Gunpowder

This is a good series, excellent acting. The moderate rating reflects my concern about the balance. There certainly was religious persecution during the reigns of Elizabeth I and James I which is to be deplored.Probably near 100 Catholics were martyred in England alone between Elizabeth's accession in 1558 and the Gunpowder plot. 100 in 50 years is a lot; but compare that to the near 300 Protestants martyred in only five years under Mary Tudor. Or to the thousands slaughtered by the Spanish Inquisition from the 15th century in Spain and the Low Countries - to say nothing of the tens of thousands of unfortunate victims in Spain's colonies of Peru and Mexico). The Catholic Encyclopedia creditably points out that Elizabeth began her reign with true toleration in mind - witnessed by the fact that there were no religious executions at all between 1558 and 1570. Things changed with the actions of the reprehensible Pope Pius V who after acceding in 1570 excommunicated Elizabeth and urged her subjects to rebel and to assassinate her. Hardly surprising that she was urged to take a tougher line. Pius's plans ultimately backfired; but he had created a problem for English Catholics - support Pope or Monarch was their only choice. Blame for what happened after falls mostly on the shoulders of that psychopathic prelate. As regards the gunpowder plotters themselves, I feel the series was misleading in portraying them as worthy patriots and genuinely religious men. Think on it; they put nearly 3 tons of gunpowder in place. Had they succeeded the magnitude of the blast would have taken out not only the Parliament building and all inside but half of London besides. Total casualties might have been 10,000 or more. Tease this up proportionately and we are talking about devastation on Hiroshima levels. They must have known how extensive the damage and death would have been - several were ex-soldiers and used to gunpowder. These men would probably have welcomed a subsequent Spanish invasion to forcibly drag their countryman back to a now alien faith. They were traitors and potential mass-murderers. No sympathy from me, I'm afraid.

Pretty good actors doing a decent enough job-but it is a very uninspired telling of a quite interesting and exciting true story. If you never see it, you aren't really missing out on anything.

About as historically correct as my left toe. There is very little truth, or what truth there can be found in documentation and historical sources within this series. I fear that like so many things like this most will take it for face value and believe what they saw on TV, far more easier than studying history.

That being said, it is a good watch, I thoroughly enjoyed how for once the streets were shown to have faecal matter in the streets. Much too often are they shown as clean cobbles. Without taking in any sense of history, and taking it as a Stuart drama is fine. The acting is good, but I see a lot of bias in the writing.

...so it's a refreshing change to see the losers having their say.

"Gunpowder" was made to tell the story about the real leader behind the gunpowder plot, Robert Catesby. He is played by Kit Harington, a descendant of Catesby.

More interesting than Catesby or Fawkes are the hunchback Lord Robert Cecil (Mark Gatiss) and his father William. They ran England as a police state during the reigns of Elizabeth I and King James I. They used a network of censors, spies, propagandists and spin doctors who were so successful in spin that some people still peddle it in the 21st century. The British constitution still bans the Head of State being a Roman Catholic.

The Cecil's set the template for authoritarian police states, communist and fascist. We can see their methods to this day in Asia, Europe and the Middle East. "Gunpowder" is really their story.

Love historical period dramas, and BBC have shown numerous times that they can be very good at them, a particularly note-worthy recent example being 'Wolf Hall'. The story of Guy Fawkes and the Gunpowder Plot is a very interesting part of history, something that was appreciated more by me once learning of the significance of the annual Bonfire Night.

'Gunpowder' is not BBC at their best though. It is interesting enough and there are a lot of good elements here (far more so than has been credit for by some reviewers), but it could have been much more explosive than it actually turned out to be. The criticisms are understandable, though the purported anti-Catholicism and propaganda ones for my tastes have been blown out of proportion.

Starting with the good things, the best thing about 'Gunpowder' is the production values. They are nothing short of splendid, especially the sumptuous costumes and atmospheric scenery/set design that actually give the feel of the viewer being transported to the early 17th century and being there as unseen observers. The music doesn't intrude but has presence and atmosphere.

Parts of the script do intrigue and provoke thought and the storytelling does have compelling and suspenseful moments. The violence and executions are harrowing and are not for the faint hearted, but that would have been the case at the time because executions were brutal then, even more so than depicted.

Mostly the acting is fine, especially from charismatic Tom Cullen, dignified Liv Tyler (who is not as out of place as one would think) and Shaun Dooley enjoying himself.

Kit Harrington and Mark Gatiss are a little more uneven but do have impressive moments. Harrington is a little flat at first but once the character grows so does his acting to something more brooding. Gatiss is too cartoonish in places, but at other times he is quite creepy.

However, the script does feel underdeveloped and tonally unbalanced, both too bland and too broad. It also too talky, Episode 2 especially is too heavy in talk and rambles, and it does affect the pacing which can be dull.

Characterisation is also not as rich as it could have been, too many of the characters are too one-dimensional and one doesn't really get to know them. The storytelling has some harrowing, exciting and suspenseful moments, but they could have come more consistently, the tone could have been more balanced and even and the pace and script could have been far tighter. Some parts seemed a bit too neat and clean.

Historical inaccuracy has also been a criticism directed at 'Gunpowder'. Actually try to avoid that criticism if it can be helped, but it is hard to ignore it here when it is a significant historical event.

Overall, interesting and has impressive elements but doesn't explode enough. Just my very humble and respectful take. 6/10 Bethany Cox