Below is a list of my favorite episodes from Season Four of “GAME OF THRONES”, HBO’s adaptation of the second half of George R. R. Martin’s 2000 novel from his A Song of Ice and Fire series, “A Storm of Swords”. The series was created by David Benioff and D. B. Weiss:
“FIVE FAVORITE EPISODES OF “GAME OF THRONES” SEASON FOUR (2014)
1. (4.02) “The Lion and the Rose” – The elite citizens of King’s Landing celebrate the wedding of King Joffrey Baratheon and Margaery Tyrell. Joffrey’s uncle, Tyrion Lannister, tries to break up with his mistress Shae so that she would leave Westeros avoid being targeted by his powerful father, Tywin Lannister.
2. (4.08) “The Mountain and the Viper” – The battered Theon Greyjoy helps his captor Ramsay Bolton seize the last Greyjoy stronghold in the North, Moat Cailin. The wildlings attack Mole’s Town. Sansa Stark comes up with a story to protect Lord Baelish from Brienne Tarth. Queen Daenerys Targaryen discovers out a disturbing secret about her aide, Jorah Mormont. And Oberyn Martell faces Gregor Clegane, the Mountain in a trial by combat to settle Tyrion’s verdict.
3. (4.05) “First of His Name” – Tommen Barantheon is crowned King of the Seven Kingdoms. His mother, Queen Cersei, builds her case of murder against her brother Tyrion. Sansa Stark and Lord Petyr Baelish arrive at the Eyrie, the home of her aunt Lysa Arryn. Jon Snow leads the Night’s Watch in an attack against the mutineers at Craster’s Keep.
4. (4.09) “The Watchers on the Wall” – The Night’s Watch finally engage in an open battle against the attacking Freefolk aka “Wildlings”.
5. (4.07) “Mockingbird” – Tyrion tries to find a champion for his upcoming trial by combat. Daenerys finally sleeps with her hired mercenary, Daario Naharis. Brienne and Podrick receive a tip on Arya Stark’s whereabouts. And both Sansa and Lord Baelish come into conflict with her jealous aunt Lysa.
Below is an article about the dish known as Chicken and Waffles:
CHICKEN AND WAFFLES
Considered an American dish, Chicken and Waffles is a fusion of two food times – chicken and waffles. The dish is part of a variety of culinary traditions that include soul food and Pennsylvania Dutch cuisine. It is served in certain specialty restaurants in the United States. The combination that is regarded as part of African-American or Southern tradition is usually served with condiments such as butter and syrup and has become a local custom in Baltimore, Maryland. However, the Pennsylvania Dutch version of the dish is usually served with pulled or stewed chicken and gravy on top. This version has become a custom in Northeastern United States.
Several theories about the origin of Chicken and Waffles do exist. But they are theories and is not exactly regarded as fact. Waffles entered American cuisine in the 1600s with the arrival of European colonists. A chef to the prince-bishop of Liège originated the waffles used in this particular dish in the 18th century. The popularity of waffles saw a boost following Thomas Jefferson’s purchase of four waffle irons in Amsterdam after 1789.
Hotels and resorts outside Philadelphia, Pennsylvania began serving waffles with fried catfish in the early 1800s. Such establishments also served other dishes like fried chicken, which gradually became the meat of choice due to catfish’s limited availability. By the 1840s, broiled chicken and waffles became the specialty at Warriner’s Tavern in Springfield, Massachusetts. The establishment was owned by Jeremy and Phoebe Warriner, two well-known African-American abolitionists. The Warriners hired African-American women as cooks for the tavern. They were usually freed or runaway slaves who had learned their trade in Southern plantation kitchens. Chicken and Waffles had been extravagant breakfast staples in plantation houses through much of the South. Earlier, I had pointed out that the chicken served with waffles by the Pennsylvania Dutch was usually stewed and topped with gravy. This version had became an established common Sunday dish among the Pennsylvania Dutch by the 1860s.
The combination of chicken and waffles did not appear in early Southern cookbooks such as “Mrs. Porter’s Southern Cookery Book”, published in 1871; or in the first African-American cookbook, “What Mrs. Fisher Knows About Old Southern Cooking”, published in 1881 by former slave Abby Fisher. The lack of a recipe for the combination of chicken and waffles in Southern cookbooks during the post-Civil War era may suggest a later origin for the dish. Popular culture had associated Chicken and Waffles with the South by 1917 with the publication of Edna Ferber’s novel, “Fanny Herself”.
Fried Chicken and Waffles had arrived in Los Angeles, California by 1931. The dish was served at The Maryland, a local restaurant that marketed the dish as a Southern specialty. The protagonist in James M. Cain’s 1941 novel “Mildred Pierce” was a woman who finds success serving “chicken-and-waffle dinner” at her Glendale restaurant. Chicken and Waffles had become a staple in New York City’s African-American community in Harlem as early as the 1930s in such locations as Tillie’s Chicken Shack, Dickie Wells’ jazz nightclub, and particularly the Wells Supper Club. The dish eventually regained popularity in Los Angeles in the 1970s, due to the fame of former Harlem resident Herb Hudson’s restaurant Roscoe’s House of Chicken and Waffles. The latter has become known as a favorite of some Hollywood celebrities and been referenced in several movies.
Below is a recipe for Chicken and Waffles from the Delish website:
Chicken and Waffles
Ingredients
Fried Chicken 1 quart buttermilk 2 tbsp. kosher salt Mix of bone-in chicken thighs, breasts, and drumsticks (about 2 lbs.) Vegetable oil, for frying 2 cups All Purpose Flour 1 tbsp. paprika
Waffles 2 cups all-purpose flour 2 tbsp. granulated sugar 1 tsp. baking powder 1/2 tsp. baking soda 1 cup sour cream 1 cup milk 6 tbsp. butter, melted, plus more for waffle iron 3 Large eggs, separated 1 tsp. cayenne Kosher salt Freshly ground black pepper 2 Large eggs
Preparation
1. Brine chicken – In a large bowl, mix together buttermilk and 2 tablespoons salt. Add chicken and cover bowl with plastic wrap. Refrigerate at least 2 hours and up to overnight.
2. Meanwhile, make waffles – Preheat oven to 200°. In a large bowl, whisk together flour, sugar, baking powder, baking soda, and a pinch of kosher salt.
3. In a separate bowl, whisk together sour cream, milk, butter and egg yolks. Gently fold wet mixture into dry mixture.
4. In a large bowl, using a hand mixer (or in the bowl of a stand mixer), beat egg whites until stiff peaks form. Fold whipped egg whites into batter, being careful not to over mix. (A few fluffy streaks of whites are fine!)
5. Heat waffle iron according to manufacturer’s instruction. When the iron is hot, brush grates with melted butter. Spoon about ⅓ cup of batter into waffle maker and cook until golden, about 5 minutes. Repeat with remaining batter. Place cooked waffles in a clean kitchen towel on a baking sheet. Place in oven to keep warm while preparing chicken.
