Avaliações de usuários

First of all, BIRDSONG is beautifully filmed and acted. Joseph Mawle is especially memorable as Jack Firebrace--who I quote in my title here--a friend and sort of foil character to the protagonist (Stephen Wraysford) played by Eddie Redmayne. Agree: American audiences may find all the British brogues a bit hard to follow without the subtitles.

While there is a palpable storyline and a good surprise at the end, BIRDSONG appeals more to the heart than to the head. It's quite a sad story, of course, but it avoids going too far in the direction of melodrama. It successfully incorporates some really huge themes: Love, forgiveness, loyalty, and others. There is also a great deal of WWI battle footage: BIRDSONG will probably appeal to most war film aficionados. Warning: Some really graphic scenes of carnage at the Somme and various other battles.

Part I shifts every few minutes from Wraysford's illicit 1910 love affair with the wife of a French business partner to his service in the British army between 1916-18. The two time settings are extremely well-synchronized: The directors and producers did a fine job of making the two stories into one. Part II, though it follows the same general pattern, is a little more of a straightforward, solidified story.

I haven't read Sebastian Faulks's original novel, but I've heard nothing but good things about it. It's probably a hard book to cinematize, but Masterpiece Theater did about the best job possible here.

Interesting backlash on this adaptation, this is the trouble when you try and put the subtlety of words in to pictures. I thought it was a great adaptation; I read the book and was pleased they got the main themes in (all bar the third storyline). I remember reading the book and not liking Stephen much and I didn't like him much here either and that continuity was pleasing. Yes some of it failed to get going, I thought the scene with the old lady and her daughter in the book was much more fraught and tense. But you know what, that was me reading into the work, you can't really do that when you are watching it. The graphics were a real weak link, the CGI battlefields were pitiful, lots of emotion as usual a distinct lack of blood or pain! With the centenary of the First World War coming up I can imagine they are holding some of their war cards close to their chest, but they could have put a little more effort into that. I enjoyed the acting and what they conveyed in a short space of time. I would have liked to have seen more character development of the soldiers, but hay we can't have everything. In all I thought it was a worthy piece of drama, and to all those who go on about the oral sex scene being unrealistic. Are you all experts in early 20th Century sexual practises?

Though I haven't read the book yet and I also had no idea this was split into two TV-movies. It came out as one single very long movie on DVD in Germany, so I watched it like that. It did appeal to me, especially acting, though some choices seemed weird. For a TV movie it is surprising I reckon that there is nudity. For regular TV I guess, but then again, we're way past that already.

The structure does seem fitting for a novel and it makes more sense in the book form (or at least seems to). Even without having read it, you can do more in the head of a reader than in a film. Still this seems more than decent enough to stand on its own, especially if the viewer is unaware of its source material.

I read the book Birdsong (the basis for this series) by Sebastian Faulks many years ago and really enjoyed it, particularly the sections about life in the trenches, which I found very gripping and evocative. Perhaps my memory is playing up, but I seemed to remember that this was the main point of the book, not the romance between Stephen and his french girlfriend, which was the main focus of this disappointing adaptation.

I am amazed how the production team managed to turn such a good book about WW1 into such a dull and plodding romantic drama. The dialogue was stilted, and although I am English and therefore used to the various English dialects, I struggled most of the time to understand what was being said so had to turn the volume up higher than normal. The acting was also poor - involving lots of staring mournfully at each other and simpering. I'm not sure if this was the actors' / director's faults or whether it was such a bad script that there was just no dialogue to work with. I've never watched a drama with so many long silences in it (except maybe the Twilight films); I'm sure this wasn't a feature of the book. I found myself getting very frustrated with the slow pace and kept wanting to reach for the FF button on the remote. I also found the casting of several of the characters very odd - especially the normally excellent Matthew Goode and Eddie Redmayne.

The one redeeming feature of the series was that it looked good.

In summary then, one to avoid and read the book instead.

First let me say that there are not enough movies made about WWI. Thats a shame.

I didn't read the book, in fact I had never heard of this until one night in May of 2012, when I had promised to take my daughter to see "The Avengers" only to discover it was sold out when we got to the theater. We came back home and turned on the TV set and this movie was about to come on. Being a fan of WWI movies like "The Lost Battalion","Flyboys" and "The Trench", I thought that I'd give this movie a look.

