just finished watching a repeat of this splendid 70's period drama on 'yesterday'.

 

what a superb dramatisation this was, brilliantly cast, brilliantly shot, brilliant scenery.. i thoughroughly enjoyed watching this again. set in the 1790's (well before d'arcy type romantic period bollox) it focused on both rich and poor.... the 'hero' ross poldark (robin ellis) was flawed, imperfect, which made it far more realistic then a my goody goody hero type (d'arcy). the 'baddie' george warleggan (ralph bates) was bad, but pretty much got away with it (so no big comuppance) again which made it realistic.

 

this drama far outclasses the current crop of sci fi dramas (torchwood, primeval, ) and current period dramas (robin hood, merlin).

 

pity we dont get such imperfect storylines/heros today...

just finished watching a repeat of this splendid 70's period drama on 'yesterday'.

 

what a superb dramatisation this was, brilliantly cast, brilliantly shot, brilliant scenery.. i thoughroughly enjoyed watching this again. set in the 1790's (well before d'arcy type romantic period bollox) it focused on both rich and poor.... the 'hero' ross poldark (robin ellis) was flawed, imperfect, which made it far more realistic then a my goody goody hero type (d'arcy). the 'baddie' george warleggan (ralph bates) was bad, but pretty much got away with it (so no big comuppance) again which made it realistic.

 

this drama far outclasses the current crop of sci fi dramas (torchwood, primeval, ) and current period dramas (robin hood, merlin).

 

pity we dont get such imperfect storylines/heros today...

 

Sadly I never got to watch Poldark - I was always doing something else. I used to watch The Onedin Line - which was set pretty much around the same era (give or take a decade or two). I have been watching old episodes of Upstairs Downstairs lately (on some obscure channel) and I'm loving it. Gordon Jackson was brilliant. I suddenly have the urge to watch The Great Escape again now!

 

What have you started?

 

Norma

It's a tad unfair to judge all of today's BBC drama on those examples Rob..... Stuff like 'Rome' and 'The Tudors' is excellent (mind you, those did have to be co-produced by US cable networks....), and those certainly have flawed characters at the centre of their stories..... Even "Ashes to Ashes" is pretty good and "Survivors" had a violent, borderline sociopathic escaped criminal as one of the main characters... I do agree though that there needs to be more "flawed" heroes and less overly 'goody goody' types, I'd love to see a British equivalent of something like the superb US cable shows "Dexter" or "The Sopranos"... But I dunno how you can blame the BBC for Mr D'arcy to be honest, he's bloody Jane Austen's creation..... :lol:

 

The Beeb did a rather good adaption of Dickens' "Bleak House" a few years ago though, certainly plenty of villains and nasty pieces of work in that drama....

 

Mind you, I guess when you DO look at older, much better dramas such as Poldark, I Claudius, The Boys from the Blackstuff, Smileys People or even Our Friends in the North and Looking After Jo Jo from the mid-90s; you have to wonder about the general state of "quality" BBC drama in 2009.....

 

And, thanks to the fukkin' Credit Crunch/Recession, it's gonna get worse before it gets better.... I have serious doubts about Dr Who in 2010. tbh, a real casualty of the Beeb cuts... Why else would they pass on experienced, proven actors such as Patterson Joseph, Bobby Carlyle or Anna Friel in favour of two absolute nobodies who look as if they're about 14....?

I think this is more of a generation gap splitter than a lot of things.

 

I bloody hated Poldark, The Onedin Line and Upstairs Downstairs.

 

Mind you I was quite young when they were on but I have seen bits of them since and I can't see why you would waste your time with them.

 

Dull, dreary and boring.

 

But I suppose I have never liked period dramas at all.

 

Mind you Blackstuff and Our Friends were fantastic but then they were products of the 80s/90s and came out of a different style of drama.

 

Don't think they can be compared to Dr Who, Merlin and Robin Hood as they are/were aimed at completely different audiences.

 

I would rather watch every episode of Torchwood (again) that endure 5 minutes of Poldark.

Edited July 9, 200916 yr by grebo69

I think this is more of a generation gap splitter than a lot of things.

 

I bloody hated Poldark, The Onedin Line and Upstairs Downstairs.

 

Mind you I was quite young when they were on but I have seen bits of them since and I can't see why you would waste your time with them.

 

Dull, dreary and boring.

 

But I suppose I have never liked period dramas at all.

 

Mind you Blackstuff and Our Friends were fantastic but then they were products of the 80s/90s and came out of a different style of drama.