6. When ready to fry – Fill a Dutch oven fitted with a candy thermometer with vegetable oil until 2″ to 3″ deep, then preheat until oil reaches 350º. Prepare one sheet pan lined with paper towels and a wire rack.
7. Transfer chicken from brine to another sheet pan and dry thoroughly with paper towels. Season generously with salt and pepper.
8. In a large, deep bowl, whisk together flour, paprika, cayenne, salt, and pepper. In a large bowl, beat eggs with 2 tablespoons water. Using tongs, place chicken in egg mixture, roll in flour mixture, and shake off excess. Fry chicken in 2 batches until golden brown and cooked through, 6 to 8 minutes (internal temperature should read 165º). Bring oil back to 350º before adding last batch.
9. Place chicken on wire rack and season with salt immediately. Plate waffles with a pat of butter and top with 2 to 3 pieces of fried chicken. Serve with maple syrup on the side for drizzling.
Below is a list of my favorite television productions set in the 1830s:
FAVORITE TELEVISION PRODUCTIONS SET IN THE 1830s
1. “Jane Eyre” (1983) – Alexander Baron wrote this excellent adaptation of Charlotte Brontë’s 1847 novel about a destitute, but strong-willed governess who falls in love with her mysterious employer. Zelah Clarke and Timothy Dalton made a superb screen team in my favorite adaptation of the novel.
2. “Wives and Daughters” (1999) – Andrew Davies wrote this excellent adaptation of Elizabeth Gaskell’s 1865 unfinished novel about the coming-of-age of a country doctor’s daughter. Justine Waddell and Keeley Hawes starred in this four-part miniseries.
3. “Middlemarch” (1994) – Andrew Davies adapted this superb adaptation of George Eliot’s 1871 novel about the lives of the inhabitants of an English town during the cusp of the Industrial Revolution. The superb cast includes Juliet Aubrey, Douglas Hodge, Robert Hardy and Rufus Sewell.
4. “Gentleman Jack” (2019-present) – Sally Wainwright created this excellent series about the relationship between early 19th century industrialist/landowner Anne Lister and wealthy heiress Ann Walker. Suranne Jones and Sophie Rundle starred.
5. “Cousin Bette” (1971) – Margaret Tyzack and Helen Mirren starred in this memorable television adaptation of Honoré de Balzac’s 1846 novel about a middle-aged spinster who wreaks vengeance upon her high-born extended family. Gareth Davies directed.
6. “The Count of Monte Cristo” (1975) – Richard Chamberlain starred in this entertaining television adaptation of Alexandre Dumas, père ‘s 1844 novel about a man’s campaign of revenge against those who had him imprisoned for over a decade. David Greene directed.
7. “Jane Eyre” (1973) – Sorcha Cusack and Michael Jayston starred in this colorful adaptation of Charlotte Brontë’s 1847 novel about a destitute, but strong-willed governess who falls in love with her mysterious employer. Joan Craft directed.
8. “Wide Sargasso Sea” (2006) Rebecca Hall and Rafe Spall starred in this adaptation of Jean Rhys’ 1966 novel, which is a prequel to “Jane Eyre”. Brendan Maher directed.
We finally come to the fourth chapter of the 1979 miniseries, “THE CHISHOLMS”. And like the first chapter, it had a running time of at least 90 minutes. This fourth chapter marked the last episode of the actual miniseries and the end of Evan Hunter’s 1976 novel . . . despite the Chisholms’ story continuing in a short-running television series.
Chapter IV began some thirty seconds before Chapter III ended. What happened in the previous episode? Hadley and Minerva Chisholm made the decision to leave Independence (in western Missouri) and continued their family’s western journey along the Overland Trail without their two older sons, Will and Gideon. Why? The latter two had left the family to search for one Lester Hackett, who had stolen Will’s horse near St. Louis. During this time, the Chisholm couple and their other three children had accompanied a former Army scout named Timothy Oates, the latter’s Pawnee wife and a family from Baltimore named Comyn. Upon hearing a rumor about fever on a wagon train that was ahead of them, the Comyns returned east. Oates and his wife Youngest Daughter eventually bid the Chisholms good-bye and headed for her family’s village. Meanwhile, Will and Gideon spent a month on a prison work gang in Iowa as punishment for “trespassing” on the farm of Lester Hackett’s mother. Following their release, they encountered a wounded Ojibwa woman named Keewedinok, who had been staying at a Missouri farm that was attacked by drunken trappers. Will and Gideon allowed Keewedinok to accompany them as far as Fort Laramie. Being alone on the trail, the Chisholms attracted the attention of a small band of Pawnee warriors who wanted their horses and the women. Chapter III ended with the Pawnees’ initial attack.
In the end, the attack proved to be brief, brutal and tragic. The Chisholm family managed to kill at least three of the Pawnee warriors. Only one – Teetonkah (the one with the Wolf’s Skin) – managed to survive after Minerva attacked him in defense. Unfortunately, Hadley sustained a blow to the head . . . and young Annabel sustained a mortal blow to her chest. She managed to survive for a day or two before she finally died from her wound not far from one of the Oregon Trail landmarks (Scott’s Bluff, I believe). Eventually, the traumatized family reached the Fort Laramie trading post. Meanwhile, Will and Gideon Chisholm continued their trek west in the company of the widowed Keewedinok. In a surprising twist, the trio encountered a tragic scenario on the plains. The two Kansa couples who had encountered their family in Chapter III were found dead and their teepees burned. Actually, only one survived – the Kansa man who had admired the Chisholms’ mules. During this moment, the Chisholm brothers discovered that the Kansa couples had been attacked by white men. And Will eventually learned that that the men who had attacked the Missouri cabin where they had found Keewedinok, were also white. One or more of them had raped her. Following this revelation, Will and Keewedinok grew increasingly attracted to each other. But their newfound emotions were eventually tested when trio finally reached Fort Laramie and the remaining members of the Chisholm family. Will’s new romance led to an estrangement between him and the racist Hadley. And the Chisholms received a bigger surprise with the unexpected arrival of one Lester Hackett at the fort.
When I first saw “THE CHISHOLMS”, I found it odd that the Virginia family had only made it as far as Fort Laramie. I could not understand why they did not continue their journey to California. I eventually realized that certain factors prevented this. One, they were very far behind by time on the trail before Will and Gideon had appeared at Laramie with Keewedinok. It would have been unwise for them to continue their journey west with no guide or without the accompaniment of other wagons . . . especially after what happened to Annabel. And by the time they reached the eastern side of the Sierra Mountains foothills, a late fall weather would have made the mountain crossing very dangerous. Remaining within the safety of Fort Laramie seemed like the smart move to make. They would have to wait until the following summer for the arrival of another overland wagon train, if they had wanted to continue to California. I also suspected that Annabel’s death had traumatized them so much – especially Hadley and Minerva – that they were unwilling to continue west. But Hadley was also reluctant to return to Virginia – especially since their best land had fallen into the hands of the Cassidy family. And they would have to travel between Laramie and Independence without a guide and other wagons. At that point, Hadley and Minerva were determined to remain near Fort Laramie.
