I am not sure about this. I've read all the books - my gf got me into them - and ST is nothing like Alan Banks, and the last few stories weren't based on the books at all, just made up stories.
I am not sure about this. I've read all the books - my gf got me into them - and ST is nothing like Alan Banks, and the last few stories weren't based on the books at all, just made up stories.
Completely agree, the books are fabulous, the TV programme is just dross.. dont get me started on ST, as Banks. He is OK in other things just not suited to this role
I am not sure about this. I've read all the books - my gf got me into them - and ST is nothing like Alan Banks, and the last few stories weren't based on the books at all, just made up stories.
I could be wrong about this but aren't the books made up stories too?
On the subject of ST as Banks - perhaps this is more a problem with ITV and commercial broadcasters in general. I find they just aren't able to do drama as they are constantly pandering to their sponsors who in turn have to satisfy a demographic.
Completely agree, the books are fabulous, the TV programme is just dross.. dont get me started on ST, as Banks. He is OK in other things just not suited to this role
As someone who hasn't read the books, imo the series isn't dross. In fact, its a damn good series. And although not a fan, I don't mind ST.
As someone who hasn't read the books, imo the series isn't dross. In fact, its a damn good series. And although not a fan, I don't mind ST.
If you get a chance read the books. They are far superior, not as PC as the TV show.For me the TV show deviates too much from the original books. The character of Banks is also different, his mannerisms, his persona
I read that Peter Robinson chose ST for the role.
But when I read the books I really don't picture Banks like that. I picture him bigger, broader darker hair, and in the books he always gets the women
I only watched one series and then gave up on it, I think they changed the ending too >:(
Completely agree, the books are fabulous, the TV programme is just dross.. dont get me started on ST, as Banks. He is OK in other things just not suited to this role
That's the trouble with reading the books first, you get a picture in your mind of the characters and they rarely look the same as the actors chosen. I bet everyone who's read the books all have different ideas about the look of Banks It was the same with Rebus. John Hannah was totally wrong for the part in looks, age and the way he played him. Ken Stott, although not a total match for me, was much closer to Rebus. He got the character right.
I've read the Banks books, but I've only seen some of one of the shows so I can't say if I think they're good or not or representative of the books. I don't know why I haven't made more effort to catch the series, it's probably because I'd rather think of the characters the way I picture them and sometimes you're disappointed with the transferral of stories from book to screen. From what I did see I couldn't take to ST as Banks.
That's the trouble with reading the books first, you get a picture in your mind of the characters and they rarely look the same as the actors chosen. I bet everyone who's read the books all have different ideas about the look of Banks It was the same with Rebus. John Hannah was totally wrong for the part in looks, age and the way he played him. Ken Stott, although not a total match for me, was much closer to Rebus. He got the character right.
I've read the Banks books, but I've only seen some of one of the shows so I can't say if I think they're good or not or representative of the books. I don't know why I haven't made more effort to catch the series, it's probably because I'd rather think of the characters the way I picture them and sometimes you're disappointed with the transferral of stories from book to screen. From what I did see I couldn't take to ST as Banks.
But so many of the detective characters on TV are nothing like how they are written in the book. Remember on TV they are aiming for as wide an audience as possible so tend to make them extremely bland.
Of crime shows on TV I think Warren Clarke as Dalziel in Dalziel & Pascoes was close but still toned down a bit.
Others they have to change such as Lovejoy where series 1 was reasonably close to the books but not a success. A few years later was brought back and turned into a loveable rogue with light japes and comedy making it a ratings smash.
I tried to watch the series as totally unconnected to the books as they are so unlike them. It's difficult though because S T is so physically unlike Banks who is described in the books several times. And his mannerisms and general personality are very different too. One example is that Banks isn't a northerner, but from Peterborough.
The other characters are also either unlike their counterparts in the books, or not in the books at all.
Though it's perhaps not appropriate to compare one medium to another, the books seem to me of much higher quality than the TV series.
Others they have to change such as Lovejoy where series 1 was reasonably close to the books but not a success. A few years later was brought back and turned into a loveable rogue with light japes and comedy making it a ratings smash.
Now if there was ever a programme that was a waste of celluloid and electricity that was it. It should go down as one of the worst programmes ever to be shown on TV IMO - truly awful.
I am not sure about this. I've read all the books - my gf got me into them - and ST is nothing like Alan Banks, and the last few stories weren't based on the books at all, just made up stories.