 

Don't think they can be compared to Dr Who, Merlin and Robin Hood as they are/were aimed at completely different audiences.

 

I would rather watch every episode of Torchwood (again) that endure 5 minutes of Poldark.

 

i wouldnt personally lump poldark in with the onedin line and upstairs downstairs...

 

one day m8, we might agree on something! :lol: torchwood? ffs!

 

It's a tad unfair to judge all of today's BBC drama on those examples Rob..... Stuff like 'Rome' and 'The Tudors' is excellent (mind you, those did have to be co-produced by US cable networks....), and those certainly have flawed characters at the centre of their stories..... Even "Ashes to Ashes" is pretty good and "Survivors" had a violent, borderline sociopathic escaped criminal as one of the main characters... I do agree though that there needs to be more "flawed" heroes and less overly 'goody goody' types, I'd love to see a British equivalent of something like the superb US cable shows "Dexter" or "The Sopranos"... But I dunno how you can blame the BBC for Mr D'arcy to be honest, he's bloody Jane Austen's creation..... :lol:

 

The Beeb did a rather good adaption of Dickens' "Bleak House" a few years ago though, certainly plenty of villains and nasty pieces of work in that drama....

 

Mind you, I guess when you DO look at older, much better dramas such as Poldark, I Claudius, The Boys from the Blackstuff, Smileys People or even Our Friends in the North and Looking After Jo Jo from the mid-90s; you have to wonder about the general state of "quality" BBC drama in 2009.....

 

And, thanks to the fukkin' Credit Crunch/Recession, it's gonna get worse before it gets better.... I have serious doubts about Dr Who in 2010. tbh, a real casualty of the Beeb cuts... Why else would they pass on experienced, proven actors such as Patterson Joseph, Bobby Carlyle or Anna Friel in favour of two absolute nobodies who look as if they're about 14....?

 

well tbh i didnt watch the tudors or rome...

 

i blame the bbc because after the success of pride n prejudice in 95, they seemed to go overboard on the romantic hero period dramas. but tbh not only bleak house, but recently tess of the d'urbavilles were also pretty good. but if the hero is a d'arcy type then its probabally crap. i like poldark as it not only gives us a realistic insight into life in the late 18th centuary but it deals with people across the social divide, and not just simpering girlies dressed in big flowery dresses.

 

i claudius was brilliant, id watch that too when/if its ever repeated, but i like history, history fascinates me especially when the drama is factually based and deals with the common man in 'merrye olde englande'.

 

i claudius was brilliant, id watch that too when/if its ever repeated, but i like history, history fascinates me especially when the drama is factually based and deals with the common man in 'merrye olde englande'.

 

Time does diminish ones impressions of certain dramas though. I remember watching I Claudius recently on repeat, and some of the acting was laughable. To be fair - the same can be said of Upstairs Downstairs - it would have brilliantly acted episodes (like the one that dealt with the sinking of the Titanic and Lady Marjorie's death) and the next minute you could have truly dreadful episodes. Whilst the character of Ruby was always appallingly acted by Jenny Tomasin, not one single second of Gordon Jackson's acting could be faulted.

 

By the way ... I did watch some episodes of The Tudors and I thought it was sh/te! I much preferred the drama a few years back in which Ray Winstone played Henry. I'm sorry - but the American's just cannot get British historical dramas right.

 

Norma

 

i wouldnt personally lump poldark in with the onedin line and upstairs downstairs...

 

one day m8, we might agree on something! :lol: torchwood? ffs!

 

I could quite easily say Poldark? ffs! you old fart!

 

But I wouldn't dream of that! :P

 

Anyway I do think we agree on someone with the initials of MJ!

Edited July 9, 200916 yr by grebo69

I think this is more of a generation gap splitter than a lot of things.

 

I bloody hated Poldark, The Onedin Line and Upstairs Downstairs.

 

Mind you I was quite young when they were on but I have seen bits of them since and I can't see why you would waste your time with them.

 

Dull, dreary and boring.

 

But I suppose I have never liked period dramas at all.

 

Mind you Blackstuff and Our Friends were fantastic but then they were products of the 80s/90s and came out of a different style of drama.

 

Don't think they can be compared to Dr Who, Merlin and Robin Hood as they are/were aimed at completely different audiences.

 

I would rather watch every episode of Torchwood (again) that endure 5 minutes of Poldark.