But certain factors threatened their plans. One, their sons – especially Gideon – were still anxious to continue west. Actually, I am not certain about Beau. At least I was not at first. After all, he was the only son who had experienced the Pawnee attack. He may have been less eager than Will or Gideon. Two, with Will and Hadley estranged over the former’s relationship with Keewedinok, it was not that surprising that Will also longed to leave the fort and continue west to California. In the end, so much happened in the following months – Lester Hackett’s reunion with the Chisholms, the birth of his and Bonnie Sue’s baby, the end of Will and Hadley’s estrangement, the appearance of Teetonkah aka Wolf’s Skin at Fort Laramie, and the near fatal attack on Keewedinok. I think these string of events, along with enough time finally led the family – especially Hadley and Minerva – to come to terms with Annabel’s death. And I believe this, along with the realization that their children planned to join the first wagon train to arrive in the following summer, finally led the couple to continue their journey to Califorina. Looking back, the Chisholms’ journey had been tainted by bad luck, bad timing and bad decisions since the moment they lost their most fertile corn field to the Cassidy family. With no such impediments and their emotional acceptance of Annabel’s death preventing them from continuing on to California, it was not surprising to see Hadley, Minerva and the rest of the Chisholms joining the next westbound wagon train in the summer of 1845.
I have to be honest. Chapter IV is not my favorite episode in the miniseries. It did feature scenes and performances that I truly enjoyed. This was certainly the case while watching Will and Keewedinok grow closer, as they traveled west with Gideon to Fort Laramie. I have to give kudos to Ben Murphy and Sandra Griego for making this an enjoyable and emotional segment to watch. Another romantic sequence that I found satisfying was Lester Hackett’s renewed courtship of Bonnie Sue, thanks to Stacy Nelkin and Charles Frank’s performances. Both Robert Preston and Murphy acted the hell out of one scene that featured Hadley and Will’s bitter quarrel over Keewedinok. And both Preston and Rosemary Harris were superb in one scene in which Hadley and Minerva had finally decided to join their children on the continuing trek to California. The episode also featured excellent supporting performances from James Van Patten, Brian Keith, Christopher Allport, Billy Drago and Susan Swift, who gave a very effective performance during Annabel’s death scene.
Chapter IV featured less action or conflict than the previous two chapters. But it was bookmarked by two action sequences featuring Drago’s character, Teetonkah. I have already described the Pawnees’ attack on the Chisholms’ lone wagon at the episode’s beginning. Near the end of the episode, Teetonkah had arrived at Fort Laramie and immediately spotted the Chisholms’ cabin and the ponies that the family had taken from him and his deceased comrades. He managed to convince a few braves to steal back the ponies and a few other items from the family. During this robbery, Keewedinok tried to stop him and was badly wounded. This led to a quite interesting and brutal fight between Teetonkah and Will that struck me as well choreographed.
Although I have possessed a VHS copy of “THE CHISHOLMS” for years, I was very happy to finally get a DVD copy of the miniseries. Even after many years, it still remained both enjoyable and fascinating to me. And frankly, I feel it is one of the best productions about westward migration in the mid-19th century. You can read the 1976 novel that it is based upon. But for me, I feel that this television adaptation is the better version. And one can thank David Dortort, Evan Hunter, director Mel Stuart and a superb cast led by Robert Preston and Rosemary Harris. The miniseries must have been very popular when it aired in the early spring of 1979. For it generated a short-lived television series that I plan to eventually view.
Below is a list of my top favorite episodes from Seasons Five and Six of “ONCE UPON A TIME”. The series was created by Edward Kitsis and Adam Horowitz:
FAVORITE EPISODES OF “ONCE UPON A TIME” SEASONS FIVE AND SIX (2015-2017)
1. (5.08) “Birth” – Killian Jones aka Captain Hook risks everything to uncover the truth about what his lady love, the new Dark One Emma Swan, did while they were all in Camelot.
2. (5.19) “Sisters” – Hades and Zelena Mills aka the Wicked Witch finally reunite in the Underworld and he informs her of his plan to leave that realm forever, using the citizens of Storybrooke. Cora Mills aka the Queen of Hearts reveals information from the past that will change the lives of her daughters, Zelena and Regina Mills aka the Evil Queen, forever.
3. (6.07) “Heartless” – Mary Margret Blanchard aka Snow White and David Nolan aka Prince Charming need to sacrifice their hearts if they want to save Storybrooke from part of Regina’s psyche, the Evil Queen. In the Enchanted Forest past, Snow White tries to get away from the Woodcutter and Charming has plans to sell his family’s farm.
4. (5.02) “The Price” – With Emma now the new “Dark One”, evil rises in Storybrooke, leading others to find a new savior. Back in Camelot’s past, Prince Arthur organizes a ball. And one of the guests proves to be someone from Regina’s past, whose actions nearly cost her heartache.
5. (6.21-6.22) “The Final Battle” – After Fiona aka the Black Fairy (Rumplestiltskin’s mother) unleashes a new curse upon Storybrooke, Henry Mills wakes up to find Emma in a mental hospital and the former as the town’s new mayor. Meanwhile, Rumpelstiltskin searches for a missing Belle; and Snow, Charming, Regina, Zelena and Hook are trapped in a crumbling Enchanted Forest.
Honorable Mention: (6.19) “The Black Fairy” – Flashbacks reveal how Fiona became the Black Fairy and why she gave up custody of her son, Rumpelstiltskin. Meanwhile, the latter searches for his younger son Gideon’s heart in order to free the latter from Fiona’s control.
There is a group of mystery writers I usually read. However, one of them is not P.D. James. Mind you, I have read one of Ms. James’ novels. But it was not enough to tempt me to become a fan of her stories. I just might give her another chance . . . especially upon discovering that one of her novels was “Death Comes to Pemberley”, a 2011 sequel to Jane Austen’s 1813 novel, “Pride and Prejudice”.
