I've read the book twice, so I understood what was going on and who the characters were, but I can imagine it'd be really confusing if you hadn't read the book.
I've read the book twice, so I understood what was going on and who the characters were, but I can imagine it'd be really confusing if you hadn't read the book.
Where's Gavin?
I think that in the early stages the book is a bit confusing as well as you try to work out how everyone is related to whom, but I can't see how you can have that many characters without it being confusing at first.
It seems Gavin has been cut. I'm not that bothered, as he wasn't one of the more memorable characters and I felt his was more of a sub-plot anyway. It can probably get by without him.
I've read the book twice, so I understood what was going on and who the characters were, but I can imagine it'd be really confusing if you hadn't read the book.
Where's Gavin?
I've read the book but found it difficult to remember who all the characters were. I was wondering about Gavin too.
I thought it was well cast. Julia MacKenzie was particularly excellent.
Barry Fairbrother and Simon Price weren't brothers in the book, were they? I know it's just an adaptation, but just wondering why they did that?
No, they weren't.
I felt like it did add something to it though. I suppose it was a way of making the Prices seem connected to everyone else, as they are a bit separate from the other characters in terms of connections in the book. Andrew is friends with Fats and Ruth is friends with Shirley, but the latter friendship I think is only mentioned briefly so I doubt they'll bother explaining all that.
Well I thought it was ok - I don't mind something where you have to think a bit for yourself, just goes to show you can't please everyone.
I thought it was ok too.
I watched it without any distractions like coming on a forum to type at the same time or stuff like that ;-)
I feel I followed it well enough to know what is going on and who is related to who and who are friends and who are not friends etc.
I will watch it next week.
I loved the book and think the series is doing it justice so far. The book is a slow burner, though. There are quite a lot of characters whose lives were all touched by the dead man in some way (mostly for the better as he was a kind person). The book's about what happens when one decent person with a social conscience and an ability to spot problems and offer support isn't there any more.
I didn't think anything could be more dull than the book but this is having a good try. The plotline has been stripped down to the bone and the characters changed or toned down, so that anybody who hasn't read it must be mystified by a lot of what's happening.
I bet the viewing figures will go through the floor next week.
Barry Fairbrother and Simon Price weren't brothers in the book, were they? I know it's just an adaptation, but just wondering why they did that?
No they weren't brothers. Not really sure why they made that link in the TV series.
Simon was how I imagined him to be - just as loathsome.
The audiobook gave Howard and Shirley west country accents, as they are meant to be social climbers (Shirley especially) but they kind of both came across as posh snobs in the TV series.
I haven't read the book but I have read all of the Harry Potter books and The Cuckoo's Calling so I was looking forward to this. I have come away quite disappointed
Disappointed.
I bought the book from a second hand book shop in Tenerife when I could find nothing else to read. This was not my type of book, I only read about two books a year and both are usually by Isac Asimov.
At the start I found it very confusing, but then the Internet posting started and I could not put it down, terrific book.
However the confusion has remained all the way thro this first episode and as a result the audience numbers will collapse. It's a real shame they did not start the Internet postings earlier and give some clear direction to the story. This could be forgiven if it was an 8 part series but with only 3 episodes it needed to get going early in the first episode.
(In the book Barry Fairbrother died on page 2 and his character was described later by others talking about his good works. IMO too much time was spent unnecessarily on scenes with BF which never existed in the book, they should have got on with the real story a bit quicker)
I felt like it did add something to it though. I suppose it was a way of making the Prices seem connected to everyone else, as they are a bit separate from the other characters in terms of connections in the book. Andrew is friends with Fats and Ruth is friends with Shirley, but the latter friendship I think is only mentioned briefly so I doubt they'll bother explaining all that.
Yeah, I didn't mind it either because, as you say, the Prices were a bit separate in the novel. I think it was a good idea to change the plot to Bellchapel being converted into a spa, as the county boundary plot from the book wouldn't have translated very well onto the screen, I don't think.
I do not want the child abuser to get it nor do I want miles as he will support his father. Regarding the teacher it is the son smoking pot which will raise a few eyebrows
Disappointed.
