A pair of scheming ex-lovers attempt to exploit others by using the power of seduction.A pair of scheming ex-lovers attempt to exploit others by using the power of seduction.A pair of scheming ex-lovers attempt to exploit others by using the power of seduction.
- Nominated for 1 BAFTA Award
- 3 nominations total
Browse episodes
Featured reviews
First of all, it's not really an adaptation. If you read carefully even here on IMDB, you will find out that Harriet Warner, who have written the first episode, was merely inspired by the original story. So it's more like a story based on the characters rather than adaptation of the classics, which could be enough for some people to skip it. The story in the series is so different that it actually puzzled me at first: what am I even watching? Character names are known, there seems to be the same period as in the novel, but that's where resemblance ends and it is in a bad way.
Don't be fooled, that's just another attempt to make money on the story with fancy name with the hope that viewer had never read it. Because if you did, there's no other answer to the omnipresent question: why diverting so much from the original novel while keeping character names and the name of the story?
Picture is good and there seems to be an intrigue, but once again, this is not original de Laclos writing and competing with him while keeping the name of his novel seems insulting.
I have only seen the first episode of the show and will not continue with it. If you have never read the story, better read it or watch one of the many successful films: Dangerous Liaisons (1988), Cruel Intentions (1999) or more dated French version from 1960.
Don't be fooled, that's just another attempt to make money on the story with fancy name with the hope that viewer had never read it. Because if you did, there's no other answer to the omnipresent question: why diverting so much from the original novel while keeping character names and the name of the story?
Picture is good and there seems to be an intrigue, but once again, this is not original de Laclos writing and competing with him while keeping the name of his novel seems insulting.
I have only seen the first episode of the show and will not continue with it. If you have never read the story, better read it or watch one of the many successful films: Dangerous Liaisons (1988), Cruel Intentions (1999) or more dated French version from 1960.
This production is another example of today's media trend of dumbing down great past works of art that appealed to mind, body and heart and instead writing sophomoric scripts full of insultingly expository dialogue, gratuitous sex, and non-existent character development. Oh...and somehow it's ok to anachronistically race flip historical characters, but not gender flip any. Instead, this adaptation reinforces cliche false sex stereotypes about men and women and turns the delightful cat and mouse game of the original tale between a female and her male equal into a cringeworthy catfight between two women spewing the comically insulting female tropes we (unfortunately) see everywhere else these days. Skip it. I had to go back and watch the Glenn Close/John Malkovich (1988) and Annette Bening/Colin Firth (1989) versions just to cleanse my palette. Oh, what Leslie Manville could have done with scripts of that caliber! But...now we'll never know...
Ok a lot people reviewing this obviously didn't bother to read the synopsis or watch the trailer. This is a television show so they are expanding on the novel. The show starts by giving origin stories to Merteuil and Valmont. The direction for their origin stories is kind of weird to me. Merteuil and Valmont being snobbish aristocratics is part of their appeal and says a lot about who they are personally. The show instead tries to give them a Dickensian type of humble beginnings origin. I'm guessing they are trying to make them more relatable but I find it kind of boring. Merteuil and Valmont are rich jerks who look down on people. Aside from that the show obviously is shot well. The female lead is descent. Not sold on the male lead though. The supporting actors are good. I'll keep watching but I'm going to manage my expectations.
The only reason to watch this mindless tripe is for Lesley Manville. So disappointing. It pays no respect to the source material, turning a story about rich, bored, wicked people destroying others for sport into romantic fluff. Do yourself a favor - read the book or the play, watch the 1988 film or 1989's Valmont. Even Cruel Intentions is a more worthy update of the story.
It looks beautiful. The costumes are gorgeous, the cinematography is first rate. Too bad it's all wasted on a silly, adolescent screenplay. Call it something else, because this show has nothing to do with Dangerous Liaisons.
It looks beautiful. The costumes are gorgeous, the cinematography is first rate. Too bad it's all wasted on a silly, adolescent screenplay. Call it something else, because this show has nothing to do with Dangerous Liaisons.
There is very little character development throughout the first few episodes, the plot feels very rushed, and the premise is not very interesting. I feel like this adaptation does do the original story any justice. I want to like the characters and the plot, but the hurried way of telling the story spoils the narrative. The scenery and costume design are amazing, but little else of this show is. There are moments of intertwining story telling mixed with long periods of irrelevant dialog. I wanted to like this show because I like the era and the premise. I really liked Outlander and similar shows, but this is nothing like those shows.
Did you know
- TriviaLesley Manville originated the role of Cécile de Volanges in the 1985 Royal Shakespeare Company stage version.
- ConnectionsVersion of Les liaisons dangereuses (1959)
- How many seasons does Dangerous Liaisons have?Powered by Alexa
Details
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
Top Gap
What is the Brazilian Portuguese language plot outline for Les Liaisons Dangereuses (2022)?
Answer