Two years after the publication of James’ novel, the BBC aired a television adaptation in the form of a three-part miniseries. Set in 1803, (six years after the ending of “Pride and Prejudice”), “DEATH COMES TO PEMBERLEY” began with Elizabeth and Fitzwilliam Darcy preparing for the annual Queen Anne’s Ball at their Pemberley estate. The first guests arrive on the day before the ball – Mr. and Mrs. Bennet, Colonel Fitzwilliam and one Mr. Henry Alveston, an attorney that happened to be friends with Jane and Charles Bingley. During supper, an unexpected carriage arrive at Pemberley conveying Elizabeth’s youngest sister, Lydia Wickham, who is in a hysterical state. She claims that both her husband George Wickham and his friend Captain Denny had been arguing, when the latter angrily left the carriage in a state of anger. Wickham followed him and a few minutes later, Lydia and the carriage’s driver heard shots. Mr. Darcy organizes a search party that includes Colonel Fitzwilliam and Mr. Alveston. They find a distraught Wickham sobbing over Denny’s dead body. Very little time passes before the local magistrate, Sir Selwyn Hardcastle, finally arrests Wickham for murder.
As I had earlier stated, I have never read P.D. James’ novel. I could never make any comparison between her novel and the 2013 television adaptation. But I can convey how I felt about the latter. There were aspects of “DEATH COMES TO PEMBERLEY” that I found either perplexing or annoying. One such aspect was Elizabeth Darcy’s reaction . . . or lack of reaction to her sister Lydia Wickham’s behavior at Pemberley. In Jane Austen’s 1813 novel, Elizabeth had never been inclined to hold her tongue regarding Lydia’s childish behavior. In this miniseries, she more or less remained silent in the face of Lydia’s childish actions and spiteful words. Within her own home. Why? Why did the screenwriter allow Elizebath to remain silent and endure Lydia’s unpleasant presence? Was this supposed to be a sign of Elizabeth’s “growing maturity”? What? I never understood Elizabeth’s lack of responses when it came to her youngest sister. Another aspect that I found slightly irritating proved to be the scene in which Elizabeth and Pemberley’s housekeeper Mrs. Reynolds inspected the food prepared for the Darcys’ upcoming ball . . . for the following day. I am aware that cooks and their kitchen staff in Georgian England usually prepared cold dishes the day before any ball or banquet. Yet, the above scene featured Elizabeth and Mrs. Reynolds inspecting dishes like roast poultry and soup that were obviously not cold dishes. Yes, it is a minor complaint. Being a history buff, I found this scene slightly annoying.
Were there any other aspects of “DEATH COMES TO PEMBERLEY” that either annoyed me or I found questionable? Well . . . yes. The miniseries’ first episode featured a flashback to Elizabeth’s first ball as Pemberley’s chatelaine. This flashback featured a moment in which Elizabeth overheard two guests making snide comments about her father’s income of £2,000 pounds per year. I found this scene puzzling. Why would anyone make snide comments about Mr. Bingley’s income? Two thousand pounds per year from an estate meant that Mr. Bennet was a moderately wealthy man. Granted, he was not as wealthy as two of his sons-in-law. But he was wealthy, especially since all five of his daughters had married by this time in the family saga. And chances are, at least half or more of the Darcys’ guests earned a good deal less than Mr. Bennet. This scene struck me as another example of this erroneous belief that the Bennets came from the middle-class – a belief that either P.D. James or the miniseries’ screenwriter Juliette Towhidi shared. I must admit I found it surprising that George Wickham’s friendship with Captain Denny had survived following the former’s scandal with Lydia Bennet in “Pride and Prejudice”. Following the scandal, Darcy managed to purchase a commission in a regular Northern regiment – Colonel Fitzwilliam’s regiment – leaving Denny behind with the militia at Brighton. Perhaps this is nothing, but I found it surprising that their friendship, which never struck me as deep in the first place – had survived so long. Following her discovery of Captain Denny’s actual killer, Elizabeth and Reverend Oliphant raced to the execution site to save Wickham. They arrived in time to prevent Wickham’s execution at the last moment. Honestly, this scene seemed like a rehash of a scene from Henry Fielding’s novel, “The History of Tom Jones, a Foundling” and other stories. I found it so hokey. A giant cliché that left me wincing with embarrassment.
Despite my issues with “DEATH COMES TO PEMBERLEY”, I rather enjoyed it. A lot more than I had originally thought I would. I had featured the three-part miniseries would turn out to be one of those Jane Austen sequels filled with a good deal of hokey gimmicks. I mean . . . a sequel to “Pride and Prejudice” that turned out to be a murder mystery? Come on! Thankfully, P.D. James’ tale proved to be a great deal more interesting and just as emotionally complex as some of Austen’s best works. Captain Denny’s murder forced Elizabeth and Darcy to overcome their natural antipathy toward Wickham and face the possibility that for once, he might not be the murderer or villain in this scenario. Yet, ironically, Wickham’s past actions had led to his situation in the first place. The mystery surrounding Denny’s murder led to other issues. It revealed a good deal of class division – especially in regard to the gentry ruling class, middle-class types like Wickham and the Darcy family’s servants.
But there were other issues that manifested in the wake of Wickham’s arrest. A romantic triangle involving Georgiana Darcy, Henry Alveston and Colonel Fitzwilliam. Naturally, Wickham’s arrest has led to family troubles for both Elizabeth and Darcy. Fearful that Wickham’s conviction and execution might lead to more scandal for the Darcy family, Pemberley’s owner resumes his old habit of suppressing his emotions. Worse, Darcy becomes willing to support Colonel Fitzwilliam’s marriage proposal to Georgiana in the name of family solidarity and staving off any hint of scandal. And both of his actions threaten to alienate him from Elizaeth. Poor Georgiana seemed torn between her desire for Henry Alveston and marriage to Colonel Fitzwilliam out of family duty. Being a Darcy, she nearly allowed family duty to win the day . . . and it probably would have if her brother and sister-in-law had not learned of Fitzwilliam’s connection to Wickham and a potential scandal.
Not only did “DEATH COMES TO PEMBERLEY” provide a first-rate narrative, it was also blessed with a superb cast. Anna Maxwell-Martin shined as the initially happy Elizabeth Darcy who found herself nearly caving under the emotional strains that Wickham’s arrest had brought to Pemberley’s inhabitants and the Darcy family. Someone had once complained that Elizabeth’s famous wit seemed to be missing in this production. I certainly do not agree. I think Maxwell-Martin’s performance made it clear that Elizabeth had evolved from the younger woman in “Pride and Prejudice” inclined to put her wit on display. In other words, Elizabeth has become more mature over the years without the need to spout witicisms every now and then. But as the situation at Pemberley grew worse, it seemed obvious clear that she had not lost her sharp tongue. Judging from Fitzwilliam Darcy’s behavior during the first half of the series’ first episode, one would assume that marriage to Elizabeth had brought about a great change in his personality. Perhaps. Or perhaps this was an example of Darcy’s behavior as a happy man. Yet, once the whole situation regarding the murder and Wickham’s arrest began to take its toll, it felt as if Darcy’s personality from the 1813 novel had re-emerged with a vengeance. I have to give kudos to actor Matthew Rhys for doing such a beautiful in capturing these different aspects of Darcy’s personality. More importantly, I thought he had skillfully handled Darcy’s gradual transition from one aspect of the latter’s personality to another.
