War and Peace

I suppose you're right about the lower orders. No, they don't feature in the text, so why should they feature in an adaptation? For me (and it seems to be just me) I'd rather be provided with a realistic representation of life as it was (as I think it would have made things more interesting).

For me, watching a never-ending parade of extremely glamorous people prancing about in picturesque surroundings is just a bit.....meh.

lona yes, it was Grantchester!! Thanks.

He's called James Norton. I rather liked him as the naughty bumbling vicar ?

I'd rather see average-looking people who can act well and bring some character and personality to their roles
I've forgotten his name too, although if he is the actor I think you mean, gettingonabit, I think he is very good - he played the psychopathic killer in Happy Valley (very scary) and the nice but bumbling detective vicar in something on ITV - was it Grantchester? Perhaps his role will develop as the series goes on.

Must look out for Hinterland!

My copy of W&P has just arrived from Amazon - nearly 1000 pages

That's because the poor didn't matter,as we still don't,Russia especially,look how the tsar lived.the people lived off the scraps.
I don't necessarily agree with the way things were,but I think it's vital the makers of true life dramas stick to the facts,and not alter them for PC reasons.As they DO.grrrrrr!

The lower orders don't feature much in the source material, so it would be a little odd if they were introduced to suit modern sensibilities. Austen's readers would not have paid to read about servants. I think Tolstoy developed an enlightened attitude towards his serfs, but they would not have been expected to feature in a novel set in the early 1800s.

There was a novel about the Bennet servants a couple of years ago that was well received: Longbourn, by Jo Baker.

Something I've noticed about these grand historical dramas is that the "lower orders" are rarely featured. It annoys me, and suggests that the only people who mattered were those who had money. This seems to be particularly true of Jane Austen adaptations, where you rarely see anyone except the aristocracy and the gentry featured. Same with W and P (so far, anyway). Yet outside the palaces the real world must have been absolutely heaving with peasants.

I loved everything about it, the costumes, scenery, settings, script, cast, the lot! I do agree though that it's going to be difficult condensing the story into just six episodes.
I too have read the book a long time ago, though skipping some of the battles. Tolstoy is sometimes just a bit too descriptive. Also remember the 1972 TV version which was wonderful but a little "grey" in my opinion. This new version explodes with colour. Well done BBC.
As an afterthought I agree that watching it more than once is an excellent idea and would definitely fix the characters in the mind. The book has over 200 characters though so we're getting off lightly here!

Tegan I always remember Jim Broadbent when he was still in the National Theatre of Brent and they did the French Revolution. He played Marie Antoinette and I remember being amazed to find myself crying over a character played by someone I'd always thought of as a comedy actor.

Thanks getting on a bit.Will try catch up.

I do like Jim Boadbent but, to me he is never absorbed into the roles he plays [even though he plays them very well]; he is always still Jim Broadbent. I'm loving Dickensian now, having not been keen at the start.

Edit: according to my version of IPlayer, 5 episodes of Hinterland are available! Happy days

Hinterland was on last night, lully, on BBC Wales. I don't know if it was aired nationwide. It was in English, so I think the most recent series.

If you have IPlayer, and Hinterland isn't there, scroll through the "channels" menu until you get to S4C; it may be still available in Welsh (with subtitles). Youtube also sometimes has it.

(Going sideways again rather than start a new thread.)

Am I correct that a new series of Hinterland has stared but only in Wales and available on I player? I enjoyed the first series.......is in Welsh only at present ?

No one here was keen to watch it and not sure I want to view a lone.

Everybody seems to be raving about that one actor (forgotten his name): the one who went to war leaving his weepy wife behind. I just don't get him-he looks like a poor man's Ioan Gruffydd to me. I'd rather see average-looking people who can act well and bring some character and personality to their roles.

And like a pp, I can't get Anthony Hopkins as Pierre out of my head either (even though I was only 12).

We watched it as have been to St Petersburg and were interested to see where they were filming it. It is a beautiful city and I loved the scenery. Having said this I was bored and the nerdy looking guy with the glasses, he seems really thick to me and his character is dreary. His father lay dying and he's out partying????!!! I really couldn't be bothered with him at all. I just love the excellent Stephen Rea, fantastic actor. This series has not gripped me the way Dickensian has.
Someone previously posted it is only 6 episodes, so I may persevere. If it had went on for weeks and weeks - no.

I'll have to check that out; currently watching Walking the Nile on catchup and finding it completely fascinating.

Empire of the Tsars just finished on BBC4 with more scenes of St Petersberg (repeated at 3am) Hopefully the series will progress to the W&P era.

I've just watched it on catch up and down noted it. I haven't seen the Anthony Hopkins version. I read the book in 1975 during a holiday in France when I surprise myself by enjoying it and keeping track of the characters. I didn't remember that bathe lily James character is 13 and agree the actor looks too old despite her giggles.
I'll watch episode two but don't think I'll ever re read the book ( unless I'm lucky enough to have three weeks peace in the he Dordogne again)

St Petersberg looks wonderful

The trouble is that Anthony Hopkins has always been a Great actor while most are only very good. I remember the impact he made in The Lion in Winter with just the flicker of an eyelid or the turn of his head. Anyone else in the part of Pierre is almost bound to be a disappointment.

gettingonabit is quite right about the younger ones all looking alike. I found that I couldn't distinguish any of the young men in the new Poldark. I think casting directors have a fixed picture of what "attractive" looks like and that's what they cast. You get the same problem with the girls, a line of identikit longhaired skinny blondes.

I didn't enjoy it, so won't watch any more. If anyone wants the Kindle book it's free at the moment.

Greyduster....pretty much what I had thought (and said) there is just no subtlety to the characters and when you already know the basic plot there are few surprises or real drama.....you already know who's a wrong 'un. Its so different to his ride and Prejudice where each actor brought something new and subtle to well loved characters and despite knowing the book inside out you still find yourself drawn to it.

I'm reserving judgement on Pierre to see how things pan out for him. But it's already my impression that he can't measure up to Anthony Hopkins.