Agree i too have and read all banks stories,,
ST comes across as weak, acting is shit, nothing like him at all in the books
Suprised peter robbinson did not have a say in the casting dept.
Wont be watching..
On the other tv series REBUS . The acting is great the characters are spot on.
Ian rankin must be proud..
The series is spoilt for me by the gloominess of the photography. In recent years there has been a trend towards creating atmosphere by placing filters over the camera lenses, thus making scenes dark and almost colourless. Indeed some of the photography reminded me of the sepia photos of 100 years ago!
The producers make think it adds atmosphere - to me its thoroughly depressing, and is making me hesitant to watch the remaining episodes.
I love the show as I enjoy a good detective story - but I can't stand the guy who plays DCI Banks. He can't act for toffee and you can't tell if he is happy, sad, angry .... as every single expression is identical.
The series is spoilt for me by the gloominess of the photography. In recent years there has been a trend towards creating atmosphere by placing filters over the camera lenses, thus making scenes dark and almost colourless. Indeed some of the photography reminded me of the sepia photos of 100 years ago!
The producers make think it adds atmosphere - to me its thoroughly depressing, and is making me hesitant to watch the remaining episodes.
What do you mean in recent years? This has been the norm for decades. I think you need to make a trip to Specsavers and maybe the memory clinic
Comments
Completely agree, the books are fabulous, the TV programme is just dross.. dont get me started on ST, as Banks. He is OK in other things just not suited to this role
I could be wrong about this but aren't the books made up stories too?
On the subject of ST as Banks - perhaps this is more a problem with ITV and commercial broadcasters in general. I find they just aren't able to do drama as they are constantly pandering to their sponsors who in turn have to satisfy a demographic.
I can put it no more diplomatically than that.
As someone who hasn't read the books, imo the series isn't dross. In fact, its a damn good series. And although not a fan, I don't mind ST.
If you get a chance read the books. They are far superior, not as PC as the TV show.For me the TV show deviates too much from the original books. The character of Banks is also different, his mannerisms, his persona
But when I read the books I really don't picture Banks like that. I picture him bigger, broader darker hair, and in the books he always gets the women
I only watched one series and then gave up on it, I think they changed the ending too >:(
That's the trouble with reading the books first, you get a picture in your mind of the characters and they rarely look the same as the actors chosen. I bet everyone who's read the books all have different ideas about the look of Banks It was the same with Rebus. John Hannah was totally wrong for the part in looks, age and the way he played him. Ken Stott, although not a total match for me, was much closer to Rebus. He got the character right.
I've read the Banks books, but I've only seen some of one of the shows so I can't say if I think they're good or not or representative of the books. I don't know why I haven't made more effort to catch the series, it's probably because I'd rather think of the characters the way I picture them and sometimes you're disappointed with the transferral of stories from book to screen. From what I did see I couldn't take to ST as Banks.
But so many of the detective characters on TV are nothing like how they are written in the book. Remember on TV they are aiming for as wide an audience as possible so tend to make them extremely bland.
Of crime shows on TV I think Warren Clarke as Dalziel in Dalziel & Pascoes was close but still toned down a bit.
Others they have to change such as Lovejoy where series 1 was reasonably close to the books but not a success. A few years later was brought back and turned into a loveable rogue with light japes and comedy making it a ratings smash.
The other characters are also either unlike their counterparts in the books, or not in the books at all.
Though it's perhaps not appropriate to compare one medium to another, the books seem to me of much higher quality than the TV series.
Now if there was ever a programme that was a waste of celluloid and electricity that was it. It should go down as one of the worst programmes ever to be shown on TV IMO - truly awful.
Agree i too have and read all banks stories,,
ST comes across as weak, acting is shit, nothing like him at all in the books
Suprised peter robbinson did not have a say in the casting dept.
Wont be watching..
On the other tv series REBUS . The acting is great the characters are spot on.
Ian rankin must be proud..
John Hannah played Rebus in series one & was rubbish.
Ken Stott took over after that & was brill.
The producers make think it adds atmosphere - to me its thoroughly depressing, and is making me hesitant to watch the remaining episodes.
This is a "ploy" to make him seem less one dimensional.
I don't know if you've noticed, that with deft positioning of the camera, you never see him "sideways on," as he'd be invisible.
What do you mean in recent years? This has been the norm for decades. I think you need to make a trip to Specsavers and maybe the memory clinic
Thank you for sharing your thoughts.
Thank you for being so rude to everyone.