“DEATH COMES TO PEMBERLEY” also featured other excellent performances. Matthew Goode gave a complex and nuanced performance as embattled George Wickham, whose smooth and manipulative persona is shaken by the threat of a murder conviction and execution. Another first-rate performance came from Trevor Eve, who skillfully portrayed the Darcys’ neighbor and ruthless county magistrate, Sir Selwyn Hardcastle. Jenna Coleman did a great job in infusing immature shallowness, malice and a surprising touch of pathos in her portrayal of Lydia Wickham. Eleanor Tomlinson’s portrayal of Georgiana Darcy seemed to possess more depth and complexity than any previous portrayal of her. Tom Ward’s performance as the Darcys’ cousin, Colonel Fitzwilliam, struck me as one of the most interesting in the limited series. Mind you, I thought P.D. James and by extension, screenwriter Juliette Towhidi; did an excellent job in allowing the Colonel to become a more complex and ambiguous character in his own right. Yet, this transformation . . . or revelation of Colonel Fitzwilliam’s character without Tom Ward’s brilliant performance. There were other performances featured in “DEATH COMES TO PEMBERLEY” that impressed me. These performances came from James Norton, Mariah Gale, Nichola Burley, Rebecca Front, James Fleet, Philip Martin Brown, Joanna Scanlan, Jennifer Hennessey, Lewis Rainer, and Penelope Keith as Lady Catherine de Bourgh.
I also have to give kudos to the production team for “DEATH COMES TO PEMBERLEY”. It is a beautiful-looking series. This can be attributed to Grant Montgomery’s luscious production designs. Montgomery did an excellent of bringing a late Georgian provincial community to life in this limited series. I believe Steve Lawes’ sharp and colorful photography of the miniseries’ Yorkshire and Derbyshire filming locations enhanced Montgomery’s work, along with Nick Wilkinson’s art direction and Ussal Smithers’ set decorations. I also believe Marianne Agertoft’s costume designs contributed to the miniseries’ production designs. I must honest. Agertoft’s costumes did not blow my mind. But I have to say that the costumes’ color schemes – especially the women’s – struck me as rich and sharp as Lawes’ cinematography.
I will not deny that I have a few issues with “DEATH COMES TO PEMBERLEY”. But my issues are minor, in compared to my admiration for this miniseries. Because I do admire “DEATH COMES TO PEMBERLEY”. I found the series’ production aspects lush and beautiful. The cast led by Anna Maxwell-Martin and Matthew Rhys gave superb performances. More importantly, I believe director Daniel Percival and screenwriter Juliette Towhidi did an excellent job of adapting P.D. James’ novel. “DEATH COMES TO PEMBERLEY” offered a very original view into the world of Jane Austen.
I have a confession to make. I am not particularly fond of Agatha Christie’s later novels featuring Belgian-born private detective, Hercule Poirot. Most of those novel were published between the end of the 1950s and 1976, the year of Christie’s death. But there is one Poirot novel that I have enjoyed over the years. It is the 1959 novel, “The Cat Among the Pigeons”.
Nearly fifty years later, the producers of the ITV series, “AGATHA CHRISTIE’S POIROT” aired an adaptation of the novel. Written by Mark Gatiss, the story began in a fictional Middle Eastern country called Ramat during a revolution. The country’s leader, Prince Ali Yusaf, and his close friend, a British pilot named Bob Rawlinson; engaged in a violent shoot-out with revolutionaries that had managed to storm the palace. Rawlinson confirmed to the prince that he had made arrangements for the latter’s valuable rubies to leave the country minutes before the revolutionaries killed them in a hail of bullets.
A few months later, Belgian detective Hercule Poirot found himself at Meadowbank, a prestigious girls’ school in England, serving as a guest speaker for its award ceremony. Poirot happened to be a close friend of the school’s founder and headmistress, Miss Honoria Bulstrode. Following the ceremony, the latter asked the Belgian detective to remain at the school for a few days and help her select her successor following her retirement. However, Poirot found himself investigating a lot more when Miss Grace Springer, the school’s sports teacher, is found skewered to death by a javelin in the Sports Pavilion. Several days later, one of the students – Princess Shaista, Ali Yusaf’s cousin – disappeared from school . . . believed to have been kidnapped. Fearful that events might lead to the school’s closing, Miss Bulstrode asked Poirot to investigate and solve both the murder and the kidnapping.
There had been some changes in this adaptation of Christie’s 1959 novel. Several supporting characters had been omitted, which is not surprising to me. Poirot was featured in the television movie from the beginning to the end . . . unlike the novel in which he made his first appearance two-thirds into the story. In fact, he and Miss Bulstrode were not close friends in the novel. I believe one of the biggest improvements of this television adaptation was to feature Poirot’s character in the story from the beginning to the end. The manner of deaths for some of the characters had been changed. The biggest change proved to be the setting. The latter was changed from the late 1950s to the mid-to-late 1930s in order to fit the premise for “AGATHA CHRISTIE’S POIROT”. Fortunately, none of these changes had damaged the television movie’s narrative. But I did find the reasoning behind Poirot’s stay at Meadowbank a little thin.
Christie’s novel has always been a favorite of mine, considering how it permeated with political intrigue. That same intrigue seemed present in “CAT AMONG THE PIGEONS”. Yet . . . how I can put it? The political atmosphere seemed slightly muted from the novel. I believe the problem originated with Grace Springer’s death. In the novel, her death seemed to emphasize the mystery surrounding the Sports Pavilion. Whereas this movie had put a great deal of focus on Springer’s character. Perhaps a bit too much. I have always found the screenwriter’s decision to transform Miss Springer into a borderline sadist with a penchant for blackmail unnecessary. I also wish that Gatiss had included Christie’s original ending that featured Ali Yusaf’s secret British wife and son. I have always found that particular scene poignant.
Otherwise, I did not have a problem with the changes made in “CAT AMONG THE PIGEONS”. Although it is not favorite Christie adaptation of mine, I cannot deny that I have always enjoyed it. One, I enjoyed the political intrigue behind the narrative, even if it seemed slightly muted. Two, I thought the movie did an excellent job in its characterizations – especially with the school’s teachers. I also enjoyed the developing relationship between Poirot and Inspector Kelsey, thanks to Gatiss’ screenplay and the performances of David Suchet and Anton Lesser. Three, if I must be honest, I thought Gatiss did a better job in portraying Ali Yusaf and Bob Rawlinson’s deaths than Christie. In the latter’s novel, the pair was killed in an arranged plane crash, off screen.
