except maybe the German slave and Josephus who was at least a realist/pragmatist.)

I'm all for love and romance, but come on! The women come across as dumb, weak, easily seduced and/or mean (scorned wives mad at mistresses). The men predatory when not just complete a-holes.

Perhaps it was the way this particular story was told, but what the Jews were fighting for wasn't really emphasized/shown. We see the Romans take revenge, but (based on the story here) they were attacked first. Revenge is what the Romans do. Sure, revolt/rebellion/dying for freedom is a topic of argument between Shirah and Josephus, but it's never made visceral for the viewer.

Ultimately, I didn't really care what happened to the Romans or the Jews. The only ones I felt bad for were the children with such lousy parents.

I too am part of the large group who think this made-for-TV movie is a disaster. I lasted longer than most, however. I actually watched all but the last hour of Part 2. Eventually, I couldn't take more of the same thing. It was beautifully filmed, but the acting was so wooden, the story so dull. What was with Cote de Pablo? Was her expression painted on? And I think it is Mido Hamada who has one of the most forced smiles I have ever seen. Showin' off new choppers, Mido? Finally, Sam Neill was so disappointing in this role. But the character is such a boring one to begin with. I shouldn't fault the actor with simply delivering what was given. I found the way the story was presented to be thoroughly confusing. I couldn't get interested in the characters, and the minute I started to "get" one of them, the plot switched to another character, and I was out in the dark once again. Now, don't get me wrong. I like an "adult" drama, maybe even verging on soap opera, but this one is a prime example of poorly written, acted, and directed schlock. At the start of the last "love in the cistern" scene, I actually broke out laughing. And in one of them, the continuity was so bad, I grimaced: the actors kept flipping from left to right side of each other with absolutely no transition or movement whatsoever. Was this supposed to be some artsy filming? Because it looked kind of deliberate, or I should say, blatant. Didn't work for me. What was the point?

This was trash. I only watched the first night. I kept thinking this must get better. Nope. I should have given up on it improving. The message night one sends was that it is okay to have sex with married men.

I couldn't even figure out what the main plot of the movie was supposed to be about.

I also didn't understand the supernatural aspect. Where these just dreams or a guilty conscious.

I have not read the book. One review said the movie does not reflect the book. I would like to hear from others that have read the book. I would be tempted to give the book a try.