The incident with the book while not accurate, very accurately portrayed the sheer horror of your home and personal possessions being desecrated. I think it was an incredibly powerful tool to get that accross.
That just makes a mockery of the whole programme. If you're going to make a drama based on fact about someone suing for being lied about, you don't make stuff up. I presume they resorted to the poor excuse of dramatic license as usual.
I believe the scene was to reflect the hurt he felt, a load of books thrown around seems chaos, to focus on one item that appears more special could project more strongly how he actually did feel about it.
Obviously not seen the Coogan scene but maybe that is there to demonstrate how the papers can affect both the famous and non famous.
I believe the scene was to reflect the hurt he felt, a load of books thrown around seems chaos, to focus on one item that appears more special could project more strongly how he actually did feel about it.
Obviously not seen the Coogan scene but maybe that is there to demonstrate how the papers can affect both the famous and non famous.
"Naturally the media will find things to criticise in The Lost Honour of Christopher Jeffries. It shows them up, after all, for the scum they are!"[/QUOTE]
They're only scum because of the scum who buy their newspapers or subscribe to their web sites.
That's a bit harsh. I buy the papers but I am certainly not scum
I don't think the real Chris would be happy with that.
I have to agree, Watkins performance is far too affected and pronounced...it literally screams EFFEMINATE. It's a shame because it detracts from what is otherwise a good performance and a very good factual drama.
I have to agree, Watkins performance is far too affected and pronounced...it literally screams EFFEMINATE. It's a shame because it detracts from what is otherwise a good performance and a very good factual drama.
Christopher Jefferies was involved in the making of this programme, so if he didn't kick about that aspect of the portrayal, then it's not for anyone else to, really.
He's the one who should know best after all.
I have to agree, Watkins performance is far too affected and pronounced...it literally screams EFFEMINATE. It's a shame because it detracts from what is otherwise a good performance and a very good factual drama.
I watched him give evidence at Leveson and this is way overdone. It is as though they are trying to make him into more of an odd ball than he actually is.
"Naturally the media will find things to criticise in The Lost Honour of Christopher Jeffries. It shows them up, after all, for the scum they are!"[/QUOTE]
They're only scum because of the scum who buy their newspapers or subscribe to their web sites.
BIB sounds like a similar excuse that the papers gave when they got caught phone hacking.
'The Public are interested, they buy our papers'
Just because the public buy the product it doesn't give them (Journos) a license to do pretty much anything they like to produce it.
Maybe they should add something to the bottom of the articles if they really want to be honest with their readers.
Quotes, not verbatim/paraphrased.
Sources who didn't want to be named.
Sources paid.
It seems almost wrong to say it because it's real lives but a fantastic, thought provoking programme.
Deserves all of the praise it has received, Jason Watkins was brilliant. Shame its viewing figures aren't great though. I just hope the press are never allowed to do that to someone in the future.
Comments
I believe the scene was to reflect the hurt he felt, a load of books thrown around seems chaos, to focus on one item that appears more special could project more strongly how he actually did feel about it.
Obviously not seen the Coogan scene but maybe that is there to demonstrate how the papers can affect both the famous and non famous.
Oh it's on now
This is quite an interesting read
Spot on Mrs T ;-)
It only spans a few years.
I have to agree, Watkins performance is far too affected and pronounced...it literally screams EFFEMINATE. It's a shame because it detracts from what is otherwise a good performance and a very good factual drama.
Cheers Cavalli,
I had a quick peek at the Daily Fail link, lovely to see the comments going against their review.
Christopher Jefferies was involved in the making of this programme, so if he didn't kick about that aspect of the portrayal, then it's not for anyone else to, really.
He's the one who should know best after all.
I watched him give evidence at Leveson and this is way overdone. It is as though they are trying to make him into more of an odd ball than he actually is.
It's easy to forget about him and his loss in all of this
I could cry for him too. Imagine coming back to this degradation of your loved home.
(Watching on +1).
That last line wasn't my quote or opinion, it was that of terry45.
Thanks, an interesting read. A sweetheart is how he is. Described.
I realised that. It was Terry45 I was getting at.
Deserves all of the praise it has received, Jason Watkins was brilliant. Shame its viewing figures aren't great though. I just hope the press are never allowed to do that to someone in the future.