The production values of the “AGATHA CHRISTIE’S POIROT” movies have been something of a mixed bag post-2000. Although most of the television movies did an excellent of reflecting Great Britain during the mid-to-late 1930s, there have been a few that I found questionable. Thankfully, I cannot say the same about the production values for “CAT AMONG THE PIGEONS”. I believe the movie benefited greatly from Jeff Tessler’s production designs, Michael Harrowes’ editing, Miranda Cull and Paul Spriggs’ art direction and Cinders Forshaw’s photography. However, I did wish that Forshaw had not been so inclined to indulged in that hazy photography that had seemed to dominate period dramas from the 1970s and 1980s.
I also enjoyed Sheena Napier’s costume designs. I thought she did a solid job in creating costumes that reflected the movie’s setting. But I had one complaint about Napier’s costumes – namely those worn by actress Natasha Little. Perhaps my eyes were deceiving me, but the hemlines for Little’s costumes seemed a bit short for the 1930s. The idea of her wearing dresses that were indicative of the late 1920s seemed rather odd. Little portrayed Ann Shapland, a secretary who had worked for a series of prestigious employers – including Miss Bulstrode. I doubt that the Miss Shapland character lacked the finances to purchase clothes that were in fashion.
The performances featured in “CAT AMONG THE PIGEONS” seemed top-notch as usual. I have already commented on David Suchet and Anton Lesser’s performances as Hercule Poirot and Inspector Kelsey, complimenting both actors for conveying the growing professional relationship between the two characters. Harriet Walter did an excellent job in her portrayal of the more than competent Honoria Bulstrode, the school’s headmistress.
Adam Croasdell gave a solid performance as the likeable, yet smarmy school gardener, Adam Goodman. Natasha Little was excellent as Miss Bulstrode’s slightly sophisticated secretary Ann Shephard, who was also hiding a poignant secret. Amara Karan proved to be rather entertaining as Princess Shaista, the royal student who regarded herself as more mature and superior than the other student. I can say the same about Amanda Abbington’s portrayal of Miss Blake, the art teacher who did not bother to hide her dislike of the boorish Miss Springer. Although I was a little critical of Gatiss’ decision to make the latter character unlikable in a rather ham-fisted manner, I cannot deny that Elizabeth Barrington gave an interesting performance.
The television movie featured solid performances from Carol MacReady, Pippa Heywood, Katie Leung, Georgia Cornick, Jo Woodcock and Lois Edmett. But I feel that Claire Skinner and Susan Wooldridge gave the two best performances as literary teacher Eileen Rich and Miss Chadwick, teacher and co-founder of the school. Both actresses did a superb job in evoking the poignant aspects of their characters.
“CAT AMONG THE PIGEONS” is a curious adaptation. Some of the changes to Agatha Christie’s 1959 novel made by Mark Gatiss struck me as a bit detrimental to the production – especially the exaggeration of Miss Springer’s character. Yet, some of the changes – including Poirot’s increased appearances and the manner of two minor characters’ death – seemed to improve the story. Overall, I enjoyed “CAT AMONG THE PIGEONS” very much thanks to Mark Gatiss’ screenplay, James Kent’s direction and especially the performances of the cast led by David Suchet. I still find it very satisfying.
“STAR TREK VOYAGER” RETROSPECTIVE: (3.25) “Worst Case Scenario”
Some time ago, I had posted a list of my top ten favorite episodes of “STAR TREK VOYAGER” (1995-2001). After re-examining my list, I was surprised to discover that the Season Three episode, (3.25) “Worst Case Scenario” was not on it.
In this penultimate episode of Season Three, B’Elanna Torres discovers a Holodeck program in which Commander Chakotay and the former Maquis crewmen stage a mutiny against Captain Janeway and the rest of Voyager’s crew. Torres’ participation in the program is interrupted by Tom Paris, who reminds her of their lunch date. He eventually becomes interested and participates in the program himself. After his first participation in the program, Paris and Torres discover that other members of the crew have also been enjoying it. But Paris’ second participation in the Holodeck program reveals that it had not been completed by its mysterious author. During a meeting, the senior staff discovers that Voyager’s Security Chief, Tuvok, had created the program (which he called “Insurrection Alpha”)as a training session for the junior members of his Security staff during the ship’s first months in the Delta Quadrant. As the Maquis and Starfleet factions of the crew began to merge, Tuvok decided to abandon the program.
Due to the crew’s enthusiasm toward “Insurrection Alpha”, Paris and Tuvok agree to expand the program into a complete holonovel. As the two officers begin to edit the original program, they suddenly find themselves trapped behind a forcefield in a simulation of the ship’s brig. A holographic version of the deceased Seska, a former Cardassian spy, appears and explains that before she had escaped the ship to join the Kazon back in Season One, she rewrote the simulation as a virtual deathtrap for Tuvok. Some of the real Voyager’s systems – like the transporter and communication systems, along with the Holodeck’s safety protocols) go offline. And Paris and Tuvok are forced to endure one hazardous situation after another as they try to stay alive.
After my recent viewing of both “Worst Case Scenario” and my top ten episode list, I discovered that I could not change the latter. However . . . if I had created a list of my twenty favorite “VOYAGER” episodes, “Worst Case Scenario” would have ranked at #11. Yes, it is that good. The Holodeck proved to be an excellent creation for STAR TREK writers to use for some first rate episodes. “STAR TREK NEXT GENERATION” had episodes like (2.03) “Elementary, Dear Data” and (3.21) “Hollow Pursuits”. “STAR TREK DEEP SPACE NINE” had the delicious (4.10) “Our Man Bashir” and (6.18) “Inquisition”. However, in my opinion, “STAR TREK VOYAGER” has aired some of the best Holodeck episodes I have ever come across. And one of those episodes is “Worst Case Scenario”.
Kenneth Biller did an excellent job of giving viewers a glimpse of the tenuous situation between the two factions aboard Voyager during its early months in the Delta Quadrant. Even more importantly, the “Insurrection Alpha” could be viewed as an ominous warning of what could have happened if the crew had failed to integrate during those early months. It is ironic that this episode aired over three years before Season Seven’s (7.04) “Repression” – which featured an actual Maquis rebellion unwittingly instigated by Tuvok, of all people. Tuvok’s program also featured the crew’s only Talaxian, Neelix, joining the rebellion. The real Neelix commented that Tuvok had incorrectly read his character during those early days. A reviewer named Jim Wright agreed. However, I have my doubts. I can recall Neelix’s numerous complaints about Janeway’s tendency to interrupt their journey for an exploration of planet or system. And I can recall one or two occasions in which the Talaxian cook and the Starfleet captain had clashed. I suspect that Tuvok had a pretty good jibe on Neelix’s character back in those days.