Agree with most of this, I hated Poldark, Onedin Line and Upstairs Downstairs and all the rest of this crap,but my parents watched them so they were always on. I think this is one of the main reasons I didn't watch TV so much back then and I turned to the radio instead and my appreciation of music improved. So in a way it did me good, as my knowledge of music back then is much better than tv programes.

strangely enough, i didnt watch poldark when it was originally aired...i caught afternoon repeats in the mid 80's! :lol: and again about ten years ago. however, i still enjoy it.

I much preferred the drama a few years back in which Ray Winstone played Henry. I'm sorry - but the American's just cannot get British historical dramas right.

 

Norma

 

Well, as much as I love Ray Winstone, I was more laughing at his portrayal of Henry VIII-as-East End-Barrow-Boy than I was convinced tbh.... Irish actor, Johnathan Rhys Myers did a fantastic job of acting the Young Henry as far as I'm concerned..... It's NOT American per se, the Beeb just had some American money from the Showtime network to help with the costs of the production, it's an extremely high budget drama, far more impressive than sh!t like "Pride and Prejudice..", and the sorts of quality actors they got - Jeremy Northam, Sam Neill, Peter O Tool, etc, kind of meant they had to go to the States to afford their wages if nothing else, but it was very much a British effort - Brit writers, (mainly) Brit actors (yes, I know Sam Neill is an Australian), Brit directors.... Frankly, I'd rather the Beeb did something like that, than do something that looks and feels cheap and half-arsed.... The Tudors more or less does a good job of inspiring a discourse with history, whereas the frankly dreadful (and VERY American) "The Other Boleyn Girl" film from a couple of years back, is probably more the thing you would be objecting to....

but if the hero is a d'arcy type then its probabally crap. i like poldark as it not only gives us a realistic insight into life in the late 18th centuary but it deals with people across the social divide, and not just simpering girlies dressed in big flowery dresses.

 

But again, how much of that is the BBC's fault....? Jane Austen kind of wrote "Pride and Prejudice" as a book about "simpering girlies in big, flowery dresses".. You cant exactly create a 'class divide' out of a text where there IS no such discourse..... Jane Austen wasn't exactly Thomas Hardy or Charles Dickens mate, or even Charlotte or Emily Bronte...... Although, you can probably blame the Beeb for adatpting the bloody thing in the first place, where it wasn't exactly necessary, the only reason the Beeb did it, I reckon, was because of the success of the Sense and Sensibility film a few years before....

 

I'd much rather the Beeb came along and did a good modern adaption of "Wuthering Heights" tbh, it's far more dark and edgy than any of the dire, soppy girlie cr@p that Austen wrote... But then, I suppose, the characters of Heathcliff and Cathy are just a bit too "flawed" aren't they....?

 

But again, how much of that is the BBC's fault....? Jane Austen kind of wrote "Pride and Prejudice" as a book about "simpering girlies in big, flowery dresses".. You cant exactly create a 'class divide' out of a text where there IS no such discourse..... Jane Austen wasn't exactly Thomas Hardy or Charles Dickens mate, or even Charlotte or Emily Bronte...... Although, you can probably blame the Beeb for adatpting the bloody thing in the first place, where it wasn't exactly necessary, the only reason the Beeb did it, I reckon, was because of the success of the Sense and Sensibility film a few years before....

 

The BBC version of Pride & Prejudice and the Emma Thompson screenplayed Sense & Sensibility were both around at the same time (1995) - so you really can't accuse the BBC of trading in on the success of S&S. I actually liked both the televised P&P and the Emma Thompson version of S&S. I honestly can't judge how close to the book the BBC version of P&P was as it is over 30 years since I read it - and all I can recall is almost being driven into a coma by its dreariness. However - having read Sense & Sensibility almost at the same time as seeing the 1995 film - all I can say is that Emma Thompson did make a huge improvement on an incredibly boring book. Quite frankly - Jane Austen sucks! Her women are weak and they are the perfect example of 'the fish that actually does need the bicycle'. The Bronte women on the other hand - these are the strong, earthy females that, to this day, I'm sure Coronation Street bases its feisty female characters on (OK - we'll forget the insipid 'Austenesque' bint that Fizz has become!)

 

However, if anyone wants to see a fabulous TV adaptation of an incredibly funny book - I would recommend anyone to watch The Barchester Chronicles based on the Anthony Trollope stories. A wonderful series with a stellar cast (Donald Pleasance, Nigel Hawthorne, Alan Rickman, Geraldine McEwan). It kept incredibly close to a thoroughly enjoyable book and the acting was so much better than the much more lauded I Claudius. I really wish Trollope had been on our reading list when we were doing our 'O' levels - instead of us being bored to death with Jane Austen - maybe a few more of us would have passed our literature exam!