I was so glad I watched this movie. I was glued to my TV for both nights that it was on. I found the story gripping and moving. I didn't want to get out of my chair (not even to go get a soda from the refrigerator). I found the cinematography to be absolutely beautiful. The battle scenes were very moving, I felt like I was down in that crawlspace with them. I know that most people will call this a love story, but I would call it a human story. Amazing Story about coming of age, falling in love and going to war. I cant praise this movie enough.

The acting is very well done, The Cinematography is amazing, the sets are very realistic, and the music score is good. I loved this movie. After watching a serious emotional movie like this, I wasn't in the mood to see cartoon-ish movie like "The Avengers" for a while.

I loved this movie I purchased a copy on DVD

Just beautiful

Tugs at your heart from the opening scenes till the last, with some lovely performances from Posey, Madden & Croze amongst many

Led by a tortured Eddie Redmayne brilliantly supported by the under rated Joseph Mawle

Nicely filmed and well acted, but it needed a lot of patience to keep watching this. For most of the time I found the slow pace annoying and the plot seemed rather thin and unrealistic. But it definitely captures the horrors of war. The romance element was much less convincing. I'm guessing that the book on which this is based is similarly slow and I found that problem with the one other book I read by Faulkes.

So it was about twice as long as needed for the amount of plot, but I think I would have preferred a looser adherence to the original and with some additional drama to make the length worthwhile.

Overall, not a strong recommendation but a reasonable production.

I was expecting much from Birdsong. I had read the book three years ago for my English A Levels course, and found myself utterly transfixed by the poignant and gut-wrenching story. Since then, Sebastian Faulks' Birdsong has become one of my favourite books of all time. This series does have its good parts. It is photographed beautifully, exquisitely even, the scenery is wonderful in the whole part of the story before Stephen goes off to war, I liked the contrast between the lush pre-war scenes and the bleak colour palette of war itself the music is effective in its simplicity and there are two good performances, the scene-stealing Jack Firebrace of Joseph Mawle and the emotionally complex Jeanne of Marie-Josee Croze. Sadly, I never found myself convinced by the story and characters. This is not helped by a script that is largely incoherent, characters that excepting perhaps Jeanne are lifeless cardboard cut-outs(I know they are not likable characters to begin with but still there is a difference between that and the characters having no life at all) and sluggish pacing. I also found Eddie Redmayne and Clemence Posey miscast, Redmayne is handsome certainly but he was also wooden and uncharismatic while Posey has no chemistry with him and looks like twenty years younger than her novelistic counterpart. The story has scenes that are either condensed(naturally considering the time) or almost endlessly stretched out(not so much), but it was the lack of atmosphere and drama that really spoiled Birdsong. The intimate scenes between Stephen and Isabelle weren't that intimate to me as both actors looked in pain during those scenes, and the war scenes due to the poorly rendered battlefields weren't poignant, tense or gut-wrenching enough. Overall, does have some good things such as the beautiful photography, but the pacing and lack of drama made Birdsong rather dull in my opinion, sorry. 5/10 Bethany Cox

Although there was a lot left out of the original book, the storytelling in this TV miniseries was beautiful. I have been loving Eddie Redmayne for a while now, but after this film, I'm hooked! I am in love with him as was Isabelle. :) I loved the actress who played her as well. She reminded me of young Juliette Binoche. I thought it was a passionate and beautifully told story. The cinematography was spectacular and the massive destruction that WWII left was very well depicted here. More films should show how the Wealthy Upper classes acted as the Generals who would order the lower classes to put themselves on the frontlines basically for suicide missions to keep everyone else in good standing, including those who sat around thinking up brilliant ideas to have innocent young soldiers killed.

I rarely review unless I love a movie and feel something has been unfairly rated due to some anomaly. Here I suspect the anomaly is that it will only be fully felt by people who have known something of this these level of intensity of love and death. Our world has become somewhat numbed to these things. I am lucky and unlucky enough to have had a meeting just like theirs and the story and intensity of it touched me very deeply. It is not just a matter of being open enough for these things to happen, but open enough to recognize their significance. And even in the absence of a war, for such a spiritual heart, as in the Bhagavad Gita, life will always be trench warfare on some level.

It's fair to say that the book is an amazing read, it's almost unfair to deem it a page turner, but that's what it is, a book you don't want to put down.

This adaptation does the book justice, it's very much a film of two halves. The first, bright, full of hope and love, vibrant, the second harsh, grey and claustrophobic, full of loss.