Normally, I could claim that “Worst Case Scenario” focused on the entire crew. After all, the episode began with Torres discovering the program and ended with Janeway declaring herself as more than a starship captain, but a community leader as well. However, I noticed that the ship’s chief pilot, Tom Paris, was featured in more scenes than any one else . . . which is why I tend to view him as the episode’s main character. I read somewhere that actor Robert Duncan McNeill considered “Worst Case Scenario” as one of his favorite episodes of the show’s first three seasons. And I can see why. Biller had produced a well written script that allowed McNeill to engage in some of his funniest work. I could also say the same for actor Tim Russ, who portrayed the stoic Tuvok. McNeill and Russ also proved that their screen teaming in (3.08-3.09) “Future’s End” was no mere fluke. They had a strong chemistry that allowed their characters to create one of the best comedic teams in science-fiction television.
But despite Robbie McNeill and Tim Russ’ dominance in this episode, other cast members were given the opportunity to shine. Ethan Phillips gave a charming performance as Neelix, whose enthusiasm for “Insurrection Alpha” almost seemed to bubble. Roxann Dawson provided one of the funniest moments in B’Elanna’s caustic reaction to Paris’ suggestion of a passionate romance between the ship’s chief engineer and chief pilot. Robert Baltran was able to capture both the holographic Chakotay’s determination to rebel against the holographic Janeway and the real Chakotay’s sly and humorous reaction to his role in Tuvok’s story. Bob Picardo was both funny and chilling as the Doctor in the holoprogram. Both Kate Mulgrew and Garrett Wang gave solid support as Captain Janeway and Harry Kim. But Martha Hackett’s return as Seska, the former Bajoran Maquis that turned out to be a Cardassian spy, proved to be a real pleasure. She was deliciously villainous as ever, confirming by belief that her Seska might be one of the best television villains around. And her holographic death in this episode proved to be more rewarding that her real death in (3.01) “Basics, Part II”.
I realize that “STAR TREK VOYAGER” is much reviled by many TREK fans. And I also realize that many would be very reluctant to accept my belief that the series had aired some of the best Holodeck episodes in the franchise. But whether they would agree with me or not, no one could ever convince me that an original episode like “Worst Case Scenario” was overrated, or at best, barely tolerable.
When I had first heard that the ITV channel and Amazon Studios had plans to adapt William Makepeace Thackeray’s 1848 novel, “Vanity Fair”, I must admit that I felt no interest in watching the miniseries. After all, I had already seen four other adaptations, including the BBC’s 1987 production. And I regard the latter as the best version of Thackeray’s novel I had ever seen.
In the end, my curiosity got the best of me and I decided to watch the seven-part miniseries. In a nutshell, “VANITY FAIR” followed the experiences of Rebecca “Becky” Sharp, the social climbing daughter of an English not-so-successful painter and a French dancer in late Georgian England during and after the Napoleonic Wars. The production also told the story of Becky’s school friend and daughter of a wealthy merchant, Amelia Sedley. The story begins with both young women leaving Miss Pinkerton’s Academy for Young Ladies. Becky managed to procure a position as governess to Sir Pitt Crawley, a slightly crude yet friendly baronet. Before leaving for her new position, Becky visits Amelia’s family. She tries to seduce Jos Sedley, Amelia’s wealthy brother and East India Company civil servant. Unfortunately George Osborne, a friend of Jos and son of another wealthy merchant, puts a stop to the budding romance.
While working for the Crawleys, Becky meets and falls in love with Sir Pitt’s younger son, Captain Rawdon Crawley. When Sir Pitt proposes marriage to Becky, she shocks the family with news of her secret marriage to Rawdon. The couple becomes ostracized and ends up living in London on Rawdon’s military pay and gambling winnings. They also become reacquainted with Amelia Sedley, who has her own problems. When her father loses his fortune, George’s own father insists that he dump Amelia and marry a Jamaican heiress. George refuses to do so and thanks to his friend William Dobbin’s urging, marries Amelia. Mr. Osborne ends up disinheriting George. However, the romantic lives of Becky and Amelia take a backseat when history overtakes them and their husbands with the return of Napoleon Bonaparte.
I wish I could say that the 2018 miniseries was the best adaptation of Thackery’s novel I had seen. But it is not. The production had its . . . flaws. One, I disliked its use of the song “All Along the Watchtower” in each episode’s opening credits and other rock and pop tunes during the episodes’ closing credits. They felt so out of place in the miniseries’ production. Yes, I realize that a growing number of period dramas have doing the same. And quite frankly, I detest it. This scenario barely worked in the 2006 movie, “MARIE ANTOINETTE”. Now, this use of pop tunes in period dramas strike me as awkward, ham-fisted, unoriginal and lazy.
I also noticed that producer and screenwriter Gwyneth Hughes threw out the younger Pitt Crawley character (Becky’s brother-in-law), kept the Bute Crawley character and transformed him from Becky Sharp’s weak and unlikable uncle-in-law into her brother-in-law. Hughes did the same with the Lady Jane Crawley and Martha Crawley characters. She tossed aside the Lady Jane character and transformed Martha from Becky’s aunt-in-law to sister-in-law. Frankly, I did not care for this. I just could not see characters like Bute and Martha suddenly become sympathetic guardians for Becky and Rawdon’s son in the end. It just did not work for me. I have one last problem with “VANITY FAIR”, but I will get to it later.
I may not regard “VANITY FAIR” as the best adaptation of Thackery’s novel, I cannot deny that it is first-rate. Gwyneth Hughes and director James Strong did an excellent job of bringing the 1848 novel to life on the television screen. Because this adaptation was conveyed in seven episodes, both Hughes and Strong were given the opportunity retell Thackery’s saga without taking too many shortcuts. The miniseries replayed Becky Sharp’s experiences with the Sedley family, George Osbourne, and the Crawley family in great detail. I was especially impressed by the miniseries’ recount of Becky and Amelia’s experiences during the Waterloo campaign – which is the story’s true high point, as far as I am concerned. Also, this adaptation had conveyed George’s experiences during Waterloo with more detail than any other adaptation I have seen.
Aside from the Waterloo sequence, there were other scenes that greatly impressed me. I really enjoyed those scenes that featured the famous Duchess of Richmond’s ball in the fourth episode, “In Which Becky Joins Her Regiment”; Becky’s attempts to woo Jos Sedley in the first episode, “Miss Sharp In The Presence Of The Enemy”; the revelation of Becky’s marriage to Rawdon Crawley in ” “A Quarrel About An Heiress”; and her revelation to Amelia about the truth regarding George in the final episode, “Endings and Beginnings”. There were people who were put off that the series did not end exactly how the novel did – namely the death of Jos, with whom Becky had hooked up in the end. I have to be honest . . . that did not bother me. However, I was amused that Becky’s last line in the miniseries seemed to hint that Jos’ death might be a possibility in the near future.
