The Buccaneers

... one critic's comments... "The Buccaneers, a refreshing take on the period drama genre, exploring the clash of cultures and the pursuit of love and ambition with a modern sensibility, all within the enchanting setting of 1870s London. Its bold and unapologetic approach might not be everyone's cup of tea, but it undeniably adds a unique flavor to the genre."

... an ok show, well done for the most part... you'll know within the first episode if you're going to be sticking with it week to week... it's entertaining to a 6 of 10, really not much more... acting like it's trying to be, yet Bridgerton it's not

... 12.14.23 - quite the S1 ending ... night b4 wedding, hubby-to-be out on some balcony drinking, while fiance's 'bedroom-entertaining'.. and that's only one of the pairings... S2 coming ... (and actually early-episodes new-Bridgerton's-boring)

I haven't read the Edith Warton novel this is based on but I enjoyed the 1995 miniseries much more than this one even with all its flaws. I can see by some of the reviews that people don't realize this based on a historical fiction novel set in the Gilded Age (late Victorian) not set in an alternate universe (à la Bridgerton). Wharton was born in 1861 so she wrote from first hand experience. The original novel was unfinished so it has been open to reworking and finishing since her death. It seems someone decided Wharton's excellent writing needed the "Bridgerton treatment". I've seen some other historical fiction series that were able to incorporate modern music and language in a way that fits with the tone and style of the story but this is definitely not one of those. The music seems like they just picked random pop songs that don't fit with anything. Also insults the viewer's intelligence by hitting you over the head with the feminist theme in modern language as if we can't figure it out on our own.

Edith Wharton's unfinished 1938 novel gets a second chance as a TV series, no doubt aided by Marion Mainwaring's completion of the book in 1993, based on Wharton's notes. The literary world was split on the two versions, but were in total cahoots when chastising the 1995 BBC TV series.

Almost thirty years on and Apple TV give it a fresh life for the modern audience, but still set it in the original period of 1870, when New York social manners where on a decline (that part of it brilliantly captured on another 2022 TV series - The Gilded Age). So a group of very American kind-of-women travel to London with the excuse of finding the perfect mannered rich English husband (but really find themselves in the process!).

The first thirty minutes seemed to be doomed, with a messy and uninteresting lazy set-up, pandering to a younger hip audience. It is soon saved by Wharton's true passion and champion of women's dilemmas during the patriarchy rule of the 1870's. Unfortunately the filmmakers style leans more toward a lightweight soapy romantic drama that has a rather blunt edge, but still maintains your interest with its lavish production.

A good watch while you're waiting for the third season of Bridgerton, or suffering through droughtlander! The show follows the 4 friends of an American heiress who marries a rich Englishman after a Summer fling. I don't exactly understand why- but they go visit her in England for a season of balls and to try to catch their own titled husbands. Yes the characters are teenage girls, but I don't understand why in some other reviews, everyone is so angry about them acting like teenage girls. This 43 year old mom who loves period drama loves it! Sisters fight, families have secrets, girls fight over liking the same boy, women get stuck in unhappy marriages, drama, drama and more drama. If you like drama, this is for you!

I absolutely hated this when I started watching it. It felt like a rip-off Bridgerton. And in many ways it is. It was Bridgerton but not as good. I almost stopped watching. But then something odd happened. Partway through episode two, I began to enjoy it a bit more. A storyline of sorts began to develop. Someone's said the acting was bad. It wasn't. In fact, there are some good, well-known actors in the show. What irked, initially, was probably more the fault of the director than the actors - the vacuous cheerleader type vibe, which didn't sit well with 1870s England. It was also a mistake copying Bridgerton and using a modern music score. That jarred. And where it worked in Bridgerton, it didn't here. But even so, as the story and characters (along with their secrets) developed, I found myself pretty hooked on this. Is it historically accurate? Nope. Is it slightly the wrong side of light and frothy? Yes. But it's also quite addictive. I found myself thinking about it when I wasn't watching it and wanting to get back to the characters. There's also a darkness (particularly with one character) which helps to take the edge off the fluff. It's not a long series and, by the end, I wished it had been longer. I really hope a second season is on the way.