Maurene

Having previously seen the 2004 series and reading the novel, I feel I can't really judge this mini-series on its own merit.

It is true to the spirit of the novel and follows pretty closely the major plot lines. It was, naturally, missing some things that I loved in the novel. And it didn't quite have the character or plot development as the 2004 series.

However, the acting was very strong throughout. Stewart makes a great John Thornton. He seems strong even as he's clearly longing for Margaret. Shanks is pretty effective as Margaret. She's very expressive in her face although I felt her Margaret was lacking some subtle feisty-ness. The supporting cast was excellent -- I particularly liked Byron as Mrs. Thornton. (What a great character Mrs. Thornton is in both series!) The only weakness I noticed was Bessy Higgins but they hardly gave the actress anything to work with. The Bessy-Margaret relationship was particularly well-done in the 2004 series. In the 1975 series Bessy is just a caricature.

Ultimately, this series suffers most from the staging and production quality. The first part seems very claustrophobic with most scenes taking place in small drawing rooms. Most of the sets are small and much of production seemed "stagey." I understand that back then they usually didn't put much money into TV mini-series.

I was happy to see that this production had an ending closer to the novel than the 2004 series.

This series will likely only be of interest to fans of the novel and those wanting to compare it to the 2004 series.

I generally like this kind of movie - young female lead, romantic, historical setting, with a fantasy/mystical element. This movie didn't disappoint but it also didn't leave much of an impression.

My biggest gripe is that it was too rushed. The lead character's 24 hour deadline meant there wasn't much time to develop relationships. This was especially problematic with the love interest (Lucy/Robert) and we're forced to take it as love at first sight. I thought they did well with the Lucy/Nellie friendship though. My other minor gripes was that the lead actress was too old and I thought she wore an obvious wig.

But, the acting was pretty good. I like Rutger Hauer playing creepy guys. And I thought Judy Parfitt added credibility to the movie. It appeared to be set in a real historic house/castle. I appreciate that the movie didn't try too hard or get too sentimental and it made its point in a very straight-forward manner.

I've spent a couple of days trying to figure out how I feel about this movie. I think you'll know from the synopsis if this is your *type* of movie. I found it an interesting story even if the characters were all rather generic types and a little flat. The acting was fine and didn't distract from the story. I found the kids believable and the teachers sympathetic.

I wanted the movie to deal in more depth with how the kids were treated at school. As it was written, their treatment was pretty cliché (although it doesn't mean it wasn't accurate). I also wanted more details on special accommodations the kids may have gotten while at camp. And I couldn't help wondering if there wasn't a legal avenue to get special needs children into Space Camp.

Overall, I did like the movie. I appreciate that it didn't push too hard for an emotional response.