The production values for “VANITY FAIR” struck me as quite beautiful. I thought Anna Pritchard’s production designs did an excellent job in re-creating both London, the English countryside, Belgium, Germany, India and West Africa between the Regency era and the early 1830s. Not only did I find the miniseries’ production values beautiful, but also Ed Rutherford’s cinematography. His images struck me as not only beautiful, but sharp and colorful. I would not say that Lucinda Wright and Suzie Harman’s costume designs blew my mind. But I cannot deny that I found them rather attractive and serviceable for the narrative’s setting.
One of the production’s real virtues proved to be a very talented cast. “VANITY FAIR” featured some solid performances from it supporting players. Well . . . I would say more than solid. I found the performances of Robert Pugh, Peter Wight, Suranne Jones, Claire Skinner, Mathew Baynton, Sian Clifford, Monica Dolan, and Elizabeth Berrington to be more than solid. In fact, I would say they gave excellent performances. But they were not alone.
Michael Palin, whom I have not seen in a movie or television production in years, gave an amusing narration in each episode as the story’s author William Makepeace Thackeray. Ellie Kendrick gave a very poignant performance as Jane Osborne, who seemed to be caught between her loyalty to her bitter father and her long-suffering sister-in-law. Simon Beale Russell gave a superb, yet ambiguous portrayal of the warm and indulgent John Sedley, who also had a habit of infantilizing his family. Frances de la Tour was deliciously hilarious and entertaining as Becky Sharp’s aunt-in-law and benefactress Lady Matilda Crawley. I could also say the same about Martin Clunes, who gave a very funny performance as the crude, yet lively Sir Pitt Crawley. One last funny performance came from David Fynn, who gave an excellent portrayal of the vain, yet clumsy civil servant, Jos Sedley. Anthony Head gave a skillful performance as the cynical and debauched Lord Styne. I thought Charlie Rowe was superb as the self-involved and arrogant George Osborne. Rowe, whom I recalled as a child actor, practically oozed charm, arrogance and a false sense of superiority in his performance as the shallow George.
I have only seen Johnny Flynn in two roles – including the role of William Dobbin in this production. After seeing “VANITY FAIR”, it seemed that the William Dobbin role seemed tailored fit for him. He gave an excellent performance as the stalwart Army officer who endured years of unrequited love toward Amelia Sedley. Tom Bateman was equally excellent as the charming, yet slightly dense Rawdon Crawley. At first, I thought Bateman would portray Rawdon as this dashing, yet self-confident Army officer. But thanks to his performance, the actor gradually revealed that underneath all that glamour and dash was a man who was not as intelligent as he originally seemed to be. Amelia Sedley has never been a favorite character of mine. Her intense worship of the shallow George has always struck me as irritating. Thanks to Claudia Jessie’s excellent performance, I not only saw Amelia as irritating as usual, but also sympathetic for once.
Television critics had lavished a great deal of praise upon Olivia Cooke as the sharp-witted and manipulative Becky Sharp. In fact, many have labeled her performance as one of the best versions of that character. And honestly? I have to agree. Cooke was more than superb . . . she was triumphant as the cynical governess who used her charms and wit in an attempt to climb the social ladder of late Georgian Britain. I would not claim that Cooke was the best on-screen Becky I have seen, but she was certainly one of the better ones. I have only one minor complaint – I found her portrayal of Becky as a poor parent to her only son rather strident. Becky has always struck me as a cold mother to Rawdon Junior. But instead of cold, Cooke’s Becky seemed to scream in anger every time she was near the boy. I found this heavy-handed and I suspect the real perpetrator behind this was either screenwriter Gwyneth Hughes or director James Strong.
I have a few complaints about “VANITY FAIR”. I will not deny it. But I also cannot deny that despite its few flaws, I thought it was an excellent adaptation of William Makepeace Thackeray’s novel. Actually, I believe it is one of the better adaptations. “VANITY FAIR” is also one of the best period dramas I have seen from British television in a LONG TIME. And I mean a long time. Most period dramas I have seen in the past decade were either mediocre or somewhere between mediocre and excellent. “VANITY FAIR” is one of the first that has led me to really take notice in years. And I have to credit Gwyneth Hughes’ writing, James Strong’s direction and especially the superb performances from a first-rate cast led by Olivia Cooke. It would be nice to see more period dramas of this quality in the near future.
Below is a list of my favorite television productions set in the 1870s:
FAVORITE TELEVISION PRODUCTIONS SET IN THE 1870s
1. “The Buccaneers” (1995) – Maggie Wadey wrote this excellent adaptation of Edith Wharton’s last novel about four American young women who marry into the British aristocracy is also another big favorite of mine. Directed by Philip Saville, the miniseries starred Carla Gugino, Alison Elliott, Rya Kihlstedt and Mira Sorvino.
2. “Around the World in 80 Days” (1989) – Pierce Brosnan starred in this television adaptation of Jules Verne’s 1872 novel about an Englishman’s journey around the world. Directed by Buzz Kulick, the miniseries co-starred Eric Idle, Julia Nickson and Peter Ustinov.
3. “Lonesome Dove” (1989) – Robert Duvall and Tommy Lee Jones starred in this excellent adaptation of Larry McMurty’s 1985 novel about a cattle drive from Texas to Montana. Simon Wincer directed.
4. “The Way We Live Now” (2001) – Andrew Davies wrote this television adaptation of Anthony Trollope’s 1875 novel about a Central European financier’s impact upon London society. Directed by David Yates, the four-part miniseries starred David Suchet, Matthew Macfayden, Shirley Henderson and Cillian Murphy.
5. “Daniel Deronda” (2002) – Andrew Davies adapted this television adaptation of George Eliot’s 1876 novel. Directed by Tom Hooper, the four-part miniseries starred Hugh Dancy and Romola Garai.
6. “The Sacketts” (1979) – Sam Elliott, Jeff Osterhage and Tom Selleck starred in this television adaptation of Louis L’Amour’s two novels – 1960’s “The Daybreakers” and 1961’s “Sackett”. Robert Totten directed.
7. “The Far Pavilions” (1984) – Ben Cross and Amy Irving starred in this adaptation of M.M. Kaye’s 1978 novel about the star-crossed romance between a British Army officer and a royal princess from Northern India. Peter Duffell directed.
8. “The Woman in White” (1997) – Tara Fitzgerald and Justine Waddell starred in this adaptation of Wilkie Collins’ 1859 novel about two half-sisters caught up in a grand conspiracy over a mysterious woman in white and a family fortune. Tim Fywell directed.
9. “Deadwood” (2004-2006) – Timothy Olyphant and Ian McShane starred in HBO’s series about the famous Dakota mining town during the late 1870s. The series was created by David Milch.
10. “The Crimson Petal and the White” (2011) – Romola Garai starred in this adaptation of Michel Faber’s 2002 novel about a London prostitute’s impact upon the lives of a wealthy family. Marc Munden directed.
Ladylavinia1932's Blog 