I bought the book from a second hand book shop in Tenerife when I could find nothing else to read. This was not my type of book, I only read about two books a year and both are usually by Isac Asimov.
At the start I found it very confusing, but then the Internet posting started and I could not put it down, terrific book.
However the confusion has remained all the way thro this first episode and as a result the audience numbers will collapse. It's a real shame they did not start the Internet postings earlier and give some clear direction to the story. This could be forgiven if it was an 8 part series but with only 3 episodes it needed to get going early in the first episode.
(In the book Barry Fairbrother died on page 2 and his character was described later by others talking about his good works. IMO too much time was spent unnecessarily on scenes with BF which never existed in the book, they should have got on with the real story a bit quicker)
It's tricky, though. If Barry had died in the first few minutes, the audience wouldn't have been aware of his links with people and his character. In the books, we get all that via internal monologues, which you obviously can't get in a TV series.
(In the book Barry Fairbrother died on page 2 and his character was described later by others talking about his good works. IMO too much time was spent unnecessarily on scenes with BF which never existed in the book, they should have got on with the real story a bit quicker)
I liked the fact that we got to know Barry a bit before he died. I guess it's easier in terms of drama to see him instead of hearing how other people saw him.
Disappointed.
I bought the book from a second hand book shop in Tenerife when I could find nothing else to read. This was not my type of book, I only read about two books a year and both are usually by Isac Asimov.
At the start I found it very confusing, but then the Internet posting started and I could not put it down, terrific book.
However the confusion has remained all the way thro this first episode and as a result the audience numbers will collapse. It's a real shame they did not start the Internet postings earlier and give some clear direction to the story. This could be forgiven if it was an 8 part series but with only 3 episodes it needed to get going early in the first episode.
(In the book Barry Fairbrother died on page 2 and his character was described later by others talking about his good works. IMO too much time was spent unnecessarily on scenes with BF which never existed in the book, they should have got on with the real story a bit quicker)
I think that the problem is that Barry was very connected to the lives of everyone in Pagford, and in the book that wasn't made clear until after his death. We got a lot of insight into the characters' thought processes and memories of him. This element is vital to the story, so if they'd killed him off in the first couple of minutes as in the book, they'd have needed to have a lot of flashbacks, which could get tiresome. The alternative was to show more of Barry and kill him off a bit later, which is what they did.
I think that in the early stages the book is a bit confusing as well as you try to work out how everyone is related to whom, but I can't see how you can have that many characters without it being confusing at first.........................
At least in the book you had characters' names, to give you a clue who everyone was. I remember reading the book, but I can't recall much about it - or even whether I finished it.
But I'm certainly clear that I won't be watching the rest of the series. I think it was one the worst things I've ever seen on TV. Slow, incoherent and totally uninteresting.
No they weren't brothers. Not really sure why they made that link in the TV series.
Simon was how I imagined him to be - just as loathsome.
The audiobook gave Howard and Shirley west country accents, as they are meant to be social climbers (Shirley especially) but they kind of both came across as posh snobs in the TV series.
I agree, Simon has been cast very well, although he does seem to have been every so slightly hammed up. But, it is a drama.
Yeah, I'm not sure that Julia McKenzie was the best choice for Shirley, because everyone knows her as the utterly pucker, Miss Marple now. I like her, don't get me wrong, but I agree with what you're saying. Howard and Shirley were meant to come across as you're typical small town gossips who think they're a cut-above, when actually they're not. On screen, they are ultra-Tory.
Plus, Julia and Michael are in their mid-70s. I thought they were meant to be late 50s/early 60s in the book?
Comments
Never ever read a JK Rowling book so approaching this with an open mind.
Expect I will watch it next week.
My personal favourite line: I do fun-runs. Well, not personally, but I know people who do.
1, can't tell you as it will spoil the story
2. Crystal is one of the main characters, it's sort of about her.
Where's Gavin?
I think that in the early stages the book is a bit confusing as well as you try to work out how everyone is related to whom, but I can't see how you can have that many characters without it being confusing at first.