 

Norma

Edited July 10, 200916 yr by Norma_Snockers

^ It frankly annoys the hell out of me that so many bloody adaptions have been done of Jane Austen, while not nearly enough has been done of Emily or Charlotte Bronte, or Thomas Hardy..... I got Pride and Prejudice forced on me at school as well.... UGH.... An absolute bore... Thank God later on I also got Catcher in the Rye.... An absolutely astounding novel by contrast..... No one's been able to do a proper adaption of "Catcher..." though, mainly because of Salinger's own incredible hostility to the idea of his work being adapted.....

But again, how much of that is the BBC's fault....? Jane Austen kind of wrote "Pride and Prejudice" as a book about "simpering girlies in big, flowery dresses".. You cant exactly create a 'class divide' out of a text where there IS no such discourse..... Jane Austen wasn't exactly Thomas Hardy or Charles Dickens mate, or even Charlotte or Emily Bronte...... Although, you can probably blame the Beeb for adatpting the bloody thing in the first place, where it wasn't exactly necessary, the only reason the Beeb did it, I reckon, was because of the success of the Sense and Sensibility film a few years before....

 

I'd much rather the Beeb came along and did a good modern adaption of "Wuthering Heights" tbh, it's far more dark and edgy than any of the dire, soppy girlie cr@p that Austen wrote... But then, I suppose, the characters of Heathcliff and Cathy are just a bit too "flawed" aren't they....?

 

the bbc CHOSE to make an adaptation of austens work, and tbh it was good enough, but the beeb seem to want to stick with that 'upper middle class romantic story', rather then anything edgier... tbh id sooner see some dickens!

By the way ... they weren't 'big flowery dresses'. The one thing that cannot be faulted about the BBC adaptations is the costume. Simple, straight line dresses that tended to thrust up the baps (and that was just the men's costumes! :lol: ) If one wants a real laugh at Austen adaptations - take a look at the Laurence Olivier / Greer Garson Pride & Prejudices - it looks like they got the women's costumes right out of a Zane Gray western!

 

Norma

I just wanted to know Rob, how much Torchwood have you actually watched?

 

Because Children of Earth knocked Poldark into a $h!tty tin pot as far as I'm concerned.

Edited July 10, 200916 yr by grebo69

I just wanted to know Rob, how much Torchwood have you actually watched?

 

Because Children of Earth knocked Poldark into a $h!tty tin pot as far as I'm concerned.

 

i saw it when it started, thought it was p*** poor bollox so turned it off. this weeks seriese i didnt watch because a.) i couldnt watch every night at 9pm, B.) the trailers that swamped the screen did not appeal at all being yet another dr who esque noisy sci-fi bollox set on earth using children... sci fi is great when theres a degree of credibility about it .

 

thats your opinion, it aint a fact. :)

the beeb seem to want to stick with that 'upper middle class romantic story', rather then anything edgier... tbh id sooner see some dickens!

 

They HAVE done Dickens though mate.... Quite a few times actually over the years.... You obviously missed "Bleak House" and "Little Dorrit", the two most recent ones..... :P

 

You want to see something edgy mate...? I would highly recommend the 1996 film adaption of Thomas Hardy's "Jude the Obscure" (shortened simply to Jude) with Chris Eccleston and Kate Winslett..... Absolutely, devastatingly tragic and depressing stuff, but superbly made (directed by Michael Winterbottom, one of our finest directors who just doesn't really get the recognition he deserves) and brilliantly acted..... Just make sure you've got a couple of hankies ready though mate, trust me, you'll need them.... "Jude" Knocks girlie sh!t like Jane Austen into the long grass.. TOTALLY....

 

Because Children of Earth knocked Poldark into a $h!tty tin pot as far as I'm concerned.

 

I agree... "Children of Earth" was bloody good Sci Fi drama.... Very 'John Wyndham-esque' (Day of the Triffids, The Midwych Cuckoos, The Chrysalids) as well in places I thought..... And Peter Capaldi was superb, easily outacting the "Torchwood Three" by a mile..... :lol: :lol:

 

Rob, you seriously missed out here mate.... Torchwood actually got better in series two, and "Children of Earth" (the best yet, and better, IMO, than just about anything in series 4 of Dr Who, esp. the cr@ppy "specials"..) was a gripping, well made, well plotted Sci Fi thriller which actually does have a degree of credibility to it.... Why on Earth Russell T Davies couldn't write Dr Who with the consistency he showed here is just baffling tbh.....