passingview

Sorry, but if you have seen the 1977 version with Nicola Pagett and Stuart Wilson, you have seen the best. It does take a serial installment versus a movie rendering to give this vast story justice. This updated version attempts that, but lacks the authenticity of the superior qualities of casting, direction, acting and storyline found in the 1977 offering. This 2000 version is quite crude by comparison, only surpassing in the more up-to-date production techniques available. Who care about those when dealing with a classic work, and who misses them for the vast difference in foundational qualities. This is the cruder offering in every sense of the word. The leads are weak, ineffectual and even far less attractive. The age factor is disregarded as Anna appears older than either her husband (who is 20 years her senior in the book) and her lover. This project is much weakened by the gratuitous and tasteless animal sexual element ascribed to the principals to the expense of heart connections. Untrue and violating of the classical source material. Disgusting contribution. Even the earlier shallower movie contributions avoided the offenses of this shoddy offering.

I will cherish my lst and 2nd season DVDs of DA, but will buy no more. Why they thought they had to hype the 3rd, who knows, but hyped it was. Now with the entrée of the 4th season, the skids are actually in sight unless they pick it up from those first two wretched hours. We're talking a loss of zest and vital connection that made DA the blockbuster hit it became. This applies to the writing, directing and even the acting. This stellar cast could not overcome insipid and recycled themes and some were actually wooden, especially noticed in the kitchen sequences with Ms. Patmore (who always rang the chimes) and Daisy. Some of their exchanges were like a high school play reading. It was just overall flat - really off. However, in reading reviews of some who have seen the UK complete season say it starts slow and picks up. Man, does it really need to.

As is my custom with favorite actors or actresses, I select titles at times in which they have contributed. This time it was Peter Egan. Saw him first in "Lillie" with Francesca Annis, and it looks like there's nothing comparable to that marvelous part and portrayal as Oscar Wilde. I heartily agree with the reviewer who warns one off this dull-as-ditch-water vehicle. In my experience, one can satisfy curiosity and interest in a poor adaptation if one has enjoyed the author and the source material. I have managed to at least watch with interest mediocre films of favorite authors just to see what they did with it, however just that one time. Nothing here invites a re-visit of this series.