It seems Gavin has been cut. I'm not that bothered, as he wasn't one of the more memorable characters and I felt his was more of a sub-plot anyway. It can probably get by without him.
I've read the book but found it difficult to remember who all the characters were. I was wondering about Gavin too.
I thought it was well cast. Julia MacKenzie was particularly excellent.
No, they weren't.
I felt like it did add something to it though. I suppose it was a way of making the Prices seem connected to everyone else, as they are a bit separate from the other characters in terms of connections in the book. Andrew is friends with Fats and Ruth is friends with Shirley, but the latter friendship I think is only mentioned briefly so I doubt they'll bother explaining all that.
I thought it was ok too.
I watched it without any distractions like coming on a forum to type at the same time or stuff like that ;-)
I feel I followed it well enough to know what is going on and who is related to who and who are friends and who are not friends etc.
I will watch it next week.
Good job somebody's easily amused!
I didn't think anything could be more dull than the book but this is having a good try. The plotline has been stripped down to the bone and the characters changed or toned down, so that anybody who hasn't read it must be mystified by a lot of what's happening.
I bet the viewing figures will go through the floor next week.
No they weren't brothers. Not really sure why they made that link in the TV series.
Simon was how I imagined him to be - just as loathsome.
The audiobook gave Howard and Shirley west country accents, as they are meant to be social climbers (Shirley especially) but they kind of both came across as posh snobs in the TV series.
It just all seemed very confused and slow paced.
I bought the book from a second hand book shop in Tenerife when I could find nothing else to read. This was not my type of book, I only read about two books a year and both are usually by Isac Asimov.
At the start I found it very confusing, but then the Internet posting started and I could not put it down, terrific book.
However the confusion has remained all the way thro this first episode and as a result the audience numbers will collapse. It's a real shame they did not start the Internet postings earlier and give some clear direction to the story. This could be forgiven if it was an 8 part series but with only 3 episodes it needed to get going early in the first episode.
(In the book Barry Fairbrother died on page 2 and his character was described later by others talking about his good works. IMO too much time was spent unnecessarily on scenes with BF which never existed in the book, they should have got on with the real story a bit quicker)
Yeah, I didn't mind it either because, as you say, the Prices were a bit separate in the novel. I think it was a good idea to change the plot to Bellchapel being converted into a spa, as the county boundary plot from the book wouldn't have translated very well onto the screen, I don't think.
We should be able to know what's going on without having to reference the source material.
It seems the only people who've enjoyed this have read the book previously.
It's tricky, though. If Barry had died in the first few minutes, the audience wouldn't have been aware of his links with people and his character. In the books, we get all that via internal monologues, which you obviously can't get in a TV series.
I liked the fact that we got to know Barry a bit before he died. I guess it's easier in terms of drama to see him instead of hearing how other people saw him.
I think that the problem is that Barry was very connected to the lives of everyone in Pagford, and in the book that wasn't made clear until after his death. We got a lot of insight into the characters' thought processes and memories of him. This element is vital to the story, so if they'd killed him off in the first couple of minutes as in the book, they'd have needed to have a lot of flashbacks, which could get tiresome. The alternative was to show more of Barry and kill him off a bit later, which is what they did.
At least in the book you had characters' names, to give you a clue who everyone was. I remember reading the book, but I can't recall much about it - or even whether I finished it.
But I'm certainly clear that I won't be watching the rest of the series. I think it was one the worst things I've ever seen on TV. Slow, incoherent and totally uninteresting.
I agree, Simon has been cast very well, although he does seem to have been every so slightly hammed up. But, it is a drama.
Yeah, I'm not sure that Julia McKenzie was the best choice for Shirley, because everyone knows her as the utterly pucker, Miss Marple now. I like her, don't get me wrong, but I agree with what you're saying. Howard and Shirley were meant to come across as you're typical small town gossips who think they're a cut-above, when actually they're not. On screen, they are ultra-Tory.
Plus, Julia and Michael are in their mid-70s. I thought they were meant to be late 50s/early 60s in the book?