The thread that runs the whole way through it, love, pure love, the power of friendship, camaraderie and the devastating feeling of loss.

The acting is first class, Eddie Redmayne of course steals it, he's one of those actors that has the ability to make you feel, without saying a word, it's a masterclass from him. Poessy and Mawle are amazing also.

Part one is great, the second is even better, it has some poignant scenes, including the men going out of the trenches.

One of those dramas that just envelopes you. 9/10.

What a wasted opportunity. That should have been a fantastic 2 part drama. But it so wasn't. I could have spent that 3 hours ironing. Or sleeping. Or staring deeply into my lovers eyes trying to find the words to... to.. to... OH FOR GOODNESS SAKE!

I never got around to reading the book and the trailer looked brilliant. After all that I have to give the post production house who made the trailer 11 out of 10 for editing and sound mixing as it really turned water into wine. What a shame the actual film didn't live up to its promise.

Can't knock the production, the production design, the CGI, any of that. The acting, well I guess they did as well as they could with what was probably only 5-10 pages of script and the rest was just mooning at each other, God it was boring. I wouldn't have minded it as much if the Redmayne and Poesy had any chemistry at all but there was none, it was like watching....well it was like watching 2 actors staring at each other for 3 hours. And that sex scene - even in 2012 post-watershed, I found the sight of oral sex barely moments after their first kiss a bit much. I have no doubt in 1910, Wraysford would have been on the receiving end of a belt round the head if he'd attempted that back then.

No wonder she went off and had a baby and he never knew about it; they barely spoke to each other for the whole show. You can't have a relationship based on smouldering looks. She left him, had a baby in secret and died and the whole time he just looked like he needed the bathroom and was trying to control himself. Yawn.

The timing was unfortunate - if it had been on after Celebrity Masterchef or something banal the UK population might have been more forgiving but being scheduled directly after the The Midwife, full of snappy dialogue, first class acting, brilliant production design, good pacing and dry humour, its faults were even more glaring.

Oh well, looks like Tim Bevan better get back to what he's best at, more Johnny English or some such nonsense.

It's a good love story during the world war 1. I love the combination and the way it has been delivered is awesome, Acting of Eddie(Stephen Wraysford) was fantastic as usual, and Clémence Poésy(Isabella)what a beauty! Highly recommended for the people who like love stories and War(too), watch patiently and enjoy.

You know, the Great War is the one I find most moving in all of history. Just the thought of those young men, trapped in mires of mud, being shot to pieces and blasted to bits is enough to get my chest heaving. So when I heard the BBC were adapting the Sebastian Faulks novel BIRDSONG for a two-part adaptation, I was looking forward to it.

Oh dear. Like the Christmastime version of GREAT EXPECTATIONS, they've dropped the ball again with a production that has too many flaws to be taken seriously. Firstly, the three hour running time is far too long. Important passages are condensed (no doubt due to the budgetary constraints of the battle sequences) and other scenes are s-t-r-e-t-c-h-e-d out so that they become endlessly dull.

Eddie Redmayne is a superb actor given the right role - see him in THE PILLARS OF THE EARTH for an example of this. But he's utterly miscast here, far too young to be playing a world-weary guy, and he just doesn't have the gravitas to pull it off. Maybe in a decade's time, but certainly not now. I can't really fault the lovely Clemence Poesy playing opposite him, but Redmayne alone is enough to put you off.

It's all about characters quietly staring at each other for minutes on end interspersed with mad, passionate sex. But the central character is so selfish and conceited that that's what it is - just sex, not romance. The other half of the running time concerns the battle scenes, and boy are these bad. Not only are they repetitive - how many times does Redmayne supposedly die only to come back? - but they ring hollow. Hurried scenes of soldiers scribbling letters to loved ones the night before a battle does not make their later deaths emotional, it just reeks of contrivance and an artificial attempt to make the viewer care. Oh, and it turns out Redmayne's a coward, too.

It says something when a supporting actor (Joseph Mawle) gives by far the best performance of them all. I've actually had the Faulks novel sitting on my shelf unread for years - like so many books - but I'm going to be in no hurry to dig it out until memories of this have long faded. As for Abi Morgan, the scriptwriter, who previously brought the above-average miniseries THE HOUR to our screens - what went wrong?

Always the same with the highbrow book readers, but film is a different medium with limitations, this is simply a moving story through the madness of war.